well germany was shit off peace our coyntry and germany loose the war eat that you little shit and dont talk about jews your people killed them like monsters i wouldnt be so proud be to be germany boy heh heh you are most hatet all over the world
If hitler had waited and fortified his forces, as well as finished making his bombs, we'd all be saying SIEG HEIL MEIN FUHRER. They were only a few sloppy descisions away from world domination.
@ugoodHomeBoy actually what doomed hitler, the nazis and the german army was the 3 month delay of the invasion of the soviet empire and his constant meddling in the daily operations of the german army and diverting forces away from the main strategic goal of conquering moscow and destroying the red army in the western half of the soviet empire. hitler was NOT a good general and trying to direct a war from over a thousand kilometers away is just insane.
Day 51: Our unit is rapidly running out of food and ammo, yet we are still no closer to TheGermanboy15's stupid comments.
Day 52: We expended all of our ammo beating back a pack of trolls. We lost 36 of our men. perhaps it is not that we drove them back, they merely had their share and left
Day 53: We are surrounded by spam, there is no escape..........no escape..........
I can understand why the Germans thought that Russia would be easily defeated. By the end of World War I, Germany occupied the Baltic States and Ukraine. Poland defeated the Soviets (1919-21). During the 1920s & early '30s, the Germans made weapons and trained in the U.S.S.R. Stalin's purges (1936-8) gutted the Red Army. The Soviets lost in Spain (1936-9), and almost lost in Finland (1939-40). Famine in Ukraine (1932-3) and the Civil War (1917-23) didn't win Germany's respect either.
I don't see how the nazi's hated the soviets so much, It's hard to even see any difference from an external view between communism and national socialism. The only thing that rly stands out are their religious views.
@TanoBrati The initial assault was only successful because of bad organisation and tactics at the top. If Stalin had not been such a friend of Hitlers and if he had listened to intelligence, pulled back from the border allowing the attack to be absorbed, allowed freedom of action of commanders to retreat if necessary then the initial assault would never have got so far. The best ally the Nazis had in the USSR was Stalin.
@alanheath Stalin's early stance exacerbated losses, but most Soviet front line air, armour & artillery concentrations were obsolescent and already marked down, being destroyed virtually on day 1. RA reforms were incomplete: poor field leadership and communications would probably have stymied any successful "pull back" manoeuvre, so redeployment to old 'Stalin Line' defences (as Zhukov advised) needed to happen pre invasion, allowing WH General Staff to adjust their plans accordingly
@elrjames777 I don't think that it was much out of date - the Nazi tanks were mainly types one and two which would not have been much better than the BT range and to the best of my knowledge no artillery was added during the war. However in the air and as we have mentioned before - the secret weapon - radio was where the Germans had the upper hand. Of course had they been on the Stalin Line the attack would have been absorbed!
@alanheath Yes: command + control: from 23 to 30 June 41 six mechanized RA corps (2,500 tanks: inc T34 nd KV) attacked Pz Grp 1's 700 in a pincer movement to meet at Dubno: they were outmaneuvered nd rendered incapable of further offensive action. A plausible extrapolation of an initial Stalin Line defence is the absence of any WH illusion that early border success had destroyed RA. If therefore, any WH plan for victory at the Stalin Line succeeded it would probably have been total.
@rupp87 Ich war in Großbritannien geboren. Meine Eltern sind Briten, meine Großeltern auch, meine Urgroßeltern auch .... für viele Generationen ... !!
@alanheath "Racist" that wouldnt apply to Israel would it? How about a little MultiCulturalism for Israel Alan? A nice Arab Prime Minister for "diversity" sake?
How about some Lebanese bankers to handle Israels finances? Let Hamas run the education system. After all Alan you have no problem recommending such diversity for
Western Europeans, now do you? Who the racist Alan? Who hates whites? ..who preaches programs of "tolerance" when you know the outcome is the death of Europe?
@871yt What has this got to do with this film? If you want Hamas to run the education system in Israel, why are you directing the comment to me - I am not Israel's education minister, do not live in Israel, have any vote there and have only spent about 20 days in my life there? Why not write to the minister involved - I suspect the ministry has an internet page?
At the same time why don't you take your racist comments and psychiatric problems somewhere else?
@shlomof They certainly control you now dont they? The slightest chink in the endless "anti semitism" hysteria sends you into denial and ..wait for it, more screams of "anti semitism. You Tube..has one fatal flaw in its business plan, it is an open source. Unlike a newspaper with a small group of controlled "writers" You Tube
commentary allows things to be said that even the Jews cant control. They would like to..but that would ruin the money flow...and Jews will never allow that
@871yt Uhhh ignorant human monkeys with their jew this, white that, or black yadayada..Were all fucking human beings..the sooner we realize this, the sooner the world will become a better place. The days of conquest are over, now it's time to move forward into the future and live together, instead of killing eachother over our differences. We all may be different, but we have more in common then uncommon. We all bleed red, we all breath air, we all have 46 chromosomes...I could go on.
@871yt You cant categorize one ethnicity as being evil. The human species is evil. If blacks had the power Europeans had I'm sure they would've enslaved the whites and other ethnicity's they saw as inferior. The human ape is a greedy and evil creature, but it's up to you to be more humane than ignorant.
20% of the citizens of Israel are arabs , 50% of them are voting for the jewish zionist parties in free and democratic elections though they have 3 independent arab parties represented in the israeli parliament.In 2004 an arab football club won the israeli cup and represented Israel in the UEFA cup.Is this considered racist?!
In a democratic country the parliament and the government are elected by the citizens, when the arab parties in ISRAEL will have the majority , clear they can appoint the prime minister , the minister of education and the finance minister, so what exactly is your problem , are you smoking some bad stuff?
@shlomof Isnt that precisely what the Jews will not allow? Israel unashamedly describes itself as homeland for Jews. I applaud this. I admire Israelis sense of identity.
But the same Jews that will never allow MultiCulturalism to happen to them..will
promote if for whites..precisely because they KNOW it will destroy white societies
Israel is homeland of jews as Italy is homeland of italians, Russia homeland of russians, Poland of polish, Romania of romanians, France of french, so what exactly is your problem?
What have jews to do with the fact that german blond girls like to marry black americans or africans?
The 50 million arabs in Europe are not my problem , and for sure I haven't sent and imposed them on the europeans.The europeans asked for them as they needed cheap working force for jobs they are reluctant to practice.
As to USA , if you are a fucked KKK racist , remember that you have brought the slaves from AFRICA to work and make you rich, so why are you complaining now, that your wives and daughters are looking for their big dicks?
@shlomof Not YOUR problem exactly. Though the Jews are complete parasites on Western Culture..they think of only their immediate tribal circle. The KKK doesnt exist
and hasnt for decades. What DOES exist is the Jewish ownership of all the media
all the Judgeships..all the banks. Blacks dont work..they ..they live off whites.
Talking about slavery..when it ended 145 years ago.. More evasion.More lies.
THE CALENDAR ON THE WALL SAYS 2012...DESCRIBE REALITY OUR ADMIT YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY
@871yt I think the true parasites of western civilisation is are the micks..Whereas Jews are hard working welth creators, you cannot say that for the mick "diaspora" who take and give nothing apart from whinging about others
@MrMickroach Yep they create wealth...by poisoning society with their mass media
the TV programming that drags the entire culture in into the gutter..but makes THEM rich. The Jewish Academic lies that are based on fraud..but perpetuate the lies
about race, and Western culture that keep the Jews in power. Its wealth alright..built on corruption, lies, deformation..subversion. The problem is the Jews like the parasites they are destroy the host animal...which they live off of.
@871yt The parasites are the racists who do not contribute to society or to wealth but only seek to steal it from themselves from those that work for it.
@shlomof Actually YOU HAVE SENT THE MUSLIMS TO EUROPE..precisely because you are incapable of seeing reality. You see your little tribal group..and thats it. Even though you live continually off of Western Civ
Why are Jews persecuted? Why has every country thrown them out? You have provided the answer..now havent you?
@TheGermanboy15 yeah you sure annihilated the Russians in 1945 didn't you, no wait they annihilated your mighty 3rd riech including Berlin, the russian troops raped many german women, maybe your grandmother was one of them, maybe you are yourself 1/4 russian you stupid little boy
@TheGermanboy15 Whilst quaintly negative epithets like rapacious, garrulous or dangerous may be ascribed to the Slavic race and their nationalities, that hardly makes them sub-human, quite the contrary one might think. As for the Anglo-Saxon race and their nationalities, a certain barbarous quality has not, within similar human experience, been entirely unknown: peoples are not evil only individuals: as for annihilation, nature will do that for us if exponential growth continues.
This documentary is the one that started my deeper interest in WWII history. I had not heard the story of the war in the East, I had no idea how much people suffered. Amazing footage, excellent documentary.
Some of the comments I see are the most uninformed comments I've seen on Youttube...
Fascism=Nazism..? Not even close ideologically.
Money was not the cause of WWII.
It was a war motivated by revenge, driven by ignorance, fueled by doctrines of hate, racial intolerance, greed and envy, and powered of course by insanity.
