Is there anything more fascinating than WW2, seriously?
It's scary how the U.S. is in the pretty much same position Germany was before Hitler turned it into something to be admired and feared. I wonder who the next Fuhrer might be, history does repeat itself after all.
@wheelmanstan your fascination cost millions of people their lives. Lest we forget it will be repeated and we must not allow another Hitler to emerge. I don't see it happening in the US.
I always wonder what would have happened if the U.S. never invented the Nuclear bomb near the end of the war. Some say Russia would have gotten the UK then the U.S. soon after. Patton was sure it would happen and wanted to take Russia out, lol.
@warriorprince1010 One measure of the economy at that time was the number of cyclotrons. Japan had 1, England had 1, France had 1, Germany had 2, Soviets had 2. The US had 30. That makes everyone but the US distinctly second rate.
@warriorprince1010 I will note that the Communists were indeed trying to take over the world, with active espionage efforts in Japan, Germany, Britain France and the US.
@warriorprince1010 Certainly India had a much larger population than Germany, and with the magnificent leadership of the the Canadians, could have developed large ground forces from the empire.
@warriorprince1010 You know, you are right. the United Kingdom existed since 1927. What I should have said rather than Great Britain was 'the British Empire'. The British Empire and its commonwealth extended far beyond the little island, and could indeed have taken Germany and USSR together.
@warriorprince1010 I will also note that in 1940 the "UK" did not exist. Rather we had Great Britain as our ally, with India/Pakistan/Bangledesh, the numerous colonies of Singapore, Malay, and Africa. France also had 4 provinces in Africa, with many other colonies around the world.
@warriorprince1010 I will go further than that. If the US president had sent over the Marines to throw Hitler out of the Rhineland in 1935, the Wehrmacht would have arranged for Hitler to die suddenly. It was not obvious what would have come. Even Britain tried the appeasement approached for a while. Predicting is hard, especially about the future. Me, I predicted the fall of the berlin wall 10 years in advance. I don't tell you all the predictions I got wrong though!
@warriorprince1010 Since the Soviets murdered millions in the 1930s were the British who didn't go to war against them cowards and appeasers? How about the Germans, who didn't go to war against the Soviets in the 1930s, were they also cowards and appeasers? What about Poland, which did fight the soviets in the 1920s, but did not in the 1930s. Were the Poles also cowards and appeasers?
What I mean is that your definition makes no sense.
@warriorprince1010 The US is independent of Britain. Britain going to war does not settle the decision for the US. The US provided all possible aid short of war to Britain. That Britain signed an agreement with Poland and kept it is to their credit. That Poland signed non-aggression agreements with Germany, and cooperated with Germany and Britain in destruction of Czechoslovakia is not to to their credit. Why do you think the US should have joined straight away? You must have some reason.
@warriorprince1010 Better to say that the support Poland, France, Britain and Italy gave to Germany at Munich against Czechoslovakia was Hitler's best ally. Perhaps one would say that the greed of Poland for land during the Pygmy wars after WWI encouraged USSR to seek a path to regain that land. Poland paid a heavy price for that greed. USSR paid a heavy price for the Molotov-von Ribbentrop agreement with Germany. The only land the US got from WWI or WWII was enough to bury our dead.
@DonMeaker So lets review. US did not display cowardice, compared to other countries. USSR was indeed attempting to take over or interfere in other countries. German, Soviet, British, Franch and Japanese economies was distinctly second rate compared to the US. USSR did not display cowardice, rather, they were an ally of Germany against Poland and Germany's prime trading partner until they were invaded.
@warriorprince1010 There were several Neutrality Acts, passed in 1935, 1936, 1937, and 1939. They were passed to prevent the US from being drawn into war, as the Nye commission and some popular literature had asserted had happened in WWI. There is a nice article in Wikipedia for you on the subject.
@warriorprince1010 FDR was limited by the neutrality act that forbade a great many things. I don't see how you can praise Germany and USSR (and perhaps Japan) for going to war against Poland and murdering millions, while claiming Americans were cowards for not murdering millions. Shame on you. Show me your battle wounds before you set yourself up as arbiter of bravery.
@warriorprince1010 Certainly we did not lack courage. US soldiers fought from N.Africa to the Elbe and from New Guinea to Okinawa, with side trips to Burma and China, and major operations in the North Atlantic, and in the air over Romania and Germany. Unlike some countries, we have laws which restrict military adventures. By contrast, Germans had to be continually lied to by their government to justify their heinous aggression.
@warriorprince1010 Preferring peace is not cowardice. The Soviets were allies of Germany against Poland, and the US was not. Hitler made a practice of attacking allies, Poland, USSR, France, and neutrals like Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway. He also declared war against countries attacked by his allies: Yugoslavia, Greece, Egypt. No wonder he couldn't get an agreement from Finland to continue the war. Even the term "non-aggression pact" is a term of derision.
@R1DIKAL Those darned Polish MADE him invade, by not surrendering. And the Belgians. The Polish and the Belgians MADE him invade by not surrendering. And the Norwegians. The Polish the Belgians and the Norwegians MADE him invade by not surrendering. And the Dutch. The Polish, the Belgians, the Norwegians, and the Dutch MADE him invade by not surrendering! And the Danes. The Polish, the Belgians the Norwegians, the Dutch, and the Danes MADE him invade by not surrendering! French, Greek, Soviets
@R1DIKAL Both Communists and National Socialists used the power of the state to steal and murder. They used identical methods, for identical goals. Hitler (SS#1) and his friend Maurice (SS#2) had Jewish ancestry. Killing some Jews because other Jews invented communism is like killing your neighbor on the left side because the neighbor on the right side stole your car. Many Germans didn't fear Communism, rather they supported it. The ideology was whether the leaders name should start with S or H
they make it sound like germany would not have lost the war if it wasnt for D-day. That is completly wrongs of course. The battle for germany was as good as lost after the massive defeat in front of Moscow in 1941, from there on the Russian had the upper hand. Also remember that over 70% of the german army was on the eastern front since they started Barbarossa. With all respect, what D-Day did was to end the war faster. The war was mainly decided ont the eastern front, not the west front.
@MissMan666 The war was decided when Hitler declared war on the US. Even without the Soviet Union, Germany was doomed. The question was whether the US would use its first nuclear bomb on Germany or Japan.
@DonMeaker there's no way that the fucking army of the US had use the atomic bomb against germany because the US army stole to germany that technology
@JEANFUHRER Fantasy doesn't hold up well. US developed the atomic bomb well in advance of Germany, despite the very good work done by some German physicists. Fortunately, the US had a number of very good German physicists working for us, many of Jewish extraction or with Jewish connections. Germany under Hitler made a practice of invading allies. That normally makes it hard to get new allies, or to keep the old ones.
@AdamSavage88 And does it really matter how biased America was? Nazi Germany was an oppressive state that enslaved millions. Obviously America's official policy was isolationist in the 1930's but remember this is a democracy we're talking about and this policy was heavily backed by congress. FDR eventually saw through this and by 1939 the Neutrality Act had been modified and the The Cash & Carry Act of 1939 was signed. This provided aid to the Allied powers and subsequently that's why Hitler...
