:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:upsidedow

Not me, but Stalin and I believe it was a small revenge for this :2 cents:

This is still a problem in the military. Every one thinks they can just shoot another person in cold blood for no reason because they are "told to do it". This is what gun nuts don't understand - not every one has the balls to shoot and kill another man when suddenly faced with that decision.

I don't understand the question. Why would I stand in the middle of a parking lot?

I am a former US Marine who taught combat tactics to officers, I have multiple assault rifles, enough food to last months, and two four wheel drive trucks....

I'm ready!

http://icdn6.digitaltrends.com/image/red-dawn-650x0.jpg

i like pooo

Yep. Richard posted a link which suggests the research has been discredited, but I'm not so sure. Plus I like the idea that even soldiers find it difficult to kill. In the documentary I mentioned I think they said something like only 2% of people had what it takes to be a bad ass killing machine who you might want on your side in the heat of battle. 1% was the professional hero type, and the other 1% were flat out sociopaths.

Okay how about a military base. Is that where you'd hang out if the North Koreans came to town?

Why not use a(n unoccupied) school building, if it's a strategic location? I don't buy the idea that they "hide behind" "human shields". If a battle takes place in an urban area then obviously there are going to be lots of civilians around. It's hardly the right of the aggressor to be moralistic about that, or cry about the enemy "hiding", just because they're not out there like sitting ducks. Not killing citizens is easy, you just don't drop bombs on cities.

Wolverines!

didn't they all die in the end? after their group went coocoo on each other and the 1 dude shot and killed his best friend/traitor?

not a second front - a first front, while the UK stood alone against the Nazi's the Russians had a non-aggression pact with the Germans.

^ Ironic, really. The only country Hitler wanted to be allies with, or at least didn't want to fight, and the country he had the greatest admiration for, was the one country that had the cojones to stand up to him.

If you'd allied with Hitler you'd have remained a superpower, alongside Germany and Japan.

You'd have your Empire, the Krauts would have their lebensraum in the East, the Japs would have whatever parts of Asia you hadn't already carved up, the Italians would have Italy, and we'd be speaking Canadian.

yes, you are right. WW2 destroyed Great Britain and we are still feeling it even now. It cost us immensely to ensure the freedom of Europe and it brought us to our knees only for our greatest ally to shaft us good and proper.

what history is this called?

I don't understand your problem with this? If Britain had fallen or if had joined up with Germany then who would have stood up to Hitler (remember at this point, Britain stood alone)? A Europe under Hitler would have left him able to throw everything at the east and remember he had allies in south America where they could build forces. If the US had decided to enter the war with no European allies (which they wouldn't have done) then what would have stopped Hitler from gobbling up south America and working upwards towards Canada?

The UK lost its empire due to world war 2 and was so broke afterwards that it had to come up with desperate measures to keep up with its payments to the US even considering giving up everything and applying to become a US state - things were that bad.

even if it cost me like 1/4 of my fathers family - i am pretty thankful that Hitler was stopped. I can't imagine to live in a world like it was from 1933-45

no problem; i just wanted to know if there was some form of classification for that version

victors write the history yes?

UK 'lost it's empire', but WW2, at best, was 'one of the reasons'. Expensive thing, 'empire'. Much better, and cheaper, and less reputation staining, letting them run themselves, eh ol'chap :winkwink:

http://i.imgur.com/M3Uv5er.jpg

Germany was owned, almost entirely, but foreign interest.. any clue on who did the owning? or facilitating?

one of your colonies, btw, aren't very happy about Dieppe. at all.

I see what you are getting. Well, I wouldn't be hiding in a school for sure.

If battle takes place in an urban area, at a certain point in time everything is fair game. But if you start stockpiling weapons in classrooms and parking an anti aircraft gun in the middle of the school playground, well, it's no longer a school. It's pretty simple for me - If you shoot from a building or hide in a building, that building is fair game.

You said "You don't drop bombs on cities". Yeah, no, it doesn't work that way. Look at what is happening in Syria right now - they are bombing the shit out of each other. War does not stop because a city gets in the war. War goes right through it.

Some of them lived. It was in the final scene... They made it to the "free zone".

The Russians weren't being beaten by anybody, wouldn't have mattered if Great Britain had been defeated by Germany and forced to fight the Russians or allied themselves with Germany voluntarily. Russia lost 27 million people in WWII and if they had to lose 127 million they still wouldn't have given in. The little gutless bitch Hitler double crossed Stalin on the Molotov Pact and invaded Russia by total surprise - Russia was totally unprepared but soon enough they gathered their wits and resources and dug in like no country ever dug in, had to, Stalin ordered ANYBODY showing any cowardice to be shot on the spot. Hitler was an absolute moron, people in general and historians as well dwell on how evil he was and his psychopathology - what isn't talked enough about is that he was borderline retarded and his decisions proved it. He was never going to win against Russia, Hitler was idiotic enough to think the Russians would surrender fast before winter came. This is the same idiot who actually believed the Brits were going to ally themselves with him.