@jordan390a I think you should go and read your definitions again. Nazism was a Fascist ideology. Core tenets Nationalism, Authoritarianism, Social Darwinism mixed in with eugenics and euthanasia...
The annexation of Czechoslovakia made Germany the worlds second largest industrial economy but Germany wasted this advantage by not turning all industry to military needs until it was to late. With the industries of France, Netherlands and other occupied countries Hitlers military should have had sufficient weapons to destroy the USSR. Finland was a debacle but Stalin's Siberian army defeated Japan in a series of battles 1936/39. This army led the pincher movement that surrounded Stalingrad
Since the soviets attacked Poland, for no reason, and the Germans attacked because the poles were boosted up by the English anFrench why didnt the world attack Russia? Why was adolf singled out?
@whiteman866 Because poland was allied with britian and france, so britain and france declared on germany, it's alot to explain but it was the right choice, fuck Nazism and communism, both ran by genocidle MANIACS.
@whiteman866 The right choice, Im not sure. We relegated millions of people to the rule of the man who conducted the slaughter of 50 million Ukranians. Hitler was targeted ONLY because he was not using the IMF. It was MONEY. The World Jewish Congress had started their war on Germany in mid 30s. Boycots,and just a general nuissance. Germany was not allowed to have self determination in Silesia, East Prussia, Sudentenland. Hitler offered to leave Poland. The English(WInnie) wanted war.
@manormaid Good question: tough to answer correctly: Communism tends to have something of a global revolutionary intention and be what the Bolsheviks termed a dictatorship of the proletariat: ostensible equality but outlawing or extirpating class enemies, religion, private property and enterprise. Fascism has more of an extreme nationalist or xenophobic character: suppressing political opposition but depending to an extent upon popularity and tolerating many extra party aspects of private life
@alanheath3 Re: "victims" Yes: although, in an overall balance, Fascist mass killings were peculiarly a 25 year phenomenon, whereas the murderous scourge of communist dictatorship has (and continues to do so in Zimbabwe for example) enjoyed far more time to claim a number of victims far greater even than the holocaust itself: Soviet gulags, deportations, collectivization and artificially induced famine, China's great leap forward and cultural revolution, Cambodia's killing fields et al:
@manormaid Facism is NAtional socialism. It is Nation based. They respect borders. Communism is anti religion, believes that their illness can be transported. But in reality it is run by a few. We are closely approaching Communism. True nat socialism did many good things.0% home loans, universal hosp, 0 unemployment. Hitler went from 30% unemployment to 2% in a few years....and keeping the army to 100K. He gave the Germans back their pride. Now they are the bufoons of movies. "I know nothing!"
@whiteman866 Fascism is not National Socialism. It has absolutely nothing to do with National Socialism. That's a stupid anti-German lie invented by the Communists.
@whiteman866 Adolf Hitler was against Christianity, he planned to replace it eventually with Germanic paganism. Unemployment in Germany could not have declined from 30% to 2% without the preparation for war. Hitler did not respect the 100k army limit as he would train 100k, fire them and recruit another 100k. Finally, what makes you think a national socialist country isn't run by the few like any other political system?
it was not the decision of a mad man to attack russia, its just that he wanted to fight america and russia at the same time. if germany would not have declared war on america all soldiers who died in the west by americans would have fighted against russia too and they would clearly have lost the war and europe would now be great and right without moslims and jews.
This is without doubt one of the finast documentaries on the German-Russian war ever made. I urge all students of history to watch it start to finish. It explains away a lot of misconceptions the West has about the war in the East.
germans was kicking russian peasant ass in the beggining 12-1 kill death ratio...1.the winter lack of clothing 2.mud slowing down advance 3.difficulty maintaining supply lines 4. 3 pronged attack shouldve combined the 3 and just aim for the heart of russia 4. operation barbarossa was delayed a couple months due to the capture of the balkins postponing barbarossa..5.russia is huge worn down german military..6 russian had allied assistance..7.german allies were WEAK and could not be relied upoun.
@kmesprtan Re: "kicking russian peasant ass" : your omission of a capital R is indicative, but please try to post more lucidly: I realize that you are precluded from an easy use of your first language here on this website, but your post is never-the-less is one of the most convoluted synopsis of events in the east that I have read in all my hours of roaming around U tube on the topic.
@elrjames777 ok but we all know that if all the emphasis was directed on the eastern front without a winter war theres no doubt in my mind that the germans wouldve been victorious...its more hitler mistakes then russian victories....
@kmesprtan Weather conditions are the same for both sides and do not make a choice to show favour to one over the other. 'Operation retribution' was forced on Hitler by enemy action and could probably not have been avoided, although a 'Moscow Option' was perfectly feasible even with the delayed start to 'Barbarossa'. However, whether or not the capture of that hub of politics, industry and communication would have ensured victory is moot, although it may probably have held defeat at bay :-)
@elrjames777 I don't think weather conditions are the same for both sides. Surely how well one is prepared and used to the conditions also bears a certain role.
I agree with you on the Moscow question but we have had 30 years + to think about it whereas the German staff did not. Furthermore had the battle at Kiev not be fought in 1941, a huge body of troops would have had to be dealt with later. Against this argument is lack of mobility of those send south from Smolensk.
@alanheath3 Preparedness for weather does bear a role; my apology for not making sufficiently clear that I was merely questioning the assertion of the "ass kicker" who had no doubt in his mind about it being the crucial factor. However, I freely admit to amending an aphorism that Napoleon is reported to have used in conversation with Grouchy and Gerrard about the difficulty of pressing hard on the heels of an enemy over muddy roads "the roads are the same for everyone" :-)
@elrjames777 The quote from Napoleon is certainly correct as then they were all using the same technology.
Changing the point, I refute the argument in football that the weather is the same for everyone. If you have a two goal need and only need a draw then you probably have the advantage when the weather turns bad (eg England v Croatia, November 2007).
@alanheath3 Sorry to be awkward, but I'm reluctant to agree wholeheartedly: I would need some convincing to be fully persuaded that the maxim of a genuinely great military commander such as Napoleon (not the derisively ascribed actual 'GROFAZ') had little or no value in the context of "Opp' Barbarossa"; because he himself had endured almost identical conditions personally with his troops. The football analogy is sound but is it really the determining factor; are no other variables more crucial ?
@alanheath3 Yor 30 yr est gud: d topic was extensively explored as sensible alternative hist in 79 by D Downing in "Moscow Option". As initially implemented, Opp Barb set 3 huge army groups to simultaneously strive to attain each of their respective targets whilst encircling RA forces in the process. D 500k prisoner victory at Kiev was stunning, but momentum to capture Len and Mosc was lost; tank diversion from AGN + AGC took a terrible mechanical toll (as you suggest): PZ generals were appalled
@elrjames777 Yes, the momentum had gone. Had the Germans at Smolensk in the summer of 1941 been fully motorised then a case may have been made for turning south.
I am trying to locate anyone who knows of Hubert Menzel, who appears in Vol.1 of this video. In September of 1938, my Aunt met a Hubert Menzel on a train to Salzburg. Hubert said he was head of a Berlin military school. A few weeks after Hitler marched into Czech, Menzel sent my aunt a letter, saying that he was in high-level meetings, & was among the first to enter Czech. He describes the joy of the citizens. I have two photos of Hubert and he looks like a younger version of the video
@mfvideos2009 Fascinating stuff: not sure where u r in the World, but u seem to have sufficient initial information to begin a proper research: try finding out which military schools were operating in Berlin during 1938 and then get in touch with those that you can :-)
Given that Stalin had wiped out his own high command, the Nazi argument that the USSR was about to move west is totally absurd. It attacked Poland, Rumania, Finland and the Baltic States only because of its alliance with the Nazis. The USSR showed no inkling of doing anything like this before the Nazi alliance.
@alanheath3 Sorry again Allan:-) Re: "USSR about to move west totally absurd" whilst we know that Hitler developed and implemented plans with the WH to destroy his racial and ideological enemies in the east at the earliest possible moment, the corollary of that is not necessarily that Bolshevik tendencies were anything other than irredentist - either before or after the Soviet / Nazi pact :-)
@elrjames777 Bolshevik apologists have argued that their territorial seizures made during their pact with their Nazi allies were only irredentist but this is not true as Bukovnia and Bessarabia had been part of Austria. Nonetheless there is no evidence that before their pact with Hitler than Stalin intended on attacking the west, otherwise he would hardly have bumped off his higher command.
I think Stalin was like Mussolini (and possibly like Franco might have been) in being a jackal.
@alanheath3 Lol: brilliant pun: if I may just ponder your post about the Bolshevik apologists for a while before responding; I believe your David Irving got some stuff out of Moscow archives, so I need to check it. However, you can guess I may be a little tendentious when not concurring with you in liking Stalin's almost world wide vision of a Bolshevik destiny to the petty nationalism (ostensibly to resist communism) of Mussolini, and particularly Franco :-)
Are you looking for more interesting documentaries on youtube?
I have created a collection of links to interesting documentaries on subjects like the history and culture of nations, world war II, science and conspiracy theories!
