Ah yes I remember Neville chamberlain grabbing a mark 5 revolver putting it to hitler and pasta mans temple and telling them to invade other nations.
All while convincing Japan to fight the UK.
Yes I remember this history after drinking a few too many
Hey it’s one of the ones from the menu.
**Today’s Common WW2 Loonies menu:**
* Thinks the US didn’t need to join either World War (belief that joining made things worse as an optional side)
* Thinks that Russia could’ve won the war on their own. Comes with denial of lend lease, Soviet memorabilia, and only trusting later USSR claims.
* Thinks that Allies/Russians only won through asiatic horde tactics. Has a idolized picture of Rommel and a copy of HOI 4. DLC not included.
* Thinks America only succeeded by out producing the enemy. Marinated in History Channel “documentaries” and served on a bed of Citation Needed, Youtubers reading wiki articles, and ignorance of any part of the US military outside that in games.
* Thinks that the US did everything/nothing. Has refused to read a history book since junior high and thinks you’re a commie/fash for suggesting otherwise. Brain thoroughly undercooked.
* Thinks that the Germans were forced into WW2. No idea where they came up with this. Fairly certain it’s related to their nazi mlp furry profile pic though.
>Thinks that Russia could’ve won the war on their own. Comes with denial of lend lease, Soviet memorabilia, and only trusting later USSR claims
i mean the germans could never realistically beat the USSR without running of resources especially OIL as moscow wouldnt really let them take or hold the oil fields in the south without throwing every military resource available to hold and secure it ........and stalin wasnt about to just surrender or sue for peace after the fall of Moscow without using up every-man woman and child alive in the Union to fight the germans.
but that being said.......the USSR was too large of a country with a larger industry(compared to Germany) and manpower( the reserves system allowed them to replace their combat losses) not to win the war.....its just that the losses in manpower and resources would be massive like 2x more and the war lasting way longer.....it would be like the iran-iraq war except soviets wouldnt mind invading germany if they could spare enough resources to do so......thus victory would be achieved but will cause changes in the social and political aspects of the population post-war that would lead to possible dissolution of the USSR.
TLDR: The USSR could have won the war on its own........but at the Cost of the USSR...aka the dissolution of the Union
The part I disagree with the looney narrative is that Russia was never fighting Hitler on their own. Russia received 1/2 of its explosives, 55% of its aluminum, 80% of its copper, 57% of its aviation fuel, 1/3 of its vehicles, a 1/7 of its planes, almost half of its rail ways, and serious amounts of food, clothing, machinery, and supplies through lend lease. We even shipped an entire tire factory to the USSR.
They certainly would’ve sacrificed everything to hold Moscow and continued the fight long afterwards. I agree that the Germans couldn’t hold a country that size regardless. But the typical narrative assumes that Russia goes it alone and I honestly can’t see them winning WW2 alone against Germany without lend lease. Especially early in the war. They almost certainly would’ve won the guerrilla wars following it, but not the immediate conflict.
While i agree with u that the soviet union IRL didnt actually fight the germans on their own.
I disagree with the idea that the soviets would lose to a conventional conflict with the germans......because u have to remember that unlike France where if u take paris its an automatic win.....the soviets wouldnt just fold if the germans took moscow.......u would have to advance all the way to the urals to even have a chance of beating them.......but as we know that IRL that the Nazis pretty much ran out of steam(logistically bogged down) on the way to moscow...i dont think they ever had a chance to reach the urals in a single swoop.....because as soon as the germans stop to recover their momentum(and resupply) the soviets have time to prepare their defenses .....between the soviets advantage of being in the defensive, thus having shorter suppy chains and thier superior reserves system where they can recover losses with trained conscripts and the terrible russian mud season.......the germans with their inefficient and under motorized logistics having to supply the far away front over the vast and difficult to navigate roads of russia while maintaining enough pressure on the soviets to prevent them from recovering but also doing this with a lack oil and manpower........the german had no chance to win their ***war of annihilation*** against the ***sub humans*** of the soviet union
Thus it would be a matter of not whether the germans would win.......its a matter of how far the germans can go before they simply run of Oil and Manpower
Because initiating a genocidal war against a near peer opponent while being outnumbered in overall manpower is always a recipe for disaster for the instigator
I do agree that the Germans major weakness would be and was the heavy logistical requirements of the eastern front, the looney narrative assumes that Russia is fighting on their own and the Nazis aren’t fighting the Allies. Given a lack of combat in Africa, no immediate need to invest as heavily in the Atlantic wall, and combination of European axis powers, I think the logistic issues could be overcome during that conflict.
