After studying Germany in WW2 for some time I have come to some

I'm not saying you're wrong, but did anyone have 'good' tactics in WW2 if not the Germans?

>>34783351
Everyone here who isn't a newfag knows this already, though.

But germans plans were good
They would've crushed USSR whhitout lend lease
They just didn't oversaw US """neutrality"""

>>34783351
List your (((studying))) sources
There is a great deal you do not know

>>34783364
Soviets with combined arms attack and deep attack tactics

>>34783503
>This is what tankies believed.

>>34783351
>Inevitable

Why did America attack Germany?

>>34783509
Was it the United States that decided "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" frenemy policy with USSR, or was it the central banks? Come on, give me some FDR associations. A certain top notch US general knew what was up, wasn't allowed to per-emptively protect USA. America didn't even join the war until Japan... Sheesh, the amount of ingrained disinformation is astonishing.

File: 1483236871302.jpg (731KB, 1227x849px) Image search: [Google]

731KB, 1227x849px

>>34783351
/pol/ wehraboos incoming

>>34783572
/pol/ wehrajews incoming

>>34783503
The soviets simply copied the germans though.

>>34783351
nailed it, honestly this should be obvious even after hi school history course ..


>>34783410
no they were not even their attack on poland was questionable at best and a huge gamble

>hey hans, you know when we attack poland
>ja
>french and british likely gonna declare war on us, what we going to do about that?
>ja muller we should not leave anything at french das will confuse stupid frank

everything germans ever planned was way over ambitious, way to inflexible and to sprinkle something on top, all of german command was either over promoted or put in command for political reason so not one with power really had broad strategic vision

>>34783351
I Have the opinion that no matter what, germany could have been defeated by any two powers regardless of who you remove.

USA & british empire
USA & USSR
British empire & USSR

What the fuck were they thinking?
I think any one of the powers could eventually beat germany Solo, especially if you discount japan.

The USA had massive untapped industry
USSR had ludicrous manpower
The british empire was well balanced enough and willing to wage a long protracted war.

>>34783604
hitler was a gambling addict essentially.

he gambled during his rise to power and various economic programs, managed to win through luck and stupid chance

>gambled in Rhineland
>Gambled in Austria, Czechoslovakia, that the western allies wouldn't intervene, (nor would italy, nor the austrians themselves).
>Gambled in Poland, got lucky because the USSR also sort of wanted parts of poland
>Gambled on the Ardennes in 1940, managed to sickle-cut because the french command was retarded with it's reserves and also lacked enough radios and propeller-blades.
>gambles with an ambitious invasion of Russia,
>Gambles with declaring war on the USA post-Pearl Harbor,
>gets his shit stomped.

>>34783607
>The USA had massive untapped industry
The USA had GD&T guaranteeing that a Chrysler tank would work with a GM turret, for example. Ford was once the most prolific aircraft builder in the world, and could have easily become the Boeing of the modern era.
Did the USA embrace GD&T after the war? Nope, gave that info to the Japs and watched their industrial quality skyrocket.

>>34783607
I think it was the Japanese that were the biggest problem for the British empire.

The defense of Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. was just pitiful, though the US wasn't much better in regards to the defense of the Philippines.

though I think there's a lot to criticize the British for in terms of designs.

The lack of a replacement for .303 was sort of dumb.. In my mind/my imaginary "Alt history world" it would be replaced by either 276 Pedersen, or some kind of "rimless .303", which would have the same or similar shoulder/taper, use the same bullet diameter, but be rimless, so conversion of SMLE's wouldn't be as much of a cost.
(though now that I write this out I'm quickly realizing that factors like "wall thickness", "the amount of space in a cartridge for powder", "pressure"(in the cartridge itself, the chamber, and the barrel) would all be important factors.)

Part of me would be amused to see (in an alternate timeline) the results of the USA, Britain, and Japan all adopting either Pedersen Rifles and/or Cartridges. Just like observations from soldiers or the results of trying to use Japanese pedersen ammo in US 10-shot Garands or in British SLR's (either ZH-29-based, Pedersen-toggle-lock, or a modified Farquhar-Hill-design)

the lack of a replacement for 7.62x54R by the Soviets is a similar thing, though I can better excuse it due to the USSR being a basket-case of a country for much of the 20's and 30's, though it's questionable that they didn't think of doing something like that when they were in the process of adopting the SVT-40, or even come up with a belt-fed or Box-mag DP.

Germany lacked a grand strategic plan, instead they made weird military excursions wherever high command saw fit, hell, the list of weird and ego fueled strategic choices is quite long
>luftwaffe has way too much personnel
>waffen SS/wehrmacht rivalry
>no wiminz in workplace
>no full wartime industry until 1944
>lots of weird and wasteful projects
>weird procurement
>treating cossacks and other potential allies like shit because üntermensch

>>34783760
>I think it was the Japanese that were the biggest problem for the British empire.
>The defense of Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. was just pitiful, though the US wasn't much better in regards to the defense of the Philippines.

Well it caught everyone by surprise Most of the units in the defence of the east were territorial units (reservists) that had already taken losses in the west, that were sent to free up regular units usually stationed there. Hence they had little equipment, no tanks, very few armoured cars, no mechanised transport.

When you have a look at singapore it was pretty much Team SNAFU without ammo, food and water.

As for .303 replacement. It was infeasable, they had something like 20million .303 rifles, SMLEs, MLEs, Ross rifles, P14 enfields, and martini enfields.

Why are so many threads on /his/ remade here on /k/? Isn't the whole point of /his/ to get rid of and contain shit threads like this?

>>34783806
I'm sure they want as much cross discussion on the matter as they can get. A lot of articles and 'facts' turn out to be fabricated which can change a lot of things and whats understood as accepted information.

If one anon from either board can show proof and change what some people thought to be facts; it's worth it.

>>34783414
I know 'bout deez nuts.

>>34783509
After the attack on Pearl Harbor US declared war on Japan. A couple days later Hitler declared war on the USA for no real reason. The US was going to enter the war either way, but Hitler gave the US population a reason to go to war with Germany. That and people were riled into a frienzy after Pearl Harbor.

>>34783351
>D-Day is when this was most clearly exposed

you need to go study some more.

citadel is when germany lost the strategic initiative and logistical flaws were exposed. hell, you could say the same about typhoon.

>>34783595
No. Blitzkrieg and deep battle are different.

>>34785679
>citadel...

not knowing german already had logistical problems since invasion of poland when 70% of their carts were horse drawn.

German was never "great". All this super weapon wank is from America pop history dramatic background music programs.

German didn't even have enough newest rifles for infantry and had to use old stock from WW 1.

German tanks were just on par with allied ones. The famous 4:1 ratio is because germans were always on the defensive when shermans rolled onto european mainland. When germans were on the offensive, allied tanks also took out german ones 4 to 1.

>>34785679
>>34785734
Do people just skip the part German NEVER wanted a protracted war because they knew their economy can't take it?

Isn't that alone exposes German's weaknesses?

