feedmegin posted:

To be fair, if there had been Tsushima 2.0 and Japan had won it, we'd all be posting in here (in German) asking why didn't America use its subs to sink Japanese naval ships rather than futile efforts to interdict Japan's transports.

Platystemon posted:

Everyone who was conceived after the war wouldn’t be here because the slightest change would scramble half of their genes and result in a different person. It eould snowball from there.

SeanBeansShako posted:

All this engine talk is just making me more excited for that sim where you restore WW2 vehicles from the ground up.


Surviving crew members crowded outside in a ditch while their Firefly burns, somebody mutters 'This would never have happened if we wore our tin hats.'

JcDent posted:

Did ze Germans give tankers helmets?

SeanBeansShako posted:

I know what the head gear is for.

Most tank crew get the gently caress out fast when things go south so I feel while it does protect you from spalling or debris at certain angles a beret or soft cap isn't going to get caught on a lever or gear stick and cost you those few precious seconds from understanding why your tank is nicknamed a Ronson lighter.

LingcodKilla posted:

Barely be stopped means hit in head with hammer.

https://youtu.be/lvBHq5PW0Ag

Nenonen posted:

Brits did have tanker helmets from the get go, but for some reason tankers preferred not to use them?



Lend Lease tanks came with American issue helmets, and in 1944 a new steel helmet based on the British airborne troopers helmet came. But you don't see them in photographs a lot. According to various internet sources steel helmets were mostly used when dismounted or when in open-topped vehicles. US crews would also put the steel shell of an infantry helmet on their tanker rigging when serving in tank destroyers and other open-toppers.

zoux posted:

https://twitter.com/DrLindseyFitz/status/1167050880170037248

La Terreur is good now

ninjahedgehog posted:

Quoting this not only for the — 'ow you zay — incroyable French accent but also a followup.

If Allied forces making their way through France came in contact with a rural village like this and a local wanted to point out a Nazi position or give them a fresh croissant or whatever, would it be more likely that the local would know English or one of the soldiers would know French? Would an American or British platoon have an interpreter with them? I assume the Canadians would have a certain percentage of Quebecois in their troop so it wouldn't be an issue.

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

French does have spelling rules, and once you get a middling-sized vocabulary you can make a pretty good guess at how to pronounce a word you've read, or how to spell a word you've heard. Those spelling rules are just inordinately fond of letters that affect how other letters are pronounced rather than contributing directly themselves.

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

Now I'm kind of wondering what Russia would be like in an alternate universe where humans can't get drunk.

zoux posted:

Phanatic posted:

That would very probably be considered a true threat. It's not just a vague statement, it's one that "on its face and in the circumstances in which it is made is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to the person threatened, as to convey a gravity of purpose and imminent prospect of execution."

Note those requirements: unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific.


That would not. It's not unequivocal. It's not unconditional. It's definitely not immediate and it's certainly not anywhere near as specific as your first exa


You could say that. No court operating under USA jurisprudence would.


The whole "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" trope was created by a Supreme Court judge who wanted to imprison people for the terrible crime of...opposing the draft. When you find yourself invoking it, it's a good sign you should reconsider your premises in regards to free speech.

Nessus posted:

We kind of have an unusual level of idolatry about our soldiers here in the US, historically speaking. Or so it seems, anyway. Did states like Prussia valorize the common soldier like we sort of do, or was it just the officers/leaders?

Nenonen posted:

I love how carefully the line between II and III gradients skirts around south eastern Finland.

HEY GUNS posted:

considering you don't have to drive up to the oil well and stab it to death in single combat...

xthetenth posted:

It's the Navy's land camo, so it's been de facto only for SEALs. The Marines hold the rights to MARPAT jealously partially because it gave a distinctive look for recruiting.

Koramei posted:

Well definitely not everyone, they slept lying down in East Asia.

Although often while resting their head on a pillow that looked along these lines:


Which have always seemed like they must be extremely uncomfortable to me, although I suppose I've never tried it out myself.