You wouldn't even mention war again if 6 million of your soldiers died in combat, 3 million in German concentration camps, 10 million women raped by the Germans, 1 million civilians starved to death by German blockade in Leningrad, thousands of villages burned to the ground with people still inside them, Germans planned to gas 50% of the Russian population, Generalplan Ost, this is what Russia suffered in world war II and thats why we will never start such a war and suffering.
I feel the same way I am not at all a nazi and I am glad they lost , but I very much like there army uniforms , tanks and guns. The photo at 2:10 is amazing. I never saw it before and it looks like it may be the 12 th SS panzer divison based on the wide range of camo. Photos of the 12 th are very hard to find.
i just dont think thease wars are about some jews religion or race thats is just so crook eyed maby some race is more hated than other but its just elites and politicans personal thing i think its abou territory or military position on map and resources of course they are things thar really matter not some religion big thinkers watch way over that stuff
@isobodari1 jews were just sort of used as a pariah because they were the wealthiest after Germany lost World War 1 the country was in an economic crisis.
America wanted NOTHING to do with the continual hate and violence that Europe expressed towards itself. It was WELL KNOWN that a stability would be reached in Europe. But the assualt on Pearl Harbor broke the veil and total war began.
Sorry AUKS00007107 you are wrong. The "Jews" had nothing to do with the hate towards Nazism. Nor the 'crimes' they committed. All nations at war comit crimes. Both towards the within and towards the focus. In America, the decision to terminate Nazism and the Japanese Empire occured when Pearl Harbor broke the veil of isolationism.
I have respect for everyone who dies fighting for and beliving in something. And I belive that the german soldiers were not bad or evil at all, they were told to fight, so they fought. Its the same with every other soldier in the world. The real assholes where Hitler, Goebbels, Goering, Himmler and the other dogs that gave orders to for example "reduce" the mass of certain ethnic groups. And the SS, they realy were Nazis, in contrast to the Wehrmacht, and they did most of the massmurdering.
I have respect for everyone who dies fighting for and beliving in something. And I belive that the german soldiers were not bad or evil at all, they were told to fight, so they fought. Its the same with every other soldier in the world. The real assholes where Hitler, Goebbels, Goering, Himmler and the other dogs that gave orders to for example "reduce" the mass of certain ethnic groups. And the SS, they realy were Nazis, in contrast to the Wehrmacht, and they did most of the massmurdering.
@aviomaster Actually, the Russians gave the world thousands of artisans, scientists and inventors. So shut up and leave this page, skippy. It's you who is stupid, not their "race".
@aviomaster You foolish man, 41, -45, Russia had no nuclear weapons, so...?! do not worry for us if it will be necessary to give their lives, for the country. )))
I am proud of my German ancestors. The Greatest army ever formed. If it were not for the allies helping russia, they would have not lasted 2 years, and the thanks we got? The last 60 years of war against communism. Hartmann had a field day blasting russian planes, Rudel was a hero destroying russian armour. Not all were Nazi, just doing what soldiers do. They fight, and they die.
@mach1franco I think the Germans could have won had the OKW had their way. Hitler insisted they (the german army) defend every piece of real-estate to the last man whereas many in the German army including Guderian wanted to use the superior mobility of the panzers to fight in a mobile defense while also creating sizable strategic reserves. Hitler should be largely credited for defeating the wehrmacht.
@Rimasta1 Very true. He was a total madman. had the best army in the world and wasted most on the worst territory he could cover. He was by far the best ally the U.S. and Britan could have asked for.
The most severe mistake, Hitler could do was declaring war to the U.S. Why? Yes, it was duty to his Axis pact but the sense was, that US were busy with Japan so they could not interfere with the war in Europe and Hitler? Come on FDR, join my party... *facepalm*
The aircraft at 1:05. Is it a Ju-52...the top gun platform would suggest so ? At first I thought it was an He-111 but the squared off tail....a Heinkel's was rounded. Only thing, a Ju-52's fusilage was more squared and ribbed was it not? A clarification would be most welcome and appreciated.
The key question is how to interpret the ratio as an indicator of combat effectiveness. American army reckoning, the Allies had slightly under 200 000 soldiers killed, and in turn killed over 250 000 Germans, for a rate 5:4.
In eastern front it was totally different: the kill rate was 1:3,5 advantage Germans if we trust Soviet official figures. If we take more realistic numbers we get 1:4 or 1:5 for Germans.
That's why we can say it clear - without West the Soviets would have lost the war.
@tranmere789 One has to be a bit skeptical of and Russian statistics, especially those compiled under Stalin. THey would be heavily skewed in the USSR's favor to try and minimize the effectiveness of the German effort. I assume you refer to the ratios as military only? Millions of Russian civilians died, and the number of German civilians was considerable, probably the bulk caused by US/British bombing. Without the West, an interesting conjecture. Had it been the Russians as the invaders....
@8301968 contd....sans the West the Russian casualties would have been horrendous(Look what little Finland did). The Russians would have been bled white. With Germans being invaders even sans the West the supply lines being stretched more and more with the Russian factories and workers ever retreating East(Germans never developed a heavy long range bomber), who knows, who will ever be able to say for sure. It does make for some interesting speculation tho. You could well be correct. Germans win.
I can tell one example. In 1942 The Red Army made 4 offensives against Finns in Svir (Syväri), in Kiestinki and two in Krivi. Some years ago the data of those losses of Red Army was calculated (russian study). It told that at least 44 000 soldiers were killed and 121 650 soldiers wounded. The Finns lost 2 000 killed in action and died in wounds. Loss rate - 1:20.
Just wonder what the kill rate would have been if Finns had 88 Flaks and assault guns like Germans had.
@tranmere789 Yes, and had they been equipped with the quality of weaponry the Germans had, MG 34/42 being just two examples. I have read opinions that said the Finn's useof skis worked exceedingly well to their advantage. The kill ratio you mention is no doubt factual, and one wonders would have it been close to those numbers had the Russians invaded Germany rather than the other. But, Hitler used the Finnish campaign as a measure of the Soviets warmaking abilities and felt free to invade.
@8301968 Soviets and warmaking ability? LMAO. Like china today, all soviets are good are is tossing bodies at bullets. The big tactic...rush straight forward..when that man dies, take his gun and keep running into the hail of bullets. Some strat.
@jphill4 It worked didn't it. What they did was have two defensive perimeters. The soldiers in the sccond one were given instructions to shoot anyone coming toward them, friend or foe. Thus the first perimeter had no choice but to hold or die. A lot of them did. Any Russian who surrendered would either die in a German prison camp or in a Russian one once they were sent back to "The Motherland". Many committed suicide rather than be returned.
@8301968 There is no historical or personal account of soldiers being shot for retreating. For deserting yes but not retreating. Nor was Stalingrad fought with Russian charging German lines. Russians used to great effect rat warfare and highly dug in defensive positions. And to say that Russian didn't use tactics and instead just threw soldiers at the Germans is also extremely false. For example Op august storm is thought in west point. And operation desert storm was the exact mimic of it.
@darkon112 And Zhukov never instigated Penal Battalions either!!!??? No historical account of that??? I guess you and I have been reading different accounts. Anything I have ever read contradicts what you just said, so as to who is correct is a matter of conjecture and depends on which one each of us read. I am aware of the Rottenkreig(sp?) tactics during Stalingrad. As for Desert Storm, Schwartzkopf was a great admirer of and stidied tactics of Guderian, Rommel and Van Manstein.
@tranmere789 Unless you're adding all the killed soviet POW and ignoring all the allies that fought and died with Germans on the eastern front your numbers aren't close to reality. And your 1:4 or 1:5 is only possible with civilian casualties .
Die Mächtigen und Reichen werden immer auf unsere Kosten agieren!
Verbrechen gegen den Frieden, Führen von Angriffskriegen, Planung und Verschwörumg zum selben Zwecke, ha.. da müsste man reihenweise US-Regierungen in Nürnberg anklagen..
Der kleine Mann ist IMMER der beschissene, der seinen Kopf hinhalten "darf".. Damals wie heute.. LEIDER!
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the fascist beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of these German women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! As you storm onward, kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army." —Jewish Soviet propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg, to Soviet soldiers upon entering Germany in 1945
Adolf Hitler was a bad war commander. He was the best friend the allied forces could have. The WW2 German people and armed forces were brilliant giving 110% to the German war effort. Hitler misled them. A terrible and horrific waste for all of us. Long live the EU!!!!!