Allies, once America joined the war, were never in any doubt of final victory. Imperial Japan had a tenth of the production power of US, let alone US plus allies. German was at half of US at its peak during the war. Literally German plus Japan combined can't out produce US alone. Italy was just pure shit, they didn't even finish transforming into modern industry.

US in the Pacific had like 100 something carriers of all sizes once the war started rolling and Japan couldn't even make 10.

It was a pure shit show. It's like The Mountain beating two 12 year olds, with one 12 year old slightly buffer because he went to the gym, and Italy is their anemic retarded half brother just sat on the ground eating dirt.

All Allies worried about is how to get all their mountains of shit on top of Hitler and if casualty is no problem, and believe you me if the war really was intense enough no one would give a fuck about casualties, they could just land anywhere on european mainland.

>>34785834
Even Britain when they were getting Blitzed they could replace and then some their aircraft loses while German couldn't.

War is all about economy and resources and the Axis were never in any position to win.

I think they were pretty technologically developed, especially compared to the Russians. One of their downfalls is that Hitler ordered his scientists to keep pumping out nazi space magic instead of focus on reliable, economic designs. They should have stopped producing new tank concepts at the Panzer 4.

>>34785996
Pz 1 & 2, already obsolete at start of the war.
Pz 3, obsolete once invasion of France begins.
Pz 4, obsolete but lucky enough to be big enough to upgraded to 75 mm and remained useful till end of the war. Armor's shit, mobility's shit (dat thin track, small engine making up armor not possible).
Pz 5 - not enough, over engineered, relies on good crew which german had almost none near the end and Pz 5 really smoothed out the problems near the end to be main stay tank
Pz 6 - pure fantasy


German's main anti armor vehicle were the self propelled guns - Stugs and Czech based "Hetzer". They are not even "tanks".

German was always shit. They won at early stages because of innovative tactics and a good strategic out maneuvering of their opponents. Once that's out the window, German's hardwares became a glaring hole in their everything.

>>34786076
You're forgetting a lot of the crazy tech they developed in small numbers. While not very useful for the overall war effort, a lot of it was insanely innovative and is still being used today in some function.
Examples:
>v1 and v2 rocket
>all those tactics you mentioned
>camouflage
>wasserfall
>small arms such as STG
There's a whole host of things I'm not mentioning. Granted most of these things were never produced in large enough numbers to affect the war but to say they were shit is misleading and uninformed

>>34783848
America was already massively supporting the Soviets and British Empire in everyting but actual warm bodies long before Pearl Harbor. 0/10 you fail history class.

>>34786228
Do you know that US developed proximity shells? It made any aircraft entering AA gun's envelop pretty much dead.

V1 and V2, literally can't hit anything worth a damn, they need to target entire city to actually hit the city. Didn't do jack shit to the British.

wasserfall can't detonate like true AA missiles can because german never had proximity detection. But US did, and small enough to fit into a small AA shell. That's how US blew up everything in the sky in the Pacific and Europe.

You can't win a war with infantry man alone and majority of their infantry were still using single shot bolt rifles.

>>34786260
I love this argument because people will say how the US supplying the Allies invalidated their neutrality, but they will say nothing about the "neutral" countries who were lending support to Germany.
Norway, Switzerland, Spain, and arguably Sweden. Nazi Germany only cared about a nation's neutrality when it benefited them.

>>34783509
Trigger warning but. Jews.

>>34786321
Hitler was a Jew?

>>34783351
True that

>Germans still used horse-drawn carts during the invasion of the Soviet Union for supplies
>Soviets had Deuce and a Half's
Just lmao

>>34786338
Rothschild's ruling america were jews.

>>34786356
But America only attacked Germany because Hitler declared war.
Regardless of what FDR personally wanted, unless he got people/congress to side with it then it wouldn't happen. Everyone agreed on war with Japan, but war with Germany came from Hitler bringing it on the US.
Or are you one of those who will conventionally always find an excuse to justify the actions of Hitler and the Nazis? Go on, tell us how they were good Germans who dindu nuffin.

>>34786278
>It made any aircraft entering AA gun's envelop pretty much dead.
VT fuse was only about twice as effective as time fuse. Don't overplay its power. Also fun fact: in US Navy most efficient AA through out the war was humble 20mm not 5'' with prox fuse.

>>34786378
Check the war declaration dates bruh.

>>34783762
>Germany lacked a grand strategic plan
Are you retarded?

File: Screenshot_20170611-041505.png (368KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1080x1920px

OP and everyone ITT needs to watch The Greatest Story Never Told

>>34783503
Oh, so defeating an army of similar size in only 6 weeks with small casualties is nothing special, right ?

>>34786425
No thanks.

File: 53454.jpg (387KB, 800x1131px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 800x1131px

>>34786378
>Everyone agreed on war with Japan, but war with Germany came from Hitler bringing it on the US.
Exactly swinging around popular opinion required Japan blockade into Pearl Harbor false flag bait. What easily could be completely avoided. But deep state wanted war not peace.

>>34786418
Germany and the US both declared war on each other on December 11th, 1941. The American declaration was a response to the German one.
While I'm sure the US would have eventually ended up in the war, most likely using U-boats sinking American ships as a large part of the reasoning, Germany decided to answer the question for everyone. They decided to gain yet another enemy and seal their own fate even quicker.

>>34786434

Why not see the other side of an issue and learn to think for yourself? Clearly the war wasn't cut and dry like American history teaches.

>>34786443
Economic sanctions in opposition to a war is not baiting for war. Japan decided to attack Pearl Harbor because they thought it would benefit their goals.
FDR and the military weren't trying to get the Pacific Fleet destroyed, they moved it to Pearl Harbor so it could respond if/when Japan attacked the Philippines, Midway, or Guam.
The mindset was still very much on negotiating peace but being ready to respond if the negotiations failed.

>>34786456
Because you want to substitute one propaganda with another.

>>34786456
>Clearly the war wasn't cut and dry
It really was though. Germany was clearly the aggressor and was also involved in ethnic cleansing.

>>34786478
The (((winners))) say WW2 started Sept 1939.
The losers say WW2 started during WW1.
There continues to be new information even to this day.
There will be new information tomorrow.
To state, as an absolute, that it is cut and dry is (((propaganda))).

>>34786557
No. It really is cut and dry.
Germany and Japan started the conflicts that eventually became WW2. The issues that led to those conflicts were results of the outcome of WW1 but the World Wars are two distinctly separate conflicts.

>>34786478
>Germany was clearly the aggressor
>Germany starts fighting in the west
>Stalin will be a good boy and sit on his ass doing nothing in the east
You are fucking retarded if you actually believe that. The only reason why Stalin didn't do any major attacking after Poland was because nobody was expecting Germany to win that fast against France so he was caught unprepared.
When Stalin is at your fucking border the best defense is a good offense, letting the red army mobilize properly is a bad idea.

>>34786557
Many economists fore warned WW 2 when they saw the economic sanctions laid onto Germany by the end of WW 1.

John Maynard Keynes wrote a whole essay warning the allied powers not to press German too hard because it'll force German to take up arm again. But they didn't listen.

Rest is history.