@AdamSavage88 You're wrong in your thinking that America did not provide aid to the Soviet Union before Germany declared war. The Lend-lease Act was signed on March 11th 1941 and the official date on which aid was extended to the Soviet Union was approved on October 30th 1941. This is all prior to Nazi Germany declaring war on America.
makes no difference Russia is the hero the world ...... if it wasnt for russia hitler would just simply invaded britain france and cut of supplies in north america.... russia stopped those filthy germans
@blackoil911 ehh yeah but he did invade France and conquered them! However he then failed to invade Britain because the Luftwaffe could not gain air superiority. I don't think he could have successfully invaded Britain anyway but that's a different story. Obviously I know the Soviets paid the price in blood, and they did of course face the full weight of the Wehrmacht for two years but I don't get your argument to be honest.
he wouldve attacked france and then britain u dumbass and rockets were not in the english mans dictionary.... germans made them and wouldve easily fucked uk big time and u obvioulsy dont know what im talking bout then look up what u said fool
@blackoil911 What are you on about you fool! "if it wasnt for russia hitler would just simply invaded britain france"... there your words not mine. They already invaded France prior to invading Russia you ignoramus so what you said makes no sense. Also they failed in their attempt to invade Britain in 1940 because of the RAF prior to Operation Barborossa in 1941 so how did the Soviets help at this stage of the war. They had a non-agression pact with Nazi Germany in 1940 you dope!
ajhahahahaha exactly german invbaded france and next they brutally bomb uk ahahhahaahah but germans spared queens hairy arse ole and went for stalins pen us u get it fag tell ur mom its ok but failed cuz russia whiped them out the planet
@blackoil911 You seem like a right dope anyway! To be honest I was trying to be polite in my 1st response but basically you're a moron. "ajhahahahaha exactly german invbaded france and next they brutally bomb uk", that's totally different to what you said at the start. To begin with you implied that without Russia, Germany would have invaded France and then England. As I said they did did and then tried both of these things prior to invading Russia in 1941...
@blackoil911 ... just explain to me what you meant by your original statement. To me it sounds as if your talking out of your arse but I don't know. The only help the Soviets supplied in 1940 was by sending raw materials to Nazi Germany to help in their war with Britain and France! And what's with the insults? Or are you just too stupid to reply with some sense.
lol i dont wanna give a history lesson boy u read what happened to germany once the winter hit...... thank god hitler attacked russia cuz if it was opposite direction that evil basturd wouldve have it all........ i dont care anymore im just saying tho russia saved the world and now its up to the brics'''' to save the world against nato
@blackoil911 I don't think you should be giving any history lessons chap! I "read what happened to Germany once the winter hit". What does that statement even mean? Obviously history shows us the Soviets bore the brunt of the fighting and pretty much beat the German Army into submission but your timeline seems all off. At the beginning of this all I said was they had already beaten France & tried to formulate an invasion of Britain prior to Barbarossa. I was only responding to your statement..
@blackoil911 ... in which you said without Russia Hitler would have invaded both Britain & France. This ALREADY HAPPENED prior to Germany invading Russia. The Soviets played no role in aiding the Allies until they were attacked themselves in 1941. Seriously how do you not get this. I know the fecking Russians played the biggest part in beating Nazi Germany but that's obvious. All I asked was for you top explain how the Soviets helped prior to Nazi Germany attacking them?
see your a fool''' u said exactly what i wanted u 2 say'''' and now u gime ur trick question its ok like john cena says '''' u can keep your application bitch u cant see me lol
@blackoil911 I said nothing different to what I said at the start you dope! You'd swear I backtracked or something. You are clearly a retarded numbnuts who has fantasies about what's true and what's not. So see you later dickhead!
@AdamSavage88 You said US didn't provide lend lease to USSR until Hitler declared war. I gave you the dates which show you to be an incorrect blowhard. Apologize nicely, like a good boy.
@AdamSavage88 Yes, you can be neutral, and help the proof is the history: That is what the US did. We provided Pre-lend lease (paid in gold) starting on 22 June 1941 and Lend Lease to USSR, before Hitler declared war on US, with the "First Protocol Period" beginning on 1 October 1941. German declaration of war came after the 7 Dec 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. I will now wait for your apology.
@AdamSavage88 Wrong again. US rather famously would only provide military goods to WWII allies for cash, until GB's money was gone. US didn't loan money to Soviet Union, or Fascist Italy, or Germany after Hitler. Rather, they continued to use US property based on earlier licenses. Lend-Lease was passed only after GB's money was gone. US had lost money in loans to WWI allies, and had laws against loaning money to countries at war. Only after Germany invaded was USSR added to Lend Lease
@AdamSavage88 Wrong again. US rather famously would only provide military goods to WWII allies for cash, until GB's money was gone. US didn't loan money to Soviet Union, or Fascist Italy, or Germany after Hitler. Rather, they continued to use US property based on earlier licenses. Lend-Lease was passed only after GB's money was gone. US had lost money in loans to WWI allies, and had laws against loaning money to countries at war. Only after Germany invaded was USSR added to Lend Lease.
@thatamazinggeek Certainly the USSR did their part and more in destroying the German army. The US and Britain destroyed the German Navy, and Luftwaffe, and destroyed a lot of the German army. Over and over, Hitler decided to trade space for time in the East, and committed his reserves in the West against Normandy, against the Ardennes. The USSR's decision to attack stupidly in 1942, 1943, and early 1944 cost millions of lives. They were much better at attacking in late '44 and '45
@thatamazinggeek Rommel in Tunisia would have been thirsty, not having supplies for a large army. His small force had plenty of trouble getting gas, parts, and munitions as it was. Certainly the USSR paid the butcher bill. US paid in other ways, providing tanks, ships, oil, aluminum, planes to our allies, in addition to key attacks that divided the German effort. The German effort at Kursk was called off in response to landings in Italy. Bagration was a greater success because of Normandy.
@thatamazinggeek And the Germans lost more soldiers to the US in Tunisia than they did to the surrender of Stalingrad...
Amphibious landings are a big deal because they are really hard. The Canadians lost a lot of very good men at Dieppe so we could learn how to do them. US with GB did 3 in Africa, 4 in Sicily, 2+ in Italy, 2 in France, and all across the Pacific, the amphibious invasion was the knockout punch. Inchon in Korea was another game breaker. 248 US amphibious landings in WWII.
@thatamazinggeek And the Germans lost more soldiers to the US in Tunisia than they did to the surrender of Stalingrad...
Amphibious landings are a big deal because they are really hard. The Canadians lost a lot of very good men at Dieppe so we could learn how to do them. 3 in Africa, 2 in Sicily, 2 in Italy, 2 in France, and all across the Pacific, the amphibious invasion was the knockout punch. Inchon in Korea was another game breaker. 248 US amphibious landings in WWII.
@tommy1973able over 230,000 Germans and Italians were captured in Tunisia. No, Dieppe was not a warcrime. Germany's invasion of Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg were war crimes. Germany's bombing of Rotterdam was a warcrime. Germany's murders in the camps were warcrimes. German's treatment of captured poles were warcrimes.