And boo fucking hoo about Britain losing its empire - its empire was built on evil, racism and greed as well and the United States by default got stuck with the mess the British Empire left behind in the Middle East, got stuck with the mess the French left behind in Vietnam, stuck with the mess the Japanese and Chinese left behind in Korea. The US wanted no part of WWII and if not for the idiot Hitler declaring war on America they may have stayed out of Europe completely and let the mighty Canadians and Brits open up a second front on their own.

oh yeah, i need to watch that again, i've only seen it on tv.

Tell us how you really feel!

Hitler was going to double cross everyone, it was just a matter of when. He made promises to everyone and eventually violated all of them.

And Russia really didn't need anyone's help. Russia was magically creating entire divisions out of thin air... Just when it looked like Russia was going to loose a battle, presto, twenty brand new divisions suddenly popped up.

It's amazing really that such small countries - Germany and Japan - thought they could take on such huge vast countries with unlimited resources.

russians are better at hacking than americans, that much i know

5000 terrorists

Ah I see now. I thought you were talked about the second front.

okay, if you like. Germany made great strides into southern Russia and got very, very close to the vital oilfields. (Russia may have a huge army but if they cannot move it then what good would that do?), it was the Russian winter that gave Russia the time to counter attack. Again, if Hitler didn't have two major fronts to fight on, how much further could he have got into Russia before the important winter if he had the full might of the German army pushing into Russia?

The US's rise in the second half of the 20th century was built entirely on how it fucked over its allies during and after the war. You may have your opinion on the British empire but really, have a look at how the US has conducted itself since its late entry into the second world war up until today.

Even hot sluts being used as cannon fodder by corrupt governments. Hot sluts exist because they're.. hot sluts who can be fucked. Not to abuse for retarded war agendas and get them killed. Evolution has become confused.

no shit





.

Yes, because in order to know if today's modern militaries in Russian and USA are comparable or superior to one another we must first talk for 8 pages about soldier from 70 yrs ago and who beat Hitler.

Answering of question GFY style. Nowhwere else on interwebs is topic fleshed out so fervently.

Das is goot! :thumbsup

And the space race too!

That's what message boards are about - going off subject!

so you are saying the russian army is not as good as the u.s. army yes?

Space race. Ha! Now that cold war has ended long ago it should be time the two main entrants in all these races work together instead of competing. Twice the brain power, half the cost.

Too bad neither is smart enough to do it.

Easy way to find out. Pit 500 Russian troops against 500 US troops on the world's largest paintball course and let them sort it out.

Then later, after the group shower, bond over vodka.

I would submit that Russia did a good job of picking the winning side. Oops. Wait. No, they didn't. They began the war as Axis allies, then did such a shitty job, they were kicked out of the club.

First off Russia began their Alliance with Germany badly by losing to Finland. Why? Because Stalin had executed over 60% of the Officer Corp and 70% of the General staff.

Hitler saw how weak the Russian Army had become and decided the time was right to double-cross Stalin. Turned out to be a good idea, poorly executed. The Axis had wiped out 59% of the Russian Army by the end of 1941. They never even needed to capture Volgagrad, it had no strategic value and they could have gone by it, but Hitler wanted to rub the capture of "Stalingrad" in Stalins face.

The U.S. Sent Military Aid, including Tanks & Planes to the tune of $20 Billion in 1940's dollars to Russia, on American Merchant ships that had to convoy through the German U-boat controlled shipping routes. The Russian Navy was almost no help here, as the Germans had destroyed it. You had more Amercan Merchant Marine sailors drinking beer in Murmansk on any given night than Russia had left in it's Navy.

How many German Tank divisions did the U.S destroy? Besides the German, Italian AND Japaneses Tanks on the ground in Africa, Italy, France, Germany and all across the Pacific; the USA also carried the brunt of the Air War over Germany. Half of our 400,000 military causalties were U.S. Aviators who died, mostly carrying out the daylight bombing raids that destroyed Germany's production capacity and transportation systems. The U.S.A wiped out the German Tanks before they could be built and destroyed the roads and railroads they would have been shipped on.

There is no doubt, that neither Britain or Russia had the ability to provide the Aircraft and crews of Airmen the USA invested. Germany would not have been destroyed without this effort, Russia and Britain probably would have negotiated a truce and the French would be speaking German today.

As for raising the flag over the Reichstag. Wow. Would you say there was ton of strategic value in doing that? Would you say it was the most significant moment of the war?

Or would you say that it did not even matter, as the Yalta Conference had determined who would possess and govern every bit of Germany, Italy and Japans territories?