@MrBobe9 May I suggest that Stalin maintained absolute power because he periodically eliminated anyone who he even suspected of being a threat. His paranoia nearly wecked the Russian military during the purges of the late 1930s. Stalin also made some mistakes early on that cost the Russians horrible casualties. Both were murderers, possibly Stalin being worse than Hitler in that he killed millions of his own people, especially the Ukrainians. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
@mrjimhoward Hitler was the worst enemy of GERMANY , when he took control of all military affairs becoming COMMANDER IN CHIEF(without any competence) he screwed the things so badly that his mistakes cost whole german generations,if it was for the german generals USSR would be conquered by 1942, HITLER made USSR worst quagmire than Napoleon's .
@mrjimhoward Ja Du hast vollkommen recht!!Hitler hat Europa zu einem Schlachthaus gemacht und das deutsche Volk verraten. Nie wieder.Für Europa! Völkerfreundschaft.
@mrjimhoward I agree with that...hitler was a moron...thank god for the rest of us because had he let his generals run the war, we would all likely be speaking german. Kind of reminds me of the United States today...politicians trying to wage wars or conflicts when they should stick to lying and let men fight the wars.
@mrjimhoward Hitler was a mediocre commander, he was certainly better than Stalin. Ideology aside, the reason why Operation Barbarossa and later Blue and Citadel were failures, was because of poor logistical planning, albeit German culture is "all" about organization; Poland and France gave German high command an arrogance believing that France 1940 would be Russia 1941! (Hilarious). Although Hitler was right in Citadel, albeit 1943 was too late in the game.
@theone1087 Hell of it was, Stalin gave his Generals more autonomy than Hitler as the war progressed. Hitler did just the opposite. Hitler's "beginners luck" early on gave him the mistaken notion that he was always right and his Generals wrong. Russia's dismal showing against Finland also made the Germans believe that the Russian campaign would be a pushover. "All we need do is kick in the front door and the whole rotten edifice will crumble". At first it did thanks to Stalin's purges.
@eldrotto Maybe you don't know that was Guderian the inventor of the blitzkrieg. Maybe you don't know Hitler's strategy in Russia. III Reich won at the beginning thanks to his commanders like Von Manstein, Guderian and Rommel; then Germany lose because it was ruled by a mad. I respect Wehrmacht generals but of course I'm happy for Nazi's defeat.
I am absolutely agreeing with you - WWII saw the biggest losses in lives and material that never have being seen before.
But as you mentioned after the re establishing, first of NATO, then EU I thing war as we knew it from the past, will never occur again. Internal clashes will, however, most likely be, but can be contained, NO MORE WW's
Germany was not able to win the war in the east. Even Hitler, the so called expert on warfare, new this. He knew they had to defeat Russia within one summer... He faillet to do so. The russians had help from England and the US. But the T 34 tank was supperior to the german tanks. Germany made 3 mistakes. 1. the declared war to the US. 2. they did not invade England. 3. they split up their forces in Russia. They should have taken Moskow first, then Stalingrad and the south of Russia and then nort
More forces would provide faster attack movement. Marine would bombard soviet land and open new fronts thf to landigs. Better industry would prvide more weapons such as tanks, airplanes etc. and better supply line. Not to mention that allies delayed german industry attacking their cities. And the high tech, soviets had nothing against 1000 Kmh airlanes, new kugelblitz AA tanks, 'Maskenbrecher' gas or Rockets that are faster then the sound. Soviets wouldnt stand a chance
Sry but this discussion seems to be a neverending story. Germans were stronger. I explained why. If soviets really were superior then explain it why. They needed to call the total war(with lend lease support) while germans couldnt use everything they got because they had other enemies.
@Ixtzalit Ultimately, the Soviets were superior because it was they that took Berlin in May 1945 after Hitler failed to take Moscow in November 1941. Simple really. Hitler made the same mistake as Napoleon did over 100 years before.
@Ixtzalit Yes, you've explained your viewpoint - well done you. The Soviet Red Army captured Berlin and the British and American ground forces were miles away.
@RedGoblinus The soviet army could come so far because they got allied help, do you understand it now? Without support and if germans would use everything they got soviets would loose and it wouldnt be possible to reach berlin. This is what i mean.
@Ixtzalit What you write is purely hypothetical. The mainstream viewpoint - even held by the German High Command as early as December 1941 - was that the German Army could not win in the East. The Germans had problems with their supplies to the front lines throughout the war in the East due to partisans sabotaging their supply lines. With or without Western help the Red Army would have won in the end even if Hitler had taken Moscow as Napoleon before him did.
@RedGoblinus Without Allies in the qest Germans would use all their divisions, marine and airforce. The inftrastructure in soviet russia was a problem but germans build their own infsrastructure. And more troops mean less partisants. Germans were before stalingrad, moscow and leningrad, soviet most important cities. How far would them come if soviets hadnt any help? Much further using entire industry, forces, marine, airforce and fihting a soviet without lend lease support.
Read all my comments pls and not only a part of them. Its clearly obvious that soviets would not stand a chance in a 1on1 confrontation. If someone denies it then he just cant accept the truth in my opinion.
Machine tools 27,9% If complexity is accounted for than the Allied contribution is considerably more important than the figures would suggest. Allied machine tools were considerably more complex and versatile than Soviet machine tools. sugar 29,5%, Meat 15,5 %, tanks, airplanes and even clothes and boots. And soviets were still near to lost, they even needed to use women to fight while germans couldnt use everything they got, even naval attack on the soviets would be very useful.
Germans - better industry, superior tactics, way superior technology, weapons of better quality, many divisions in the north, west and south and the Luftwaffe used only 50% of its forces against UdSSR.Allied help for SU and % of everything they got: Aviation fuel 59%Automotvie fuel 2.5%, locomotives 81,6 %, rail cars 80,7%, explosives 33&, copper ore 45,3%, aluminium 55,5%, tires30,1% The UK also delivered 103,500 tons of natural rubber so the actual Allied proportion was quite a bit higher. ->
Soviets evebn used women because the situation was so critical while germans still didnt use everything they got and soviets got massive support. I think its enough to proof that germans were stronger. Soviets wouldnt use children to boost their industry and women to fight for the army if not neccecary.
I do even think that germans would come much further before the winter if soviets were alone. There is even a book 'Russias life saver' There are alot of infos about lend lease and the situation in the SU. Americans didnt even want to help them but they realised that SU wont stand a chance against germany so they helped them.
While the soviets used even women to protect their territories because the situation was so critical german couldnt need their full power. Using all industry, Lufwaffe, Marine and divisions would improve german forces. And without lend lease soviets wouldnt have that great production. Germans were already at the doors of moscow without all their forces and support on the soviet side. The winter was just another factor.
Now, germans were bofore moscow, the political center of the soviet union. How far would them come if they used all their forces against soviets including marine and luftwaffe? How far would they come if soviets wouldnt have the massive support from usa? (much further, because lend lease was essential for the victory) They couldnt use all their industry against soviets because they had other problems in the west.
And the oil wasnt that a big problem, later, after the fall of romania germans had some problems. The suplly line in the soviet russia was bad, thats why they had problems with supplies. The infastructure in the soviet union was a disaster
@Ixtzalit You cannot overlook this fact. The correct grade of engine oil was a very major problem outside Moscow. German tanks would not function in the cold without the correct grade of engine oil and guns would not fire without the correct grade of lubrication oil. Meanwhile, the clever Soviets - who were using the correct grade of engine oil for cold weather - were able to take full advantage of the cold by unleashing their crack Siberian divisions against the ill prepared German Army.
@RedGoblinus Yes, it was a major problem outside moscow, but the front wasnt only at moscow. The winter was more luch then a strategy. Because it was one of the coldest winters in the russian history. Winter didnt destroy german tanks, it delayed the offensive, thats all. All counteroffensives were done thx to american help.I think you call them clever because you re a russian too.
I repeat, oil wasnt the major problem of germans. It was the suplly line.
@Ixtzalit I still think you're getting muddled between engine oil and fuel.
Lack of fuel was not the problem for German tanks and guns outside Moscow but the incorrect grade of engine oil was - engines and guns seize up in severe cold without the right viscosity of engine/lubrication oil. The Germans lost about 1 million men outside Moscow through cold and combat. After the debacle of Moscow the thinking men in the German High Command knew the war in the East could not be won.
@RedGoblinus he thinking men in the German High Command knew the war in the East could not be won.' Where did you get this? This is not true. Germans lost 1 millions of soldiers because of it, but it doesnt mean it was imüpossible to continue the war. I understand what you mean with the engine oil. As i said the front wasnt only at moscow and germans had still better tactics, soldiers, industry, technology and morale ->
@Ixtzalit The German High Command knew they needed to quickly take Moscow to win the war in the East. In 1942 they were not strong enough after the losses outside Moscow earlier in the year to try to take Moscow again so they went for the stategy of starving the USSR of fuel by taking the oil fields in the South. Stalingrad was on the way to Baku where the USSR's oil reserves were. As we know, the Germans failed to take Baku and failed to hold Stalingrad. That was the beginning of the end.