@7JDH7NL7 It is a good idea, im pretty sure one oph his generals (hitlers) mentioned to have a mol3ile counter attack instead oph a wall, think oph how much time and money the wall cost, not to mention the mines,etc...
@7JDH7NL7 Not that I would recommend it, but if Hitler didn't go round attacking his allies, he would not have had to have so many soldiers in the east...
D-day is really over rated. Germany was all but lost whether D-day was successful or not. It just sped things up, but needless British and North American's died, when those communist dogs should have bore the entire blunt of the wehrmacht's rage. 22 million? not enough I say!
Hitler was a military genius, until he got his ass kicked! Also, if Russia sided with Germany, imagine what the world would be like now ! my videos show it
Those who have studied the German defense lines in Normandy how noticed that so called Atlantic Wall - at least in Normandy - was just a myth germans believed before the 6th of June 1944 and western allies before and after that.
E.g in Omaha Beach, 4 miles line, there were 14 relatively poorly armed bases with some 300 germans. Some old Czech 3" guns, not even anti-tank. Just because there were men like Heinrich Severloh the americans (34 000) however lost thousands of soldiers.
@tranmere789 One Sherman tank of the two that made it ashore at Omaha was destroyed by a German antitank gun. The Sherman managed to destroy the antitank gun. If you have swum there, you would have found that the tide creates natural trenches and ditches, so the space between where the landing craft must stop (at low tide) and the nearest cover was cut up by these trenches.
@DonMeaker buddy, you take this shit way too seriously. you werent even there, you dont know waht your talking about. your just full of american propoganda bullshit. the stuff they teach in other countries is way different
Basicly the biggest error that Hitler made was canceling the invasion of Britain and went to fight Russia. If Hitler had invaded Britain, America would have done two things, either 1.Declair war on Germany, or 2. Sit out. But if America did declair war on Germany and Hitler was still allied with Russia, he could ask Russia for aid. And WW2 might have been extended.
@Movegas1 There was that little episode when he had his soldiers wave white flags from their tanks to facilitate penetration of the French defense lines, but he was a mere division commander then. After he got to Africa he became more aware of the importance of following the rules.
Germany and England were the only countries with the best soldiers (with years of battle experience behind them) in WW2. The only strategy that helped America and Russia were overwelming numbers.
My Respect to all the German Soldiers of WW1 and WW2.
That and the technical superiority of our aircraft, planes and tanks. As I recall, the British frequently expressed their admiration of US supplies and equipment, as did the Russians.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I wouldn't say technical superiority in tanks and planes... I would rather say numerical superiority. The Germans had the best tanks and planes of ww2. The first jet fighter for example. Messerschmitt Me 262. + the germans had the top 133 fighter Ace's of ww2. For example, Erich Hartmann - 352 kills. The war was decided in the east were the germans were outnumbered sometimes even 20 to 1. All the best german units were in the east. Americans mostly fighted young boys and old men.
I would say technical superiority, based on the frequent presence of bombers of the German industry.
Again, the best German units were switched back and forth. Grossdeutchland, certainly on anyone's list of best units, fought in both fronts. German kill ratios are suspect. no doubt EH was very good, but the rules for confirming kills were different, and tactical conditions were also different, permitting various scores. EH flew Bf/Me109s, less advanced than even spitfires, so is nonsequiteur.
@DonMeaker I'm not so sure about that. As my understanding of it is, the Panzers had zero fear of your Amerikan Shermans. They were pathetic. Anytime the Shermans won, was from sure numbers. Don't get me wrong, respect to both parties. But don't forget, in this video, it mentions Germans advance upon Poland, but never - as most WW 2 'documentaries' never do...mentions the RUSSIAN within POLAND.
@koscheii666 The Germans knew that US tactics were for US tanks to avoid German tanks if possible, and to have the TDs attack the Panzers from the flanks. Like at Norville just north of Bastogne, where 4 TDs killed 30 Panthers and Tigers. Like Arracourt where the Panzers attacked 4th Armored division and got their heads handed them. Or where 2nd Armored division broke out at St Lo and lost 42 men to kill 1500 Germans of 2nd SS Panzer
@lancer89032 In some ways the T-34 was better (lower ground pressure faster turret traverse). In other ways Sherman was better (stabilized gun, faster time to engage, better 75mm HE round, better 76mm armor penetration). They both had about the same frontal armor, with T-34 having an edge in side armor. The Soviets had 4000 Shermans provided by Lend Lease, and used them from Berlin to Manchuria.
@lancer89032 It was better in some ways, inferior to Sherman in others. the T-34/76 had a turret traverse time of 10 seconds for 2 pi, compared to Sherman's 15 seconds and Tlger Panther D/A of 60 seconds. On the other hand the Sherman 75mm gun had better HE round, and Sherman 76 had better armor penetration. Sherman's stabilized gun could hit on the move, a feature unique to US made tanks in WWII. All other tanks had to come to a halt, and stop swaying to hit. US tanks only had to slow a bit.
@Poeskaas Except the US had the most effective air force, and the most effective artillery, with airburst fuses for 10X the effect of quick or superquick fuses. US signals decrypts complemented British ULTRA with US MAGIC decrypts which provided a unique high level second look inside Japanese and German high commands. Germany invented modern combined arms warfare, then forgot it, switching to heavy tank monsters without air, or artillery support. US learned combined arms from the Germans.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
+ all the best german soldiers were at the eastern front. Most who have fought in WW1. Battle hardened soldiers with years of experience doing batlle during WW1. At the western front the allies faced young ill experienced soldiers. Soldiers mostly between 18 and 25. And sometimes even children between 12 and 17. But even these young ill experienced soldiers inflicted heavy casualties on the Allies. They fought valiantly against overwelming numbers of Allied forces.
Too bad Soviets and Germans didn't follow Geneva convention. Furthermore too bad Soviets didn't back up Poland and prevent the darned war in the first place.
@DonMeaker "Too bad Soviets and Germans didn't follow Geneva convention. Furthermore too bad Soviets didn't back up Poland and prevent the darned war in the first place"
@DonMeaker its not like they were in a position to, they were economically devestated and their military was in chambles from the purges. this explains the horrible loss of life in the early phases of the war
@TheRussianMILF The Soviets were in a better position to defeat Germany with Poland on their side, and before Germans had combat experience, and before Soviets lost tens of thousands fighting Finland, not to mention the added border states of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania.
@TheRussianMILF And I just explained why USSR would have been better off, despite their lack of readiness, allying with Poland against Germany to prevent a war, rather than allying with Germany, a proven untrustworthy party. USSR paid with more than 20 million lives for that error.
@TheRussianMILF The loss of life was higher in later phases. USSR official casualty figures were falsified, as were census figures during the great purges.
@tommy1973able So did we provide money to the Nazis or get money from them? you seem to be confused, wanting to have it both ways. Certainly during 1941 Germany's biggest trading partner was USSR.
@DonMeaker the nazies did everything on short time credit,true stalin did everything to please hitler till barbarossa,mainly grain and oil,but the money came from the USA and on the lesser part england since 1932 till about 38,germany had no money at all!!it,s the same people who financed all the wars sinse napoleon,look up zeitgeist the movie to learn more...there so much info there u should watch!!!!