Visit my website which you can find on my youtube channel Or simply select and copy the following lines into your browser's address bar:
The material supply of the USSR by Roosavely was the biggest logistics movement in human history. Nazi generals were taken completely by supprize by the sheer volume of weaponry the Russians had. A Russia they defeated in just 3 weeks in WW-1.
@Avalon400 Russia was not defeated in three weeks in WW1 but three years. But yes, the supply of American equipment and food was the biggest logistics movement in history not that there was any thanks from the USSR. On the contrary, it persuaded Stalin of how weak the west was.
@alanheath3 You do realise the supplies the British Empire,United States sent the Soviets couldnt even make 25% of the Soviet war effort?? Also U.S became very rich thanks to the war, infact they got everything they ever wanted if you research. And it was the Allies who started the Cold war as early as 1944, The Allies even planned to attack the Soviet Union as early as 1945.(Operation Unthinkable) There was no thanks from the U.S to the Soviets who played the main role and saved the day!
@martynrobin121 100% agreed that allied supplies to Stalin, whilst substantial, were not critical in defeating the WH in the east..However, Operation Unthinkable became exactly that: it was rejected by UK Chiefs of Staff as militarily unfeasible. I believe, with you, that it is unreasonable to doubt that war in the east decided the outcome of WWII - but everything else you posted (beyond the obvious fact that the "US became very rich thanks to the war" is merely unsubstantiated assertion :-)
@martynrobin121 I would hardly call enough food to feed the entire Red Army for every day of the war less than 25% of the Soviet war effort. It was the USSR who started the Cold War in 1943 when it broke off diplomatic relations with Poland followed in 1944 with the mass arrests in Poland as one occupier was exchanged for another although the West continued to support its dodgy ally.
The USA did become rich but the UK and France were almost bankrupted and USSR got a huge empire in Europe.
@alanheath3 The Soviets were able to feed there Armies and Civilians and they were able to produce countless thousands of Tanks,Aircraft,etc. Most of the Soviet war-effort 75% came from Russia, The most vital supply the Allies gave the Red Army was vehicles. And it was the Soviets who invaded Poland 1939, nobody said anything, Relations between the Allies and Sovits were very poor, And the U.S plan to was destroy Britain by economic ruin, U.S saw Britain as possible enemie!
@martynrobin121 The Soviets were not able to feed their population - there had been major famine in the USSR in the 1930s and according to Russian sources people died in Siberia (which was nowhere near the front) during the war because of starvation.
As for no-one saying anything about the Soviet invasion of Poland, I know a lot of Poles who continue to say things about it.
As for your allegation on a US plan to economically destroy the UK - it is absurd and there is no evidence for it.
@alanheath3 100% agree your famine post: Re: radios hardly mentioned, here are the figures: precis from Walter Scott Dunn: in the early years of war in the east, communication was a serious problem for RA: radios and field telephones were rare and did not give an effective command structure below Regimental level. Lend-lease made a major contribution to the advance in communications that was a major element in improved performance of RA in 1944: 40k radios, 380k field fones, 1.25m fone cable :-)
@elrjames777 I am convinced that the radio was the 'secret weapon' of WW2. How else can one explain the efficiency of the German armies when otherwise their equipment was often inferior to that facing them. They had co-ordination which their opponents did not!
@alanheath3 Yes: I believe all WH AF and Pz Gndr vehicles were so equipped: "how can one explain" is a fascinating questn: at an operational level you must be right, but command and control is two edged, and HItler was able to interfere in detail bcoz of good net communications: it seems early on that Paulus was advised to destroy 6th Army 1,000 watt transmiitter to give an excuse for independent action: a Supreme Command Signals unit was flown in enabling Zeitler to receive outspoken messages.
@elrjames777 So now we have any even more interesting situation that I had not considered. The radio was indeed the secret weapon, initially serving one side and then the other. The von Paulus story is really curious, I knew nothing about it! Had he destroyed it, he could have saved the lives of thousands of Axis troops - although probably no more than a temporary reprieve.
@alanheath3 Re "temporary reprieve" You are so right Alan; and intuitively focus exactly on the dilemma facing any analysis free of over politicized observation: at issue is the latterly admirable, stoic almost pagan WH defence against Bolshevism juxtaposed with and compromised by the earlier corruption, misuse and undermining of the professionalism, discipline, training and mental disposition of the WH in increasingly murderous pursuit of willo-the-whisp perverted Nazi ideas and practices :-)
@alanheath3 OK: but my comment really has little direct bearing on the series, merely a few notes of the basic outline of my perspective encouraged by your earlier post. This 'War of the Century' really is BBC history at its best, avoiding crude politically correct tendentiousness and without vogue like imperative to obtrude the historical journeys of their presenters and producers onto our screens: lets see if you glean the same conclusion from the final part of the programme as myself :-)
@elrjames777 This is definitely one of the best programmes related to WW2 - I am cautious about offering the title of the best. There are one or two little errors (like counting the wrong number of months or incorrect percentage) but this is really minor.
I am up to part 15 now.
I am sure you have seen the BBC Auschwitz story which is brilliant. There was also a series on Roman Emperors in the same light which was fantastic and very well presented giving new interpretations!
@alanheath3 Yes: but compared to historical journey type presentations that BBC Timewatch has warped into, this really is an exemplary production. RE: Auschwitz: didn't that flow from the equally excellent "Nazi lesson from History" BBC series of professor Kershaw. A chillingly compelling documentary on the topic is also posted here on u tube: "one third of the holocaust": this is hard to refute logically, although intuitive refutation from the actual historical and political background remains.
@elrjames777 As a person who has spent years researching the holocaust in Poland, I can say that the one third of the holocaust is nothing but nonsense using lies when half baked scientific evidence is unavailable. The person responsible is a crazed racist - I had correspondence with him. He never once went to a single archive, did one interview, knows none of the languages involved - nothing. He concentrates on finding small errors in texts and blowing them out of all proportion.
@alanheath3 Re: "holocaust": Yeah: thanks Alan: once I recovered from initial shock in beginning to doubt the credibility of any survivor witnesses, I viewed the Eichmann trial: some footage of which is missing I believe: thankfully, on second viewing, I was able to notice flaws in the "one third" presentation that I had previously overlooked: the barbers testimony was manipulated, internal walls could easily been knocked down with hammers and co2 used obviating a need for flush doors and masks
@alanheath3 The Soviet Union was hudge, They were obviously going to have problems with Famine and world war justs makes things 100x worse. Allied Aid to the Soviet Union during World war couldnt even mae up 25% of the Soviet war-effort. And the U.S was planning for war with Britain, When World war 2 broke out the U.S stayed out and Hitler made fools out of the Yanks, The U.S wanted to bankrupt and destroy britain economy just like the Great war.
@alanheath3 The Soviet Union had problems with Famine before the war, A world war just makes things worse. Over 75% of the Soviet war-effort came from Russia, They had endless resources of Tanks,Aircraft,Weapons,Men. The Soviets were able to Feed most of there troops,civilians obviously Allied Aid helped, 25% is still alot, the most vital things the Allies gave the Soviets was Vehicles, But without the Red Army there would be no victory for the Allies.
@martynrobin121 The problems of famine before WW2 were as a result of the disastrous, deliberate policies of Stalin in turning the richest agricultural area in the world into a place where maybe 3m people - some 2% of the population of the entire country - died of hunger.
Neither the USSR, nor any other country on earth, has endless supplies.
I believe the Allies could have won without the USSR. On the other hand I do not believe that without the western Allies the USSR could have won.
@alanheath3 Without the Red Army it would be impossible for the Allies to win the war, thats fact. Allies were weak compared to the Soviets who were willing to sacrifice millions for victory. The Soviet Union played the main role during the war by far. Yes, If the British had accepted Hitler peace offer 1940 then the Soviets might have been defeated. However the Red Army was the biggest on the planet, The Reds had the biggest air-force,tanks,etc in the world, They could out produce the Axis.
@martynrobin121 Yes: RA fended off total collapse in 41 mainly with its own resources, but it may not have resisted or beaten WH so well in later years without lend-lease, which gave it the where-with-all to operate successfully. Similarly, is it likely that Begration would be so crushing in 44 without Allied invasion of France? In any event, the root cause of WH defeat by RA was Hitler's willful interference with its professional ability: Stalin tended to defer to his generals at crucial times
@elrjames777 You do realise that the Axis campaign in Russia failed from the start, Barberossa ended in disaster the Red Army T-34s and troops from the East proved too much for the Axis forces. Stalingrad the main forces defeated yet again by the Red Army resources of endless T-34 tanks and man-power the same with Battle of Kursk, The Soviets had endless resources and didnt care about human lives only victory, Allied aid to Russia could only make 25% of the Soviet war-effoct.
@martynrobin121 If someone other than Hitler had been in charge then the Germans may have beaten the Soviet Union. Of course if someone other than Hitler had been in charge then there would have been no war in the first place.
@alanheath3 Yes, If Adolf Hitler was killed early in the war then the Germans and Europeans Axis powers could have a chance of defeated the Red Army, After the Battle of France it was Hitler who took full control of the Axis forces and thought he was a Military genius when infact he was foolish.However fighting the British Empire & Soviet Union at the same time, Is insane and impossible to win the Axis without Hitler would have gave up, Hitler was the problem and the man who started the war.