>>34786588
fucking (((snowflake)))

>>34786592
If Hitler didn't trust Stalin then maybe he shouldn't have signed a non-aggression pact or agreed to invade Poland together then.
Germany could have taken all of Poland and used it as a buffer state if they were really that worried.
Not that they should have been worried since the Red Army was a mess trying to redefine itself and modernize. As with everything else from 1939 on, Hitler got ahead of his own plans and it came back to bite him in the ass because the German military wasn't prepared.

>>34786609
You can drop the parenthesis, /pol/tard. Everyone knows what you're hinting towards.

>>34786598
Economics was indeed a major factor
Hitler was ahead of his time at certain global distrusts
Hitler also ran to the grand mufti, a lesser known aspect of a "time of great destruction"
Now, his love child Angela continues the tradition of bringing in mudslimes to do her bidding
Imagine WW3 led by a Germany with no Germans in the forward forces to protect the Aryans

>>34786644
>You can drop the parenthesis, /pol/tard. Everyone knows what you're hinting towards.
(((fucktard)))

>>34786456
What other side of the issue?
WW2 is literally one of the only clear cut wars of the twentieth century. Sure the Allies did some shady stuff, but in the end, we were far more righteous in our goals than the Nazis.

File: what_if_you_were_a_wehraboo.png (187KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 640x360px

>>34783652

Plenty of top tier commanders and strategic thinkers have had a long string of gambles. Some of them are even renown. It's part of the gig in trying to take of the world: you must assess the situation and take risks constantly. Caesar especially, Napolean, and to a lesser extent Alexander the Great all come to mind in terms of high risk decision making.

Now, Hitler in particular wasn't particularly good at this. Nor was Germany really in a position to try and do what it did. Just the fact that a leader has a penchant for high risk gambling doesn't necessarily make them wrong. In fact, you prove the point since your list has gambles that paid off.

>>34786675

Plz watch The Greatest Story Never Told

>>34786598
Keynes was partially wrong. Whereas he said that the war debt payments PLUS the Versaille payments would bankrupt Germany, the German government didn't have to go the route it did (print money to pay debts). The German government did that on purpose with the hopes of weaseling their way out of debt. And it basically worked too. People sympathized with Germans and blamed all sorts of things for the hyperinflation.

>>34786675
>some shady stuff
whew boy
nukes sure do cast some shady shade

>>34786654
Have you actually read Mein Kampf, you really should.

It's like the book's been written by Alex Jones.

His view point is that of the European conservative in the early 1900s. Very anti socialism/communism and very anti Semite. They hated socialists/communists because they were constantly stirring up political unrest and advocating changes in government. They hated the Jews, because... why not?

File: Air_Chief_Marshal_Sir_Arthur_Harris.jpg (33KB, 607x798px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 607x798px

>>34786668
Don't make me come over there again.

>>34786629
>the Red Army was a mess trying to redefine itself and modernize
Yeah, no shit that's why it was a good idea to attack it on the spot. Even so they still lost.
Can you imagine having to deal with a modernized red army that's ready to fight you from the start ? Or you really think that conflict wasn't inevitable ?
Also, their pact was like the friendship between two college sluts, both parties knew it was bullshit. Stalin just wanted France and Germany to destroy each other like in WW1, of course that didn't happen since France sucked massive dick, but nobody knew how big of a failure France's command was at the time.

>>34786692
You mean the nukes that the Germans were also trying (but failing since they kicked out all of their most talented scientists) to produce?

>>34783652
With Russia it was attack now while they are still arming or they attack after fully arming a large army. The Fascist and the Commies hated each other and Hitler and Stalin knew it. It was who breaks the treaty first.

>>34786715
Your mind in an empty wasteland full of tumbleweeds and dust.

>>34786740
The Red Amy wasn't going to reform under Stalin unless something big changed.
That big change was the German invasion which quickly made the Soviets realize they HAD to get their shit together and do it as quickly as possible. It was already hard enough to form defenses and organize counterattacks but would have been even harder if more time progressed and Stalin decided further purges were needed.
Soviets attacking Germany first was not going to happen in that condition and if it did, then the USSR would not have gotten Lend Lease aid since they would be seen as aggressors.

>>34786310
They invaded Norway and occupied it, somthing about the British wanting it for strategic reasons. Spain would joined if not scarred so badly from civil war. Hitler also had plans to invade Switzerland. They had voleneteers from all around Europe, like Scandivian countries, Baltic states and Spain. There was the Arabian Free legion. Of course they only liked it when It benefited them. Shoulder accepted Isreal terms to become fascist and fuck with the British.

>>34786766
Not only this, but Germany also had shit intelligence. Their spies provided shit info so they underestimated how strong Russia really was, on paper the invasion seemed a lot more feasible, but reality begged to differ.

>>34783572
Both sides committed heanious acts. An example is French Colonial troops (mostly Moroccan) raping and killing a bunch of Italian woman and children after a battle (which I don't think the colonial troops even fought in). I forget the name, but it has a book and movie about it.
>Two Girls
I think

>>34786847
>Both sides committed heanious acts
yes this is true, humans are monsters regardless of what country they are from.

>>34786834
A lot of it was from observing how much of a relative thrashing the Finns gave the Soviets. Of course, one has to wonder why Hitler didn't realize that a large part of that was because the Finns knew the areas they were fighting in very well and used that knowledge to their advantage. Which then brings the question: why didn't Hitler realize bringing the war in the USSR would give the Soviets that same home field advantage that the Finns had where they would know the areas and conditions better than the invaders?

>>34786742

They didn't kick out their best scientists.

Look up Operation Paperclip. If the best scientists were already gone then who did the US and ussr steal after the war????

More Jewish fallacies rearing their ugly heads itt.

>>34787008
Paperclip was rounding up who was left, particularity the rocket and aviation scientists.
How do you explain the scientists who fled before or during the war?

Why is there always some excuse to explain why Nazi Germany shooting itself in the foot with moronic policies was acceptable?

>>34786310
Wow, nice wild irrelevent accusation you got there.

>>34787138
You're more than welcome to refute it, but Nazis care about facts as much as they care about neutrality- which is to say not a bit.

>>34786847
I have a relative who grew up at the end of ww2 in germany. She had many stories of her and her mother trying to avoid being raped or having their things taken by occupying troops. It wasn't as benevolent of an affair as our history says it is.

>>34786899
Because Hitler didn't know much about war, especially strategy. Much like how most ex-soldiers of any country don't know anything about guns, logistics, strategy, etc, but people assume they do just because they were in the military.
Hitler was very good at manipulation. In short, he was a woman.

>>34787205

Lol he was literally a decorated veteran

>>34787211
So what made him better qualified to lead more than any other of the millions of veterans?
He was able to convince people to follow him because he was a good speaker, but that doesn't change that his ideas were bad ones and his own actions ultimately destroyed his own movement. Especially with the nepotism that existed within Germany during that period, where Hitler appointed people who had absolutely no qualifications to be put in charge of huge agencies.
Just look at how much of a shitshow the Luftwaffe was with Goering. Or the SS with Himmler. Or The army with Keitel, who was just a yes-man to Hitler.