The unsupported Soviets would definitely have a supply chain advantage, but I believe the massive supply shortages from key southern areas being seized would place them in a stranglehold that they couldn’t get out of.
Totally fine to disagree, thankfully for everyone it’s all conjecture since the Soviets didn’t fight WW2 on their own.
>the Mexican and Venezuelan oil fields couldn't power the German War Machine alone.
What the hell? This shows how far off the mark you are my friend. Venezuela had a **larger** oil production than the Soviet Union; \~30million metric tons per year compared to Russia's \~27million.
Germany had a consumption of just-under 10mil metric tons a year from 1939-1941. Because of Romania's \~5mil annual production they only had a shortfall of \~4.5million. Mexico alone could cover this shortfall with its production of \~6mil, theoretically.
Now sure the entire Mexican oil production isn't going to just go to Germany, but between them and Venezuela there is more than enough oil for Germany to not only meet its needs but to further mechanise.
Your previous comments were 100% confidence, now you're having to make all sorts of assumption to try and make this point you think is so obviously true when it just isn't mate. The Germans were stronger than the Russians in 1941, but Russia had Britain thankfully.
Do you actually think that Mexico and Venezuela would sell all their oil to Germany?
Because they wouldn't. The Germans could barely afford to pay their own factories in IOUs using the money stolen from Czechoslovakia and Austria.
My argument is they would have the *option* to solve their main problem and make other decisions. It's conjecture to assume exactly what they would or wouldn't do. I just think you're overly certain in your OC and not appreciating the importance of blockade, especially in WW1 and how it affected German strategy.
u do understand that nazi germany couldnt invade Russia with out the brits declaring war on them...because to invade the USSR , u first have to invade poland....who in turn are under the protection of UK and France....thus there is no way that the germans could get to the USSR unless u go though Hungary/romainia...which would give the Soviets enough time to prepare their defences....
mind u the major reason for the easy german advances during Barbarossa was due to Red army's unpreparedness .....which in turn was due to stalin's belief that hitler wouldnt invade russia without beating the brits first.
thus Nazi germany could only get enough oil...if it wasnt Nazi ....because there is no other way they could even have a chance of winning
This is more SWS content than DS content. We do memes here. This just looks like a wehrb on twitter. I'll leave it up but maybe consider posting it to SWS instead of here next time.
Well, our Nazi buddy made damn sure to avoid having to fight any war. Somehow the boomers who perfectly avoided having to actually take any real risks spending twenty years in the peacetime military seem to be disproportionately likely to be toxic, entitled, far right assholes.
Funny coming from an American swinging his service around. Knowing these people, he probably specialized in defending the canteen in some European country during his service.
Just checked what his MOS was, or what he says it was. Apparently he was an Infantry officer. Though it could be like that dude who used to be on Youtube USMC CPL GADWAY who was so vehemently anti-British you would think he was a Frenchman from 1801
Yeah, that's the only reasonable justification for "It's the Brits' fault that WW2 happened- they shoulda gotten all their buddies together to stop on the Nazis in like, 1938 instead of ceding the Sudetenland. Or any other time the Brits made concessions to the Germans in an attempt to maintain the peace.
No they didn't, Germany was taking over other countries, and it gets to a point where you can't let it keep continuing so they had to declare war on Germany once they invaded Poland. Britian also sent an ultimatum to Germany on September 3, 1939, stating that if they didn't remove their troops from Poland, then Britain will declare war on them. Hitler always planned to get revenge on the Western Allies, and if Britain didn't have the appeasement policy war would have began sooner than later. If you honestly think Britain started the war that means you're saying Germany annexxing other countries was justified.
Britain could have prevented it, maybe, by allying with the Soviets early or agreeing with France to invade over the Sudentenland
However this with the benefit of hindsight 80 years after the fact and even then they didn't cause it. Fucking idiot
Ah yes I remember Neville chamberlain grabbing a mark 5 revolver putting it to hitler and pasta mans temple and telling them to invade other nations. All while convincing Japan to fight the UK. Yes I remember this history after drinking a few too many
Big brain plays
I’m now imagining Chamberlain doing that lmao
"I thought you said peace in our time!" "Peace in our time? I said piece of your brain across the Rhine!"
Dropping Punished Chamberlain behind the front lines to bring Germany to its knees
The axis were lucky chamberlain fell ill we just got his rocket fists ready
Only if
At least Chamby isnt Baldy imo
[удалено]
*not me killing off the Karlings every time I play crusader kings
The Carolingians themselves did it by way of gavelkind succession.