@martynrobin121 Yes: we all know that RA high command, Zhukov particularly, employed sacrificial methods in deliberate attempts to overwhelm WH opposition: but it is mere political comfort for you to suggest that WH failed from the start and RA would have won even without western aid. There is no factual basis that T34 production was endless and that 6th Army could not have avoided destruction even without Hitler's baleful influence nor that RA would have won Kursk even without Lucy spy ring :-)
@elrjames777 The Soviet Industry was in the Urals and safe from Axis bombing.The Soviets were able to mass produce and had endless resources. The Red Army had countless thousands of tanks that could be destroyed and replaced easy, Also countless thousands of Aircraft, Russia had endless man-power and dictator that would sacrifice millions just like Hitler. Red Army was the biggest in the world and had the most tanks,aircraft,men,etc. The Axis had to fight Britan,Soviets later U.S aswell!!!
@martynrobin121 Wrong: don't fall for the same old mythological mantras: much of soviet tank production, for instance (which only peaked at 2,000 per month in 1945 and was therefore not countless, as you claim), was dependent upon electricity generated by steam and water power plants near Moscow, Gorky, Tula and Staliogorsk: about 75% of the power used by the entire Soviet defence industry: had "Eisenhammer" succeeded, only two smaller energy centers behind the Urals would have been left intact.
@elrjames777 The question of electricity generation in the USSR is extremely valid. My gut feeling however is that you are wrong on this one and I pursue it further if I get the chance. That is just my gut feeling by the way - I have no evidence!
@alanheath3 Re: "electricity" its easy to google Operation Iron Hammer: and I have the full account of the proposed attack in Alfred Price's "last Year of the Luftwaffe": I should be glad to modify my view in light of any research you turn up, although the main thrust of my post was to undermine martyn's ridiculous insistence that soviet production, resources and manpower were endless and invulnerable, and that "lend lease" had little or no effect on RA performance :-)
I have the following theory - just a thought. I know how difficult it is to transfer production from one country to another today.
In the USSR no-one wanted to make decisions, yet we are to believe that somehow whole factories moved east with their workforce and waiting for them was all the infrastructure necessary including power, roads, rail, accommodation etc.
It makes no sense unless the factories were already there and waiting!
@alanheath3 o m gosh: excuse a little laughter with u: but isn't "already there and waiting" just the hypothetical proposition we considered about Bolshevik anticipation of, and perhaps even designs upon, western territorial intentions and interests: however: the sensible answer is probably that even heavy factory machinery imperatively had to be, and was, moved within the 6 months that railway infrastructure and enemy action allowed: although preconceived factory prefabrication is unexplained.
@elrjames777 Stalin did not like retreats and dismantling of factories and moving everything including all the labour strikes me as being a major retreat. I find it hard to believe that anyone would authorise this.
If the plan was a war of aggression why built them so far back from where they are needed (unless raw materials, power etc was there) - particularly given how small the population was.
I think rail links are the key. Obviously it happened but maybe the scale has been exaggerated.
@martynrobin121 The USSR did not have endless resources and quality of production was not very good. Although massively outnumbered in tanks, the Nazi armies ran rings round the USSR in 1941. To a large extent the Finns held their own for three months despite having next to no conventional anti tank weapons of any consequence.
@alanheath3 The Soviets had endless resources of Tanks,Aircraft,Man-power,etc and the Soviet Industry was bigger than the European Axis industy. The Red Army problems at the start of the war was due to the lack of Leaders, Stalin got paranoid and killed his best generals and leaders in the 1930s whitch made the Red Army ineffective till 1941. However Moscow then after the Red Army proved very effective the Axis just couldnt keep up.
nazis suck balls, anyone who says differently has a pair of balls resting on their forehead.
seversic 20 hours ago
well it seems like germany have many hitlers children ..when i read maybe yo should take one good shower with gas uuuuuuuuiuuuuuu
nappendal77 3 days ago
well germany was shit off peace our coyntry and germany loose the war eat that you little shit and dont talk about jews your people killed them like monsters i wouldnt be so proud be to be germany boy heh heh you are most hatet all over the world
nappendal77 3 days ago
If hitler put Erich von Manstein in charge of the eastern front in 1941, germany would of beaten russia,he was the best general of the war.
lopido 4 days ago
Where can you get a copy of this video on DVD? Thanks.
otissumnerbrown 5 days ago
In all actuality, if hitler had invaded and knocked out britain, the russian campaign would have been a success.
memadmax69 1 week ago
@memadmax69
If hitler had waited and fortified his forces, as well as finished making his bombs, we'd all be saying SIEG HEIL MEIN FUHRER. They were only a few sloppy descisions away from world domination.
ugoodHomeBoy 1 week ago
@ugoodHomeBoy Yeah, and if a frog had wings his ass wouldn't bump the ground when he jumped would it?
Goofus5453 1 week ago
@ugoodHomeBoy ¸he had disentery for two crucial weeks of Barbarossa,when his generals wnt on major russian cities instead of goinig towards ural
zaostrog 1 week ago
@ugoodHomeBoy actually what doomed hitler, the nazis and the german army was the 3 month delay of the invasion of the soviet empire and his constant meddling in the daily operations of the german army and diverting forces away from the main strategic goal of conquering moscow and destroying the red army in the western half of the soviet empire. hitler was NOT a good general and trying to direct a war from over a thousand kilometers away is just insane.
SocratesTheGadfly 1 week ago
@memadmax69 The Royal Navy would have blown them to hell.
Goofus5453 1 week ago
The BBC documentaries are outstanding........so much better than those rubbishy US-centric American ones.
Aussiephil99 1 week ago 3
Day 51: Our unit is rapidly running out of food and ammo, yet we are still no closer to TheGermanboy15's stupid comments.
Day 52: We expended all of our ammo beating back a pack of trolls. We lost 36 of our men. perhaps it is not that we drove them back, they merely had their share and left
Day 53: We are surrounded by spam, there is no escape..........no escape..........
CrypticWatcher 1 week ago
I can understand why the Germans thought that Russia would be easily defeated. By the end of World War I, Germany occupied the Baltic States and Ukraine. Poland defeated the Soviets (1919-21). During the 1920s & early '30s, the Germans made weapons and trained in the U.S.S.R. Stalin's purges (1936-8) gutted the Red Army. The Soviets lost in Spain (1936-9), and almost lost in Finland (1939-40). Famine in Ukraine (1932-3) and the Civil War (1917-23) didn't win Germany's respect either.
KevinByrne2 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't see how the nazi's hated the soviets so much, It's hard to even see any difference from an external view between communism and national socialism. The only thing that rly stands out are their religious views.
lmos26 1 month ago
Comment removed
lmos26 1 month ago
Comment removed
lmos26 1 month ago
aw man, tnx. for posting this...probably the best doc. about the Eastern Front ever made!
20thcenturyfilmdocs 1 month ago
@20thcenturyfilmdocs and your stuff is also pretty good! I watched Breaker Morant again last night!
alanheath 1 month ago
ww2 in were 30 million died lol the soviet union alone lost 30 million
kmesprtan 2 months ago
@kmesprtan Soviets lost more due to Stalin starving his people..
ChannerUK 1 month ago
The fact that the USSR even survived the initial assault is incredible. Probably the only country that could have, besides the US.
TanoBrati 2 months ago
@TanoBrati The initial assault was only successful because of bad organisation and tactics at the top. If Stalin had not been such a friend of Hitlers and if he had listened to intelligence, pulled back from the border allowing the attack to be absorbed, allowed freedom of action of commanders to retreat if necessary then the initial assault would never have got so far. The best ally the Nazis had in the USSR was Stalin.
alanheath 2 months ago
@alanheath
Ifs and Buts...
TanoBrati 2 months ago
@alanheath Stalin's early stance exacerbated losses, but most Soviet front line air, armour & artillery concentrations were obsolescent and already marked down, being destroyed virtually on day 1. RA reforms were incomplete: poor field leadership and communications would probably have stymied any successful "pull back" manoeuvre, so redeployment to old 'Stalin Line' defences (as Zhukov advised) needed to happen pre invasion, allowing WH General Staff to adjust their plans accordingly
elrjames777 1 month ago
@elrjames777 I don't think that it was much out of date - the Nazi tanks were mainly types one and two which would not have been much better than the BT range and to the best of my knowledge no artillery was added during the war. However in the air and as we have mentioned before - the secret weapon - radio was where the Germans had the upper hand. Of course had they been on the Stalin Line the attack would have been absorbed!
alanheath 1 month ago
@alanheath Yes: command + control: from 23 to 30 June 41 six mechanized RA corps (2,500 tanks: inc T34 nd KV) attacked Pz Grp 1's 700 in a pincer movement to meet at Dubno: they were outmaneuvered nd rendered incapable of further offensive action. A plausible extrapolation of an initial Stalin Line defence is the absence of any WH illusion that early border success had destroyed RA. If therefore, any WH plan for victory at the Stalin Line succeeded it would probably have been total.
elrjames777 1 month ago
30 million people! That's almost half of the entire death toll of the war.