@DonMeaker Too bad that Britain and France did not stand up to Hitler at Munich. Instead they appeased him. The Russian Red Army were the true heros during world war 2. They stopped the German war machine and destroyed the German sixth army.
@lancer89032 No doubt there were heroic people misruled by the Soviets. They lost more than a million second lieutenants. On the other hand, Soviets also invaded Poland and Finland as German allies. The Soviet Army was able to stop the Germans in USSR. Britain was able to stop Germans from crossing the Channel Britain. US and Britain with allies were able to stop Germans in Africa, drive Germans from Italy and France, and from the skies over Germany. The team was built by Germany for her defeat
Well it would have been an impenetrable fortress if Hitler didn't decide to invade Russia on June 22, 1941. Because then the allied forces would have faced up to 3 000 000 extra well trained German soldiers and thousends of elite Panzer and Tiger tank units. Plus hundreds if not thousends well experienced luftwaffe fighter units. It would have been a bloodbath for the allies. A disater!!! The allied armies morele would have been down the drain for good.. england might even have surrendered.
@Poeskaas youre are so right.. i often think the same thing. and yes i believe the germans where the best troops ever. to stand up så long against all these other countrys.. true soldiers. respect:) im also a dedicated ww2 guy
Exactly. I ask myself how would it have been if Hitler attacked England and never went East into Russia... Hmm The Allies would have been beat on D-day for sure.
I have to say I partially agree with you. Excluding the holocaust and SS barbarism I have an admiration for the scale of the Reich's concept of a master race. You only have to look at the shear order of science & technical development achieved by the Germans in that period. Effectively they accelerated human progress by an order of magnitude only recently exceeded.
you guys need to remember the Americans, British and Canadians fought not the best of what the Germans had to offer, every unit that could was sent to fight the Soviets. The wall was also not completed and the Luftwaffe had very little planes available, the germans were fighting in Italy and in the east
The reason the Luftwaffe had very few planes is because of the Big Week, when the US shot down and straift the planes, only two flights by lufwaffe happen on D-Day.
The planes were moved the day before D-Day (ironically) and were out of range on the day, only 2 planes were left within range and those were the only two planes to attack the allies during D-day.
Of course, the fact that Germany had very little in the way of an Air Force available, was a determining factor I'd say in deciding the way things went on D-Day . . .
Has any historian done a computer simulation to see if, had the Germans used the British idea to burn fuel-oil just off the coastline, the Allied invasion fleet or at least landing teams, could have been greatly hampered or reduced in strength?
hardly incredible,the allies breached it in normandy,because of britian not being invaded early in the war,germany spent billions on the atlantic wall,time,money,manpower,resources,in men ,held down tens of thousands of men in the west,all of which was kept away from the east,which helped the soviets overcome the nazis eventually,
Is there anything more fascinating than WW2, seriously?
It's scary how the U.S. is in the pretty much same position Germany was before Hitler turned it into something to be admired and feared. I wonder who the next Fuhrer might be, history does repeat itself after all.
wheelmanstan 4 months ago
@wheelmanstan your fascination cost millions of people their lives. Lest we forget it will be repeated and we must not allow another Hitler to emerge. I don't see it happening in the US.
EJCQGriff 3 months ago
@EJCQGriff Hows the weather up there on that horse? STFU it was an amazing time in history.
Goregasm913 1 month ago
@EJCQGriff Why is the US involved in every present war now then, the only reason that there is no great war is because of nuclear weapons
VolksSturmdivision 2 weeks ago
I always wonder what would have happened if the U.S. never invented the Nuclear bomb near the end of the war. Some say Russia would have gotten the UK then the U.S. soon after. Patton was sure it would happen and wanted to take Russia out, lol.
wheelmanstan 4 months ago
@germaniajim2
so true ...
Frobisch 5 months ago
meh they talk all big about d-day. d-day was child's play compared to the operations on the eastern front.
ApocDevTeam 6 months ago
@ApocDevTeam what? it's not some childish competition you freak
MrCriticize 5 months ago
@ApocDevTeam I knowww....but omaha beach was pretty nasty. the rest beach operations went pretty smooth.
coolconfuzer 5 months ago
Great video. Thank you!
yegorovich 6 months ago
Evil Genius!!!
yegorovich 6 months ago
So if hitler had attacked UK not Russia, when we whoud got the uk, and then attack US or Russia... its kinda cool what a singel choise can do :P
MrToppy123 6 months ago
@warriorprince1010 One measure of the economy at that time was the number of cyclotrons. Japan had 1, England had 1, France had 1, Germany had 2, Soviets had 2. The US had 30. That makes everyone but the US distinctly second rate.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 I will note that the Communists were indeed trying to take over the world, with active espionage efforts in Japan, Germany, Britain France and the US.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Certainly India had a much larger population than Germany, and with the magnificent leadership of the the Canadians, could have developed large ground forces from the empire.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 You know, you are right. the United Kingdom existed since 1927. What I should have said rather than Great Britain was 'the British Empire'. The British Empire and its commonwealth extended far beyond the little island, and could indeed have taken Germany and USSR together.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
Comment removed
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 I will also note that in 1940 the "UK" did not exist. Rather we had Great Britain as our ally, with India/Pakistan/Bangledesh, the numerous colonies of Singapore, Malay, and Africa. France also had 4 provinces in Africa, with many other colonies around the world.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 I will go further than that. If the US president had sent over the Marines to throw Hitler out of the Rhineland in 1935, the Wehrmacht would have arranged for Hitler to die suddenly. It was not obvious what would have come. Even Britain tried the appeasement approached for a while. Predicting is hard, especially about the future. Me, I predicted the fall of the berlin wall 10 years in advance. I don't tell you all the predictions I got wrong though!
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Since the Soviets murdered millions in the 1930s were the British who didn't go to war against them cowards and appeasers? How about the Germans, who didn't go to war against the Soviets in the 1930s, were they also cowards and appeasers? What about Poland, which did fight the soviets in the 1920s, but did not in the 1930s. Were the Poles also cowards and appeasers?