>>34787211
I've seen plenty veterans spew out fuddlore about pistols, m8. My point is that unless a serviceman specifically works with "whatever" he does not know shit about "whatever".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_Adolf_Hitler#First_World_War
Literally nothing in there to give anyone any indication that the man would know anything that would give him an edge in war decision-making over a toddler.

File: IMG_7117.gif (2MB, 1800x996px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1800x996px

>>34783572
/leftypol/ tankies incoming

>>34783503
The germs danced circles around the Soviets until late 44

>>34786823
Spain was playing both sides. Also Franco asked Hittler for too much so he wouldnt accept and he could be neutral. Basically because he could do nothing.
Also voluntiers fougth only Russia as they where an anticommunist as payback for the CondorLegion.

>>34787408
They had their largest advance bogged down and haled in 1941 and had an entire field army encircled and captured in 1942.

>>34786423
Are you? It was all based on some vague idea of lebensraum

>>34783604
>all of german command was either over promoted or put in command for political reason so not one with power really had broad strategic vision
Besides Goering and Himmler, you'd be wrong.

>>34787505
You could ass Rommel to that list too.
A brilliant tactician who got where he was because of his relationship with Hitler. Also someone who was given strategic position he was probably not suited for.
This did not go unnoticed by the Prussian-descended generals who came to resent Rommel and eventually sold him out after the July 20th plot even though his involvement is dubious.

>>34786310
>arguably sweden
Nothing to argue there, Sweden worked with the Germans enough to make them not a target + some.
Sweden was licence building DB601 aircraft engines for use in their WW2 Saab pusher aircraft.

File: article-2041097-001E899000000258-278_636x446.jpg (78KB, 636x446px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 636x446px

>>34787568
add* Rommel to that list.
Not "ass". What am I doing?

>>34787588
Did you just assume the freshness of that corpse?

>>34786715
>They hated the Jews, because... why not?
I see that you haven't read Mein Kampf either.
Their anti-"International Clique" stance was well reasoned.

>>34787568
Rommel was sold out by a single guy namedropping him under torture, Hitler was fed up with him anyways due to disobeying orders and not bringing anymore victories, post war Rommel's part in the plot was exaggerated to make him a 'clean' war hero

>>34787571
Of course. Both Denmark and Norway also tried to remain neutral, look where that got them.

Sweden managed to use both realpolitik and legitimate neutrality principles to remain neutral. Why the fuck should they not trade with the Germans, when the british decides to blockade them?

>>34786474
>Economic sanctions in opposition to a war is not baiting for war
It is. Japan was put into lose-lose situation Either completely retract their expanding ambitions or lose resources and lose ambitions again or conquer resources what means war with USA.Roosevelt new this. And more putting Japan is such dire situation he did;t prepare american military to the possible strike (who would've thought this? Its not like Japanese was know for starting war in 1904 with sudden strike, oh wait...). "Da ebil Japanese" put plausible explanation for the pressure against them, not preparing for an attack is explained by usual incompetence (you can't blame politics for criminal negligence otherwise you will end jailing them all). Perfect bait.

Of course Japanese were not angels and got what they deserved but this not about Japan got. But about what Americans got. They got full involvement in the world war which was absolutely despised but population majority (so much for the Republic) , Americans got alliance with Commies and armed their conquer of Europe. Who in the 1933 would thought that US would be greatest ally of Soviet Crusade against Europe? Do America deserve such fame? This is the question.

> weren't trying to get the Pacific Fleet destroyed
Any realistic American losses didn't matter for war outcome. It was obvious for anyone who can calculation economies strength, and Americans were good at business and such calculations. America wins in any case, it is too big to lose. For the politic purposes the more Americans will die in first strike the greater would be public wrath, the easier public can be turned into desired direction.
> they moved it to Pearl Harbor so it could respond if/when Japan attacked the Philippines, Midway, or Guam.
yeah very plausible explanation for criminal negligence. Can't hang President for such fail though, only glorify.

>>34786592
>The only reason why Stalin didn't do any major attacking after Poland was because nobody was expecting Germany to win that fast against France so he was caught unprepared.
No. There were 2 major reasons:
1. Stalin feared Germany to the depth of his soul (and as latter war showed it was not empty fears), he wanted mobilize fully industry and win against Germany through Cold War first.

2. Stalin was tired from all hammering that USSR received for the little bites USSR did against Europe, Baltic states, Finland, USSR is kicked from league of nations, Stalin becomes bad boy. Just like Russia and Putin becomes bad boy in 2014 with Crimea occupation. (Again). It is losing position to be bad boy for everyone. So Stalin decided to rein his horses back and wait for opportunity to present himself as good boy. And through his own "Pearl Harbor" he finally baited Germany into clear aggression. Though USSR nearly died in the process. But sacrifice was not empty USSR sins were abolished and USSR was accepted into the good boys club of the WWII.

>>34787656
Older Generals resented Hitler because he wasn't an aristocratic Prussian but tried to control the military, which had traditions strongly linked to that nobility.
They were also some of the few who could tell Hitler "No" and get away with it.

The non-agro pact and splitting of Poland was both sides buying time. The Soviets were trying to get a common border with Germany: the original goal for the border was getting easier access to facilitate armed revolution they could support, but when that became difficult and their agents were fleeing (agents they sold back to the Germans in an exchange for some new aircraft prototype that the Germans didn't think they'd be able to do anything with before Barbarossa crushed them), direct military invasion to "intervene" while Germany was occupied in France was an easier course: they no longer lacked the military intelligence they had lacked in the winter war and were well on their way to recovering from the purges of their officers, which could be best handled as things progressed. Training large masses of airborne units, which are almost strictly offensive so these had to be converted into Guards rifle infantry on the defensive (another aspect was lack of air superiority), and all the defenses they had set up were exchanged for offensive preparations. It wasn't just the modernization of their military which turned the tide, but that they got the offensive initiative around which the red army was designed.

I genuinely believe that the Soviets were planing an invasion and that Germany didn't have a defensive chance in hell. The failed invasion of Russia gave the west enough time to get there so at least half the damn country didn't end up a commie shithole. Can you imagine the shitshow that could have been with Russians "liberating" France? I honestly think, camps, rapes, and bombing of civilians aside the second world war turned out fairly well.

>>34786834
This but they also had decent counterintelligence, which is why GRU reports before the invasion were so varied and contradictory. It's part of how they got as far as they did.

File: 1.jpg (106KB, 893x702px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 893x702px

>>34783351
>Germany during WW2 is massively overrated

Oh totally. Picture related. They just decided to give up without
firing a shot.

Fucking slavaboos. They talk so much shit in K. But when I start
posting pics that counter the pro-russian narrative of the cult of
soviet victory they abandon thread then just restart a new one.

>>34786260
You're an idiot with no reading comprehension. Lend lease wasn't the same as troop commital. 0/10 you failed English.

>>34783351

So your post proves that Germans are superior people down to the DNA

File: 1392086646619.png (305KB, 600x699px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 600x699px

>>34789636

>>34786740
>their pact was like the friendship between two college sluts, both parties knew it was bullshit
T B H all girls who skank around with each other have unbreakable bonds

>>34783652
So was Caesar. But these two men knew when and what to gamble, in other words gamble smart. But Hitler lost touch with reality probably because of drugs later in the war.