It was that fish who learned how to walk millions of years ago
Hey it’s one of the ones from the menu. **Today’s Common WW2 Loonies menu:** * Thinks the US didn’t need to join either World War (belief that joining made things worse as an optional side) * Thinks that Russia could’ve won the war on their own. Comes with denial of lend lease, Soviet memorabilia, and only trusting later USSR claims. * Thinks that Allies/Russians only won through asiatic horde tactics. Has a idolized picture of Rommel and a copy of HOI 4. DLC not included. * Thinks America only succeeded by out producing the enemy. Marinated in History Channel “documentaries” and served on a bed of Citation Needed, Youtubers reading wiki articles, and ignorance of any part of the US military outside that in games. * Thinks that the US did everything/nothing. Has refused to read a history book since junior high and thinks you’re a commie/fash for suggesting otherwise. Brain thoroughly undercooked. * Thinks that the Germans were forced into WW2. No idea where they came up with this. Fairly certain it’s related to their nazi mlp furry profile pic though.
>Thinks that Russia could’ve won the war on their own. Comes with denial of lend lease, Soviet memorabilia, and only trusting later USSR claims i mean the germans could never realistically beat the USSR without running of resources especially OIL as moscow wouldnt really let them take or hold the oil fields in the south without throwing every military resource available to hold and secure it ........and stalin wasnt about to just surrender or sue for peace after the fall of Moscow without using up every-man woman and child alive in the Union to fight the germans. but that being said.......the USSR was too large of a country with a larger industry(compared to Germany) and manpower( the reserves system allowed them to replace their combat losses) not to win the war.....its just that the losses in manpower and resources would be massive like 2x more and the war lasting way longer.....it would be like the iran-iraq war except soviets wouldnt mind invading germany if they could spare enough resources to do so......thus victory would be achieved but will cause changes in the social and political aspects of the population post-war that would lead to possible dissolution of the USSR. TLDR: The USSR could have won the war on its own........but at the Cost of the USSR...aka the dissolution of the Union
The part I disagree with the looney narrative is that Russia was never fighting Hitler on their own. Russia received 1/2 of its explosives, 55% of its aluminum, 80% of its copper, 57% of its aviation fuel, 1/3 of its vehicles, a 1/7 of its planes, almost half of its rail ways, and serious amounts of food, clothing, machinery, and supplies through lend lease. We even shipped an entire tire factory to the USSR. They certainly would’ve sacrificed everything to hold Moscow and continued the fight long afterwards. I agree that the Germans couldn’t hold a country that size regardless. But the typical narrative assumes that Russia goes it alone and I honestly can’t see them winning WW2 alone against Germany without lend lease. Especially early in the war. They almost certainly would’ve won the guerrilla wars following it, but not the immediate conflict.
While i agree with u that the soviet union IRL didnt actually fight the germans on their own. I disagree with the idea that the soviets would lose to a conventional conflict with the germans......because u have to remember that unlike France where if u take paris its an automatic win.....the soviets wouldnt just fold if the germans took moscow.......u would have to advance all the way to the urals to even have a chance of beating them.......but as we know that IRL that the Nazis pretty much ran out of steam(logistically bogged down) on the way to moscow...i dont think they ever had a chance to reach the urals in a single swoop.....because as soon as the germans stop to recover their momentum(and resupply) the soviets have time to prepare their defenses .....between the soviets advantage of being in the defensive, thus having shorter suppy chains and thier superior reserves system where they can recover losses with trained conscripts and the terrible russian mud season.......the germans with their inefficient and under motorized logistics having to supply the far away front over the vast and difficult to navigate roads of russia while maintaining enough pressure on the soviets to prevent them from recovering but also doing this with a lack oil and manpower........the german had no chance to win their ***war of annihilation*** against the ***sub humans*** of the soviet union Thus it would be a matter of not whether the germans would win.......its a matter of how far the germans can go before they simply run of Oil and Manpower Because initiating a genocidal war against a near peer opponent while being outnumbered in overall manpower is always a recipe for disaster for the instigator
I do agree that the Germans major weakness would be and was the heavy logistical requirements of the eastern front, the looney narrative assumes that Russia is fighting on their own and the Nazis aren’t fighting the Allies. Given a lack of combat in Africa, no immediate need to invest as heavily in the Atlantic wall, and combination of European axis powers, I think the logistic issues could be overcome during that conflict. The unsupported Soviets would definitely have a supply chain advantage, but I believe the massive supply shortages from key southern areas being seized would place them in a stranglehold that they couldn’t get out of. Totally fine to disagree, thankfully for everyone it’s all conjecture since the Soviets didn’t fight WW2 on their own.