MrCheeseman2011 2 months ago
@MrCheeseman2011 And?????
YaxKukMo1426 2 months ago
The narrator's voice in this documentary reminds me of potholer54.
slashingraven 2 months ago
fntime is dissing Canada.
Yet looking at his favorites what do we see.
First, he believes in a geocentrist model in which the earth is the center of the universe.
He's a believer in a 6 day creation by God. Coupled with the idea of a vast scientific conspiracy.
The mass media television mind control....
NASA never went to the moon....
He's a naturalpath who feels mordern medicine doesn't work....
Judging by your favorite videos, I'm not sure you could find Canada on a map.
Craigmw45 2 months ago
Finland FTW
MultiJerkku 2 months ago
Russians are sub-human scum. The day will come when Anglo-Saxon people will annihilate the Slavic eastern race.
TheGermanboy15 2 months ago
@TheGermanboy15 I hope that that does not happen before the racist scum is completely annihiliated.
alanheath 2 months ago 9
@alanheath
I see you live in Poland, I'm sorry but i can't understand when a Polack/Dog is talking to me.
TheGermanboy15 2 months ago
@TheGermanboy15 In that case perhaps you need to take English lessons or ask someone to translate for you. Ich bezweifle, dass Sie Deutsch sprechen.
alanheath 2 months ago 11
@alanheath
You don't have to use google-translate.
TheGermanboy15 2 months ago
@TheGermanboy15 You are right, I don't. If you don't understand me though, you could use it.
alanheath 2 months ago
@alanheath Ich denke, ich spreche Deutsch.
rupp87 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rupp87 and I do my best to do so!
alanheath 1 month ago
@alanheath LOL! Ich schätze, dass es immer Idioten gibt.
thechicat 2 days ago
@thechicat Leider gibt es viele Idioten hier auf you tube!
alanheath 1 day ago
@TheGermanboy15 You'll be sucking polish cock soon, just like your mother, grow up little Adolf
bartronZ 1 month ago
@alanheath Sie sind in Deutschland geboren Ich bin Amerikaner aus meist Deutsch Vorfahren wie geht es ihnen ?
rupp87 1 month ago
@rupp87 Ich war in Großbritannien geboren. Meine Eltern sind Briten, meine Großeltern auch, meine Urgroßeltern auch .... für viele Generationen ... !!
alanheath 1 month ago
@alanheath "Racist" that wouldnt apply to Israel would it? How about a little MultiCulturalism for Israel Alan? A nice Arab Prime Minister for "diversity" sake?
How about some Lebanese bankers to handle Israels finances? Let Hamas run the education system. After all Alan you have no problem recommending such diversity for
Western Europeans, now do you? Who the racist Alan? Who hates whites? ..who preaches programs of "tolerance" when you know the outcome is the death of Europe?
You do Alan.
871yt 1 week ago
@871yt What has this got to do with this film? If you want Hamas to run the education system in Israel, why are you directing the comment to me - I am not Israel's education minister, do not live in Israel, have any vote there and have only spent about 20 days in my life there? Why not write to the minister involved - I suspect the ministry has an internet page?
At the same time why don't you take your racist comments and psychiatric problems somewhere else?
alanheath 1 week ago
@alanheath The point of this is that every news program..all so called documentaries
are all the product of a Jewish run media conglomerate. YouTube for example is Jewish
owned. And the ENDLESS bombardment of white Western societywith WWII...Holocaust...Civil Rights, Racial mixing..Mass Immigration serves one purpose
to fragment any sense of white identity or white cohesion. Whether a Jew has the honesty to admit what he is doing is another story
871yt 4 days ago
@871yt
So if jews run youtube , how come they allow cockroaches to post anti jewish comments?!
shlomof 4 days ago
@shlomof They certainly control you now dont they? The slightest chink in the endless "anti semitism" hysteria sends you into denial and ..wait for it, more screams of "anti semitism. You Tube..has one fatal flaw in its business plan, it is an open source. Unlike a newspaper with a small group of controlled "writers" You Tube
commentary allows things to be said that even the Jews cant control. They would like to..but that would ruin the money flow...and Jews will never allow that
871yt 3 days ago
@871yt Uhhh ignorant human monkeys with their jew this, white that, or black yadayada..Were all fucking human beings..the sooner we realize this, the sooner the world will become a better place. The days of conquest are over, now it's time to move forward into the future and live together, instead of killing eachother over our differences. We all may be different, but we have more in common then uncommon. We all bleed red, we all breath air, we all have 46 chromosomes...I could go on.
GKris1989 3 hours ago
@871yt You cant categorize one ethnicity as being evil. The human species is evil. If blacks had the power Europeans had I'm sure they would've enslaved the whites and other ethnicity's they saw as inferior. The human ape is a greedy and evil creature, but it's up to you to be more humane than ignorant.
GKris1989 3 hours ago
@871yt
20% of the citizens of Israel are arabs , 50% of them are voting for the jewish zionist parties in free and democratic elections though they have 3 independent arab parties represented in the israeli parliament.In 2004 an arab football club won the israeli cup and represented Israel in the UEFA cup.Is this considered racist?!
shlomof 4 days ago
@shlomof This is excellent news. Now lets keep going and going. True Multiculutralism
An Arab Prmie Minister...NOW
A Hamas run education system NOW
A Lebanese banker run finance system..NOW
Whats thematter...? Jew whine...scream...and connive until white society commits
suicide in the name of an insane ideology..so now its the Jews turn.
871yt 4 days ago
@871yt
In a democratic country the parliament and the government are elected by the citizens, when the arab parties in ISRAEL will have the majority , clear they can appoint the prime minister , the minister of education and the finance minister, so what exactly is your problem , are you smoking some bad stuff?
shlomof 4 days ago
@shlomof Isnt that precisely what the Jews will not allow? Israel unashamedly describes itself as homeland for Jews. I applaud this. I admire Israelis sense of identity.
But the same Jews that will never allow MultiCulturalism to happen to them..will
promote if for whites..precisely because they KNOW it will destroy white societies
871yt 3 days ago
@871yt
Israel is homeland of jews as Italy is homeland of italians, Russia homeland of russians, Poland of polish, Romania of romanians, France of french, so what exactly is your problem?
What have jews to do with the fact that german blond girls like to marry black americans or africans?
shlomof 3 days ago
@shlomof My problem is ..the calendar on the wall. Mine says 2012. Yours?
How is that you havent noticed there are 50 million muslims in Europe?
How is that whites will soon be a minority in the USA..the country they built?
How is that you have never noticed that every program on every Jewish media
TV show is about the wonders of diversity..the glories of mass immigration the evil oppression of white evil doers. What a daydream you live in.
871yt 2 days ago
@871yt
The 50 million arabs in Europe are not my problem , and for sure I haven't sent and imposed them on the europeans.The europeans asked for them as they needed cheap working force for jobs they are reluctant to practice.
As to USA , if you are a fucked KKK racist , remember that you have brought the slaves from AFRICA to work and make you rich, so why are you complaining now, that your wives and daughters are looking for their big dicks?
shlomof 2 days ago
@shlomof Not YOUR problem exactly. Though the Jews are complete parasites on Western Culture..they think of only their immediate tribal circle. The KKK doesnt exist
and hasnt for decades. What DOES exist is the Jewish ownership of all the media
all the Judgeships..all the banks. Blacks dont work..they ..they live off whites.
Talking about slavery..when it ended 145 years ago.. More evasion.More lies.
THE CALENDAR ON THE WALL SAYS 2012...DESCRIBE REALITY OUR ADMIT YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY
871yt 2 days ago
@871yt I think the true parasites of western civilisation is are the micks..Whereas Jews are hard working welth creators, you cannot say that for the mick "diaspora" who take and give nothing apart from whinging about others
MrMickroach 2 days ago
@MrMickroach Yep they create wealth...by poisoning society with their mass media
the TV programming that drags the entire culture in into the gutter..but makes THEM rich. The Jewish Academic lies that are based on fraud..but perpetuate the lies
about race, and Western culture that keep the Jews in power. Its wealth alright..built on corruption, lies, deformation..subversion. The problem is the Jews like the parasites they are destroy the host animal...which they live off of.
871yt 2 days ago
@871yt Your racism clouds your visioon of the true parasite which is the Irish! Jews are hard working and wealth creators
MrMickroach 2 days ago
@871yt The parasites are the racists who do not contribute to society or to wealth but only seek to steal it from themselves from those that work for it.
alanheath 1 day ago
@alanheath Lol, so Jews = racists?
Dercommandingofficer 21 hours ago
@shlomof Actually YOU HAVE SENT THE MUSLIMS TO EUROPE..precisely because you are incapable of seeing reality. You see your little tribal group..and thats it. Even though you live continually off of Western Civ
Why are Jews persecuted? Why has every country thrown them out? You have provided the answer..now havent you?