File: _pol_ has a revelation.png (9KB, 487x72px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 487x72px

>>34783351
>>34783572

>>34789825
>hello fellow National Socialists

>>34783595
How could they copy the concept when it was developed before Nazis were even in power in Germany?

>>34787408
I had no idea that Stalingrad and Kursk took place in 1944.

File: Brit-1406647844613.jpg (2MB, 2000x889px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x889px

>>34783760
> The lack of a replacement for .303 was sort of dumb.

The Brits had millions of rifles and machine guns chambered in .303 and bazillions of rounds of .303 ammo, then add the all the empire’s .303 guns and ammo and it makes absolutely no sense to scrap all of that for a new cartridge and weapons that are marginally (if that) better.

File: 1501061303560.jpg (420KB, 1199x1085px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 1199x1085px

>>34789869
It's a good thing I told you then. Russian winter defeated the Germans not those subhuman slavs

>>34790082
jokes for ages

>>34790082
SoS?

>>34783509
Because Germany keep attacking American Merchant ships

>>34790082
>this is what delutional wehraboos actually believe

by 1943 the germans were on the run for the rest of the war.

germany didn't win a single major engagement on the eastern front after losing stalingrad.

File: 1447011040269.gif (790KB, 375x304px) Image search: [Google]

790KB, 375x304px

>>34786733
You killed your brother, and for what? Your empire is no more, the british isles will be demographically conquered within 50 years, the british culture, history, and people will be paved over.

>>34783351
>1. Germany during WW2 is massively overrated, in actual fact, they were quite technologically undeveloped
stopped reading after that

>>34792222
truth hurts?

>>34787408
LOL

File: shut the fuck up please.jpg (14KB, 236x308px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 236x308px

>>34792222
s a m e .
>>34794163
No, the retardation and lack of actual 'studying' involved to write such bullshit. That's what hurts.

>>34783503

Saying that an army realizing that they should do combined arms in 1942 is loable is like saying that moving out of your parents house in your 40s is loable.

No is not, you should have done it long before you lazy fuck.

And deep attacks were a result of the soviets realizing that they weren't in WW1 anymore... again by 1942-3 which still has some merit.

Germany still used horses a lot in 1942, was a logistical clusterfuck with no standarization and by 1943 lacked several esential resources to even keep the war going on.

But tactically, they wrecked the Polish and French on several levels and both countries spent a lot of resources preparing for the upcoming war.

>>34794727
> Deep attacks being more than just driving forward

They literally just drove toward until they ran out of fuel

>>34783351
Pretty much. Something that was pretty eye opening to me was actually reading about the invasion of France. The Germans were so surprised that it was actually working that they didn't know what to do. Most of them, Hitler included, figured France would be a slugfest and that it would drain a lot of their resources.

The real story of the early war wasn't German superiority it was sheer Allied incompetence and lack of preparation.

>>34783351
Nice blogpost asshole. Write an e-Book about it.

File: pO34Nac.gif (986KB, 636x360px) Image search: [Google]

986KB, 636x360px

>>34783509
Anglo Pride World Wide.

File: Panzer division preparing on the russian front, July 1941.jpg (129KB, 1200x780px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1200x780px

>>34783351
>their tactics were outdated
>caught all of europe with their pants down

Considering everything thought it would be WW1 all over again, German tactics were fine.

>>34783351
>allied victory was inevitable
Not many people thought that in 1941. Had the Germans invaded Britain instead of Russia, could have been a pretty different story.

Had the Japanese not bombed pearl harbor and the US never entered the war (or at least not until much much later), could also have been very different.

Germany could have done incredibly well if Hitler hadn't fucked himself in the ass with micromanaging his armies. Ignoring Stalingrad and focusing most of his forces on Moscow would also have helped. many of the Russians believed if Moscow fell, things would start to go very badly.

>>34783364
Americans with combined arms and close air and artillery, the infantry-squad lesf something to be desired.

>>34794786
>Had the Germans invaded Britain instead of Russia, could have been a pretty different story.

Seelöwe would be a fucking disaster and everyone but the wehraboos knows it.
The weakened Germany would then get its shit pushed in by the USSR.

>>34794975
Invading by air would be the way to go. Worked on Crete, no reason it wouldn't work in Britain. Mass air landings in the north and midwest, work your way down to the capital.

>>34783351
You studied a WW2 picture book in your school library.

>>34794993
>Worked on Crete, no reason it wouldn't work in Britain.
Please tell me you are pretending to be retarded.

>>34794993
>invading mainland Britain via paradrops
>especially using Göring's Fuckupwaffe

That's it. That was enough /k/ for today. I'm done.

>>34794993
>airdropping a couple thousand soldiers where you have no air supremacy would be the way to go. Also they would have like 500 rounds of ammo at most, if they can find their weapon drops, and no artillery support, not even mortars. Also they would have no food or water, and command structure would be all fucked up since 80% of airlandings would die before they hit the ground. No reason it wouldn't work in Britain.

>>34795094
>implying they wouldn't have learned a lot from crete
They could air drop the entire force destined for Russia. The Brits didn't have the aircraft to shoot down every German aircraft, and there is almost no air defense in the rural areas.

Combine that with troops dropped off by U-boat and you'd certainly cause a big problem for the brits. Its a gamble, but less of a gamble than invading Russia imo.

Remember the British were close to breaking point from bombing and uboat attacks on their supply routes. A full blown invasion may have been enough to push them over the edge.

We're talking about a country where private businesses had to sponsor the building of spitfires in order to have enough aircraft to remain in the fight...

>>34783351
>. Germany during WW2 is massively overrated, in actual fact, they were quite technologically undeveloped, their tactics were outdated...

In 1939 the only power that ahead of them technologically was the UK and in the realm of tactics they were the worlds leader. I am not say that you are wrong over all but I am saying that what you are saying is only true after about 1943.

File: 20245995_1003163079787243_2908574469641760857_n.jpg (77KB, 960x892px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 960x892px

>>34794993
>>34795057
>>34795075
>>34795094
>>34795109

This is how it would have gone down
> German fleet starts mobilising
> British intelligence picks up on this from resistance reporters and home fleet starts forming, all warships are recalled from convoy duties
> Paratroopers are dropped in south of England
> Dover docks are blown up to prevent their use
> home guard and auxilliaries are activated
> RAF reserve groups in wales, midlands and scotland are mobilised and on high alert
> Paratroops attempt to advance on villages
> Make little progress due to home guard resistance (don't laugh home guard were mostly veterans and zealots who's armouries were comparable to german paratroopers)
> British & canadian forces in britain march south to the drop zones
> German Fleets turn up of port of dover
> Can't unload tanks
> barges capsize in rough channel weather, More capsize from coastal gunfire splashes
> German troops land on beaches
> providing they aren't gassed or incinerated
> british coastal troops run out of ammo and lead bayonet charge down to beach
> Absolute slaughter
> Providing Germans could have got inland (about 60% chance on this) they advance no more than half way before they're halted.
> Every village would have had to be flattened on the way there due to home guard resistance and civil disobedience.
> German fleet of coast if caught offguard by a pincer movement by home fleet and anti invasion fleet
> Double the size in capital ships, Nearly 6 times the tonnage on escorts.
> Fleet is Sank entirely in mass counterattack with RAF
> German troops are now entirely surrounded and forced to surrender, provided they are actually provided with terms.