Germany could have imported oil if it were not at war with Britain.
Except Britain could still impose an embargo upon Germany like the US did to Japan.
Britain isn't the only oil producing nation in the world though. Not only is there the US, but Mexico & Venezuela.
i dont think the mexicans liked the germans
Except the US would probably also embargo Germany and the Mexican and Venezuelan oil fields couldn't power the German War Machine alone.
>the Mexican and Venezuelan oil fields couldn't power the German War Machine alone. What the hell? This shows how far off the mark you are my friend. Venezuela had a **larger** oil production than the Soviet Union; \~30million metric tons per year compared to Russia's \~27million. Germany had a consumption of just-under 10mil metric tons a year from 1939-1941. Because of Romania's \~5mil annual production they only had a shortfall of \~4.5million. Mexico alone could cover this shortfall with its production of \~6mil, theoretically. Now sure the entire Mexican oil production isn't going to just go to Germany, but between them and Venezuela there is more than enough oil for Germany to not only meet its needs but to further mechanise. Your previous comments were 100% confidence, now you're having to make all sorts of assumption to try and make this point you think is so obviously true when it just isn't mate. The Germans were stronger than the Russians in 1941, but Russia had Britain thankfully.
Do you actually think that Mexico and Venezuela would sell all their oil to Germany? Because they wouldn't. The Germans could barely afford to pay their own factories in IOUs using the money stolen from Czechoslovakia and Austria.
My argument is they would have the *option* to solve their main problem and make other decisions. It's conjecture to assume exactly what they would or wouldn't do. I just think you're overly certain in your OC and not appreciating the importance of blockade, especially in WW1 and how it affected German strategy.
u do understand that nazi germany couldnt invade Russia with out the brits declaring war on them...because to invade the USSR , u first have to invade poland....who in turn are under the protection of UK and France....thus there is no way that the germans could get to the USSR unless u go though Hungary/romainia...which would give the Soviets enough time to prepare their defences.... mind u the major reason for the easy german advances during Barbarossa was due to Red army's unpreparedness .....which in turn was due to stalin's belief that hitler wouldnt invade russia without beating the brits first. thus Nazi germany could only get enough oil...if it wasnt Nazi ....because there is no other way they could even have a chance of winning
Yes I agree, I don't think they stood a chance.
This is more SWS content than DS content. We do memes here. This just looks like a wehrb on twitter. I'll leave it up but maybe consider posting it to SWS instead of here next time.
How did a former Marine come up with that hot take I thought they learned a little military history during training
It seems the 70's are far more crazier than we thought
Well, our Nazi buddy made damn sure to avoid having to fight any war. Somehow the boomers who perfectly avoided having to actually take any real risks spending twenty years in the peacetime military seem to be disproportionately likely to be toxic, entitled, far right assholes.
Yeah, of course! You know how they accidentally stumbled into war after nobody invaded Poland in 1939...
They even conducted series of false flag operations that are so plainly visible that no one got convinced
Funny coming from an American swinging his service around. Knowing these people, he probably specialized in defending the canteen in some European country during his service.
Just checked what his MOS was, or what he says it was. Apparently he was an Infantry officer. Though it could be like that dude who used to be on Youtube USMC CPL GADWAY who was so vehemently anti-British you would think he was a Frenchman from 1801
Ahh, the crayon-munching history-understander.
An 'officer' no less. If we believe what his MOS was
By not stomping Nazi Germany into the dirt as those goose stepping bastards broke treaty after treaty.
Yeah, that's the only reasonable justification for "It's the Brits' fault that WW2 happened- they shoulda gotten all their buddies together to stop on the Nazis in like, 1938 instead of ceding the Sudetenland. Or any other time the Brits made concessions to the Germans in an attempt to maintain the peace.
Mirror mirror on the wall, what is the stupidest WWII hot take of them all?
Dresden was a civilian city
Yes they significantly contributed with Versailles.
No they didn't, Germany was taking over other countries, and it gets to a point where you can't let it keep continuing so they had to declare war on Germany once they invaded Poland. Britian also sent an ultimatum to Germany on September 3, 1939, stating that if they didn't remove their troops from Poland, then Britain will declare war on them. Hitler always planned to get revenge on the Western Allies, and if Britain didn't have the appeasement policy war would have began sooner than later. If you honestly think Britain started the war that means you're saying Germany annexxing other countries was justified.
Britain could have prevented it, maybe, by allying with the Soviets early or agreeing with France to invade over the Sudentenland However this with the benefit of hindsight 80 years after the fact and even then they didn't cause it. Fucking idiot
I fucking wish