@RedGoblinus This isnt true. Germand didnt want to win the war starving the USSR by fuel. Germans wanted to capture baku because they needed fuel. And if the german High Command would know that they lost then they wouldnt continue the war. All succesful operations at the soviet side were don thx to americans. Soviet weapons production improves up to 50% thx to americans while germans couldnt not use all their divisions. Soveit Union wouldnt stand a chance 1on1. Now it again ->
@Ixtzalit Adolf Hitler told his Generals that the major attack for 1942 would be on the Soviet oil fields (Operation Blue). He ordered this attack for two reasons: - if the Red Army was starved of fuel it would collapse, if the German military had access to the same oil, it would prosper. Operation Blue thus started as a massive attack to capture the oilfields in the USSR and ended in disaster at Stalingrad.
@RedGoblinus He ordered his generals to capture the baku fields because germany needed oil. Starving the UdSSR from the Oil hadnt the highest priority. You can read it on wikipedia. Stalingrad was his Hitlers foult.
@Ixtzalit Forgetting Stalingrad, Hitler's orders did stabilize the German front outside Moscow in December 1941. It seems that because German guns wouldn't fire and their tanks were mainly seized up - due to intense cold - panic set in when the Red Army attacked with guns blazing. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans and the Germans ran for their lives. It must have been truely terrifying for them as their guns could not fire and all the German soldier could do was run or die.
@RedGoblinus Many troops at moscow were Waffen SS or SS troops. They fought till the end. Where did you take this nonsense that germans ran for their lives. And the offensvie at moscow was canceled because it was way too expensive for the soviets. After the help from USA they were able to continiue their offensive. Now, tell me how could they have to win 1on1? I quoted enough about it. Lend Lease etc. Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe and Reichmarine were superior to all soviet forces.
@Ixtzalit The German defeat outside Moscow in 1941 early 1942 had nothing to do with the USA or lease lend. Adolf Hitler stabilsed the front with the sacrifice of a whole Waffen SS division - 'Das Reich' - I believe. USA lease lend supplies were not in Soviet hands in any quantity until summer 1942 at the very earliest. The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow.
@RedGoblinus The counteroffensive from moscow was canceled because it was way too expensive. It had much to do with lend lease because first after the us support arrived they could continue the offensive.
@Ixtzalit The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow in December 1941. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans with guns blazing and the Germans ran for their lives. That's what happened - it's no fairytale. Great Britain and the USA then knew that Russia could be a very valuable ally and worth backing with enough raw materials and guns that they could muster.
@Ixtzalit The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow in December 1941. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans with guns blazing and the Germans ran for their lives. That's no fairytale - it happened. Great Briatin and the USA then realised that Russia was a very valuable ally worth backing with all the guns and raw materials they could muster.
@Ixtzalit The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow in December 1941. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans with guns blazing and the Germans ran for their lives. That's no fairytale - it happened. Great Briatin and the USA then realised that Russia was a very valuable ally worth backing with all the guns and raw materials they could muster.
And about your smilyes^^, i xactly know that you re angry. If you wouldnt be then you wouldnt mock. You re trying to preted a superiority using smilyes, but for me its just an underline under your hatred. Do whatever you want,if you re angry or not, its not even important for me.... Germans were stronger, i think you just want to accept it, thats all..
Yes, germans had rely on submarines, which were superior in 1945. And soviets build MORE t34 and IL2 Stumorvik thx to amerians, because they gave they ressources and weapons.Lend-Lease allowed the Soviets to focus their own production almost solely on the production of weapons and ammunition. And The Sturmovik was nothing compared to german airplanes. Germans were before moscow, while they couldnt use all their forces against SU and SU got massive support. How often should i repeat it
@Ixtzalit Yep, the German 'Herren Volk' were before Moscow in the freezing cold without winter coats and with the wrong grade of engine oil in the engines of their tanks - that would not work as a result. German guns would not fire - again due to the wrong grade of lubrication oil for winter conditions. If you don't find this funny then you must carry the defective German gene that doesn't allow for the appreciation of real humour. Here, have a smiley.... :-)
@RedGoblinus Germand had alot of problems because of the winter but it doesnt mean it pushed them back. Germany s Airforces used onlly 50% of their strenght, 74 divisdions were in italy and france, some divisions in france and many divisions in norway + the forces in germany. The marine couldnt be used against soviets. Soviets didnt need to build ships and got massive ressource support from usa. Counteroffensives were stopped because they hadnt ress. anymore.
Germans theory about blue eyes and blond hair didnt come from him, german doctors and sciencists said that. Germans took childred with blue eyes and blind hair and deported them to germany. The 'aryan' theory was just a propaganda.
And the aryan theory was just a tool in hitlers hands. He used it to avoid dissent in germany. Poles were north europeans too. They are related with germans. Some of them were even more german then hitler. Hungary or Romania had slavs too, Hitler worked with them. Hitler didnt even want a war with poland, poland didnt want to exchange danzig for some territories in the south. Polish corridor was very important for germans because they wanted to build a railway between pommern and prussia.
People follow leaders witch much charisma. They serve and even die for them. Hitler was a sick man with parkinsons dissase, that had influence on many of his decisions( Some doctor said that). Hitler wasnt that dumb as people say, he was sick, that was the main problem. What would happen if Goebbels would achieve the throne?
And btw, scientists found proofs that people with blue eyes and blonde hair are more intelligent. Just google it and you ll have an answer( No, i am not a Nazi^^)
@Ixtzalit So, if the typical World War 2 'Aryan' German with blue eyes, 6 feet tall and blond hair was so intelligent then why did they allow themselves to be led by an Austrian that was none of the above?
@RedGoblinus I didnt say they way superior or more intelligent, its just a scientic theory, so dont ask me that. After WWII Germany had a very low industry. People didnt have work or earned little money. People didnt like jews because they had money and did share nothing. Hitler promised everything for them, he used massive propaganda programs and had alot of talented people around him. Maybe he wasnt that intelligent, but he was very charismatic..->
@Ixtzalit Germany's ultimate defeat lay in Hitler's suicidal personality. Hitler didn't want to die alone - he wanted to take millions with him and he did. Hitler was probably made mentally ill and/or mentally damaged following the Gas poisoning he suffered in the trenches against the British Army in the latter stages of World War 1. Don't you think it rather odd that Hitler had an intense affair with his young niece?
@RedGoblinus The stories about the affait with his niece are not 100% sure, so i cant say that. Yes, i believe that hitler was mentally damaged. But on the other hand, he didnt harvest his hatred for the brits. He wanted peace with britain and used his aryan propaganda for example saying that brits are aryans too. His objective was only the soviet union. France maintained the bad relations so a war with them was inevitable
@Ixtzalit Adolf Hitler is an interesting character because he was ultimately responsible for Germany's destruction. It's as if he built the Germany Reich up from the defeat of World War 1 to be destroyed more completely. Some of his later utterances even suggest an admiration for Joe Stalin - very curious considering the fact that it was Joe Stalin's war leadership that was destroying the German Army more completely than the British and Americans combined were capable of.
@RedGoblinus Joseph Stalin led an army that was eqeuipped thx to americans and brits. Lend Lease was essential for the soviet victory. They could defend himself thex to the allies and on the other side german Luftwaffe was trapped in europe same as their marine. In a 1on1 confrontaion Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe and Reichsmarine would have won.
@Ixtzalit The Soviet T34 tanks and IL2 Sturmovik ground attack fighters certainly did not come from Great Britain or the USA. With or without help from the West the USSR would have beaten Germany eventually. The German navy was also no match for the Royal Navy and that's why German surface ships were a rarity and the Germans had to rely on submarines.
Both Stalin and Hitler werent wise, i ve just said that Stalin wasnt Hitlers Nemesis. Both had two different personalities. Hitler gained loyality of his people and they died for him while the people in the Soviet Union didnt trust Stalin. He wasnt even appointed to be a leader.
@Ixtzalit Stalin's government financed industrialization by restraining domestic consumption to ensure capital went for re-investment into industry, and by ruthless extraction of wealth from the kulaks - even free market economy countries do that. Stalin's Government also used numerous foreign experts, to design new factories, supervise construction, instruct workers and improve manufacturing processes. This led to the establishment of a manufacturing base capable of beating the Germans.
@RedGoblinus There are even some stories about parents which eaten their own children because stalin took everything. On the other side stalin wasted money for some very expensive projects as this canal. And the industrial capacity was boosted thx to americans, because soviets didnt need to build everything.Lend-Lease allowed the Soviets to focus their own production almost solely on the production of weapons and ammunition.
@Ixtzalit Field Marshal Stalin takes some flak from historical revisionists but he did lead the USSR to victory over NAZI Germany. Stalin was a very tough leader - just what the USSR needed when they faced the best mechanized army in the world in June 1941. Our own Sir Arthur Harris faces the same kind of flak from historical revisionists but he did help nullify the German war machine via his RAF bomber campaign. They didn't hang around debating - they put words into positive action.