871yt 2 days ago
@TheGermanboy15 yeah you sure annihilated the Russians in 1945 didn't you, no wait they annihilated your mighty 3rd riech including Berlin, the russian troops raped many german women, maybe your grandmother was one of them, maybe you are yourself 1/4 russian you stupid little boy
bartronZ 1 month ago
@TheGermanboy15 Whilst quaintly negative epithets like rapacious, garrulous or dangerous may be ascribed to the Slavic race and their nationalities, that hardly makes them sub-human, quite the contrary one might think. As for the Anglo-Saxon race and their nationalities, a certain barbarous quality has not, within similar human experience, been entirely unknown: peoples are not evil only individuals: as for annihilation, nature will do that for us if exponential growth continues.
elrjames777 1 month ago
This documentary is the one that started my deeper interest in WWII history. I had not heard the story of the war in the East, I had no idea how much people suffered. Amazing footage, excellent documentary.
CrowleysGhost 2 months ago
Some of the comments I see are the most uninformed comments I've seen on Youttube...
Fascism=Nazism..? Not even close ideologically.
Money was not the cause of WWII.
It was a war motivated by revenge, driven by ignorance, fueled by doctrines of hate, racial intolerance, greed and envy, and powered of course by insanity.
Does this sound familiar...?
jordan390a 3 months ago
@jordan390a I think you should go and read your definitions again. Nazism was a Fascist ideology. Core tenets Nationalism, Authoritarianism, Social Darwinism mixed in with eugenics and euthanasia...
Bazanadu 2 months ago
@jordan390a It sounds very familiar. Like many of the comments made on this page which is, I think, the point you are trying to make!
alanheath 2 months ago
@jordan390a
Not even close? They are almost identical, the major difference is the emphasis on the racial element in Nazism.
serialkiller1990 2 months ago
@serialkiller1990 And as many communist regimes have shown, the racial element can also creep up there too.
alanheath 2 months ago
@serialkiller1990 your so right.
thothemighty 1 week ago
the Russians are still as menace, as are the Chinese, north Koreans, etc. and, of course, the u.s.
roaringwaterbay 3 months ago
The annexation of Czechoslovakia made Germany the worlds second largest industrial economy but Germany wasted this advantage by not turning all industry to military needs until it was to late. With the industries of France, Netherlands and other occupied countries Hitlers military should have had sufficient weapons to destroy the USSR. Finland was a debacle but Stalin's Siberian army defeated Japan in a series of battles 1936/39. This army led the pincher movement that surrounded Stalingrad
binaway 3 months ago
the winter stoped the panzer division only this
TheCarlosconsultor 3 months ago
"War of LAST century" ;)
Eshayzbra96 3 months ago
Since the soviets attacked Poland, for no reason, and the Germans attacked because the poles were boosted up by the English anFrench why didnt the world attack Russia? Why was adolf singled out?
whiteman866 3 months ago
@whiteman866 Because poland was allied with britian and france, so britain and france declared on germany, it's alot to explain but it was the right choice, fuck Nazism and communism, both ran by genocidle MANIACS.
Eshayzbra96 3 months ago
@whiteman866 The right choice, Im not sure. We relegated millions of people to the rule of the man who conducted the slaughter of 50 million Ukranians. Hitler was targeted ONLY because he was not using the IMF. It was MONEY. The World Jewish Congress had started their war on Germany in mid 30s. Boycots,and just a general nuissance. Germany was not allowed to have self determination in Silesia, East Prussia, Sudentenland. Hitler offered to leave Poland. The English(WInnie) wanted war.
whiteman866 3 months ago
@whiteman866 Because the treaty with Poland only provided for assistance in the case of an attack from Germany.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Re: "treaty with Poland" 100% correct :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
союзнички, блин...
FrauleinSchmuck 3 months ago
@FrauleinSchmuck Гитлер и Сталин были очевидными союзниками!
alanheath3 3 months ago
Comment removed
FrauleinSchmuck 3 months ago
Whats the difference between fascism and communism? They both appear to be the same oppressive regimes
manormaid 3 months ago
@manormaid Good question: tough to answer correctly: Communism tends to have something of a global revolutionary intention and be what the Bolsheviks termed a dictatorship of the proletariat: ostensible equality but outlawing or extirpating class enemies, religion, private property and enterprise. Fascism has more of an extreme nationalist or xenophobic character: suppressing political opposition but depending to an extent upon popularity and tolerating many extra party aspects of private life
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 I don't think that the victims would have noticed much difference!
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Re: "victims" Yes: although, in an overall balance, Fascist mass killings were peculiarly a 25 year phenomenon, whereas the murderous scourge of communist dictatorship has (and continues to do so in Zimbabwe for example) enjoyed far more time to claim a number of victims far greater even than the holocaust itself: Soviet gulags, deportations, collectivization and artificially induced famine, China's great leap forward and cultural revolution, Cambodia's killing fields et al:
elrjames777 3 months ago
@manormaid Facism is NAtional socialism. It is Nation based. They respect borders. Communism is anti religion, believes that their illness can be transported. But in reality it is run by a few. We are closely approaching Communism. True nat socialism did many good things.0% home loans, universal hosp, 0 unemployment. Hitler went from 30% unemployment to 2% in a few years....and keeping the army to 100K. He gave the Germans back their pride. Now they are the bufoons of movies. "I know nothing!"
whiteman866 3 months ago
@whiteman866 Fascism is not National Socialism. It has absolutely nothing to do with National Socialism. That's a stupid anti-German lie invented by the Communists.
reichsadler1888 3 months ago
@whiteman866 Adolf Hitler was against Christianity, he planned to replace it eventually with Germanic paganism. Unemployment in Germany could not have declined from 30% to 2% without the preparation for war. Hitler did not respect the 100k army limit as he would train 100k, fire them and recruit another 100k. Finally, what makes you think a national socialist country isn't run by the few like any other political system?
1JesseW 3 months ago
it was not the decision of a mad man to attack russia, its just that he wanted to fight america and russia at the same time. if germany would not have declared war on america all soldiers who died in the west by americans would have fighted against russia too and they would clearly have lost the war and europe would now be great and right without moslims and jews.
gunnerman259 3 months ago
sweet
Aphex217Twin 3 months ago
This is without doubt one of the finast documentaries on the German-Russian war ever made. I urge all students of history to watch it start to finish. It explains away a lot of misconceptions the West has about the war in the East.
fliegeroh 3 months ago
rw
2008Sameoldfitup 3 months ago
germans was kicking russian peasant ass in the beggining 12-1 kill death ratio...1.the winter lack of clothing 2.mud slowing down advance 3.difficulty maintaining supply lines 4. 3 pronged attack shouldve combined the 3 and just aim for the heart of russia 4. operation barbarossa was delayed a couple months due to the capture of the balkins postponing barbarossa..5.russia is huge worn down german military..6 russian had allied assistance..7.german allies were WEAK and could not be relied upoun.
kmesprtan 3 months ago
@kmesprtan Re: "kicking russian peasant ass" : your omission of a capital R is indicative, but please try to post more lucidly: I realize that you are precluded from an easy use of your first language here on this website, but your post is never-the-less is one of the most convoluted synopsis of events in the east that I have read in all my hours of roaming around U tube on the topic.
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 ok but we all know that if all the emphasis was directed on the eastern front without a winter war theres no doubt in my mind that the germans wouldve been victorious...its more hitler mistakes then russian victories....
kmesprtan 3 months ago
@kmesprtan Weather conditions are the same for both sides and do not make a choice to show favour to one over the other. 'Operation retribution' was forced on Hitler by enemy action and could probably not have been avoided, although a 'Moscow Option' was perfectly feasible even with the delayed start to 'Barbarossa'. However, whether or not the capture of that hub of politics, industry and communication would have ensured victory is moot, although it may probably have held defeat at bay :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 I don't think weather conditions are the same for both sides. Surely how well one is prepared and used to the conditions also bears a certain role.
I agree with you on the Moscow question but we have had 30 years + to think about it whereas the German staff did not. Furthermore had the battle at Kiev not be fought in 1941, a huge body of troops would have had to be dealt with later. Against this argument is lack of mobility of those send south from Smolensk.
alanheath3 3 months ago 2
@alanheath3 Preparedness for weather does bear a role; my apology for not making sufficiently clear that I was merely questioning the assertion of the "ass kicker" who had no doubt in his mind about it being the crucial factor. However, I freely admit to amending an aphorism that Napoleon is reported to have used in conversation with Grouchy and Gerrard about the difficulty of pressing hard on the heels of an enemy over muddy roads "the roads are the same for everyone" :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 The quote from Napoleon is certainly correct as then they were all using the same technology.
Changing the point, I refute the argument in football that the weather is the same for everyone. If you have a two goal need and only need a draw then you probably have the advantage when the weather turns bad (eg England v Croatia, November 2007).
alanheath3 3 months ago 2
@alanheath3 Sorry to be awkward, but I'm reluctant to agree wholeheartedly: I would need some convincing to be fully persuaded that the maxim of a genuinely great military commander such as Napoleon (not the derisively ascribed actual 'GROFAZ') had little or no value in the context of "Opp' Barbarossa"; because he himself had endured almost identical conditions personally with his troops. The football analogy is sound but is it really the determining factor; are no other variables more crucial ?
elrjames777 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Yor 30 yr est gud: d topic was extensively explored as sensible alternative hist in 79 by D Downing in "Moscow Option". As initially implemented, Opp Barb set 3 huge army groups to simultaneously strive to attain each of their respective targets whilst encircling RA forces in the process. D 500k prisoner victory at Kiev was stunning, but momentum to capture Len and Mosc was lost; tank diversion from AGN + AGC took a terrible mechanical toll (as you suggest): PZ generals were appalled
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 Yes, the momentum had gone. Had the Germans at Smolensk in the summer of 1941 been fully motorised then a case may have been made for turning south.
alanheath3 3 months ago
I am trying to locate anyone who knows of Hubert Menzel, who appears in Vol.1 of this video. In September of 1938, my Aunt met a Hubert Menzel on a train to Salzburg. Hubert said he was head of a Berlin military school. A few weeks after Hitler marched into Czech, Menzel sent my aunt a letter, saying that he was in high-level meetings, & was among the first to enter Czech. He describes the joy of the citizens. I have two photos of Hubert and he looks like a younger version of the video
mfvideos2009 3 months ago
@mfvideos2009 Fascinating stuff: not sure where u r in the World, but u seem to have sufficient initial information to begin a proper research: try finding out which military schools were operating in Berlin during 1938 and then get in touch with those that you can :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
The odds against the Finns were a lot more than two to one as suggested here. More like eight to one in troops committed.
alanheath3 4 months ago in playlist pllay 13
@alanheath3 There is a saying in Finland that one Finn can beat ten Russians...but what do you do when that 11th Russian shows up?
kentamitchell 4 months ago
@kentamitchell You just get a second finn ;)
casperado666 4 months ago
@casperado666 That will work just fine, until *another* dozen Russians show up.
kentamitchell 4 months ago
Given that Stalin had wiped out his own high command, the Nazi argument that the USSR was about to move west is totally absurd. It attacked Poland, Rumania, Finland and the Baltic States only because of its alliance with the Nazis. The USSR showed no inkling of doing anything like this before the Nazi alliance.
alanheath3 4 months ago in playlist pllay 3
@alanheath3 Sorry again Allan:-) Re: "USSR about to move west totally absurd" whilst we know that Hitler developed and implemented plans with the WH to destroy his racial and ideological enemies in the east at the earliest possible moment, the corollary of that is not necessarily that Bolshevik tendencies were anything other than irredentist - either before or after the Soviet / Nazi pact :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 Bolshevik apologists have argued that their territorial seizures made during their pact with their Nazi allies were only irredentist but this is not true as Bukovnia and Bessarabia had been part of Austria. Nonetheless there is no evidence that before their pact with Hitler than Stalin intended on attacking the west, otherwise he would hardly have bumped off his higher command.
I think Stalin was like Mussolini (and possibly like Franco might have been) in being a jackal.
alanheath3 3 months ago 2
@elrjames777 I must say that you write very nicely - I think I write nicely but I don't write as nicely as you do.
Anyway my tooth is hurting so I need to go and see the irredentist now.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Lol: brilliant pun: if I may just ponder your post about the Bolshevik apologists for a while before responding; I believe your David Irving got some stuff out of Moscow archives, so I need to check it. However, you can guess I may be a little tendentious when not concurring with you in liking Stalin's almost world wide vision of a Bolshevik destiny to the petty nationalism (ostensibly to resist communism) of Mussolini, and particularly Franco :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
Germany was simply over-stretched. One on one they could beat Soviet easily.
dlmaniac 4 months ago
@specialed192554 So people who get hanged are macho? Giving you sadistic enjoyment makes them manly?
MikeMths35 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey!
Are you looking for more interesting documentaries on youtube?
I have created a collection of links to interesting documentaries on subjects like the history and culture of nations, world war II, science and conspiracy theories!
Visit my website which you can find on my youtube channel Or simply select and copy the following lines into your browser's address bar:
MYHISTORYLINK
.
COM
MrFlohi 4 months ago in playlist War of the Century
GREATEST MURDERER OF ALL TIME-UNCLE JOE
graciemaemarie11 4 months ago
@graciemaemarie11 Yeah: Uncle Joe and Auntie Mao :-(
elrjames777 4 months ago
Why the hell there is a prositute video in the suggestions O_O
ganado15 4 months ago 2
they are all made by 12 yr olds, that don't know shit and spell like 1st graders
debzeppeliniv 4 months ago in playlist WWII Documentary Videos
The material supply of the USSR by Roosavely was the biggest logistics movement in human history. Nazi generals were taken completely by supprize by the sheer volume of weaponry the Russians had. A Russia they defeated in just 3 weeks in WW-1.
Avalon400 4 months ago
@Avalon400 Russia was not defeated in three weeks in WW1 but three years. But yes, the supply of American equipment and food was the biggest logistics movement in history not that there was any thanks from the USSR. On the contrary, it persuaded Stalin of how weak the west was.
alanheath3 4 months ago in playlist pllay 16
@alanheath3 You do realise the supplies the British Empire,United States sent the Soviets couldnt even make 25% of the Soviet war effort?? Also U.S became very rich thanks to the war, infact they got everything they ever wanted if you research. And it was the Allies who started the Cold war as early as 1944, The Allies even planned to attack the Soviet Union as early as 1945.(Operation Unthinkable) There was no thanks from the U.S to the Soviets who played the main role and saved the day!
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 100% agreed that allied supplies to Stalin, whilst substantial, were not critical in defeating the WH in the east..However, Operation Unthinkable became exactly that: it was rejected by UK Chiefs of Staff as militarily unfeasible. I believe, with you, that it is unreasonable to doubt that war in the east decided the outcome of WWII - but everything else you posted (beyond the obvious fact that the "US became very rich thanks to the war" is merely unsubstantiated assertion :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 I would hardly call enough food to feed the entire Red Army for every day of the war less than 25% of the Soviet war effort. It was the USSR who started the Cold War in 1943 when it broke off diplomatic relations with Poland followed in 1944 with the mass arrests in Poland as one occupier was exchanged for another although the West continued to support its dodgy ally.
The USA did become rich but the UK and France were almost bankrupted and USSR got a huge empire in Europe.
alanheath3 3 months ago 11
@alanheath3 The Soviets were able to feed there Armies and Civilians and they were able to produce countless thousands of Tanks,Aircraft,etc. Most of the Soviet war-effort 75% came from Russia, The most vital supply the Allies gave the Red Army was vehicles. And it was the Soviets who invaded Poland 1939, nobody said anything, Relations between the Allies and Sovits were very poor, And the U.S plan to was destroy Britain by economic ruin, U.S saw Britain as possible enemie!
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 The Soviets were not able to feed their population - there had been major famine in the USSR in the 1930s and according to Russian sources people died in Siberia (which was nowhere near the front) during the war because of starvation.
As for no-one saying anything about the Soviet invasion of Poland, I know a lot of Poles who continue to say things about it.
As for your allegation on a US plan to economically destroy the UK - it is absurd and there is no evidence for it.
alanheath3 3 months ago 8
@alanheath3 100% agree your famine post: Re: radios hardly mentioned, here are the figures: precis from Walter Scott Dunn: in the early years of war in the east, communication was a serious problem for RA: radios and field telephones were rare and did not give an effective command structure below Regimental level. Lend-lease made a major contribution to the advance in communications that was a major element in improved performance of RA in 1944: 40k radios, 380k field fones, 1.25m fone cable :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 I am convinced that the radio was the 'secret weapon' of WW2. How else can one explain the efficiency of the German armies when otherwise their equipment was often inferior to that facing them. They had co-ordination which their opponents did not!
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Yes: I believe all WH AF and Pz Gndr vehicles were so equipped: "how can one explain" is a fascinating questn: at an operational level you must be right, but command and control is two edged, and HItler was able to interfere in detail bcoz of good net communications: it seems early on that Paulus was advised to destroy 6th Army 1,000 watt transmiitter to give an excuse for independent action: a Supreme Command Signals unit was flown in enabling Zeitler to receive outspoken messages.
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 So now we have any even more interesting situation that I had not considered. The radio was indeed the secret weapon, initially serving one side and then the other. The von Paulus story is really curious, I knew nothing about it! Had he destroyed it, he could have saved the lives of thousands of Axis troops - although probably no more than a temporary reprieve.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Re "temporary reprieve" You are so right Alan; and intuitively focus exactly on the dilemma facing any analysis free of over politicized observation: at issue is the latterly admirable, stoic almost pagan WH defence against Bolshevism juxtaposed with and compromised by the earlier corruption, misuse and undermining of the professionalism, discipline, training and mental disposition of the WH in increasingly murderous pursuit of willo-the-whisp perverted Nazi ideas and practices :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 I still have not seen this programme all the way through!!
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 OK: but my comment really has little direct bearing on the series, merely a few notes of the basic outline of my perspective encouraged by your earlier post. This 'War of the Century' really is BBC history at its best, avoiding crude politically correct tendentiousness and without vogue like imperative to obtrude the historical journeys of their presenters and producers onto our screens: lets see if you glean the same conclusion from the final part of the programme as myself :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 This is definitely one of the best programmes related to WW2 - I am cautious about offering the title of the best. There are one or two little errors (like counting the wrong number of months or incorrect percentage) but this is really minor.
