Moderator: maddog986
ORIGINAL: nate25
This is a touchy subject. [:)] Most of us are convinced that we are correct and all other views are suspect.
History happened the way it happened. Period. But it's certainly fun to speculate on the "variables", as long as they're somewhat based on hard numbers or facts.
ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy
Good stuff guys. I enjoyed reading this.
I have another question. Remember in the movie "Stalingrad" where some German guards are herding some Russian prisomers and one of them threw the platoon leader to the ground? I noticed the guards had some sort of heavy chain and medallion around their necks. Would anyone happen to know what that medallion is for?
ORIGINAL: british exil
Yep the Feldjäger, the german version of the MP.
Lit. translated would mean Fieldhunter.
Feldjäger is the title used since 1955, since the Bundeswehr. In the Wehrmacht the title was Feldgendarmerie.
Mat
ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN
If only I had been Il Duce in charge of Italy in 1933. The Med was the key to a victorious empire if pitted against Britain, France & Russia so as Il Duce, all of those gorgeous Italian babes wouldve helped me seduce the enemy into complicity & the Ententes evil empire would have been mine forever!!!
[:'(]
Sabrina Antonella Isabella
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI8U_g2GoYo
ORIGINAL: nate25
They called then the "Kettenhund", the chained dogs. MPs, basically.
ORIGINAL: wodin
ORIGINAL: nate25
They called then the "Kettenhund", the chained dogs. MPs, basically.
Correct sir.
During the battles where the Germans had to stand their ground and weren't allowed to retreat they also patrolled the rear areas and woe betide anyone without the necessary documents to be there, as depending on how bad things where they could find themselves hanging from a lamppost as a deserter and a warning to others.
Warspite1ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy
So they were MPs got it. Thanks for answering!
ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy
So they were MPs got it. Thanks for answering!
ORIGINAL: rogo727
Regardless of if the Germans could have won WW2 in which I feel they couldn't for the sole fact they where at war with the US and Uk no other army in the history of the world has done so much with SO LITTLE as the German army of WW2. I'm not a nazi but I truly do marvel at all there accomplishments. Being at war for four years against a population that was more than twice as yours (USSR). And while the US and UK battled some good divisions of the Wehrmacht lets face it the heart and soul of the germanhood was involved on the eastern front. To say that without aid from the western union to the soviets the soviets would have rolled into Berlin is ludicrous at best. When the aid stopped in 1945 was the beginning of the end of communism in the USSR . I shuttler to think of what the former USSR would be right now if they had a democratic system in place after WW2. The Germans are a robust, they fought two world wars (and lost) to only to become the leading economic force in Europe. The Germans lost WW2 because of overwhelming production and population base the Allies put forward and it wasn't my general was smarter than yours although this is true in a few battles. On this forum alone I can see there are plenty of armchair generals and for that fact admirals too. No book has ever made me change my mind that the Russians alone could have beaten Germany.
, did you have to hit so hard?Warspite1ORIGINAL: rogo727
Regardless of if the Germans could have won WW2 in which I feel they couldn't for the sole fact they where at war with the US and Uk no other army in the history of the world has done so much with SO LITTLE as the German army of WW2. I'm not a nazi but I truly do marvel at all there accomplishments. Being at war for four years against a population that was more than twice as yours (USSR). And while the US and UK battled some good divisions of the Wehrmacht lets face it the heart and soul of the germanhood was involved on the eastern front. To say that without aid from the western union to the soviets the soviets would have rolled into Berlin is ludicrous at best. When the aid stopped in 1945 was the beginning of the end of communism in the USSR . I shuttler to think of what the former USSR would be right now if they had a democratic system in place after WW2. The Germans are a robust, they fought two world wars (and lost) to only to become the leading economic force in Europe. The Germans lost WW2 because of overwhelming production and population base the Allies put forward and it wasn't my general was smarter than yours although this is true in a few battles. On this forum alone I can see there are plenty of armchair generals and for that fact admirals too. No book has ever made me change my mind that the Russians alone could have beaten Germany.
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Warspite1ORIGINAL: rogo727
Regardless of if the Germans could have won WW2 in which I feel they couldn't for the sole fact they where at war with the US and Uk no other army in the history of the world has done so much with SO LITTLE as the German army of WW2. I'm not a nazi but I truly do marvel at all there accomplishments. Being at war for four years against a population that was more than twice as yours (USSR). And while the US and UK battled some good divisions of the Wehrmacht lets face it the heart and soul of the germanhood was involved on the eastern front. To say that without aid from the western union to the soviets the soviets would have rolled into Berlin is ludicrous at best. When the aid stopped in 1945 was the beginning of the end of communism in the USSR . I shuttler to think of what the former USSR would be right now if they had a democratic system in place after WW2. The Germans are a robust, they fought two world wars (and lost) to only to become the leading economic force in Europe. The Germans lost WW2 because of overwhelming production and population base the Allies put forward and it wasn't my general was smarter than yours although this is true in a few battles. On this forum alone I can see there are plenty of armchair generals and for that fact admirals too. No book has ever made me change my mind that the Russians alone could have beaten Germany.
As to exactly what the outcome would have been if the UK and USA stood back and let Germany/USSR slug it out, I am not sure. Best case - they fight each other to exhaustion and Hitler and Stalin get overthrown..... oh well, nice dream.
However, as far as your comment about the achievements of the German Army is concerned (all politics aside) then I think you have a valid point. Max Hastings addressed this point in his book Armageddon (I think it was called). Worth a read if you have not done so already.
Warspite1
As to exactly what the outcome would have been if the UK and USA stood back and let Germany/USSR slug it out, I am not sure. Best case - they fight each other to exhaustion and Hitler and Stalin get overthrown..... oh well, nice dream.
However, as far as your comment about the achievements of the German Army is concerned (all politics aside) then I think you have a valid point. Max Hastings addressed this point in his book Armageddon (I think it was called). Worth a read if you have not done so already.
ORIGINAL: nate25
The Russians had to strip most of their arty units of motorized transport for the final soiree at Berlin.
Without Lend/Lease the Russians would have been far worse off than most realize. It's just not ''proper" right now to say the Russians couldn't have done it by themselves.
