Weapons Of War - Waffen SS Leibstandarte 2/5

Excellent documentary series "Weapons Of War".
Episode "Leibstandarte".

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• documentary
• Weapons
• War
• Waffen
• SS
• Leibstandarte
• Adolf
• Hitler

[TheSkarsbo]

@Etay1993 what I did expect was a video that we can be able to watch, but obviously I found out that the video had so shitty quality so I couldn't watch it. Is that a good enough answare for you? Stop being a dick Etay1993.

[Etay1993]

@TheSkarsbo This is about WW2 what did you expect when you entered this video?

[TheSkarsbo]

Noooo 240p

[fluffy1931]

@stanbrekston ..,ditto sir.

[stanbrekston]

@fluffy1931 fluffy, & i say this with all respect. this has been a very stimulating debate for me. it's miles ahead of just a shouting match & calling each other names. i doubt that either of our minds have been changed, but i salute your depth & breath of knowlege. well done!

[fluffy1931]

@stanbrekston ..,as you were in 'sealion'. The difference is that norway & denemark & guadalcanal actually happened in real life and not in your fantasy. In 1942' the US has the amphibious capabilities to successfully launch & supply 2 amphibious operations in 2 seperate hemispheres and did it in real life.

Operation Torch has nothing to do with your eastern front fantasy? Germany does not have ability to support its operations in North Africa because the allies are interdicting its supplys.

[stanbrekston]

@fluffy1931 now you're in norway, denmark & guadalcanal. who's jumping around now? but it's ok. we can talk about that too. yes the british had a german cruiser bottled in a fjord in norway but it was of no strategic importance because after the bismarck, hitler had basically given up on the surface navy anyway. as far as torch goes, yes, because an UNDEFEATED red army was engaging hitlers best forces torch was succesful. guadalcanal, hats off to u.s. forces for denying the japanese an airfield

[fluffy1931]

@stanbrekston ..,I was not talking about strategic resources dude? More like strategic airforce & navy. I do know the difference btwn a airborne operation & amphibious operation. Yes and the fallschirmjager use on Crete resulted in cost so great that germany never again would attempt anything on such a scale. This is getting repetitive again with sealion? Why would a disaster like sealion be anyless of a disaster throwing a airborne operation into it? Germany has limited amphibious capabilities

[fluffy1931]

@stanbrekston ..,lol again dude. In real life & history 1940-45 Germany didn't have the amphibious capabilities to attack UK. In 1940' Norway & Denemark - Germany was successful but at a cost to her navy sinking of one of the Kriegsmarine's two heavy cruisers, two of its six light cruisers, 10 of its 20 destroyers and six U-boats.

The US; however, in 1942 - US was able to supply and support two amphibious operations in separate hemispheres ( North Africa - Operation Torch / Guadalcanal).

[stanbrekston]

@fluffy1931 germany's lack of strategic assets? fluffy have you ever heard of the donets basin? the ukraine? the oil fields of the caucasus & ploesti? do those count? as for sealion, have you ever heard of the fallschirmjager? they only conducted a succesful landing in crete. could they also perhps be used in sealion? why would britain be knocked out? with a defeated soviet union & conqured n.africa the majority of the british troops were in china-burma-india! all assets in ussr would be x-frrd