Your assumption in landing in the midlands is stupid, it was not logistically viable, with the south east of england barely scraping through.

>>34795109
>They could air drop the entire force destined for Russia.

Using what? All the Ju-52 that were ever built, at once?

>Remember the British were close to breaking point from bombing

What fucking meme is this? The bombing was a hilariously disjointed and ineffective campaign that had marginal impact on British infrastructure which, when the Luftwaffe shifted to bombing residential areas, dropped to zero.

>>34795109
>they could air drop the entire force destined for russia
>germany being able to drop, by air, anything more than a regiment at once

You have legit Downs

>>34783503
At the end sure. However there was a lot of costly fine tuning to get there. Just saying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

File: 1487456213916.jpg (93KB, 313x382px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 313x382px

>>34795109
>troops dropped off by U-boat
Leave

>>34792077
American (((Merchant´s ships)))

>>34783351
>1. Germany during WW2 is massively overrated, in actual fact, they were quite technologically undeveloped, their tactics were outdated, and by halfway through the war, they were extremely lacking in industrial might.

well known, only nazi sympathizers say otherwise. wermacht was poorly trained and SS was not elite in any way. they just made the first move and took amphetamines.

their tanks performed better than any others but building and maintaining them was not worth it. american and russian tanks were better for an actual army, not as an engineering marvel like german tanks were.

and their planes were way, way ahead of everyone else but they got fucked early so it didn't matter. british COULD have had jets for WW2 and fucked germanys shit up hardcore., but bitched out at the last minute.

because of all of this, the USA had the best actual airforce in WW2 by far.

tl;dr germany wasn't that great, they just made the first move and didn't follow any rules.

File: 45.jpg (37KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x333px

>>34795109

This is the face of the wehraboo.

>>34795158
FUCK

>>34795159
>british COULD have had jets for WW2
They had operational jets in WW2 you retard.

>>34795191
No they didn't. They had a single plane with turbojet engines, and it was a piece of shit pseudo-jet that they only used at the very end of WW2. They could have had legitimate jets at the beginning and germany never would have even touched the UK.

>>34786478
You must be 18 to post here

>>34786733
Your mom lets you handle objects this sharp?

>>34795238
Germanys 262 wasn't much better.

the engines had to be replaced entirely after 25 hours at 80% thrust.

>>34795238
>no they didn't have a jet
>they had a single plane with jet engines
>but it wasn't good
>also it was at the end of ww2, so it doesn't count as ww2
This is you. Think about what you've done.

>>34795636
fuck off poopy head they basically didn't have one. all of them together only ever destroyed like 10 german planes.

>>34783351
You try to win a world war on your own vs. USSR and the West combined

see how far you get

That Germany lasted almost 6 years is a testament to how incredible they were compared to the rest of the world

Its interesting that JIDF browses /k/

>>34795708
>That Germany lasted almost 6 years
not how it works. they took lots of land before anyone even know what was going on and kept attacking for the first ~4 years. the last 2 are their actual performance when other armies are attack them back.

>>34795717
what is strategic bombing
what is war with USSR starting in 1941
what is lend lease

>>34795717
>kept attacking for the first ~4 years.
They stopped attacking around the end of 1940 or middle of 1941 depending on how you look at it.

>>34795761
>They stopped attacking around the end of 1940 or middle of 1941 depending on how you look at it.
>Stalingrad

>>34795708
>That Germany lasted almost 6 years is a testament to how incredible they were compared to the rest of the world
Or, a testament to the rest of the world not having militarized to the same extent, especially the US, and a testament also to how difficult it is to stage an amphibious invasion.

>>34795717
yeah because poland was really a military superpower that could have defended themselves against literally any army on the planet.

>>34795779
Again, depending on how you look at it. If you are counting short-lived, ineffective offensives, then Germany was attacking as late as 1944. If you are counting tactical offensives, then they were attacking as late as 1945. If you are sane, and will describe Germany as "attacking" when it is taking large-scale strategic actions, then 1940.

>>34795789
for >>34795708

>>34795790
Stalingrad was the biggest fight in the entire war you fucking nazi-boo retard.

>>34790082
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6th_Army_(Wehrmacht)

>>34795109
Germany could have just captured a British merchant vessesl, put the entire wermacht in the hold and sailed it up the Thames estuary

>>34795109
>troops dropped off by U-boat
lmao

>>34796515

The sad part is that it would likely result in less % of casualties than his genius paradrop plan, even if the vessel was disintegrated halfway.

>>34783848
>A couple days later Hitler declared war on the USA for no real reason.

Japan was allied with Germany, therefore the reason Germany declared war on the USA.

>>34783351

The real reason Germany lost WWII:

>Shit logistics (more trucks, less Tigers)
>Hitler interfering with military planning - stick to politics
>Shitty allies (looking at you Italy)
>Poking the Bald Eagle

I can go into more detail if you want

>>34783351
1. I would argue that's partly wrong. Germany was actually technologically overpowered with incredible tactics with industrial might in the first half. They developed what would become modern Armor tactics and revolutionized a lot of weapons technology. You could argue this wouldn't have been the case had it not been for Russia, since if the T-52 didn't make mince meat of early battles then it wouldn't have caused Germany to rethink their doctrine and create the PaK anti tank guns as well as the Tiger and updated Panzers.

The last half is when they became inferior, but that's because they became cut off from all industrial, they could not adapt fast enough to other factions doctrines such as the Allied amphibious invasions as well as US air power, and their tech had become stagnant.

2. Maybe you just typed that wrong or I'm reading it wrong because it doesn't really make sense to me. They're so overrated that they're underrated in terms of how good they did? No one argues that they did terribly even when they were actively losing. Germany's downfall was Hitler. Hitler began taking power away from his generals and made tactically unsound decisions that cost them Africa, Italy, the Eastern Front and the Western Front.

>>34795127
To be honest, watching the Home Fleet + anti Invasion Fleet + Bomber Command gangrape a German naval landing would be delicious.

>>34796646
Thank you you fuckin idiot dullard dipshit. Nobody knew that, glad you're here. You fucking idiot.

No shit Captain Obvious fuck. Germany still didn't need to, Hitler chose too. All his Generals advised against it. Got any more insight second graders know?

>>34798131
>The real reason Germany lost WWII:
>being a regional power still recovering from a deep economic crisis
>appointing your retarded buddies to the highest military and government positions
>taking on the world

FTFY

>>34798289
>True, though Hitler did a lot to fix things
>Hitler
>Hitler

>>34787571
don't forget, Germany circumvented Versailles treaty by developing their 88mm cannon in Sweden as well. fukken swedes

File: 13736951_167876933631295_1587588972_n.jpg (58KB, 490x490px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 490x490px

>>34783351
>1. Germany during WW2 is massively overrated, in actual fact, they were quite technologically undeveloped, their tactics were outdated, and by halfway through the war, they were extremely lacking in industrial might.
is this some new revisionist trend on /k/, because being contrarian to established history/knowledge is cool here or have I been living a lie?