I am up to part 15 now.
I am sure you have seen the BBC Auschwitz story which is brilliant. There was also a series on Roman Emperors in the same light which was fantastic and very well presented giving new interpretations!
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Yes: but compared to historical journey type presentations that BBC Timewatch has warped into, this really is an exemplary production. RE: Auschwitz: didn't that flow from the equally excellent "Nazi lesson from History" BBC series of professor Kershaw. A chillingly compelling documentary on the topic is also posted here on u tube: "one third of the holocaust": this is hard to refute logically, although intuitive refutation from the actual historical and political background remains.
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 As a person who has spent years researching the holocaust in Poland, I can say that the one third of the holocaust is nothing but nonsense using lies when half baked scientific evidence is unavailable. The person responsible is a crazed racist - I had correspondence with him. He never once went to a single archive, did one interview, knows none of the languages involved - nothing. He concentrates on finding small errors in texts and blowing them out of all proportion.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Re: "holocaust": Yeah: thanks Alan: once I recovered from initial shock in beginning to doubt the credibility of any survivor witnesses, I viewed the Eichmann trial: some footage of which is missing I believe: thankfully, on second viewing, I was able to notice flaws in the "one third" presentation that I had previously overlooked: the barbers testimony was manipulated, internal walls could easily been knocked down with hammers and co2 used obviating a need for flush doors and masks
elrjames777 3 months ago
@alanheath3 The Soviet Union was hudge, They were obviously going to have problems with Famine and world war justs makes things 100x worse. Allied Aid to the Soviet Union during World war couldnt even mae up 25% of the Soviet war-effort. And the U.S was planning for war with Britain, When World war 2 broke out the U.S stayed out and Hitler made fools out of the Yanks, The U.S wanted to bankrupt and destroy britain economy just like the Great war.
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 Being huge is no justification for famine. The US is huge but does not suffer from famine.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 The Soviet Union had problems with Famine before the war, A world war just makes things worse. Over 75% of the Soviet war-effort came from Russia, They had endless resources of Tanks,Aircraft,Weapons,Men. The Soviets were able to Feed most of there troops,civilians obviously Allied Aid helped, 25% is still alot, the most vital things the Allies gave the Soviets was Vehicles, But without the Red Army there would be no victory for the Allies.
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 The problems of famine before WW2 were as a result of the disastrous, deliberate policies of Stalin in turning the richest agricultural area in the world into a place where maybe 3m people - some 2% of the population of the entire country - died of hunger.
Neither the USSR, nor any other country on earth, has endless supplies.
I believe the Allies could have won without the USSR. On the other hand I do not believe that without the western Allies the USSR could have won.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Without the Red Army it would be impossible for the Allies to win the war, thats fact. Allies were weak compared to the Soviets who were willing to sacrifice millions for victory. The Soviet Union played the main role during the war by far. Yes, If the British had accepted Hitler peace offer 1940 then the Soviets might have been defeated. However the Red Army was the biggest on the planet, The Reds had the biggest air-force,tanks,etc in the world, They could out produce the Axis.
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 Yes: RA fended off total collapse in 41 mainly with its own resources, but it may not have resisted or beaten WH so well in later years without lend-lease, which gave it the where-with-all to operate successfully. Similarly, is it likely that Begration would be so crushing in 44 without Allied invasion of France? In any event, the root cause of WH defeat by RA was Hitler's willful interference with its professional ability: Stalin tended to defer to his generals at crucial times
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 You do realise that the Axis campaign in Russia failed from the start, Barberossa ended in disaster the Red Army T-34s and troops from the East proved too much for the Axis forces. Stalingrad the main forces defeated yet again by the Red Army resources of endless T-34 tanks and man-power the same with Battle of Kursk, The Soviets had endless resources and didnt care about human lives only victory, Allied aid to Russia could only make 25% of the Soviet war-effoct.
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 If someone other than Hitler had been in charge then the Germans may have beaten the Soviet Union. Of course if someone other than Hitler had been in charge then there would have been no war in the first place.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Yes, If Adolf Hitler was killed early in the war then the Germans and Europeans Axis powers could have a chance of defeated the Red Army, After the Battle of France it was Hitler who took full control of the Axis forces and thought he was a Military genius when infact he was foolish.However fighting the British Empire & Soviet Union at the same time, Is insane and impossible to win the Axis without Hitler would have gave up, Hitler was the problem and the man who started the war.
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 Yes: we all know that RA high command, Zhukov particularly, employed sacrificial methods in deliberate attempts to overwhelm WH opposition: but it is mere political comfort for you to suggest that WH failed from the start and RA would have won even without western aid. There is no factual basis that T34 production was endless and that 6th Army could not have avoided destruction even without Hitler's baleful influence nor that RA would have won Kursk even without Lucy spy ring :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 The Soviet Industry was in the Urals and safe from Axis bombing.The Soviets were able to mass produce and had endless resources. The Red Army had countless thousands of tanks that could be destroyed and replaced easy, Also countless thousands of Aircraft, Russia had endless man-power and dictator that would sacrifice millions just like Hitler. Red Army was the biggest in the world and had the most tanks,aircraft,men,etc. The Axis had to fight Britan,Soviets later U.S aswell!!!
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 Wrong: don't fall for the same old mythological mantras: much of soviet tank production, for instance (which only peaked at 2,000 per month in 1945 and was therefore not countless, as you claim), was dependent upon electricity generated by steam and water power plants near Moscow, Gorky, Tula and Staliogorsk: about 75% of the power used by the entire Soviet defence industry: had "Eisenhammer" succeeded, only two smaller energy centers behind the Urals would have been left intact.
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 The question of electricity generation in the USSR is extremely valid. My gut feeling however is that you are wrong on this one and I pursue it further if I get the chance. That is just my gut feeling by the way - I have no evidence!
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 Re: "electricity" its easy to google Operation Iron Hammer: and I have the full account of the proposed attack in Alfred Price's "last Year of the Luftwaffe": I should be glad to modify my view in light of any research you turn up, although the main thrust of my post was to undermine martyn's ridiculous insistence that soviet production, resources and manpower were endless and invulnerable, and that "lend lease" had little or no effect on RA performance :-)
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 I agree on the general thrust!
I have the following theory - just a thought. I know how difficult it is to transfer production from one country to another today.
In the USSR no-one wanted to make decisions, yet we are to believe that somehow whole factories moved east with their workforce and waiting for them was all the infrastructure necessary including power, roads, rail, accommodation etc.
It makes no sense unless the factories were already there and waiting!
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 o m gosh: excuse a little laughter with u: but isn't "already there and waiting" just the hypothetical proposition we considered about Bolshevik anticipation of, and perhaps even designs upon, western territorial intentions and interests: however: the sensible answer is probably that even heavy factory machinery imperatively had to be, and was, moved within the 6 months that railway infrastructure and enemy action allowed: although preconceived factory prefabrication is unexplained.
elrjames777 3 months ago
@elrjames777 Stalin did not like retreats and dismantling of factories and moving everything including all the labour strikes me as being a major retreat. I find it hard to believe that anyone would authorise this.
If the plan was a war of aggression why built them so far back from where they are needed (unless raw materials, power etc was there) - particularly given how small the population was.
I think rail links are the key. Obviously it happened but maybe the scale has been exaggerated.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@martynrobin121 The USSR did not have endless resources and quality of production was not very good. Although massively outnumbered in tanks, the Nazi armies ran rings round the USSR in 1941. To a large extent the Finns held their own for three months despite having next to no conventional anti tank weapons of any consequence.
alanheath3 3 months ago
@alanheath3 The Soviets had endless resources of Tanks,Aircraft,Man-power,etc and the Soviet Industry was bigger than the European Axis industy. The Red Army problems at the start of the war was due to the lack of Leaders, Stalin got paranoid and killed his best generals and leaders in the 1930s whitch made the Red Army ineffective till 1941. However Moscow then after the Red Army proved very effective the Axis just couldnt keep up.
martynrobin121 3 months ago
@alanheath3 not economically destroy but the US took the place of the British Empire in the world scenario
pedroissler 2 months ago
@pedroissler I don't see how. Explain.
alanheath3 2 months ago
@alanheath3 Americans deserve to be 'rich'! We are good looking, good dancers,
and we now make the best beer! Have you ever seen NFL football?
And we don't waste our time reading. We let other nationalities do our reading
and then explain it to us. Also, Americans are world class sleepers!
American cuisine is also the best, MacDonalds, KFC are everywhere.
Also we have cheap gasoline! Stop being envious, you can come to
America if you behave yourself and brush your teeth.
fntime 3 months ago
@fntime good one!
alanheath3 3 months ago
@fntime Americans make the best beer? Give your head a shake! American beer is limp-wristed piss-water.
gsmonks 3 months ago
@gsmonks -- yeah, German beer is nector of the Gods...
the82spartans 3 months ago