LOGO
Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 02-25-2011, 12:52 AM   #21
PyncGyncliacy

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
706
Senior Member
Default
The Germans could've took them out. The Germans could've focused all their Military resources on the Eastern Front to capturing Moscow, then taking it from the central position. But Hitler was focused on capturing the oil fields, which was the primary goal on the African theatre. The Germans were so strong they made the Soviets a superpower. Just look at the casualty and production statistics for the Soviets. No one loses 20,000+ Tanks within six months without having an incredible military industry and economy.
Yaaaawwwwnnnnn.....and yet....and yet, Nazi Germany is long gone...followed by the USSR a few decades later....Oh yeah, and we're still here.
PyncGyncliacy is offline


Old 02-25-2011, 12:54 AM   #22
duncanalisstmp

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
396
Senior Member
Default
Yaaaawwwwnnnnn.....and yet....and yet, Nazi Germany is long gone...followed by the USSR a few decades later....Oh yeah, and we're still here.
The USSR is not gone. Putin's just trying to make it look like there is a new Russia. I'm glad we're still here, but we still have a long Second Cold War ahead of us.The Nazi military was, I believe, the greatest military we have seen along with Napoleon's Grand Army and the Mongol Armies of Genghis Khan.
duncanalisstmp is offline


Old 02-25-2011, 01:01 AM   #23
Kristoferson

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
522
Senior Member
Default
The USSR is not gone. Putin's just trying to make it look like there is a new Russia. I'm glad we're still here, but we still have a long Second Cold War ahead of us.The Nazi military was, I believe, the greatest military we have seen along with Napoleon's Grand Army and the Mongol Armies of Genghis Khan.
And yet they were defeated by what I consider to have been (HAVE been) the greatest military ever; the American allied forces.
BTW, you are going on like one of Hitler's henchmen, sitting on his steps in South America 1950, about what could have been, while chickens pick grit in his door yard.....
Kristoferson is offline


Old 02-25-2011, 01:11 AM   #24
tobaccoman

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
358
Senior Member
Default
And yet they were defeated by what I consider to have been (HAVE been) the greatest military ever; the American allied forces.
BTW, you are going on like one of Hitler's henchmen, sitting on his steps in South America 1950, about what could have been, while chickens pick grit in his door yard.....
I'm no Nazi, I can guarantee you that. I'm just trying to get out the answers. Without the Soviets, the Germans would've beat the Americans. Their Navy potential that it took endless merchant production to end the fear of them starving the British out of the war. U-Boats proved that modern navies rely on submarines. Also, the German Air Force was far technologically superior to that of the American Air force. It would've taken a very determined guerilla campaign to knock the Germans out of the homeland, as proven by the Bermuda conference.
tobaccoman is offline


Old 02-25-2011, 01:21 AM   #25
movlabk

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
376
Senior Member
Default
I'm no Nazi, I can guarantee you that. I'm just trying to get out the answers. Without the Soviets, the Germans would've beat the Americans. Their Navy potential that it took endless merchant production to end the fear of them starving the British out of the war. U-Boats proved that modern navies rely on submarines. Also, the German Air Force was far technologically superior to that of the American Air force. It would've taken a very determined guerilla campaign to knock the Germans out of the homeland, as proven by the Bermuda conference.
The U-boats almost killed us, until we captured one, then figured out their codes. But hey, that's war. And that's why we won. We outsmarted them, got lucky, whatever.
Their airforce was good, but we beat them too.
I'll admit, Russia was needed. But going to war in the Soviet winter was not a particularly bright move by Mr Adolph.
movlabk is offline


Old 02-25-2011, 01:40 AM   #26
jenilopaz

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
399
Senior Member
Default
The U-boats almost killed us, until we captured one, then figured out their codes. But hey, that's war. And that's why we won. We outsmarted them, got lucky, whatever.
Their airforce was good, but we beat them too.
I'll admit, Russia was needed. But going to war in the Soviet winter was not a particularly bright move by Mr Adolph.
Their airforce got beat when we bombed their industrial capacity. Now imagine us and them one on one. Germany free to concentrate all their power on us. Adolph thought that Barbarossa would be so easy, he didn't equip his troops for the winter. It was the winter that beat Napoleon, and Hitler didn't learn.
jenilopaz is offline


Old 02-25-2011, 03:03 AM   #27
AndyColemants

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
344
Senior Member
Default
Yeah, war sucks. Guess they shouldn't have started one.
they did not start it idiot.

The embargo placed on them was an act of war to starve the Germans into submission. the evil fuckign jews started the war you fuckign dip shit dumb fuck.
AndyColemants is offline


Old 02-25-2011, 01:24 PM   #28
pprropeciaaa

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
477
Senior Member
Default
they did not start it idiot.

