Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
krampster2
Jun 26, 2014

Robo Reagan posted:

The German's plan was literally "we're going to overrun the french in a week and after they surrender we'll haul rear end across the country using our hella modern train infrastructure and smash the Russians with overwhelming force" but then the french were total cunts and refused to roll over and die so both sides dug themselves in then russia shows up and they dig in on that side too and boom you've got WW1

Hmm. Also British people couldn't read maps. Most (or a lot of) the soldiers from my country died because some British high up from some fancy and useless academy couldn't navigate Turkey and landed us on a heavily protected part of the coastline, rather than the intended weaker section. loving hold the map the right way up you silly Brits.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

hohhat
Sep 25, 2014

Booblord Zagats posted:

NATO's plan in the 70s and 80s: Don't invade Russia from the Western side, they can just keep falling back to worse and worse terrain while straining your logistics. Just buffer them to the West and invade from the East or the North in the Spring months to strip away their ability to supply all their major population centers and then you can just starve them out by snapping off all roads pipe-lines and rail-lines while they burn themselves out by trying to push against you to the East or North.

"They outnumber us 20 to 1, should we use those nukes?"

"Nah, lets invade them from the north and cut rail lines."

*Paris is crushed by Soviet tanks*






Not to say that wouldn't be cool and all....

etalian
Mar 20, 2006

krampster2 posted:

Hmm. Also British people couldn't read maps. Most (or a lot of) the soldiers from my country died because some British high up from some fancy and useless academy couldn't navigate Turkey and landed us on a heavily protected part of the coastline, rather than the intended weaker section. loving hold the map the right way up you silly Brits.

It's what you get for being a client state of the british

1st_Panzer_Div.
May 11, 2005
Grimey Drawer

Disco Infiva posted:

:psypop:

Are you for real?

They are... but german girls just get old, russian girls magically transform into babushkas with amazing cooking skills the day they turn 50.

etalian
Mar 20, 2006

1st_Panzer_Div. posted:

They are... but german girls just get old, russian girls magically transform into babushkas with amazing cooking skills the day they turn 50.

the solution is to keep the german girl in your bed, and the baba in the kitchen after she turns 30.

hohhat
Sep 25, 2014

Robo Reagan posted:

WW1 was both sides staring at each other from 100 yards away and gaining/losing a few meters for four years WW2 involved entire cities disappearing so take a guess

WW1 had some cool cave drawings tho

WW1 was very civilized. Fairly shallow and static fronts where the soldiers could industrially massacre one another with a minimum of civilian casualties or material damage.

But if you go in more for genocide and scorched earth, WW2 has the edge.

Echo Chamber
Oct 16, 2008

best username/post combo

krampster2 posted:

Do the WW1 and the WW2 historians argue all time over which war was cooler and more awesome?
WWI gave us JRR Tolkien.

WWII gave us anime.

hohhat
Sep 25, 2014

Echo Chamber posted:

WWI gave us JRR Tolkien.

WWII gave us anime.

The 20th century was a carnival of horrors.

thathonkey
Jul 17, 2012
serious answer: he prolly would have after winter but russia beat him to the punch by violating the truce or whatever then proceeded to decimate large #s of german forces thanks to an unusually harsh winter basically winning the war for everyone else. yet in US history classes they say it was thanks to us :smug:

we did gently caress japan's poo poo up though. they shouldve realized mass murdering civilians is basically what our military does and we are drat good at it.

XMNN
Apr 26, 2008
I am incredibly stupid
people always hype the russian winter but the mud was also brutal



Blistex
Oct 30, 2003

Macho Business
Donkey Wrestler
If anyone is interested in Eastern Front horrors, you should read "The Forgotten Soldier" by Guy Sajer.

Venom Snake
Feb 19, 2014

by Nyc_Tattoo
It will never cease to amuse me how in 1941, a single KV1 could manage to half the advance of half a division because at the time the german tanks had such lovely short barrel guns they couldn't piece the drat things armor. If the Russian army hadn't been lead by buffoons and idiots at the start of the Eastern Front Conflict the German army would have gotten owned so hard the war would have probably been over by 43.