@RedGoblinus Yes, they did, but Stalin wasnt really tough. His own servants didnt like him, people didnt like and he wasted money and put his nose into miliatyr operations. I mean Hitler was worst, Stalingrad was his foult but on the other side Hitler had parkinsons desease. It had much influence on his desisions. Sry but Churchill and his people like Hurris were on the same level as nazis, or even worst in my opinion. Racists and thirsting for revenge attacking german people.
@Ixtzalit Sir Arthur Harris was a brilliant commander. The reasons for bombing Germany were to disrupt industrial production of weapons, to wear down the German people’s morale and to force the German Army and Air Force into having to defend against the bombing over a wide area. Repeated attacks on the German Reich also caused the diversion of industrial war production to defensive rather than offensive weapons and equipment. A war winning strategy.
@RedGoblinus Churchil and Harris were rasists. You can find enough sources about it. A war winning strategy is to attack the insdustry, but they attacked german civilians while americans attacked german industry. Germans were nationalists, so its nearly impossible to break the morale of them. Churchill knew that
@Ixtzalit Germany was the racist Police state and not Great Britain. Tell me at what time the British people considered Russians to be 'subhuman'? The Germans treated the Russians as subhumans and got a good kicking for it. Anyway, German morale was certainly broken by early 1945 with Uncle Joe Stalin's Red Army at the Eastern borders of Hitler's German Reich and the RAF and USAAF taking liberties in German airspace. We had the German 'master race' on their knees. :-)
@RedGoblinus Red Army defeated german forces because they were supported :) I quoted the reasons numerous times. And Great Britain was racist. Hitler used his 'subhuman' stories as a pretense, but he didnt think like that. Britain was racists. They used black people and KZ camps and exploited other countries. How about the japanese canadians? Brits acted like idiots. And yes, You had germans on their knees, but ONLY because germans were outnumbered. In 1on1 brits wouldnt stand a chance ':)'
@Ixtzalit You what? My RAF Grandfather could take out 100 German front line soldiers with one bomb dropped from his Avro Lancaster bomber. :-) He could take out 100 Gestapo Police with his De Havilland Mosquito fighter bomber and be back in England in time for tea and biscuits. :-)
@RedGoblinus nice, its not even important for me because i meat hunderds of people which say such things especially here on youtube, so i cant check it. And such a grandfather fought against germans without antiaircraftsupport, fuel, supplies and fighter support because of their critical situation caused by the numbers of the fronts. And you cant deceive me with your smileys. If you purpose to write such useless comments then its futile to continue this conversation in my opinion.
@Ixtzalit Resistance is futile. ;-) The RAF bombers were actually being shot at with 88mm anti aircraft batteries. Those same 88mm guns were thus not knocking out allied tanks and this thus helped the liberation of Europe from the master race (herren volk) tyranny that was Hitler's regime. Tell me, are you blond, 6 feet tall and with blue eyes just like your dear dearted Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler?
@RedGoblinus Which ressistance? And here you go againg with your smileys, you re trying to preted the superiority in a debate, thats a typical tactic, forget it. Yes, the 88mm cannons knocked out allied airplanes and tanks, because germans were more clever and create a a cannon that was used as AT and AA. '...your dear dearted Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler?' Here you go again, such conversations are a waste of time.
Stalin wasnt wise, and he wasnt Hitlers nemesis, that were somepropaganda stories. Hitler and Staln had two different personalities. Hitler was a bad militarist but he knew how to gain loyality of his people. And UdSSR wouldnt win without the help from USA. Barbarossa wouldnt fail. Brits and americans sent tanks, yes, but it was just a small part of Lend Leade, Ressources were important, the tanks werent worth much. Railroad rails, railcars, explosives, copper ore, aluminium etc.
And germans couldnt use all their forces against SU. And they coult focus their own production of ground forces(they had marine, airforce, atlantic wall etc.) while soviets used everything they had and the used even women for battle and children for production. Brits and americans delayed german industry attacking their war factories. instead of 1100 Tiger II Tanks they had only 500 thx to bombardements. Germany was way stronger then SU.
tires, mashine tools, automotive fuel, aviation fuel. Even boots,clothes, meat and sugar.And, in short, the answer is that Lend-Lease allowed the Soviets to focus their own production almost solely on the production of weapons and ammunition. Soviet Union wasnt that strong.59% of the aviation fuel came from USA, 2,5% auto. fuel, 92,7% of railroad rails, 81,6% locomotives, 80,7% railcars, 33% explosives, 45,2% copper ore, 55,5% alluminium, 30,1% tires, and much much more.
This has been flagged as spam show
You wouldn't even mention war again if 6 million of your soldiers died in combat, 3 million in German concentration camps, 10 million women raped by the Germans, 1 million civilians starved to death by German blockade in Leningrad, thousands of villages burned to the ground with people still inside them, Germans planned to gas 50% of the Russian population, Generalplan Ost, this is what Russia suffered in world war II and thats why we will never start such a war and suffering.
RaaGoneFishing 5 days ago
What is music?????????????
Pucha1964 5 days ago
"EVERY WAR HAS TWO LOSERS" - William Stafford
procopro 3 weeks ago in playlist Favorite videos
I feel the same way I am not at all a nazi and I am glad they lost , but I very much like there army uniforms , tanks and guns. The photo at 2:10 is amazing. I never saw it before and it looks like it may be the 12 th SS panzer divison based on the wide range of camo. Photos of the 12 th are very hard to find.
alexlancer11 1 month ago
Great collection of photos.You have to hand it to the Soviets,they came back from the brink of disaster and would not give up
jagerschweigen 1 month ago
Play with this song/Spielst mit diese lied /watch?v=XElTJTkY4ZY
febertotti 1 month ago
nothing good comes from war.............
pilotmountain1 2 months ago
@pilotmountain1 Not during that time period but perhaps this day in age its easier to argue that
7Bosniak 2 weeks ago
i just dont think thease wars are about some jews religion or race thats is just so crook eyed maby some race is more hated than other but its just elites and politicans personal thing i think its abou territory or military position on map and resources of course they are things thar really matter not some religion big thinkers watch way over that stuff
isobodari1 2 months ago
@isobodari1 jews were just sort of used as a pariah because they were the wealthiest after Germany lost World War 1 the country was in an economic crisis.
7Bosniak 2 weeks ago
Как могли вторгаться и жестоко убивать наших ? не считали за людей ? - значит сами они нелюди - их нужно было уничтожить всех...за содеянное...
IvanTtofimov 2 months ago
Большинство кто на видео, так и остались на Восточном фронте НАВЕЧНО....
SexyKristi 2 months ago
America wanted NOTHING to do with the continual hate and violence that Europe expressed towards itself. It was WELL KNOWN that a stability would be reached in Europe. But the assualt on Pearl Harbor broke the veil and total war began.
jrregan 2 months ago
Sorry AUKS00007107 you are wrong. The "Jews" had nothing to do with the hate towards Nazism. Nor the 'crimes' they committed. All nations at war comit crimes. Both towards the within and towards the focus. In America, the decision to terminate Nazism and the Japanese Empire occured when Pearl Harbor broke the veil of isolationism.
jrregan 2 months ago
the only thing that earned them so much animosty is that they fought the jews.
every other 'crime' was either already committed by the allies before (and even after) WWII, and in a far larger scale.
AUKS00007107 4 months ago
what did the nazis do wrong?
the only thing that earned them so much animosty is that they fought the jews.
every other 'crime' was either already committed by the allies before (and even after) WWII, and in a far larger scale.
AUKS00007107 4 months ago
I have respect for everyone who dies fighting for and beliving in something. And I belive that the german soldiers were not bad or evil at all, they were told to fight, so they fought. Its the same with every other soldier in the world. The real assholes where Hitler, Goebbels, Goering, Himmler and the other dogs that gave orders to for example "reduce" the mass of certain ethnic groups. And the SS, they realy were Nazis, in contrast to the Wehrmacht, and they did most of the massmurdering.
Planktontube 4 months ago
I have respect for everyone who dies fighting for and beliving in something. And I belive that the german soldiers were not bad or evil at all, they were told to fight, so they fought. Its the same with every other soldier in the world. The real assholes where Hitler, Goebbels, Goering, Himmler and the other dogs that gave orders to for example "reduce" the mass of certain ethnic groups. And the SS, they realy were Nazis, in contrast to the Wehrmacht, and they did most of the massmurdering.
Planktontube 4 months ago
These images seem so vivid that they could have happened last week
354sd 4 months ago
Comment removed
gtyyycol 4 months ago
Comment removed
gtyyycol 4 months ago
the eastern front completely dwarfs the western front...