What I mean is that your definition makes no sense.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 The US is independent of Britain. Britain going to war does not settle the decision for the US. The US provided all possible aid short of war to Britain. That Britain signed an agreement with Poland and kept it is to their credit. That Poland signed non-aggression agreements with Germany, and cooperated with Germany and Britain in destruction of Czechoslovakia is not to to their credit. Why do you think the US should have joined straight away? You must have some reason.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Except that declaring war is a power given to US congress. Do a little research, please.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Better to say that the support Poland, France, Britain and Italy gave to Germany at Munich against Czechoslovakia was Hitler's best ally. Perhaps one would say that the greed of Poland for land during the Pygmy wars after WWI encouraged USSR to seek a path to regain that land. Poland paid a heavy price for that greed. USSR paid a heavy price for the Molotov-von Ribbentrop agreement with Germany. The only land the US got from WWI or WWII was enough to bury our dead.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@DonMeaker So lets review. US did not display cowardice, compared to other countries. USSR was indeed attempting to take over or interfere in other countries. German, Soviet, British, Franch and Japanese economies was distinctly second rate compared to the US. USSR did not display cowardice, rather, they were an ally of Germany against Poland and Germany's prime trading partner until they were invaded.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 There were several Neutrality Acts, passed in 1935, 1936, 1937, and 1939. They were passed to prevent the US from being drawn into war, as the Nye commission and some popular literature had asserted had happened in WWI. There is a nice article in Wikipedia for you on the subject.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 FDR was limited by the neutrality act that forbade a great many things. I don't see how you can praise Germany and USSR (and perhaps Japan) for going to war against Poland and murdering millions, while claiming Americans were cowards for not murdering millions. Shame on you. Show me your battle wounds before you set yourself up as arbiter of bravery.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Certainly we did not lack courage. US soldiers fought from N.Africa to the Elbe and from New Guinea to Okinawa, with side trips to Burma and China, and major operations in the North Atlantic, and in the air over Romania and Germany. Unlike some countries, we have laws which restrict military adventures. By contrast, Germans had to be continually lied to by their government to justify their heinous aggression.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Preferring peace is not cowardice. The Soviets were allies of Germany against Poland, and the US was not. Hitler made a practice of attacking allies, Poland, USSR, France, and neutrals like Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway. He also declared war against countries attacked by his allies: Yugoslavia, Greece, Egypt. No wonder he couldn't get an agreement from Finland to continue the war. Even the term "non-aggression pact" is a term of derision.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@R1DIKAL Those darned Polish MADE him invade, by not surrendering. And the Belgians. The Polish and the Belgians MADE him invade by not surrendering. And the Norwegians. The Polish the Belgians and the Norwegians MADE him invade by not surrendering. And the Dutch. The Polish, the Belgians, the Norwegians, and the Dutch MADE him invade by not surrendering! And the Danes. The Polish, the Belgians the Norwegians, the Dutch, and the Danes MADE him invade by not surrendering! French, Greek, Soviets
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@R1DIKAL Both Communists and National Socialists used the power of the state to steal and murder. They used identical methods, for identical goals. Hitler (SS#1) and his friend Maurice (SS#2) had Jewish ancestry. Killing some Jews because other Jews invented communism is like killing your neighbor on the left side because the neighbor on the right side stole your car. Many Germans didn't fear Communism, rather they supported it. The ideology was whether the leaders name should start with S or H
DonMeaker 8 months ago
Visit our website to learn more about the Atlantic Wall or our Atlantikwall-Museum.
AtlantikwallMuseum 8 months ago 2
they make it sound like germany would not have lost the war if it wasnt for D-day. That is completly wrongs of course. The battle for germany was as good as lost after the massive defeat in front of Moscow in 1941, from there on the Russian had the upper hand. Also remember that over 70% of the german army was on the eastern front since they started Barbarossa. With all respect, what D-Day did was to end the war faster. The war was mainly decided ont the eastern front, not the west front.
MissMan666 8 months ago
@MissMan666 The war was decided when Hitler declared war on the US. Even without the Soviet Union, Germany was doomed. The question was whether the US would use its first nuclear bomb on Germany or Japan.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@DonMeaker there's no way that the fucking army of the US had use the atomic bomb against germany because the US army stole to germany that technology
JEANFUHRER 7 months ago
@JEANFUHRER Fantasy doesn't hold up well. US developed the atomic bomb well in advance of Germany, despite the very good work done by some German physicists. Fortunately, the US had a number of very good German physicists working for us, many of Jewish extraction or with Jewish connections. Germany under Hitler made a practice of invading allies. That normally makes it hard to get new allies, or to keep the old ones.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@AdamSavage88 ... advocated unrestricted submarine warfare in 1939!
brownsey1 9 months ago
@AdamSavage88 And does it really matter how biased America was? Nazi Germany was an oppressive state that enslaved millions. Obviously America's official policy was isolationist in the 1930's but remember this is a democracy we're talking about and this policy was heavily backed by congress. FDR eventually saw through this and by 1939 the Neutrality Act had been modified and the The Cash & Carry Act of 1939 was signed. This provided aid to the Allied powers and subsequently that's why Hitler...
brownsey1 9 months ago
@AdamSavage88 You're wrong in your thinking that America did not provide aid to the Soviet Union before Germany declared war. The Lend-lease Act was signed on March 11th 1941 and the official date on which aid was extended to the Soviet Union was approved on October 30th 1941. This is all prior to Nazi Germany declaring war on America.
brownsey1 9 months ago
@brownsey1
makes no difference Russia is the hero the world ...... if it wasnt for russia hitler would just simply invaded britain france and cut of supplies in north america.... russia stopped those filthy germans
blackoil911 8 months ago
@blackoil911 ehh yeah but he did invade France and conquered them! However he then failed to invade Britain because the Luftwaffe could not gain air superiority. I don't think he could have successfully invaded Britain anyway but that's a different story. Obviously I know the Soviets paid the price in blood, and they did of course face the full weight of the Wehrmacht for two years but I don't get your argument to be honest.
brownsey1 8 months ago
@brownsey1
he wouldve attacked france and then britain u dumbass and rockets were not in the english mans dictionary.... germans made them and wouldve easily fucked uk big time and u obvioulsy dont know what im talking bout then look up what u said fool
blackoil911 8 months ago
@blackoil911 What are you on about you fool! "if it wasnt for russia hitler would just simply invaded britain france"... there your words not mine. They already invaded France prior to invading Russia you ignoramus so what you said makes no sense. Also they failed in their attempt to invade Britain in 1940 because of the RAF prior to Operation Barborossa in 1941 so how did the Soviets help at this stage of the war. They had a non-agression pact with Nazi Germany in 1940 you dope!
brownsey1 8 months ago
@blackoil911I agree with most of what you say. But dont forget Stalin was even worse than Hitler, he killed way more inocent people.
MissMan666 8 months ago
@brownsey1
ajhahahahaha exactly german invbaded france and next they brutally bomb uk ahahhahaahah but germans spared queens hairy arse ole and went for stalins pen us u get it fag tell ur mom its ok but failed cuz russia whiped them out the planet
blackoil911 8 months ago
@blackoil911 You seem like a right dope anyway! To be honest I was trying to be polite in my 1st response but basically you're a moron. "ajhahahahaha exactly german invbaded france and next they brutally bomb uk", that's totally different to what you said at the start. To begin with you implied that without Russia, Germany would have invaded France and then England. As I said they did did and then tried both of these things prior to invading Russia in 1941...
brownsey1 8 months ago
@blackoil911 ... just explain to me what you meant by your original statement. To me it sounds as if your talking out of your arse but I don't know. The only help the Soviets supplied in 1940 was by sending raw materials to Nazi Germany to help in their war with Britain and France! And what's with the insults? Or are you just too stupid to reply with some sense.
brownsey1 8 months ago
@brownsey1
lol i dont wanna give a history lesson boy u read what happened to germany once the winter hit...... thank god hitler attacked russia cuz if it was opposite direction that evil basturd wouldve have it all........ i dont care anymore im just saying tho russia saved the world and now its up to the brics'''' to save the world against nato
blackoil911 8 months ago
@blackoil911 I don't think you should be giving any history lessons chap! I "read what happened to Germany once the winter hit". What does that statement even mean? Obviously history shows us the Soviets bore the brunt of the fighting and pretty much beat the German Army into submission but your timeline seems all off. At the beginning of this all I said was they had already beaten France & tried to formulate an invasion of Britain prior to Barbarossa. I was only responding to your statement..
brownsey1 8 months ago
@blackoil911 ... in which you said without Russia Hitler would have invaded both Britain & France. This ALREADY HAPPENED prior to Germany invading Russia. The Soviets played no role in aiding the Allies until they were attacked themselves in 1941. Seriously how do you not get this. I know the fecking Russians played the biggest part in beating Nazi Germany but that's obvious. All I asked was for you top explain how the Soviets helped prior to Nazi Germany attacking them?
brownsey1 8 months ago
@brownsey1
see your a fool''' u said exactly what i wanted u 2 say'''' and now u gime ur trick question its ok like john cena says '''' u can keep your application bitch u cant see me lol
blackoil911 8 months ago
@blackoil911 Trick question? Seriously are you retarded, it's OK if you are it'll be an excuse at least!
brownsey1 8 months ago
@brownsey1 hahaha its all good u said exactly what i wanted u to say buy bitch
blackoil911 8 months ago
@blackoil911 I said nothing different to what I said at the start you dope! You'd swear I backtracked or something. You are clearly a retarded numbnuts who has fantasies about what's true and what's not. So see you later dickhead!
brownsey1 8 months ago
@AdamSavage88 You said US didn't provide lend lease to USSR until Hitler declared war. I gave you the dates which show you to be an incorrect blowhard. Apologize nicely, like a good boy.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@AdamSavage88 Yes, you can be neutral, and help the proof is the history: That is what the US did. We provided Pre-lend lease (paid in gold) starting on 22 June 1941 and Lend Lease to USSR, before Hitler declared war on US, with the "First Protocol Period" beginning on 1 October 1941. German declaration of war came after the 7 Dec 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. I will now wait for your apology.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@AdamSavage88 Wrong again. US rather famously would only provide military goods to WWII allies for cash, until GB's money was gone. US didn't loan money to Soviet Union, or Fascist Italy, or Germany after Hitler. Rather, they continued to use US property based on earlier licenses. Lend-Lease was passed only after GB's money was gone. US had lost money in loans to WWI allies, and had laws against loaning money to countries at war. Only after Germany invaded was USSR added to Lend Lease
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@AdamSavage88 Wrong again. US rather famously would only provide military goods to WWII allies for cash, until GB's money was gone. US didn't loan money to Soviet Union, or Fascist Italy, or Germany after Hitler. Rather, they continued to use US property based on earlier licenses. Lend-Lease was passed only after GB's money was gone. US had lost money in loans to WWI allies, and had laws against loaning money to countries at war. Only after Germany invaded was USSR added to Lend Lease.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@thatamazinggeek Certainly the USSR did their part and more in destroying the German army. The US and Britain destroyed the German Navy, and Luftwaffe, and destroyed a lot of the German army. Over and over, Hitler decided to trade space for time in the East, and committed his reserves in the West against Normandy, against the Ardennes. The USSR's decision to attack stupidly in 1942, 1943, and early 1944 cost millions of lives. They were much better at attacking in late '44 and '45
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@thatamazinggeek Rommel in Tunisia would have been thirsty, not having supplies for a large army. His small force had plenty of trouble getting gas, parts, and munitions as it was. Certainly the USSR paid the butcher bill. US paid in other ways, providing tanks, ships, oil, aluminum, planes to our allies, in addition to key attacks that divided the German effort. The German effort at Kursk was called off in response to landings in Italy. Bagration was a greater success because of Normandy.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@thatamazinggeek And the Germans lost more soldiers to the US in Tunisia than they did to the surrender of Stalingrad...
Amphibious landings are a big deal because they are really hard. The Canadians lost a lot of very good men at Dieppe so we could learn how to do them. US with GB did 3 in Africa, 4 in Sicily, 2+ in Italy, 2 in France, and all across the Pacific, the amphibious invasion was the knockout punch. Inchon in Korea was another game breaker. 248 US amphibious landings in WWII.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@thatamazinggeek And the Germans lost more soldiers to the US in Tunisia than they did to the surrender of Stalingrad...
Amphibious landings are a big deal because they are really hard. The Canadians lost a lot of very good men at Dieppe so we could learn how to do them. 3 in Africa, 2 in Sicily, 2 in Italy, 2 in France, and all across the Pacific, the amphibious invasion was the knockout punch. Inchon in Korea was another game breaker. 248 US amphibious landings in WWII.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@DonMeaker u mean more than 150,000?and diepe was a warcrime!
tommy1973able 10 months ago
@tommy1973able over 230,000 Germans and Italians were captured in Tunisia. No, Dieppe was not a warcrime. Germany's invasion of Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg were war crimes. Germany's bombing of Rotterdam was a warcrime. Germany's murders in the camps were warcrimes. German's treatment of captured poles were warcrimes.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
the germans laughed at the Maginot line..then built one of their own.. how silly..
ab330 11 months ago
@thatamazinggeek YEAH!!!
RUSSIA FTW
TheRussianMILF 1 year ago
Atlantic wall was stupid idea...
sheemsheem 1 year ago
@sheemsheem Well, thats your idea to protect the west when most of his troops are in the east? tell me i would like to know :) !
7JDH7NL7 1 year ago
@7JDH7NL7 It is a good idea, im pretty sure one oph his generals (hitlers) mentioned to have a mol3ile counter attack instead oph a wall, think oph how much time and money the wall cost, not to mention the mines,etc...
sheemsheem 1 year ago
@7JDH7NL7 Not that I would recommend it, but if Hitler didn't go round attacking his allies, he would not have had to have so many soldiers in the east...
DonMeaker 10 months ago
D-day is really over rated. Germany was all but lost whether D-day was successful or not. It just sped things up, but needless British and North American's died, when those communist dogs should have bore the entire blunt of the wehrmacht's rage. 22 million? not enough I say!
dymd3z 1 year ago
@dymd3z D Day was an amphibious invasion on a front of 8 divisions. Name a bigger one?
DonMeaker 1 year ago
Hitler was a military genius, until he got his ass kicked! Also, if Russia sided with Germany, imagine what the world would be like now ! my videos show it
1973mazdarx4coupe 1 year ago
@1973mazdarx4coupe USSR did side with Germany, until Germany thought it could get away with yet another breached agreement.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
Those who have studied the German defense lines in Normandy how noticed that so called Atlantic Wall - at least in Normandy - was just a myth germans believed before the 6th of June 1944 and western allies before and after that.