I mean yeah they were seriously outdated in many respects, no ones denying that. but going as far to say they were technologically undeveloped and used outdated tactics is extreme.

what about there state of the art equipment and tactics which was literally the birth point of the next generation of warfare?
>assault rifles
>main battle tanks (i know that in the light of the war they were waging it was a logistical and strategic mistake to invest in well developed, over produced heavy tanks but you cant deny there technological and tank design achievements)
>armor/blitzkrieg tactics, lessons of which are still incorporated to this day
>infantry camouflage which again was ahead of its time
>stealth technology
>jets (inb4 me 262 sucked, it actually achieved a positive k/d against mind boggling numerical odds)
>Ballistic missiles (yes it was a stupid investment, but again the technological significance cant be downplayed)
>defense in depth and very aggressive use of counter-attacks
>night vision
>mobile defense
>tank hunters (infantry and armor)

I could go on but you get the point. I just don't see how you could take any of that away from them, ie. what people go on about when talking about the nazis, no ones out there boasting about there logistics or bombers, the things people give credit to the Germans for, mostly deserve it.

>inb4 wehaboo

>>34783760
Agree Singapore was a disaster for Britain. They had so many advantages compared to that of the Japanese but command was so far up their own ass.

Rimless ammo is great and something the british should of moved to earlier,however, by WW2 it was just too much money and time to replace a cartridge they had stockpiles of. If they did adopt a new cartridge they would of run into the same problems the Japanese did with ammo logistics.

>>34798782
bump, im genuinely curious as to what OP is getting at

File: 1502226061046.gif (739KB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

739KB, 750x750px

>>34799013
>>34798782

>>34798782
It's not revisionism, it's about the supply and ability to use technology versus the ability to develop it.

>Assault rifles
Only start showing up late in the war in any sort of numbers
>Main Battle Tanks
Tanks with terrible ready rates and mediocre combat performance when given inevitably poorly trained crews circa 1944.
>Armor/blitzkrieg tactics
Not really that revolutionary. It's a development from what the Prussians started doing in the early 19th century.
>Infantry camouflage
... I am so impressed at how this gets mentioned above so much else, when it really, really doesn't matter that much. Anyway, the Americans developed similar camouflage as well, but decided to keep it to the Pacific to avoid friendly fire incidents.
>Stealth technology
First off, the Ho 229 wasn't really very stealthy, nor was it designed to be. Secondly, they made what, one working prototype?
>inb4 me 262 sucked
It did. Horrific operational ready rates and repair requirements kept most of them on the ground. It also kept pilots from being adequately trained.
>the technological significance cant be downplayed
I'm going to downplay it, because A. there was no realistic warhead the Germans could come up with to make it ever worthwhile, B. it cost as much as the fucking Manhattan project, and C. the V1 was a much, much better use of time and resources, and that should have been obvious from the start. Both had virtually the same capabilities on target, but one was even cheaper than flying real planes of Britain.
>Defense in depth and very aggressive use of counter-attacks
Umm.... have you ever read any US Army FM? Try FM18-5, Tactical Employment Tank Destroyer Unit.
>Night vision
See M3 Carbine.
>Mobile defense
Uhh.... have you just been playing HOI4 and got the idea that you had to research that? Hardly a unique concept.
>tank hunters
...........
Implying that is a unique thing makes you the king of the "wehaboo".

>>34783503
On a side note i read that the Operation Desert Storm (a big success) was inspired by the august storm.

>>34799425
tankie pls

>>34798256
He was obligated because he was allied with Japan you peter puffer.

>>34801418
There was no obligation listed within the Tripartite Pact for the other two members to declare war if one did. German and Italian declarations of war against the US were done outside of any legal requirement.
Japan asked Germany to join the war against the US a few days before Pearl Harbor, and Hitler could have refused. The only part of the Pact that said all three nations must follow each other was added after Pearl Harbor. It said there would be no separate peace agreements between the members of the Axis Powers and the Allies (None will surrender or accept peace unless the other two members agree beforehand) Ultimately, that served no purpose since each nations surrendered at a different time.

>>34783351
ITT: butthurt jüde lovers

File: 91237dd611391f1aebd2bad2c36a6a61--german-soldier-wwii.jpg (64KB, 531x704px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 531x704px

Germany was one of the most advanced, tactical and humane societies that has ever existed. They pioneered so many things like jet engines, assault rifles (your welcome kolashnakike), and animal rights. They truly shocked the world and showed just what the Aryan race was capable of.

1.All of the so called "invasions" they did were nothing more than liberating the ethnic german populations who were being repressed by their respective countries. At no point did Germany express intent to actually invade Europe or dominate any of these coutnries. They were just borrowing them to sort out some of the persecution the Germans were facing. It was the Jewish led coalition of the British and the French who declared war on Germany. This is a fact

2.The tactics and technology of Germany were perfect. Just look at how fast they were able to invade Poland and France! It wasn't until Jewish saboteurs got involved that the German war machine began to slow down. For instance there is evidence to suggest that Jewish saboteurs let the air out of the tires of stukkas and jimmied the turning gears on the BF109s right before the Battle of Britian

3."concentration camps" were actually amusement parks for the entertainment of Jews who were barred from German society

4.Germany never officially lost the war. Yes the entire high command killed themselves, but this isn't an official surrender according to the conventions of war at the time.

"war crimes" my ass

>>34799268
Brother speaking the truth

>>34802296
10/10

It is all about the K/D ratio. Obviously the Russians had 4 times the army. But the germans inflicted 3:1 and higher ratio of casaulties in Aerial, Tank, and infantry regardless of being on the offensive or defensive. Fucking slavshit commies need to reconcile this.

>>34804462
But the K/D between the two were similar to one another

>>34804641
Practically every battle the Russians had more people, and the Germans inflicted 1.5 to 2 times as many casualties against them compared to their losses. This is more apparent in tank companies, and aerial combat. Do you have any examples of this not being the case?

File: community_image_1390052460.jpg (520KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 1280x720px

>>34804674
Don't the Russian and the Germans material losses differently?

>>34804703
Yeah the german numbers are probably inflated because they were on the defensive from 1942 on, and thus had to abandon equipment that was not taken out in combat perse.

>>34802296
Jesus just stop

>>34804703
Yes.
For example, if a tank ditched a track, Soviets counted it as loss.
Meanwhile if a Panzer lost turret, it wasn't counted as a loss because it could be rebuilt into an assault gun for example.
When all things are tallied, combat death ratio on EF was 1.3 (or 1.5, not sure right now) in Axis favour.

>>34804674
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jassy%E2%80%93Kishinev_Offensive

>>34783351
In what areas were the Germans technologically deficient and why do you think poorly of their tactics?

The logistics is a legitimate criticism.

>>34805949
holy shit

>>34795130
>infrastructure
morale tho

>>34806270
>morale tho

Do you know fucking nothing about the Blitz?
If anything it made the British resist more, drove them to individually contribute to the war effort, bitch less about what it did to their standard of living and doom any future German attempts to negotiate.