ZedBazinga 4 months ago
T 34 and IS arrive in Berlin and got rid the World of these butchers
steelhelex 5 months ago
all of those young men had to die so old leaders could feel powerful and young again..
pyllywaltteri 5 months ago
@18kersh - YOU do not get it ...
@BabylonianSage - You do not get it too ...
aviomaster 5 months ago
German Nazis
mad1966dog 6 months ago
rest in peace soviets and germans, they gave their life for their motherlands and fought with an incredible braveness
Planktontube 6 months ago
Russian are stupid , dismantling of their Nuclear Stockpile they will find themselves in 1941 all over again.
That is inevitable. Simply STUPID race.
aviomaster 6 months ago
@aviomaster Actually, the Russians gave the world thousands of artisans, scientists and inventors. So shut up and leave this page, skippy. It's you who is stupid, not their "race".
BabylonianSage 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BabylonianSage do not pay attention ;-)
18kersh 5 months ago
@aviomaster You foolish man, 41, -45, Russia had no nuclear weapons, so...?! do not worry for us if it will be necessary to give their lives, for the country. )))
does anyone know where is Bosnia?
18kersh 5 months ago
Hitler was a good man to his people but a lousy war general unfortunately.
StrongGayBlackMan 7 months ago
In the words of that German soldier from "Saving Private Ryan"- Fuck Hitler!
Paull5823 7 months ago
nobody can break us!slava slavjan!
hmcccp 7 months ago
I am proud of my German ancestors. The Greatest army ever formed. If it were not for the allies helping russia, they would have not lasted 2 years, and the thanks we got? The last 60 years of war against communism. Hartmann had a field day blasting russian planes, Rudel was a hero destroying russian armour. Not all were Nazi, just doing what soldiers do. They fight, and they die.
mach1franco 7 months ago
@mach1franco I think the Germans could have won had the OKW had their way. Hitler insisted they (the german army) defend every piece of real-estate to the last man whereas many in the German army including Guderian wanted to use the superior mobility of the panzers to fight in a mobile defense while also creating sizable strategic reserves. Hitler should be largely credited for defeating the wehrmacht.
Rimasta1 7 months ago
@Rimasta1 Very true. He was a total madman. had the best army in the world and wasted most on the worst territory he could cover. He was by far the best ally the U.S. and Britan could have asked for.
mach1franco 7 months ago
@mach1franco
The most severe mistake, Hitler could do was declaring war to the U.S. Why? Yes, it was duty to his Axis pact but the sense was, that US were busy with Japan so they could not interfere with the war in Europe and Hitler? Come on FDR, join my party... *facepalm*
Sp4wn82 6 months ago
if there no hitler, stalin would reach lisabona, and later all the world, kommunism consstitution is -communism all over the world
Divirix1 7 months ago
@Divirix1 did you play red alert too? cuz thats exactly what happend. great game in its day.
Rimasta1 7 months ago
Fuck Hitler.
M1garandmaster 7 months ago
@M1garandmaster fuck stalin
Divirix1 7 months ago 2
hahahahahah russians killed them all,german souless materialistic pigs!!!
hmcccp 8 months ago
@hmcccp haha - 1 ss division killed 20 russian divisians, heil Hitler
Divirix1 7 months ago
hahahahahah russians killed them all,german souless pigs!!!
hmcccp 8 months ago
les photos sont magnifiques,pas la guerre.
1pierrepoli 8 months ago
It would be better if Germany had won the war. It was not that of Communism, which killed more people than Germany.
Glory of the Third Reich for the fight against Communism !
TheAndersPL 8 months ago
And all that happend just because of one psychopath.
suineg1 9 months ago
4:02 looks like a flamethrower on a small trolley. Never seen that before!
ml191172 9 months ago
See...
iamthewitness. c o m
23ord 10 months ago
shut up all the clowns
Artem3185 11 months ago
and the Russians won
2striptease 11 months ago
The aircraft at 1:05. Is it a Ju-52...the top gun platform would suggest so ? At first I thought it was an He-111 but the squared off tail....a Heinkel's was rounded. Only thing, a Ju-52's fusilage was more squared and ribbed was it not? A clarification would be most welcome and appreciated.
8301968 1 year ago
The key question is how to interpret the ratio as an indicator of combat effectiveness. American army reckoning, the Allies had slightly under 200 000 soldiers killed, and in turn killed over 250 000 Germans, for a rate 5:4.
In eastern front it was totally different: the kill rate was 1:3,5 advantage Germans if we trust Soviet official figures. If we take more realistic numbers we get 1:4 or 1:5 for Germans.
That's why we can say it clear - without West the Soviets would have lost the war.
tranmere789 1 year ago
@tranmere789 One has to be a bit skeptical of and Russian statistics, especially those compiled under Stalin. THey would be heavily skewed in the USSR's favor to try and minimize the effectiveness of the German effort. I assume you refer to the ratios as military only? Millions of Russian civilians died, and the number of German civilians was considerable, probably the bulk caused by US/British bombing. Without the West, an interesting conjecture. Had it been the Russians as the invaders....
8301968 1 year ago
@8301968 contd....sans the West the Russian casualties would have been horrendous(Look what little Finland did). The Russians would have been bled white. With Germans being invaders even sans the West the supply lines being stretched more and more with the Russian factories and workers ever retreating East(Germans never developed a heavy long range bomber), who knows, who will ever be able to say for sure. It does make for some interesting speculation tho. You could well be correct. Germans win.
8301968 1 year ago
@8301968
I can tell one example. In 1942 The Red Army made 4 offensives against Finns in Svir (Syväri), in Kiestinki and two in Krivi. Some years ago the data of those losses of Red Army was calculated (russian study). It told that at least 44 000 soldiers were killed and 121 650 soldiers wounded. The Finns lost 2 000 killed in action and died in wounds. Loss rate - 1:20.
Just wonder what the kill rate would have been if Finns had 88 Flaks and assault guns like Germans had.
tranmere789 11 months ago
@tranmere789 Yes, and had they been equipped with the quality of weaponry the Germans had, MG 34/42 being just two examples. I have read opinions that said the Finn's useof skis worked exceedingly well to their advantage. The kill ratio you mention is no doubt factual, and one wonders would have it been close to those numbers had the Russians invaded Germany rather than the other. But, Hitler used the Finnish campaign as a measure of the Soviets warmaking abilities and felt free to invade.
8301968 11 months ago
@8301968 Soviets and warmaking ability? LMAO. Like china today, all soviets are good are is tossing bodies at bullets. The big tactic...rush straight forward..when that man dies, take his gun and keep running into the hail of bullets. Some strat.
jphill4 11 months ago
@jphill4 It worked didn't it. What they did was have two defensive perimeters. The soldiers in the sccond one were given instructions to shoot anyone coming toward them, friend or foe. Thus the first perimeter had no choice but to hold or die. A lot of them did. Any Russian who surrendered would either die in a German prison camp or in a Russian one once they were sent back to "The Motherland". Many committed suicide rather than be returned.
8301968 11 months ago
@8301968 There is no historical or personal account of soldiers being shot for retreating. For deserting yes but not retreating. Nor was Stalingrad fought with Russian charging German lines. Russians used to great effect rat warfare and highly dug in defensive positions. And to say that Russian didn't use tactics and instead just threw soldiers at the Germans is also extremely false. For example Op august storm is thought in west point. And operation desert storm was the exact mimic of it.
darkon112 9 months ago
@darkon112 And Zhukov never instigated Penal Battalions either!!!??? No historical account of that??? I guess you and I have been reading different accounts. Anything I have ever read contradicts what you just said, so as to who is correct is a matter of conjecture and depends on which one each of us read. I am aware of the Rottenkreig(sp?) tactics during Stalingrad. As for Desert Storm, Schwartzkopf was a great admirer of and stidied tactics of Guderian, Rommel and Van Manstein.
9241937 9 months ago
@9241937 I should have made myself more clear. Yes, Penal battalions were shot if they retreated. Privates though weren't.
darkon112 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jphill4
"About all the russians are good at is tossing bodies at bullets."
This is a german myth. of course this strategy was used by the soviets. but only in the first years of war.
because the SU wasnt ready for war, they had to fight with all what they could find in this moment.
i dont know, what you read, but only with this tactic they would never win.
harrikelm 10 months ago
@8301968
More silly reasonings didn't hear. For a long time...
BceMcacaT 11 months ago
@tranmere789 About all the russians are good at is tossing bodies at bullets.
jphill4 11 months ago
@tranmere789 Unless you're adding all the killed soviet POW and ignoring all the allies that fought and died with Germans on the eastern front your numbers aren't close to reality. And your 1:4 or 1:5 is only possible with civilian casualties .
darkon112 9 months ago
Die Mächtigen und Reichen werden immer auf unsere Kosten agieren!
Verbrechen gegen den Frieden, Führen von Angriffskriegen, Planung und Verschwörumg zum selben Zwecke, ha.. da müsste man reihenweise US-Regierungen in Nürnberg anklagen..
Der kleine Mann ist IMMER der beschissene, der seinen Kopf hinhalten "darf".. Damals wie heute.. LEIDER!
Gruss!
globetrotter0580 1 year ago
i salute...to every soldier, who fight in the 2. WW....respect
cherusker001 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the fascist beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of these German women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! As you storm onward, kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army." —Jewish Soviet propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg, to Soviet soldiers upon entering Germany in 1945
docwillems 1 year ago
simple as this if he didnt start the secound front we would of all be german
VisitingBoss 1 year ago
does anyone know the name of the music?
The vidoe is a masterpiece
Kolyanich 1 year ago
@Kolyanich Its from Medal of Honor, search market garden i think
Lafayette912 1 year ago
@Kolyanich the music is called "Arnhem Knights" and is in the game Medal of Honor Frontline
edge033 1 year ago
@edge033 thnx!
Kolyanich 1 year ago
Poor soldiers, young guys, dieing in muddy nowhere, on roadsides. War is so stupid.
Ebildays 1 year ago 3
Many people say Hitler hated the Jews more than everything. FAIL he hated communist more.
djjosh34445 1 year ago
What is name of this song?
fafjaafh 1 year ago
fuck hitler, fuck nazi
EuroNetWelt 1 year ago
All of this Warriors, were Heroes...
Lars6448 1 year ago 2
absolut perfect vid...
cherusker001 1 year ago 23
Adolf Hitler was a bad war commander. He was the best friend the allied forces could have. The WW2 German people and armed forces were brilliant giving 110% to the German war effort. Hitler misled them. A terrible and horrific waste for all of us. Long live the EU!!!!!
mrjimhoward 1 year ago 16
@mrjimhoward Do you think Stalin was a good comander?!
Anderas777 1 year ago
@Anderas777 STALIN was different from HITLER he didn't have absolute power like HITLER, I believe MOLOTOV was the brain behind STALIN.
ZHUKOV defied STALIN in 1941 and wasn't fired.
GUDERIAN defied HITLER got fired.
STALIN prevailed because he let his generals take care of military matters, i guess he was as incompetent as HITLER in military affairs.
HITLER was a control freak, a simple corporal without any understand of advanced TACTICS and STRATEGIES , drove his generals crazy.
MrBobe9 1 year ago
@MrBobe9 May I suggest that Stalin maintained absolute power because he periodically eliminated anyone who he even suspected of being a threat. His paranoia nearly wecked the Russian military during the purges of the late 1930s. Stalin also made some mistakes early on that cost the Russians horrible casualties. Both were murderers, possibly Stalin being worse than Hitler in that he killed millions of his own people, especially the Ukrainians. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
8301968 1 year ago
@mrjimhoward Hitler was the worst enemy of GERMANY , when he took control of all military affairs becoming COMMANDER IN CHIEF(without any competence) he screwed the things so badly that his mistakes cost whole german generations,if it was for the german generals USSR would be conquered by 1942, HITLER made USSR worst quagmire than Napoleon's .
MrBobe9 1 year ago
@mrjimhoward Ja Du hast vollkommen recht!!Hitler hat Europa zu einem Schlachthaus gemacht und das deutsche Volk verraten. Nie wieder.Für Europa! Völkerfreundschaft.
Bierfass70 1 year ago
@mrjimhoward Fuck the EU!!!
walt7500 1 year ago
@walt7500 fuck you
mezlay2 1 year ago
@mezlay2 Thank you!
walt7500 1 year ago
@walt7500 your welcome. i think...
mezlay2 1 year ago
if i was a white cristian i would have head for the german side. if i was porr i would have head for the sovietunion
TheJagarbast 1 year ago
@mrjimhoward I agree with that...hitler was a moron...thank god for the rest of us because had he let his generals run the war, we would all likely be speaking german. Kind of reminds me of the United States today...politicians trying to wage wars or conflicts when they should stick to lying and let men fight the wars.
jphill4 11 months ago
@mrjimhoward Hitler was a mediocre commander, he was certainly better than Stalin. Ideology aside, the reason why Operation Barbarossa and later Blue and Citadel were failures, was because of poor logistical planning, albeit German culture is "all" about organization; Poland and France gave German high command an arrogance believing that France 1940 would be Russia 1941! (Hilarious). Although Hitler was right in Citadel, albeit 1943 was too late in the game.
theone1087 11 months ago
@theone1087 Hell of it was, Stalin gave his Generals more autonomy than Hitler as the war progressed. Hitler did just the opposite. Hitler's "beginners luck" early on gave him the mistaken notion that he was always right and his Generals wrong. Russia's dismal showing against Finland also made the Germans believe that the Russian campaign would be a pushover. "All we need do is kick in the front door and the whole rotten edifice will crumble". At first it did thanks to Stalin's purges.
8301968 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrjimhoward "He was the best friend the allied forces could have" OMG, FUCK YOU MORON!
HomoCallidus 10 months ago
@mrjimhoward Hitler is a bad commander? LOL WTF. He FUCKED YOUR EU IN 1.5 Year. France in 2 weeks
eldrotto 6 months ago
@eldrotto Maybe you don't know that was Guderian the inventor of the blitzkrieg. Maybe you don't know Hitler's strategy in Russia. III Reich won at the beginning thanks to his commanders like Von Manstein, Guderian and Rommel; then Germany lose because it was ruled by a mad. I respect Wehrmacht generals but of course I'm happy for Nazi's defeat.
Uvaldon92 5 months ago
@mrjimhoward
I am absolutely agreeing with you - WWII saw the biggest losses in lives and material that never have being seen before.
But as you mentioned after the re establishing, first of NATO, then EU I thing war as we knew it from the past, will never occur again. Internal clashes will, however, most likely be, but can be contained, NO MORE WW's
MrJoergenfoged 5 months ago
@mrjimhoward I think I could led them better then he did.So many mistakes
lodhol 4 months ago
Die ehrenvollste und beste Armee der Welt ! Ruhet in Frieden !
BFCer1 1 year ago
germany lost to west because the japanese .....
djsimo149 1 year ago
The West will never understand why he would never defeat Russia.
Ermako4 1 year ago 5
Germany was not able to win the war in the east. Even Hitler, the so called expert on warfare, new this. He knew they had to defeat Russia within one summer... He faillet to do so. The russians had help from England and the US. But the T 34 tank was supperior to the german tanks. Germany made 3 mistakes. 1. the declared war to the US. 2. they did not invade England. 3. they split up their forces in Russia. They should have taken Moskow first, then Stalingrad and the south of Russia and then nort
Kudelcity 1 year ago
More forces would provide faster attack movement. Marine would bombard soviet land and open new fronts thf to landigs. Better industry would prvide more weapons such as tanks, airplanes etc. and better supply line. Not to mention that allies delayed german industry attacking their cities. And the high tech, soviets had nothing against 1000 Kmh airlanes, new kugelblitz AA tanks, 'Maskenbrecher' gas or Rockets that are faster then the sound. Soviets wouldnt stand a chance
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Sry but this discussion seems to be a neverending story. Germans were stronger. I explained why. If soviets really were superior then explain it why. They needed to call the total war(with lend lease support) while germans couldnt use everything they got because they had other enemies.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Ultimately, the Soviets were superior because it was they that took Berlin in May 1945 after Hitler failed to take Moscow in November 1941. Simple really. Hitler made the same mistake as Napoleon did over 100 years before.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus I ve already explained it. Soviets captured berlin because they got help and germans couldnt use everything against them
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Yes, you've explained your viewpoint - well done you. The Soviet Red Army captured Berlin and the British and American ground forces were miles away.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus The soviet army could come so far because they got allied help, do you understand it now? Without support and if germans would use everything they got soviets would loose and it wouldnt be possible to reach berlin. This is what i mean.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit What you write is purely hypothetical. The mainstream viewpoint - even held by the German High Command as early as December 1941 - was that the German Army could not win in the East. The Germans had problems with their supplies to the front lines throughout the war in the East due to partisans sabotaging their supply lines. With or without Western help the Red Army would have won in the end even if Hitler had taken Moscow as Napoleon before him did.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Without Allies in the qest Germans would use all their divisions, marine and airforce. The inftrastructure in soviet russia was a problem but germans build their own infsrastructure. And more troops mean less partisants. Germans were before stalingrad, moscow and leningrad, soviet most important cities. How far would them come if soviets hadnt any help? Much further using entire industry, forces, marine, airforce and fihting a soviet without lend lease support.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Without you taking a piss there would be less water in the Ocean too.
vkon15 1 year ago
Read all my comments pls and not only a part of them. Its clearly obvious that soviets would not stand a chance in a 1on1 confrontation. If someone denies it then he just cant accept the truth in my opinion.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Machine tools 27,9% If complexity is accounted for than the Allied contribution is considerably more important than the figures would suggest. Allied machine tools were considerably more complex and versatile than Soviet machine tools. sugar 29,5%, Meat 15,5 %, tanks, airplanes and even clothes and boots. And soviets were still near to lost, they even needed to use women to fight while germans couldnt use everything they got, even naval attack on the soviets would be very useful.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Germans - better industry, superior tactics, way superior technology, weapons of better quality, many divisions in the north, west and south and the Luftwaffe used only 50% of its forces against UdSSR.Allied help for SU and % of everything they got: Aviation fuel 59%Automotvie fuel 2.5%, locomotives 81,6 %, rail cars 80,7%, explosives 33&, copper ore 45,3%, aluminium 55,5%, tires30,1% The UK also delivered 103,500 tons of natural rubber so the actual Allied proportion was quite a bit higher. ->
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Soviets evebn used women because the situation was so critical while germans still didnt use everything they got and soviets got massive support. I think its enough to proof that germans were stronger. Soviets wouldnt use children to boost their industry and women to fight for the army if not neccecary.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Sry for bad grammar, i hope you can understand it.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
I do even think that germans would come much further before the winter if soviets were alone. There is even a book 'Russias life saver' There are alot of infos about lend lease and the situation in the SU. Americans didnt even want to help them but they realised that SU wont stand a chance against germany so they helped them.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
While the soviets used even women to protect their territories because the situation was so critical german couldnt need their full power. Using all industry, Lufwaffe, Marine and divisions would improve german forces. And without lend lease soviets wouldnt have that great production. Germans were already at the doors of moscow without all their forces and support on the soviet side. The winter was just another factor.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Now, germans were bofore moscow, the political center of the soviet union. How far would them come if they used all their forces against soviets including marine and luftwaffe? How far would they come if soviets wouldnt have the massive support from usa? (much further, because lend lease was essential for the victory) They couldnt use all their industry against soviets because they had other problems in the west.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
And the oil wasnt that a big problem, later, after the fall of romania germans had some problems. The suplly line in the soviet russia was bad, thats why they had problems with supplies. The infastructure in the soviet union was a disaster
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit You cannot overlook this fact. The correct grade of engine oil was a very major problem outside Moscow. German tanks would not function in the cold without the correct grade of engine oil and guns would not fire without the correct grade of lubrication oil. Meanwhile, the clever Soviets - who were using the correct grade of engine oil for cold weather - were able to take full advantage of the cold by unleashing their crack Siberian divisions against the ill prepared German Army.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Yes, it was a major problem outside moscow, but the front wasnt only at moscow. The winter was more luch then a strategy. Because it was one of the coldest winters in the russian history. Winter didnt destroy german tanks, it delayed the offensive, thats all. All counteroffensives were done thx to american help.I think you call them clever because you re a russian too.
I repeat, oil wasnt the major problem of germans. It was the suplly line.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit I still think you're getting muddled between engine oil and fuel.
Lack of fuel was not the problem for German tanks and guns outside Moscow but the incorrect grade of engine oil was - engines and guns seize up in severe cold without the right viscosity of engine/lubrication oil. The Germans lost about 1 million men outside Moscow through cold and combat. After the debacle of Moscow the thinking men in the German High Command knew the war in the East could not be won.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus he thinking men in the German High Command knew the war in the East could not be won.' Where did you get this? This is not true. Germans lost 1 millions of soldiers because of it, but it doesnt mean it was imüpossible to continue the war. I understand what you mean with the engine oil. As i said the front wasnt only at moscow and germans had still better tactics, soldiers, industry, technology and morale ->
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit The German High Command knew they needed to quickly take Moscow to win the war in the East. In 1942 they were not strong enough after the losses outside Moscow earlier in the year to try to take Moscow again so they went for the stategy of starving the USSR of fuel by taking the oil fields in the South. Stalingrad was on the way to Baku where the USSR's oil reserves were. As we know, the Germans failed to take Baku and failed to hold Stalingrad. That was the beginning of the end.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus This isnt true. Germand didnt want to win the war starving the USSR by fuel. Germans wanted to capture baku because they needed fuel. And if the german High Command would know that they lost then they wouldnt continue the war. All succesful operations at the soviet side were don thx to americans. Soviet weapons production improves up to 50% thx to americans while germans couldnt not use all their divisions. Soveit Union wouldnt stand a chance 1on1. Now it again ->
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Adolf Hitler told his Generals that the major attack for 1942 would be on the Soviet oil fields (Operation Blue). He ordered this attack for two reasons: - if the Red Army was starved of fuel it would collapse, if the German military had access to the same oil, it would prosper. Operation Blue thus started as a massive attack to capture the oilfields in the USSR and ended in disaster at Stalingrad.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus He ordered his generals to capture the baku fields because germany needed oil. Starving the UdSSR from the Oil hadnt the highest priority. You can read it on wikipedia. Stalingrad was his Hitlers foult.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Forgetting Stalingrad, Hitler's orders did stabilize the German front outside Moscow in December 1941. It seems that because German guns wouldn't fire and their tanks were mainly seized up - due to intense cold - panic set in when the Red Army attacked with guns blazing. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans and the Germans ran for their lives. It must have been truely terrifying for them as their guns could not fire and all the German soldier could do was run or die.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Many troops at moscow were Waffen SS or SS troops. They fought till the end. Where did you take this nonsense that germans ran for their lives. And the offensvie at moscow was canceled because it was way too expensive for the soviets. After the help from USA they were able to continiue their offensive. Now, tell me how could they have to win 1on1? I quoted enough about it. Lend Lease etc. Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe and Reichmarine were superior to all soviet forces.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit The German defeat outside Moscow in 1941 early 1942 had nothing to do with the USA or lease lend. Adolf Hitler stabilsed the front with the sacrifice of a whole Waffen SS division - 'Das Reich' - I believe. USA lease lend supplies were not in Soviet hands in any quantity until summer 1942 at the very earliest. The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus The counteroffensive from moscow was canceled because it was way too expensive. It had much to do with lend lease because first after the us support arrived they could continue the offensive.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Ixtzalit The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow in December 1941. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans with guns blazing and the Germans ran for their lives. That's what happened - it's no fairytale. Great Britain and the USA then knew that Russia could be a very valuable ally and worth backing with enough raw materials and guns that they could muster.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Ixtzalit The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow in December 1941. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans with guns blazing and the Germans ran for their lives. That's no fairytale - it happened. Great Briatin and the USA then realised that Russia was a very valuable ally worth backing with all the guns and raw materials they could muster.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Ixtzalit The myth of German Army invincibility was exploded completely outside Moscow in December 1941. The Red Army swarmed over the Germans with guns blazing and the Germans ran for their lives. That's no fairytale - it happened. Great Briatin and the USA then realised that Russia was a very valuable ally worth backing with all the guns and raw materials they could muster.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
And about your smilyes^^, i xactly know that you re angry. If you wouldnt be then you wouldnt mock. You re trying to preted a superiority using smilyes, but for me its just an underline under your hatred. Do whatever you want,if you re angry or not, its not even important for me.... Germans were stronger, i think you just want to accept it, thats all..
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Yes, germans had rely on submarines, which were superior in 1945. And soviets build MORE t34 and IL2 Stumorvik thx to amerians, because they gave they ressources and weapons.Lend-Lease allowed the Soviets to focus their own production almost solely on the production of weapons and ammunition. And The Sturmovik was nothing compared to german airplanes. Germans were before moscow, while they couldnt use all their forces against SU and SU got massive support. How often should i repeat it
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Yep, the German 'Herren Volk' were before Moscow in the freezing cold without winter coats and with the wrong grade of engine oil in the engines of their tanks - that would not work as a result. German guns would not fire - again due to the wrong grade of lubrication oil for winter conditions. If you don't find this funny then you must carry the defective German gene that doesn't allow for the appreciation of real humour. Here, have a smiley.... :-)
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Germand had alot of problems because of the winter but it doesnt mean it pushed them back. Germany s Airforces used onlly 50% of their strenght, 74 divisdions were in italy and france, some divisions in france and many divisions in norway + the forces in germany. The marine couldnt be used against soviets. Soviets didnt need to build ships and got massive ressource support from usa. Counteroffensives were stopped because they hadnt ress. anymore.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
I meant #would' not 'for', sry
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
So, the if the war with brits for wound his mind, then he would hate them, but he didnt do.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Germans theory about blue eyes and blond hair didnt come from him, german doctors and sciencists said that. Germans took childred with blue eyes and blind hair and deported them to germany. The 'aryan' theory was just a propaganda.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
And the aryan theory was just a tool in hitlers hands. He used it to avoid dissent in germany. Poles were north europeans too. They are related with germans. Some of them were even more german then hitler. Hungary or Romania had slavs too, Hitler worked with them. Hitler didnt even want a war with poland, poland didnt want to exchange danzig for some territories in the south. Polish corridor was very important for germans because they wanted to build a railway between pommern and prussia.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
People follow leaders witch much charisma. They serve and even die for them. Hitler was a sick man with parkinsons dissase, that had influence on many of his decisions( Some doctor said that). Hitler wasnt that dumb as people say, he was sick, that was the main problem. What would happen if Goebbels would achieve the throne?