The embargo placed on them was an act of war to starve the Germans into submission. the evil fuckign jews started the war you fuckign dip shit dumb fuck.
What embargo did the jews control? What products were restricted?
pprropeciaaa is offline


Old 02-27-2011, 08:48 PM   #29
acissombiapse

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
411
Senior Member
Default
And yet they were defeated by what I consider to have been (HAVE been) the greatest military ever; the American allied forces.
BTW, you are going on like one of Hitler's henchmen, sitting on his steps in South America 1950, about what could have been, while chickens pick grit in his door yard.....
http://www.ww2incolor.com/german/​De...Gefallene.html

I admire your fervor but I think it was the Russians who basically beat the Germans. The casualty figures don't substantiate this but it's true nevertheless. The German army, once it started it's retreat from Russia, never stopped. 5.5 million German soldiers died while 10.7 million Russian soldiers bit the dust. It was a gross waste of human life.
It was unbelievable that the Germans had the audacity to open a two front war. Stupid too.
acissombiapse is offline


Old 02-27-2011, 08:54 PM   #30
Ettiominiw

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
697
Senior Member
Default
http://www.ww2incolor.com/german/​De...Gefallene.html

I admire your fervor but I think it was the Russians who basically beat the Germans. The casualty figures don't substantiate this but it's true nevertheless. The German army, once it started it's retreat from Russia, never stopped. 5.5 million Russian soldiers died while 10.7 million Russians soldiers bit the dust. It was a gross waste of human life.
It was unbelievable that the Germans had the audacity to open a two front war. Stupid too.
They beat themselves. The Russians were prone to the suprise of the attack. Their only comeback to it was a pincer movement, but it was vunerable to the central position. Not only that, but their attempt to seize the initiative was stopped at Kharkov by a feigned retreat that left them vunerable to encirclement. Hitler stopped them, in his growing demands for more living space and oil resources, which he could've got from the North Africa theatre.
Ettiominiw is offline


Old 02-27-2011, 08:59 PM   #31
blogwado

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
526
Senior Member
Default
they did not start it idiot.

The embargo placed on them was an act of war to starve the Germans into submission. the evil fuckign jews started the war you fuckign dip shit dumb fuck.
You have to go back to the Versaille treaty of WWl where it all started.
blogwado is offline


Old 02-27-2011, 09:04 PM   #32
Shiplyopidomi

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
477
Senior Member
Default
You have to go back to the Versaille treaty of WWl where it all started.
Very True. It gave another reason for Hitler to rant against the Allied forces of WWI, and the Jews.
Shiplyopidomi is offline


Old 02-28-2011, 12:49 AM   #33
RealCHEAPsoftDOWNLOAD

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
509
Senior Member
Default
Very True. It gave another reason for Hitler to rant against the Allied forces of WWI, and the Jews.
The treaty was very restrictive. The Germans really suffered under it. Woodrow Wilson stated that if he were at the signing (he was Ill), it would not have been the same, or something akin to that. I guess he meant verbage. Wilson thought it was too tough a treaty also.
RealCHEAPsoftDOWNLOAD is offline


Old 02-28-2011, 12:51 AM   #34
wmhardware

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
462
Senior Member
Default
The treaty was very restrictive. The Germans really suffered under it. Woodrow Wilson stated that if he were at the signing (he was Ill), it would not have been the same, or something akin to that. I guess he meant verbage. Wilson thought it was too tough a treaty also.
It made their economy suffer also. Germans printed more money to pay the debt they owed, which caused hyperinflation. I heard a piece of bread was about $250,000 at one point.
wmhardware is offline


Old 03-03-2011, 06:21 AM   #35
uC4F0NVL

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
454
Senior Member
Default
Very True. It gave another reason for Hitler to rant against the Allied forces of WWI, and the Jews.
As opposed to the saber rattling buffoonery of the Kaiser or the schizo ambivalance of the Austro-Hungarians?

You don't know probably a quarter of the internal grievances and centuries old axes to be ground. Versailles was not a plot. It was an idealist debacle.
Hitler had a chance to rebuild Germany. He was never interested in just doing that though. The entire revitalization was hitched to the war wagon in both economy and philosophy. Liebensraum, baby, liebensraum.
uC4F0NVL is offline


Old 03-03-2011, 06:23 AM   #36
JonDopl

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
446
Senior Member
Default
The treaty was very restrictive. The Germans really suffered under it. Woodrow Wilson stated that if he were at the signing (he was Ill), it would not have been the same, or something akin to that. I guess he meant verbage. Wilson thought it was too tough a treaty also.
There were some very stubborn and pissed off French with fingers in the pie.
JonDopl is offline


Old 03-03-2011, 10:05 AM   #37
tretcheenia

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
414
Senior Member
Default


STOMP THE FRENCH! FINISH THE JOB OVER THERE!
tretcheenia is offline


Old 03-03-2011, 10:45 PM   #38
gedsiz

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
391
Senior Member
Default
As opposed to the saber rattling buffoonery of the Kaiser or the schizo ambivalance of the Austro-Hungarians?

You don't know probably a quarter of the internal grievances and centuries old axes to be ground. Versailles was not a plot. It was an idealist debacle.
Hitler had a chance to rebuild Germany. He was never interested in just doing that though. The entire revitalization was hitched to the war wagon in both economy and philosophy. Liebensraum, baby, liebensraum.
If his military was advanced enough to build V2 Rockets, then I think it was the most advanced of its time. It's just that he didn't make good strategic moves.
gedsiz is offline


Old 03-04-2011, 05:12 PM   #39
Alkassyinhisk

Join Date
Oct 2005
Location
Thailand
Posts
459
Senior Member
Default
So what. They started one against Poland.
Britain and France had an obligation to defend Poland should Poland be attacked. The Soviets, lead by mostly Jewish commissars, attacked Poland on Sept 18 1939. Britain and France declared war on Germany but not on the Soviets, even though the Jewish NKVD murdered 15,000 Polish politicians, officers and intellectuals.
Alkassyinhisk is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:07 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity