Who would win in a full-scale war? Nazis have >more training

>>35100297
Nazis, so you mean SS specifically...

for one thing, they were not well trained at all. they were a political tool.

The gooks would have migs while the SS won't have planes of any kind.

>panzers against some starving rice farmers
Well, if you take only the human and small firearms resources, the vietcongs would win in the jungle. In any other scenario it would be impossible to say who would win. But if you take germany planes+armored cars and tanks, it would be a easy victory, there is no way a entire army would lose to some gookies.

where is it? how many people fighting? WE NEED MORE INFORMATION

>>35100474
anon I have bad news....

>>35100460
Viet Cong didn't have MIGs though

>>35100297
Neither of them have the force projection to actually attack each other.

>>35100297
Deadliest warrior already called it for the SS. Can't argue with their peerless and flawless testing methodology.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55DgYpL7mzs

>>35100297
Do you mean Nazis against literally only Vietcong, or do you mean Nazis against the historical Vietcong + North Vietnam + Soviet/Chinese economic and technological backing combo?

File: VC infantry.jpg (128KB, 736x925px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 736x925px

>>35100297
Neither have power projection worth a damn so they cant reach each other with any real force.

If we assume they have strategic goals similar to their respective conflicts, VC want to take and hold Vietnam while SS want to acquire lebensraum then it becomes a VC victory as they do not need to project power. SS might get a handful of troops to Vietnam but not nearly enough to do anything significant.

>>35100678
How about IJA vs VC then?

File: C-RV6g7U0AAsEuB.jpg (54KB, 634x412px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 634x412px

>>35100502

Yes, they ran the simulation on their laptop. It is known.

>>35100297
SS are trained in killing partisans. U.S. was not at the time. SS would most definitely come up with a way to burn the gooks out. Have to remember, the SS weren't about hearts and minds.

>The SS vs the entire VC military

That's stupid.

File: VC with battlefield capture.jpg (233KB, 1280x1012px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1280x1012px

>>35100723
That is a bit more complicated

Strategic goals are roughly the same, VC wants Vietnam, IJA wants a colony.

The IJA was fuckhuge but most of it was tied up in China. Remember that total IJA forces committed to the war against the USA/UK/Commonwealth/Dutch was only a few hounded thousand more then what the US had in 'nam at the peak. However lets just ignore all that and assume that the entirety of the IJA is available. Now we once again must look at power projection.

The IJA can not move troops by itself. It must get the IJN to agree and IRL those two services hated each other and active plotted against one another. Assuming the Navy agrees to back an Army plan their sealift capacity then they could move in and supply several hundred thousand troops, a million+ force such as was used in China is unlikely due to the greater distances and logistical requirements. As the IJA has its own air arm it also gets air support.

So can such a Japanese force take and hold Vietnam?

I would argue no. While incredibly brutal the IJA was not terribly effective in the counter-partisan role. Furthermore the VC would enjoy a sizable technological advantage, at least until their modern ammunition ran out and forced them to depend on battlefield capture. Early engagements would favor the VC which would allow them to both capture more arms and attract more recruits. Furthermore the IJA completely lacked the mobility and coordination of infantry, artillery and air that the USA enjoyed in Vietnam. Unable to effectively maneuver and support troops in contact the IJA would be forced to concede the initiative to the VC and slowly bleed men and materiel. They could hold cities and coast but ultimatly there is no path to IJA victory.

>>35100484
Well it was also with the NVA, with alot of USSR support, but most damning would be having South Vietnam as an ally

>>35100965
Any account on what the VC though of US gear?

>>35101031
Not that I know of off hand unfortunately.

>>35100297
Guys guys listen (tokes). Aww yeah so like (exhales), like what if (cough) like what if (giggles), mannn this is good stuff where you geddit mang? So I was saying, what if..... (stares)......yeah, Goku wins anyway.

>>35100489
The viet cong hardly did shit after stretching themselves too far. The regular army did have SAMs

>>35100965
The viet cong used ww2 surplus arms also. The Viet cong wasn't really good at much besides terror bombings even then the real force was the regular Vietnamese army with china/Russian/North Korea backing

Taking logistics out, we'll just move the Vietnam war to 1945 and have the SS replace the US Army.

You know, a bunch of genocidal, heavily indoctrinated and fanatical troops of varying quality, with no moral concerns for burning Vietnamese huts down. Realistically, it unfolds much the same way as it did in real life, but the SS roast a lot more gooks and civilians than the US ever did.

ss go home

>>35101451
The VC did use a bunch of WWII leftovers but they also had lots of AKs and RPG-2s. They had more then enough to achieve local fire superiority over a WWII era Japanese force.

You are correct that the VC left the fighting to the NVA post-Tet but the level of attrition they would face against a WWII force compared to the US Army is far, far lower. They would face no coordinated air support, no helicopter mobile infantry and very little coordinated artillery support. It would become a series of light infantry actions, for which the VC was more then adequately equipped for.

File: kamerad.gif (4MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 480x270px

>>35101453

the germans clear cut that jungle in under a year. total war.