This is a KV1



This is your average german tank in 1941

Baby the Birdman
Jul 14, 2005


Every real nigga fuck they main girl in the ass.

XMNN posted:

people always hype the russian winter but the mud was also brutal





I don't know if it actually happened , but I listened to Dan Carlin's Hardcore history - ghosts of the ostfront and it was cool when he mentioned how the red army lined up dying german soldiers on the mud, hosed them down with water to freeze them and then drove their vehicles over them.
Also the part where people from fleeing german towns left a bunch of alcohol behind to the advancing red army with hopes of distracting them and slowing them down, but the Russians drank it all and got hornier and angrier and ended up raping everybody. I recommend listening to that podcast.

hohhat
Sep 25, 2014
Doesn't matter what your tanks look like, you just need a shitload of them. The Nazis could never win, the Soviets massively outproduced them.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of fellows.

etalian
Mar 20, 2006

Venom Snake
Feb 19, 2014

by Nyc_Tattoo

Agag posted:

Doesn't matter what your tanks look like, you just need a shitload of them. The Nazis could never win, the Soviets massively outproduced them.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of fellows.

Idk, the myth of "superior German steel" really only holds true on the western front were the allies literally could not give a poo poo due to them having the luxury of not fighting the majority of the German panzer corps.

The T34 was very advanced for it's time, and shocked the poo poo out of the Germans when they first encountered it, then of course you had the t34/85 upgrade which made them even more deadly.

The coolest thing about Russian tanks is the pragmatic design, for instance the ISU-152 is literally a 152 mm howitzer strapped to a metal box and it could literally rip a Panther apart.

So on top of all that you also had stupid poo poo the Germans did like the Elephants engine being extremely underpowered resulting in hull losses as the engines exploded when they tried to go up a small hill.

hohhat
Sep 25, 2014
The problem is Nazis can't count and believe a bunch of bullshit about "will" and "racial purity."



"So what if they massively outnumber us. Slavs are not true men."

*has capital leveled by Red Army*

Venom Snake
Feb 19, 2014

by Nyc_Tattoo
It is very entertaining we that the US had no heavy tank at the end of the war and we had to fire like half our generals who were retards like Patton who wanted to keep the tanks rolling to Moscow despite the fact we had nothing that could take on the IS3.

Fidel Cuckstro
Jul 2, 2007

Satsuki Kiryuin posted:

It is very entertaining we that the US had no heavy tank at the end of the war and we had to fire like half our generals who were retards like Patton who wanted to keep the tanks rolling to Moscow despite the fact we had nothing that could take on the IS3.

However would we have stopped a big tank???

etalian
Mar 20, 2006

Satsuki Kiryuin posted:

It is very entertaining we that the US had no heavy tank at the end of the war and we had to fire like half our generals who were retards like Patton who wanted to keep the tanks rolling to Moscow despite the fact we had nothing that could take on the IS3.

US had the a-bomb, was operating at peak war capacity, better air power and a better navy.

Much of the soviet effectiveness in the later half in WWII was also due to how the massive lend-lease aid solved problem like the Soviet military's tail side problem.

Venom Snake
Feb 19, 2014

by Nyc_Tattoo

etalian posted:

US had the a-bomb, was operating at peak war capacity, better air power and a better navy.

Much of the soviet effectiveness in the later half in WWII was also due to how the massive lend-lease aid solved problem like the Soviet military's tail side problem.

An a-bomb we could only manufacture in a limited amount. Noone is saying we wouldn't gently caress some poo poo up but lol if you think we had a snow balls chance in hell of facing off against the USSR at the height of it's power.

Fidel Cuckstro
Jul 2, 2007

Satsuki Kiryuin posted:

An a-bomb we could only manufacture in a limited amount. Noone is saying we wouldn't gently caress some poo poo up but lol if you think we had a snow balls chance in hell of facing off against the USSR at the height of it's power.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong and dumb.

Venom Snake
Feb 19, 2014

by Nyc_Tattoo

Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:

I'm sorry, but you're wrong and dumb.

