Nothing actually, nothing at all.GreatbigHippo wrote:
Again? What has Russia done that the US doesn't do all the time?
16 May 2016, 21:22
M4a3e8(76)w vs Panzer V vs T34
I really liked the response I got from my poll on heavy tanks so I thought I'd add a list for medium tanks as well. If someone thinks I missed a tank and should add one to the poll just let me know.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
149 Replies
16 May 2016, 21:22
Thinj pablo said it actually..Quasi-duck wrote:
Where did that nonsense come from? Probably one of the best tanks of all time, I never remember saying I did not like it.oceanhawk wrote:
I thought you hated the Abrams?
yes good tank,
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
-Friedrich von Haye
16 May 2016, 22:08
is that why they lost?? What a shame in such case ))))oceanhawk wrote:
Combined with superior armor, better troops and Generals. With the best moral as well!Quasi-duck wrote:
Unexpected attack and most of Soviet air forces destroyed on the ground.oceanhawk wrote:
Then explain how the Germans were winning the war in 41?
21 May 2016, 20:23
No, I like the Abrams.oceanhawk wrote:
Think Pablo said it actually..
No, they lost because of *beeeeeeeeeeeeep* Hitler.MihailMD wrote:
Is that why they lost?
The past is a foreign country.
21 May 2016, 20:35
sure, it is just an excuse.Pablo22510 wrote:
No, I like the Abrams.oceanhawk wrote:
Think Pablo said it actually..No, they lost because of *beeeeeeeeeeeeep* Hitler.MihailMD wrote:
Is that why they lost?
Germany couldn't compete with USSR in man power, resources , equipment ( in later stages) or willingness to go to the end. They didn't stand a chance
21 May 2016, 20:41
That's why they nearly took Moscow, and could have taken it, if it wasn't for Hitler.MihailMD wrote:
sure, it is just an excuse.Germany couldn't compete with USSR in man power, resources , equipment ( in later stages) or willingness to go to the end. They didn't stand a chance
The past is a foreign country.
21 May 2016, 20:43
Proof?Pablo22510 wrote:
That's why they nearly took Moscow, and could have taken it, if it wasn't for Hitler.
21 May 2016, 20:49
Of what? Of the fact that they were in the outskirts of Moscow, or of the fact that Hitler delayed the invasion for 3 weeks that would've been crucial.Quasi-duck wrote:
Proof?
The past is a foreign country.
21 May 2016, 20:53
No, that if Hitler had not been giving orders, victory in Moscow was assured. Do you have proof? History says no.
21 May 2016, 20:56
If Hitler hadn't decided to help Mussolini, Op Barbarossa would've started 3 weeks earlier, which would've been an immense advantage, as Moscow would've fallen. Also, Hitler took command of the Wehrmacht on December 19th, 1941, which was when Army Group Centre started retreating from Moscow.
The past is a foreign country.
21 May 2016, 21:18
That doesn't matter. German flanks were covered by men armed with a few rifles, broom poles and tanks from the 20's. That is why Axis forces were routed at Stalingrad.Pablo22510 wrote:
If Hitler hadn't decided to help Mussolini, Op Barbarossa would've started 3 weeks earlier, which would've been an immense advantage, as Moscow would've fallen. Also, Hitler took command of the Wehrmacht on December 19th, 1941, which was when Army Group Centre started retreating from Moscow.
21 May 2016, 21:25
Axis forces were routed at Stalingrad because Hitler didn't allow them to retreat, and because the Soviets poured infinite numbers of men in.Quasi-duck wrote:
That doesn't matter. German flanks were covered by men armed with a few rifles, broom poles and tanks from the 20's. That is why Axis forces were routed at Stalingrad.
The past is a foreign country.
22 May 2016, 08:13
Soooo what you're trying to say is, if USSR hadn't used its tactics, developed in the 20's and 30's and called Deep Operations, Germany would have conquered them in WWII?Pablo22510 wrote:
Axis forces were routed at Stalingrad because Hitler didn't allow them to retreat, and because the Soviets poured infinite numbers of men in.
22 May 2016, 08:53
No, what I'm saying is that if Hitler had allowed his generals to counter those tactics, they would've won.Quasi-duck wrote:
Soooo what you're trying to say is, if USSR hadn't used its tactics, developed in the 20's and 30's and called Deep Operations, Germany would have conquered them in WWII?
The past is a foreign country.
22 May 2016, 11:15
How does one counter Deep Operation tactics? Remember, if the Soviets are having trouble with the frontline Germans they will just attack the Romanians and Italians at the sides.Pablo22510 wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that if Hitler had allowed his generals to counter those tactics, they would've won.
22 May 2016, 15:48
not a single chance. They could have started weeks or months earlier, it wouldn't matter, the end result would be the same, with or without Hitler.Pablo22510 wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that if Hitler had allowed his generals to counter those tactics, they would've won.Quasi-duck wrote:
Soooo what you're trying to say is, if USSR hadn't used its tactics, developed in the 20's and 30's and called Deep Operations, Germany would have conquered them in WWII?
Look at history. No invader came out of Russia victorious. It was a bad idea in the first place to go against USSR.
22 May 2016, 15:51
Well, the Polish and Lithuanian Commonwealth did. They kinda became Russian then though.MihailMD wrote:
No invader came out of Russia victorious.
EDIT: My bad, they only got about as far as Moscow.
22 May 2016, 15:55
exactly))). How did they Become part of Russia?))Quasi-duck wrote:
Well, the Polish and Lithuanian Commonwealth did. They kinda became Russian then though.MihailMD wrote:
No invader came out of Russia victorious.
The same way as part if Berlin and East Germany became a puppet state of USSR,
22 May 2016, 18:31
Well, someone has to be the first to succeed.MihailMD wrote:
not a single chance. They could have started weeks or months earlier, it wouldn't matter, the end result would be the same, with or without Hitler.Look at history. No invader came out of Russia victorious. It was a bad idea in the first place to go against USSR.
The past is a foreign country.
22 May 2016, 18:37
Not necessarily. Jump into space, someone has to succeed, y'know?Pablo22510 wrote:
Well, someone has to be the first to succeed.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