File: image.jpg (16KB, 300x165px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x165px

>>35101016
THE SOUTH WOULD HAVE BEEN A FINE ALLY IF WE DIDNT KILL THERE PRESIDENT

>>35100297
>Nazis
>Resources

Ahahahahahahahahahahah

Vietcong would wipe the floor with the Nazis.

>>35100297
get the FUCK off my board Nazi

>>35100589
And does he mean Vietcong against literally only the SS or does he mean Vietcong against the SS, wehrmacht, and everyone else on the German side?

File: worst captcha.jpg (84KB, 406x504px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 406x504px

>>35100297
LITERALLY THE DEADLIEST WARRIORS RE-ASH.

NECK YOURSELF.

Also captcha go home, you're drunk.

>>35100314
"not well trained at all"
Bullshit.

>>35100474
RPG-7 would annihilate Panzers dude

Nazis since they wouldn't puss out on the home front after massacring some gooks.

File: 80s_hitler_by_neetsfagging322297-dai10vu.jpg (184KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1200x1200px

>>35101712
"Your" board? Keep dreaming.

>>35100297
>mfw I realise the posters itt haven't read much history...
You guys do realise that at least 30% of French Foreign Legion troop strength during Indochina war (before US involvement) was made up of Wehrmacht and Waffen SS veterans?

>>35102008

French incompetence was at leadership level not the troops on the ground.

>>35100499
This. The VC couldn't get the manpower and equipment together and organized to attack Germany out in the open and if they did they'd be slaughtered by tanks, but if any Germans set foot in a jungle full of Cong they'd never come out again.

Neither has any of the type of weapons and equipment needed to attack the other at all. It'd be a stalemate, whoever attacked first would lose.

Nazis would've had a full state media on their side that wasn't full of jews agitating against the war and they wouldn't have been too pussy to not just conquer Vietnam and colonize it.

US couldn't beat VC with 70s tech and vast resources. Why would the Nazis have a chance with 40s tech?

>>35100474
wrong, imagine some psycho cracked out germans chewing amphetamine pills crawling through the tunnels like rats overpowering the rice farmers slaughtering everyone in the tunnels god that would make a crazy movie.

alternatively they'd throw in a jew with a bomb strapped to him to speedrun the tunnel.

>>35101712
waaaahhhhhh wahhhhh

>>35101871
Look up all the times that SS totenkopf got BTFO by people that the rest of the Wehrmacht was curbstomping

>>35101871
No better than your average grunt, in most cases far worse read some firsthand accounts. Especially the guy describing the warden ss in the Warsaw uprising a bunch of drunk loud unprofessional political tools. Even better read the passage from survivors of Stalingrad talking about the warden showing up and promptly driving away

>>35101871
Look up all the first hand accounts and you'll be surprised. Survivors of Stalingrad has an account of the warden showing up the leaving because it was to intense. Or the acounta of a pioneer in Warsaw uprising. Ss troops were a drunk unorganized rabble taking higher casualties then everyone else due only to incompetence.

SS because they would just kill everyone everytime there was a guerilla attack, rather than go for MUH HEARTS MUH MINDS

>>35101871
>believing the memes

>>35103573

The vietcong are better equipped and likewise have no moral restrictions limiting them. SS get BTFO. Proper Wehrmacht would stand a chance but not those goons.

>>35100297
veitcong

>SS fighting Vietcong
why don't you guys just ask the French Foreign Legion how it worked out

>>35100754
>SS would most definitely come up with a way to burn the gooks out.

You are militarily illiterate. SS were not jungle warfare experts and would have met the same grisly fate as the Foreign Legion and Paras (who WERE experts) the VC cut to pieces. The Vietnamese survived China, the French, the Japs, the French and the US.

>>35101453
>but the SS roast a lot more gooks and civilians than the US ever did.

The US did most roasting via the magnificent US Air Force and Navy. SS couldn't come close. You ruthlessfags don't seem to get anyone can be ruthless. In the jungle the VC would exfiltrate then kill the stupid white men who came after them.

>>35102040
>French incompetence was at leadership level not the troops on the ground.

Wrong again. VC ambushes chewed up well equipped French armored columns. Read some Bernard Fall and learn. Wehrboos are hilarious.

>>35100297
Assuming the SS have the US logistical capability or that Vietnam is just next to the Reich...

They would have emptied Vietnam of its population by killing every yellow face they could find. Military and civilian.
The same for Afghanistan. If the nazis were leading the coalition they would have killed and burned to the ground 3 or 4 village for every taliban (basically a partizan) they would have found.

The only way of dealing properly with a guerilla (and more generally with an asymmetrical warfare) is the SS way.

For exemple :
Taliban (or any insurgeant) placing IED and hiding in village ?
- Version 1. Call the air force and bomb the village till is terraformed. Then go in it with flamethrower and kill every survivor. Military or civilian.
-Version 2. For every attack or dead man you have you kill an entire village of these cuckroach. You can placing them (with women and children of course) in a church/mosque or any big house and burn it down

Ahmed come to your country and puts bomb in your cities ?
Take every muslim and place them in concentration camps or deport them.