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit I meant germans after WWI, sry.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
And btw, scientists found proofs that people with blue eyes and blonde hair are more intelligent. Just google it and you ll have an answer( No, i am not a Nazi^^)
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit So, if the typical World War 2 'Aryan' German with blue eyes, 6 feet tall and blond hair was so intelligent then why did they allow themselves to be led by an Austrian that was none of the above?
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus I didnt say they way superior or more intelligent, its just a scientic theory, so dont ask me that. After WWII Germany had a very low industry. People didnt have work or earned little money. People didnt like jews because they had money and did share nothing. Hitler promised everything for them, he used massive propaganda programs and had alot of talented people around him. Maybe he wasnt that intelligent, but he was very charismatic..->
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Germany's ultimate defeat lay in Hitler's suicidal personality. Hitler didn't want to die alone - he wanted to take millions with him and he did. Hitler was probably made mentally ill and/or mentally damaged following the Gas poisoning he suffered in the trenches against the British Army in the latter stages of World War 1. Don't you think it rather odd that Hitler had an intense affair with his young niece?
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus The stories about the affait with his niece are not 100% sure, so i cant say that. Yes, i believe that hitler was mentally damaged. But on the other hand, he didnt harvest his hatred for the brits. He wanted peace with britain and used his aryan propaganda for example saying that brits are aryans too. His objective was only the soviet union. France maintained the bad relations so a war with them was inevitable
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Adolf Hitler is an interesting character because he was ultimately responsible for Germany's destruction. It's as if he built the Germany Reich up from the defeat of World War 1 to be destroyed more completely. Some of his later utterances even suggest an admiration for Joe Stalin - very curious considering the fact that it was Joe Stalin's war leadership that was destroying the German Army more completely than the British and Americans combined were capable of.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Joseph Stalin led an army that was eqeuipped thx to americans and brits. Lend Lease was essential for the soviet victory. They could defend himself thex to the allies and on the other side german Luftwaffe was trapped in europe same as their marine. In a 1on1 confrontaion Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe and Reichsmarine would have won.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit The Soviet T34 tanks and IL2 Sturmovik ground attack fighters certainly did not come from Great Britain or the USA. With or without help from the West the USSR would have beaten Germany eventually. The German navy was also no match for the Royal Navy and that's why German surface ships were a rarity and the Germans had to rely on submarines.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
Both Stalin and Hitler werent wise, i ve just said that Stalin wasnt Hitlers Nemesis. Both had two different personalities. Hitler gained loyality of his people and they died for him while the people in the Soviet Union didnt trust Stalin. He wasnt even appointed to be a leader.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Stalin's government financed industrialization by restraining domestic consumption to ensure capital went for re-investment into industry, and by ruthless extraction of wealth from the kulaks - even free market economy countries do that. Stalin's Government also used numerous foreign experts, to design new factories, supervise construction, instruct workers and improve manufacturing processes. This led to the establishment of a manufacturing base capable of beating the Germans.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus There are even some stories about parents which eaten their own children because stalin took everything. On the other side stalin wasted money for some very expensive projects as this canal. And the industrial capacity was boosted thx to americans, because soviets didnt need to build everything.Lend-Lease allowed the Soviets to focus their own production almost solely on the production of weapons and ammunition.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Field Marshal Stalin takes some flak from historical revisionists but he did lead the USSR to victory over NAZI Germany. Stalin was a very tough leader - just what the USSR needed when they faced the best mechanized army in the world in June 1941. Our own Sir Arthur Harris faces the same kind of flak from historical revisionists but he did help nullify the German war machine via his RAF bomber campaign. They didn't hang around debating - they put words into positive action.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Yes, they did, but Stalin wasnt really tough. His own servants didnt like him, people didnt like and he wasted money and put his nose into miliatyr operations. I mean Hitler was worst, Stalingrad was his foult but on the other side Hitler had parkinsons desease. It had much influence on his desisions. Sry but Churchill and his people like Hurris were on the same level as nazis, or even worst in my opinion. Racists and thirsting for revenge attacking german people.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Sir Arthur Harris was a brilliant commander. The reasons for bombing Germany were to disrupt industrial production of weapons, to wear down the German people’s morale and to force the German Army and Air Force into having to defend against the bombing over a wide area. Repeated attacks on the German Reich also caused the diversion of industrial war production to defensive rather than offensive weapons and equipment. A war winning strategy.
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Churchil and Harris were rasists. You can find enough sources about it. A war winning strategy is to attack the insdustry, but they attacked german civilians while americans attacked german industry. Germans were nationalists, so its nearly impossible to break the morale of them. Churchill knew that
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Germany was the racist Police state and not Great Britain. Tell me at what time the British people considered Russians to be 'subhuman'? The Germans treated the Russians as subhumans and got a good kicking for it. Anyway, German morale was certainly broken by early 1945 with Uncle Joe Stalin's Red Army at the Eastern borders of Hitler's German Reich and the RAF and USAAF taking liberties in German airspace. We had the German 'master race' on their knees. :-)
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Red Army defeated german forces because they were supported :) I quoted the reasons numerous times. And Great Britain was racist. Hitler used his 'subhuman' stories as a pretense, but he didnt think like that. Britain was racists. They used black people and KZ camps and exploited other countries. How about the japanese canadians? Brits acted like idiots. And yes, You had germans on their knees, but ONLY because germans were outnumbered. In 1on1 brits wouldnt stand a chance ':)'
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit You what? My RAF Grandfather could take out 100 German front line soldiers with one bomb dropped from his Avro Lancaster bomber. :-) He could take out 100 Gestapo Police with his De Havilland Mosquito fighter bomber and be back in England in time for tea and biscuits. :-)
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus nice, its not even important for me because i meat hunderds of people which say such things especially here on youtube, so i cant check it. And such a grandfather fought against germans without antiaircraftsupport, fuel, supplies and fighter support because of their critical situation caused by the numbers of the fronts. And you cant deceive me with your smileys. If you purpose to write such useless comments then its futile to continue this conversation in my opinion.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
@Ixtzalit Resistance is futile. ;-) The RAF bombers were actually being shot at with 88mm anti aircraft batteries. Those same 88mm guns were thus not knocking out allied tanks and this thus helped the liberation of Europe from the master race (herren volk) tyranny that was Hitler's regime. Tell me, are you blond, 6 feet tall and with blue eyes just like your dear dearted Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler?
RedGoblinus 1 year ago
@RedGoblinus Which ressistance? And here you go againg with your smileys, you re trying to preted the superiority in a debate, thats a typical tactic, forget it. Yes, the 88mm cannons knocked out allied airplanes and tanks, because germans were more clever and create a a cannon that was used as AT and AA. '...your dear dearted Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler?' Here you go again, such conversations are a waste of time.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
Stalin wasnt wise, and he wasnt Hitlers nemesis, that were somepropaganda stories. Hitler and Staln had two different personalities. Hitler was a bad militarist but he knew how to gain loyality of his people. And UdSSR wouldnt win without the help from USA. Barbarossa wouldnt fail. Brits and americans sent tanks, yes, but it was just a small part of Lend Leade, Ressources were important, the tanks werent worth much. Railroad rails, railcars, explosives, copper ore, aluminium etc.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
And germans couldnt use all their forces against SU. And they coult focus their own production of ground forces(they had marine, airforce, atlantic wall etc.) while soviets used everything they had and the used even women for battle and children for production. Brits and americans delayed german industry attacking their war factories. instead of 1100 Tiger II Tanks they had only 500 thx to bombardements. Germany was way stronger then SU.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago
tires, mashine tools, automotive fuel, aviation fuel. Even boots,clothes, meat and sugar.And, in short, the answer is that Lend-Lease allowed the Soviets to focus their own production almost solely on the production of weapons and ammunition. Soviet Union wasnt that strong.59% of the aviation fuel came from USA, 2,5% auto. fuel, 92,7% of railroad rails, 81,6% locomotives, 80,7% railcars, 33% explosives, 45,2% copper ore, 55,5% alluminium, 30,1% tires, and much much more.
Ixtzalit 1 year ago