Still, there is no doubt in my mind that Russia suffered more horribly than any other nation during the course of WWII. The USSR's total casualties are estimated at 22 to 30 million people. Thats almost as many people as Stalin had killed (estimates suggest 35 million) before the war. The courage and endurance of the people was incredible. A million died of starvation alone in Leningrad, and no one knows all the numbers for Volgagrad.

To Mutt's point, sure, maybe some of that courage was artificial. The casualty figures for the battle of Stalingrad report that 14,000 Russian soldiers were executed by their own people.

:1orglaugh this should be the rules of engagement for allwars, except for the showering part.

Very interesting....

This is what is happening now. Being as the US no longer has the Space Shuttles, the US relies on Russia to get Americans and supplies to the International space station.

Eventually society will look back at all of this bickering... And laugh.

What's slowly happening now is that all countries are becoming the same. Russia is no longer communist, and even China is changing too. Eventually it will no longer be "one country is better than the other" but instead "how have we helped each other".

Fuck, we bicker about the Space Race when the truth is the only reason anyone did what they did was because of the work the Germans did.

No no, the showering is important. Makes for a better hockey team, I'm sure it will work for the military.

:D

maybe that's why i've never gotten into hockey?

You should learn the difference b/n fiction and reality. The Finish war is yet another war the Russians didn't lose ? true, they went there extremely ill prepared and the Fins put up tremendous fight, but if memory serves me right, the war ended with the Russians taking territory from the Fins. I am pretty sure that this is portrayed as the Russians losing the war by every single US or Western media, but it simply did not happen.

You are 100% correct about Stalin crippling his own army and you are 100% correct about the US helping the Russians during the war. "In total, the US deliveries through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks); 11,400 aircraft and 1.75 million tons of food"

This is profound.

How exactly has the use fucked over it's allies?

A couple of minor points, Churchill had plenty of chances to negotiate a truce and even during "The Darkest Hour" refused.
Yes America did provide (sell) loads of hardware but their troops were badly trained and their leaders refused point blank to learn the lessons learnt the hard way by the British in the war with Germany. an example being that the USAF insisted on restarting day raids, ignoring the RAF advice to fly by night resulting in huge losses.

We know. However this is not something to be proud of :2 cents:

thought so too

I can second it. Our army is not as good as the US one. Yours at least much bigger than ours. On the other hand, in case of war, the strength will not mean anything because of nukes. It's like a slim guy against a huge bodybuilder on steroids when both have guns :2 cents:

Yep, but not for free. It was done in exchange of gold. That's just a business :2 cents:

Churchill saw the wisdom in standing his ground. Hilter was a one trick pony - he would promise he wouldn't attack, would stage "incidents" and then claim he was protecting "Germans and German interests" and then would attack.

Sure, Churchill could have signed a peace treaty... And then watched as Germany build up in invasion force in France while Hilter start complaining loudly about how "Germans were being treated" in the UK.

He did the right thing.

Not at all. Americans believed in brute force, not hiding in the darkness of night and maybe hitting the target. They wanted to destroy their targets, not play guessing games.

Nukes don't come into play in such discussions. Once one side uses them, the other side would too. This is why we've been fighting proxy wars for the past fifty years.

i was just fucking with my buddy, cdsmith, richard style, i figured he'd appreciate that. :upsidedow



nevertheless, i'm not so sure. ultimately it depends where and why. you guys invade us and y'all will have some probs, we invade y'all, we'll have issues. this happens in some shithole somewhere, it will be a who can't shoot who the most.

it's also hard to gauge how russia would do since the union broke-up. not much experience to draw on.

also, i am not so sure we all settled things at the end of the cold war and our governments are now buddy buddy.

just like when we were all buddy buddy with apollo-soyuz yet spying like crazy on each other and who knows what else.

Operation Drumbeat was a prime example of us knowing better than countries with experience, when we refused to black out coastal areas, allowing U-Boats free reign to attack whatever they liked. Seems absolutely staggering and ubelievable, but this was the decision of Admiral Ernest King, perhaps motivated by an intense hatred of Britain.

The British warned us about Operation Drumbeat (after cracking Enigma, something Hollyweird thinks we did before we were even in the war), but were ignored. End result:

Not sure where that text is originally from, but it's not Wikipedia. Wikipedia though says the Brits eventually had to build ships and supply them to us because we wouldn't just turn out the lights; as it describes, a kind of "reverse Lend Lease".

Speaking of which, since people have been talking about Lend Lease, you can read about "reverse Lend Lease" here:

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=16340

Nukes will be used in case of any direct (non-proxy) Russia-vs-USA conflict. We just have no other weapon against your aircraft carriers. I.e. one US aircraft carrier == one Russian tactical nuke missile. I mean that non-nuclear war is just impossible. At least, according to our military doctrine. Telling you that as the Russian officer in reserve.

i'd bet the u.s. won't be the next entity firing off a nuke. that's some pretty bad publicity to deal with.

find the 'iceships' yet?

that was the plan for the uboats. build 'icebergs' as ships.

no joke.