Patton was for war with the soviets and believed we could be them, that should tell you all you need to know about how retarded that line of thought is.

Fidel Cuckstro
Jul 2, 2007

Satsuki Kiryuin posted:

Patton was for war with the soviets and believed we could be them, that should tell you all you need to know about how retarded that line of thought is.

Ok, guy who thinks 'building a bigger tank' was something America couldn't do in 1945.

etalian
Mar 20, 2006

Satsuki Kiryuin posted:

Patton was for war with the soviets and believed we could be them, that should tell you all you need to know about how retarded that line of thought is.

the russians had no force projection capability like a strong navy, airforce or huge merchant marine fleet unlike the western allies.

skeletonotherkin
Sep 26, 2014

Satsuki Kiryuin posted:

Patton was for war with the soviets and believed we could be them, that should tell you all you need to know about how retarded that line of thought is.

Didn't the soviets greatly outnumber the entire combined allied forces in Germany at the end of the war?

etalian
Mar 20, 2006

skeletonotherkin posted:

Didn't the soviets greatly outnumber the entire combined allied forces in Germany at the end of the war?

Yes in shear size it had the largest number of tanks, artillery pieces and infantry at its peak power.

Venom Snake
Feb 19, 2014

by Nyc_Tattoo
It's not a matter of "could the soviets win a world war by taking over America" it's a matter of "Could the soviets probably kick the western allies rear end in europe?" and the answer to that is yes.

RideTheSpiral
Sep 18, 2005
College Slice
battle of the wits itt

XMNN
Apr 26, 2008
I am incredibly stupid

Baby the Birdman posted:

I don't know if it actually happened , but I listened to Dan Carlin's Hardcore history - ghosts of the ostfront and it was cool when he mentioned how the red army lined up dying german soldiers on the mud, hosed them down with water to freeze them and then drove their vehicles over them.
Also the part where people from fleeing german towns left a bunch of alcohol behind to the advancing red army with hopes of distracting them and slowing them down, but the Russians drank it all and got hornier and angrier and ended up raping everybody. I recommend listening to that podcast.
in beevor's berlin there's a story about advancing red army troops capturing a chemical plant with a big tank of methanol that they mistook for ethanol then literally drank themselves to death

hohhat
Sep 25, 2014
WW2 anecdotes.

"One time a bunch of guys died this way. Then, somewhere else, a bunch of guys died this way."

Zzulu
May 15, 2009

(▰˘v˘▰)

Agag posted:

WW1 was very civilized. Fairly shallow and static fronts where the soldiers could industrially massacre one another with a minimum of civilian casualties or material damage.

But if you go in more for genocide and scorched earth, WW2 has the edge.

Seriously, World War II ramped up the cruelty and civilian casualties by an insane degre

In World War 1 around 5-7 million civilians lost their lives. A horrific number, for sure

In World war 2 around 35-60 million civilians died :psyduck:

Civilians were specifically targeted by all sides and you had bombing raids against cities and terror campaigns all over the world, culminating in, of course, two nukes obliterating two entire cities and the firebombing of tokyo

Wild Horses
Oct 31, 2012

There's really no meaning in making beetles fight.
The allies in western europe had basically no chance against the Red Army in 1945. Just look at how they raped manchuria in like, a week, to get an idea of how they had their poo poo together. They basically made Blitzkrieg on a huge scale and had an army capable of delivering.

Crewmine
Apr 26, 2012
Someone (important??) said that at the end of WW2 all the USSR needed to conquer Europe was boots

luckily they were suffering a boot shortage or something because they didn't and then imploded

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

hohhat
Sep 25, 2014

Crewmine posted:

Someone (important??) said that at the end of WW2 all the USSR needed to conquer Europe was boots

luckily they were suffering a boot shortage or something because they didn't and then imploded

Nah.





Wild Horses posted:

The allies in western europe had basically no chance against the Red Army in 1945. Just look at how they raped manchuria in like, a week, to get an idea of how they had their poo poo together. They basically made Blitzkrieg on a huge scale and had an army capable of delivering.

Yup.


That's why the US nuked Nagasaki.

  • Locked thread