>>35100297
That ain't a context.

The VCs used the maoist idea of "the guerilla is to the people like the fish is to the water".
This worked against americans and frenchs because those had some scrupule about "taking away the water".

The SS would just kill every village that is suspected of harboring VCs.
They might even torch whole villages and deport the inhabitants just to "clear the battlefield".

The SS weren't great fighters but, when used as an anti-partisan force, they were ruthlessly efficient.

>>35105774
>The SS would just kill every village that is suspected of harboring VCs.
They might even torch whole villages and deport the inhabitants just to "clear the battlefield".

you ruthless fags seem to forget the US used many of these tactics and it was ineffective

we used Agent Orange/Blue to desyroy rice paddies and deny cover
we torched villages suspected of harboring VC in xzippo raids
we forcibly deported villages to the cities which we had much more control over
we used napalm and overwhelming air support indiscriminately

the SS may take it another step into actual wholesale genocide, but that will only make even more VC
the Nazis faced their own partisans in Europe and were never able to completely dislodge then in any country they occupied even when they used ruthless tactics, including wholesale genocide

why would said ruthlessness which did not work against fellow Europeans in the 40s work against possibly more resilient and more experienced in guerrilla warfare VC with 60s/70s tech?

>>35100723
Historically, that was a win for the IJA. They occupied Vietnam, although a dude named Ho Chi Minh made life miserable for them. He had OSS support, for what it's worth.

>>35103573
>SS because they would just kill everyone everytime there was a guerilla attack, rather than go for MUH HEARTS MUH MINDS
you are a retard

>>35105954
You have missed a few crucial points
1. The US BTFO the gooks in most engagments
2. The US public did not want to expand the war into crucial logistical areas like Cambodia
3. The SS or Germany in general will probably KILL EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE COUNTRY once they got tired of guerrilla warfare
4. The US got the gooks to sign a peace treaty after bombing them in the north
Politics were a much bigger player in vietnam than small infantry engagments

>>35106702
>1. The US BTFO the gooks in most engagments
the Germans btfo partisans with WWI and WWII weaponry, but can they repeat it against partisans/guerillas with the same mix of arms partisans had in WWII, plus modern assault rifles and other equipment
the Nazis also worked in climates that Germany had some experience with (even if they botched preparation for tje Russian winter)
can they repeat it in an environment more suited to guerilla tactics that they are entirely unfamiliar with?
>2. The US public did not want to expand the war into crucial logistical areas like Cambodia
Germany also ostensibly had full support of their populace and were not as hounded by media, but never fully stamped out partisan action either
>3. The SS or Germany in general will probably KILL EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE COUNTRY once they got tired of guerrilla warfare
the Nazis only made real extermination attempts on select groups and failed to fully remove any of them
and what purpose would empty, poisenes, and burned jungle serve?
>4. The US got the gooks to sign a peace treaty after bombing them in the north
Germany's supposed willingness to spare no force in conquest and persistence will not make an unwinnable war winnable
>Politics were a much bigger player in vietnam than small infantry engagments
yes, but Germany would trade one "disadvantage" (unwillingness to commit major atrocities with wild abandon) for a significant technological diaadvantage compared to the US

>>35106702
>expand the war into crucial logistical areas like Cambodia
also, partisans existed even in areas with minimal or no Allied direct support, namely Yugoslav partisans under Tito

>>35103573
every retard who thinks we just need to kill everyone and burn down villages to win coin needs to realize the Nazis tried that shit in yugoslavia and it failed utterly

>>35106702
>3. The SS or Germany in general will probably KILL EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE COUNTRY once they got tired of guerrilla warfare

how the fuck are they going to get through the VC to do that?

The US dropped more bombs in Vietnam than all sides in WW2 combined and people think the luftwaffe is going going to go on a brutal bombing campaign and wipe out the VC just because "nazis are so brutal and badass" lol

>>35100297
Nazis all the way.

They won't hesitate to go full Genghis on their ass if they had to

>>35100297
>nazi germany
>not having the most superior technology
nice try schlomo, but the gig is up

>>35101871
At the beginning of the War they had no battle experience compared to standard German infantry.

>>35107581
While the SS did have a higher number of machine guns and usually were able to get more StG. 44s, they still had bolt action rifles, less powerful anti-armor weapons, older radios and no experience in the jungle.

>>35102907
the totenkopf weren't a combat unit

>>35101871
the SS generally did embarrassingly bad, their only advantage was having the leadership baby and pamper them with newer equipment sometimes, and also they could be more fanatical

Viet Cong had nazi technology in the early period of the war and fighting against the French it was Nazis + nazi technology fighting against communist and captured nazi technology from Russia and the Eastern bloc.

>>35108499
>no experience in the jungle
The less orthodox the unit, the more German units favored biding in forests than maneuvering. Even volksgrenadier units did respectably when they pulled that shit.

File: 1504292922502.png (647KB, 787x830px) Image search: [Google]

647KB, 787x830px

>>35111049
European forests are nowhere near the same as South East Asian jungles.