E.g in Omaha Beach, 4 miles line, there were 14 relatively poorly armed bases with some 300 germans. Some old Czech 3" guns, not even anti-tank. Just because there were men like Heinrich Severloh the americans (34 000) however lost thousands of soldiers.
tranmere789 1 year ago
@tranmere789 One Sherman tank of the two that made it ashore at Omaha was destroyed by a German antitank gun. The Sherman managed to destroy the antitank gun. If you have swum there, you would have found that the tide creates natural trenches and ditches, so the space between where the landing craft must stop (at low tide) and the nearest cover was cut up by these trenches.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@DonMeaker buddy, you take this shit way too seriously. you werent even there, you dont know waht your talking about. your just full of american propoganda bullshit. the stuff they teach in other countries is way different
TheRussianMILF 1 year ago
@TheRussianMILF I have been there. I care not what errors others teach.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
very good documentary, general rommell was indeed a very bright individual
DecoratedSPLATTER 1 year ago
Anyone know if any of those 6 million mines are still there? Scary.
ost324 1 year ago
@ost324 Mines get phound yearly.
sheemsheem 1 year ago
o my god, how dutch people are speaking english :P
PitbullNL 1 year ago
@PitbullNL
better than any other nation in continental europe, i guess.
heinixxx 1 year ago
brilliant vid!!!
doing project on this for school!
1julery1 1 year ago
Basicly the biggest error that Hitler made was canceling the invasion of Britain and went to fight Russia. If Hitler had invaded Britain, America would have done two things, either 1.Declair war on Germany, or 2. Sit out. But if America did declair war on Germany and Hitler was still allied with Russia, he could ask Russia for aid. And WW2 might have been extended.
tempuserification 1 year ago
I'll give you that, rommel brought honor and chivalry to a country that truly in retrospect had little.
Movegas1 1 year ago
@Movegas1 There was that little episode when he had his soldiers wave white flags from their tanks to facilitate penetration of the French defense lines, but he was a mere division commander then. After he got to Africa he became more aware of the importance of following the rules.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
It is nto the most important day of the 20th century, the end of the battle of stalingrad and kursk are the most important days
jeffman3003 1 year ago
Does anyone know the name of Hitler's speech at 4:49
ltflak 1 year ago
He turned on russia saving the the british and preparing the cold war without knowing.
StaffanGoldschmidt 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
what a waste of effort.the british had the best idea,set fire to the sea
MrOutofthis 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This is such a crappy documtary, forgetting tons of important tings, and see's it all from U.S side...very poor
MissMan666 2 years ago
The British Manchester bomber has a unique place in history, being cancelled for not meeting requirements as least as quickly as any aircraft ever.
DonMeaker 2 years ago 7
Actually the Soviets fought before being attacked, on the side of the Hitlerites against Poland.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
I guess you didn't know about the invasion on Sept 17 1939 of Poland by USSR. Hope you brush up your history before you embarass your self further.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Ph.D doesn't mean your any smarter or always right.
noborusan 2 years ago 4
you have no idea what u r talking about
GruesomeRacer 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I know my history retard.. if you dont have anything smart to say then just get lost you idiot.. lol
Poeskaas 2 years ago
Germany and England were the only countries with the best soldiers (with years of battle experience behind them) in WW2. The only strategy that helped America and Russia were overwelming numbers.
My Respect to all the German Soldiers of WW1 and WW2.
Poeskaas 2 years ago 6
Comment removed
dylanthomashawco1234 2 years ago
you are sadly misinformed
GruesomeRacer 2 years ago
The most skilled US soldiers had some small involvement in Heavy Bombers, then Artillery where the US was superior.
DonMeaker 2 years ago 8
That and the technical superiority of our aircraft, planes and tanks. As I recall, the British frequently expressed their admiration of US supplies and equipment, as did the Russians.
DonMeaker 2 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I wouldn't say technical superiority in tanks and planes... I would rather say numerical superiority. The Germans had the best tanks and planes of ww2. The first jet fighter for example. Messerschmitt Me 262. + the germans had the top 133 fighter Ace's of ww2. For example, Erich Hartmann - 352 kills. The war was decided in the east were the germans were outnumbered sometimes even 20 to 1. All the best german units were in the east. Americans mostly fighted young boys and old men.
Poeskaas 2 years ago
I would say technical superiority, based on the frequent presence of bombers of the German industry.
Again, the best German units were switched back and forth. Grossdeutchland, certainly on anyone's list of best units, fought in both fronts. German kill ratios are suspect. no doubt EH was very good, but the rules for confirming kills were different, and tactical conditions were also different, permitting various scores. EH flew Bf/Me109s, less advanced than even spitfires, so is nonsequiteur.
DonMeaker 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
GREAT AM 100% Agree with you Germans lot its best Army in east but after that lot Germans were Superior HAIL GERMANY HAIL HITLER.
amir1fbi 2 years ago
@DonMeaker I'm not so sure about that. As my understanding of it is, the Panzers had zero fear of your Amerikan Shermans. They were pathetic. Anytime the Shermans won, was from sure numbers. Don't get me wrong, respect to both parties. But don't forget, in this video, it mentions Germans advance upon Poland, but never - as most WW 2 'documentaries' never do...mentions the RUSSIAN within POLAND.
koscheii666 8 months ago
@koscheii666 The Germans knew that US tactics were for US tanks to avoid German tanks if possible, and to have the TDs attack the Panzers from the flanks. Like at Norville just north of Bastogne, where 4 TDs killed 30 Panthers and Tigers. Like Arracourt where the Panzers attacked 4th Armored division and got their heads handed them. Or where 2nd Armored division broke out at St Lo and lost 42 men to kill 1500 Germans of 2nd SS Panzer
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@DonMeaker The Russian T34 was far superior to any tank that we gave Russia in aid.
lancer89032 8 months ago
@lancer89032 In some ways the T-34 was better (lower ground pressure faster turret traverse). In other ways Sherman was better (stabilized gun, faster time to engage, better 75mm HE round, better 76mm armor penetration). They both had about the same frontal armor, with T-34 having an edge in side armor. The Soviets had 4000 Shermans provided by Lend Lease, and used them from Berlin to Manchuria.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@lancer89032 It was better in some ways, inferior to Sherman in others. the T-34/76 had a turret traverse time of 10 seconds for 2 pi, compared to Sherman's 15 seconds and Tlger Panther D/A of 60 seconds. On the other hand the Sherman 75mm gun had better HE round, and Sherman 76 had better armor penetration. Sherman's stabilized gun could hit on the move, a feature unique to US made tanks in WWII. All other tanks had to come to a halt, and stop swaying to hit. US tanks only had to slow a bit.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@Poeskaas Except the US had the most effective air force, and the most effective artillery, with airburst fuses for 10X the effect of quick or superquick fuses. US signals decrypts complemented British ULTRA with US MAGIC decrypts which provided a unique high level second look inside Japanese and German high commands. Germany invented modern combined arms warfare, then forgot it, switching to heavy tank monsters without air, or artillery support. US learned combined arms from the Germans.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@Poeskaas I recommend you look at "Victory through Airpower" as a key to the US strategy that helped the US through the war.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
+ all the best german soldiers were at the eastern front. Most who have fought in WW1. Battle hardened soldiers with years of experience doing batlle during WW1. At the western front the allies faced young ill experienced soldiers. Soldiers mostly between 18 and 25. And sometimes even children between 12 and 17. But even these young ill experienced soldiers inflicted heavy casualties on the Allies. They fought valiantly against overwelming numbers of Allied forces.
Poeskaas 2 years ago
Grossdeutchland fought on both east and west. No doubt that Germans lost more men fighting russians. More Germans were captured in the West.
DonMeaker 2 years ago 3
True, because most german soldiers wanted to surrender to the Western Allies instead because they would be treated much better.
Poeskaas 2 years ago
Too bad Soviets and Germans didn't follow Geneva convention. Furthermore too bad Soviets didn't back up Poland and prevent the darned war in the first place.
DonMeaker 2 years ago 17
This has been flagged as spam show
@DonMeaker "Too bad Soviets and Germans didn't follow Geneva convention. Furthermore too bad Soviets didn't back up Poland and prevent the darned war in the first place"
Too bad Hiter was a fucking idiot...
RomeAndMarty4Ever 1 year ago
@DonMeaker its not like they were in a position to, they were economically devestated and their military was in chambles from the purges. this explains the horrible loss of life in the early phases of the war
TheRussianMILF 1 year ago
@TheRussianMILF The Soviets were in a better position to defeat Germany with Poland on their side, and before Germans had combat experience, and before Soviets lost tens of thousands fighting Finland, not to mention the added border states of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@DonMeaker are u retarded? i just explained why russia wasnt ready
TheRussianMILF 1 year ago
@TheRussianMILF And I just explained why USSR would have been better off, despite their lack of readiness, allying with Poland against Germany to prevent a war, rather than allying with Germany, a proven untrustworthy party. USSR paid with more than 20 million lives for that error.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@TheRussianMILF The loss of life was higher in later phases. USSR official casualty figures were falsified, as were census figures during the great purges.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@DonMeaker too bad the americans and british didn,t follow either,instead they financed the nazies in order to get more money!!!!!!
tommy1973able 10 months ago
@tommy1973able So did we provide money to the Nazis or get money from them? you seem to be confused, wanting to have it both ways. Certainly during 1941 Germany's biggest trading partner was USSR.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@DonMeaker the nazies did everything on short time credit,true stalin did everything to please hitler till barbarossa,mainly grain and oil,but the money came from the USA and on the lesser part england since 1932 till about 38,germany had no money at all!!it,s the same people who financed all the wars sinse napoleon,look up zeitgeist the movie to learn more...there so much info there u should watch!!!!
tommy1973able 10 months ago
@tommy1973able Germany printed their own money. Your assertions that Germany had no money are silly.
DonMeaker 10 months ago
@DonMeaker Too bad that Britain and France did not stand up to Hitler at Munich. Instead they appeased him. The Russian Red Army were the true heros during world war 2. They stopped the German war machine and destroyed the German sixth army.
lancer89032 8 months ago
@lancer89032 No doubt there were heroic people misruled by the Soviets. They lost more than a million second lieutenants. On the other hand, Soviets also invaded Poland and Finland as German allies. The Soviet Army was able to stop the Germans in USSR. Britain was able to stop Germans from crossing the Channel Britain. US and Britain with allies were able to stop Germans in Africa, drive Germans from Italy and France, and from the skies over Germany. The team was built by Germany for her defeat
DonMeaker 8 months ago
Yeah, the Atlantic Wall was a far from impenetrable idiot's idea.
ColonelAllan 2 years ago
Well it would have been an impenetrable fortress if Hitler didn't decide to invade Russia on June 22, 1941. Because then the allied forces would have faced up to 3 000 000 extra well trained German soldiers and thousends of elite Panzer and Tiger tank units. Plus hundreds if not thousends well experienced luftwaffe fighter units. It would have been a bloodbath for the allies. A disater!!! The allied armies morele would have been down the drain for good.. england might even have surrendered.
Poeskaas 2 years ago 3
@Poeskaas youre are so right.. i often think the same thing. and yes i believe the germans where the best troops ever. to stand up så long against all these other countrys.. true soldiers. respect:) im also a dedicated ww2 guy
audimetallica 2 years ago
thanks man.
Poeskaas 2 years ago
Exactly. I ask myself how would it have been if Hitler attacked England and never went East into Russia... Hmm The Allies would have been beat on D-day for sure.
stuka33 2 years ago
Operation Sealion weakend the Luftwaffe greatly.
stuka33 2 years ago
Besides being the Anti-Christ Hitler was an idiot. I'm glad Germany lost the war.
He should've been killed in WW1
fitzgregmac 2 years ago
Wat attrocities?
Racial purity is an important factor!
KensaimasterWung 3 years ago 9
Who made this documentary and when was it aired?
Jezzdenmark 3 years ago
I have to say I partially agree with you. Excluding the holocaust and SS barbarism I have an admiration for the scale of the Reich's concept of a master race. You only have to look at the shear order of science & technical development achieved by the Germans in that period. Effectively they accelerated human progress by an order of magnitude only recently exceeded.
turboslag 3 years ago 8
Why do so many people not know how to make a video with proper sound?
Fetchdafish 3 years ago
4:47 wtf
dpsantos1994 3 years ago
you guys need to remember the Americans, British and Canadians fought not the best of what the Germans had to offer, every unit that could was sent to fight the Soviets. The wall was also not completed and the Luftwaffe had very little planes available, the germans were fighting in Italy and in the east
shit, attack from all sides
tHeWasTeDYouTh 3 years ago
The reason the Luftwaffe had very few planes is because of the Big Week, when the US shot down and straift the planes, only two flights by lufwaffe happen on D-Day.
shermanace 3 years ago 10
The planes were moved the day before D-Day (ironically) and were out of range on the day, only 2 planes were left within range and those were the only two planes to attack the allies during D-day.
slantythecamel 3 years ago 2
sure, but still the Big week drained down the Luftwaffe power.
shermanace 3 years ago 11
lol at the guy who didn't know hadrians Walls name.
svaran 3 years ago
Germany is and was cool.
EddyARB 3 years ago 5
Of course, the fact that Germany had very little in the way of an Air Force available, was a determining factor I'd say in deciding the way things went on D-Day . . .
SonneEightyEight 4 years ago
Has any historian done a computer simulation to see if, had the Germans used the British idea to burn fuel-oil just off the coastline, the Allied invasion fleet or at least landing teams, could have been greatly hampered or reduced in strength?
DataWaveTaGo 4 years ago
How smart and intelligent were those Germans, well organized, incredible!
Marleneagnes 4 years ago 20
hardly incredible,the allies breached it in normandy,because of britian not being invaded early in the war,germany spent billions on the atlantic wall,time,money,manpower,resources,in men ,held down tens of thousands of men in the west,all of which was kept away from the east,which helped the soviets overcome the nazis eventually,
merseyside 4 years ago
@Marleneagnes
Yep, that`s why they lost.
Frlja 1 year ago
thx for uploading these great videos.
zeromuz 4 years ago 4
your welcome will upload more
kingtiger88 4 years ago
@kingtiger88
Thanx, i saw this docu before on tv, but this is nice.
We are curentley restoring a part of the atlanticwall here in Holland.
Greetz, Ramon
janusx66 1 year ago
mave.foorumi.eu
marjis3 1 year ago