File: 53454.jpeg.jpg (73KB, 768x576px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 768x576px

>>34795785
>and a testament also to how difficult it is to stage an amphibious invasion.
>burgers still think D-Day won WWII

>>34806392
Where did he imply that in his post?

>>34792160
This

>>34792222
>Lmao who needs instruments in cockpits
>Horse drawn army (free space)
>Juan gorillion competing standards
>Bolt actions for everybody
etc

>>34795159
>and their planes were way, way ahead of everyone else
No, not really. Maybe at the very beginning of the war.

>>34798782
>Stealth technology
Not having two gigantic reflective surfaces (vertical stabilizers) isn't the same as stealth technology. Also Jack Northrop says hi and to stop ripping him off.

>Jets
UK and US say hi.

>Night vision
US had it too.

>Tank design achievements
Big numbers are impressive, yes.

>>34795817
No it wasn't you dumb fucking cuck.

>>34798782
>is this some new revisionist trend on /k/, because being contrarian to established history/knowledge is cool here or have I been living a lie?
The original history of Germany losing only to Soviet numbers and western lend-lease is actually a nice little bit of early Cold War propaganda that (along with the clean Wehrmacht shit) was designed to allow West Germany to re-arm. It's a common tactic of the USA to give their defeated enemy something to cling to so they don't keep a grudge up against them (see: the Lost Cause and the CSA).

I'd go through the rest of the myths you said line by line but other anons have done that already.

>>34789842
This.

But Stalin went all genocide my own generals and a lot of the good tactician where deaded.

Not even going to deal with the rest of bullshit you're pushing but:
>main battle tanks (i know that in the light of the war they were waging it was a logistical and strategic mistake to invest in well developed, over produced heavy tanks but you cant deny there technological and tank design achievements)
MBTs developed out of medium tanks, not heavy tanks which were a developmental dead-end (though it did take the USA a while longer than everyone else to work that one out). The Panzer III/IV were less relevant in this development than things like the Comet or even the Sherman.

>>34806270
Anon the BoB was such a propaganda coup and morale victory it's remembered (and celebrated) to this very fucking day in bongland.

>>34783760
>The lack of a replacement for .303 was sort of dumb.. In my mind/my imaginary "Alt history world" it would be replaced by either 276 Pedersen, or some kind of "rimless .303", which would have the same or similar shoulder/taper, use the same bullet diameter, but be rimless, so conversion of SMLE's wouldn't be as much of a cost.

They've already had .280 British(not the 50's one, the P14 one), it's simply that infantry rifles were literally irrelevant and big rim isn't that important for belt-fed rifle.

Also:
>muh rimlock

Grab SMLE and purposefully cause a rimlock. It's fucking hard to do it. It requires very specific magazine design which prevents it(which SMLE has) but it's harder than one would expect.

Basically same applies to 7.62x54R. Does Mosin get rimlocks? Disconnector can cause funky malfunctions(very rarely) but prevents it. Do SVT's get those? Not that much, neither do more modern SVD's. Also the belt-fed DP thing going back to "why didn't everybody adopt GPMG in interwar period, like Germans did?" question which is very simple if you think about it for a minute.

>>34808558
>big rim isn't that important for belt-fed rifle.
MG*

not rifle

>>34792160
Piss off mate come here and chat shit and you'll get banged cunt

>>34783351
It's more nuanced. Because they were stripped of their military in the Treaty of Versailles they were able to start with a clean slate in the 1930s both in equipment and tactics. They also started rearming well before the Allies so that in 1939 they had a significant head start on both quality and quantity of weaponry. However, it was still a 1930s era military. They had innovative ideas about armor and air support using 1930s era tanks and aircraft. Most of the army was still horsedrawn or foot mobile and they didn't have the industrial base to change that even if the thought to do so was widely prevalent. So, in 1939 their 1930s era military was ahead of the 1919 era militaries of the other powers.

Once the war started and rearmament really kicked into gear, the other powers adopted the German innovations and used their bigger industrial base to do it better and advance those ideas. By late war you had better equipped 1945 era militaries against a largely still 1930s military with some 1940s characteristics trying to adapt to the new ideas and hobbled by a weak industrial base. At that point it was German experience and tactical skill that let them get the most out of what they had and prolong the war.

Generally, the Germans weren't as advanced as propaganda portrayed militarily or economically, but their edge was real in the 1930s.

>>34787416
And the Blue division was also Franco political manuevering. It was a way to destroy the falangist movement which was now becoming a problem domestically for him. He got them to volunteer for the Russian front to get them out of the country and thin them out a bit.

>>34808801
>quantity
The French army alone had a numerical superiority on both divisions and number of armored vehicles. The naval stage was a joke and the only thing the Kriegsmarine even had was u-boats and a bunch of cruisers they couldn't even put out to sea. The only quantitative advantage the Germans had over the Allies was in the air, thanks to the French deciding 3/4 of their current fleet was outdated and couldn't be fielded.

>>34808868
It's weird knowing Franco was smart

>>34786401
>don't overplay
>twice as effective
??????????

>>34788681
That's because Slavs are retarded, not because Germans were great at what they were doing

>>34794657
Ok, where's all the German spess tech then?

>>34795114
>this delusion

>>34806392
Yeah, he never implied that. What level of autism are you at to start imagining people saying things?

>>34798224
>T-52
What?
>technologically advanced
I can't think of anything advanced they had besides those crazy horse-drawn carts

>>34798782
Holy fucking shit. I was going to refute all of your terrible points, but
>>stealth technology
You're either larping, or you're so retarded, there's no saving you

>>34783364
German soldiers saw british soldiers as being equal in skill and proffesionalism but often lacking in agression. They found the americans to be amuterish but aggresive and impressed with how they made do in chaos.

the soviets the found rugged and terrifying but completely lacking in any instinct of self presevation.

Its said sometimes that the best ww2 force would be british soldiers and ncos, german platoon company and battalion officers and soviet generals. With the americans providing the logistics.

In truth the war was so big their could be huge differances in ability between different units and time periods within any one nation. A US infantry company from 1944 doesnt come close to a german unit from 1942 and a british unit from 1939 does not compere to a soviet one from 1945.

i am drunk snd english is not first language so sorry for spelling.

>>34811945
found the rusky

>>34783509
>>34783552
>Why did America attack Germany?
/pol/ historical revisionism and idiocy sumed up in a single post.
Well done master retard.

>On 11 December 1941, four days after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the United States declaration of war against the Japanese Empire, Nazi Germany declared war against the United States

>>34783351
>the USA still uses tactics and military doctrine from Nazi Germany
>the USA still uses tank technology from WW2 Germany

>After studying Germany in WW2 for some time I have come to some conclusions.

You didnt.

>>34812665
>the USA still uses tank technology from WW2 Germany
>the USA still uses tactics and military doctrine from Nazi Germany
Fucking what

>>34812714
What's so hard to understand?

>>34814165
which technologies and tactics can be applied across all nations universally

>>34814165
Your autism