WW2 Victory Day Parade - May 9.

[Najnaj]

Amazing how soviet union is credited for the victory, if it wasnt for the allied invasion of france germany would have crushed the soviets

Other way around. Stalin and the Soviets played THE role in WW2.

It was a horrifyingly cruel role with total disregard for all life and human suffering but.. it won the war.

[Gaaz]

We were talking about Soviet troops raping German women not invasion of Dagestan republic.

While many of these accusations regarding USSR were indeed true, do not forget that US military court went through more than 11 000 rape cases hearings in Germany alone. These cases were so severe that they could not be "not filed". Imagine how many were overlooked or dismissed due to lack of substance (that means no third party witness willing to testify)? Rape culture among american troops occupying Germany became so prevalent, that army command started to print flyers to try and dissuade soldiers. FYI, youngest rape victim among these cases was only 7, oldest 69. Eisenhower even issued orders to shoot rapists on sight... in England and France. But this order did not concern Germany (not a single guilty verdict there, even though 153 soldiers were convicted in France alone, after the D-Day landing and before the German capitulation). So please, get off your high horse. An occupying army will rape as a rule of thumb. It does not matter if these are USSR troops or US troops. It is also funny how 2 million rapes by Soviet troops are casually thrown about, when some German historians put a total number of rapes as high as 4+ million. I wonder who is the cause of these extras...
PS. Funnily enough, although I am not a great fan of British military, they proved themselves most disciplined among Allied forces when it came to rapes. Very few cases were connected to them. But British officers were given strict orders to enforce a "no rape" policy and to their credit, managed to uphold discipline among British ranks for the most part.

[Puupi]

While many of these accusations regarding USSR were indeed true, do not forget that US military court went through more than 11 000 rape cases hearings in Germany alone. These cases were so severe that they could not be "not filed". Imagine how many were overlooked or dismissed due to lack of substance (that means no third party witness willing to testify)? Rape culture among american troops occupying Germany became so prevalent, that army command started to print flyers to try and dissuade soldiers. FYI, youngest rape victim among these cases was only 7, oldest 69. Eisenhower even issued orders to shoot rapists on sight... in England and France. But this order did not concern Germany (not a single guilty verdict there, even though 153 soldiers were convicted in France alone, after the D-Day landing and before the German capitulation. So please, get off your high horse. It is also funny how 2 million rapes by Soviet troops are casually thrown about, when some German historians put a total number of rapes as high as 4+ million. I wonder who is the cause of these extras...

Holy fucking whataboutism, fuck off lol.

[Morally Grey Storm]

Wikipedia is not a source. A wikipedia article is a collection of information. The sources are listed in the wikipedia article.
So attacking wikipedia doesn't accomplish anything.

I am not as much as attacking wikipedia as questioning it's authentity as information source.
Because it is quite questionable at times.
Doubly so when it comes to politics.

I already pointed out on page 1 on this thread that I think USSR would have won Germany even without allied help. They were already winning before D-Day happened.

That is a different topic as of now.

So are you saying there isn't a difference between eg. SS-troops and Wehrmacht when it comes to atrocities? All soldiers are the same...right?

No.
Do not play the "so you're saying" game with me, it will not work.
What I said was "people at war commit atrocities".
And if you are trying to make it look like there is no difference between a german soldier of that time and a soviet one, then you might be somewhat off with your judgement.
As in, completely fething off.
20 millions of citizens massacred in cold blood.
The Holocaust.
The genocide of Polish(?) people.
Forced labour.
Experiments upon living people.
Auschwitz.

You do not compare it to what soviet soldiers did.
Somewhat off a scale to compare.

- - - Updated - - -

Holy fucking whataboutism, fuck off lol.

What a sound rebuttal.
Thank you.

[Puupi]

I am not as much as attacking wikipedia as questioning it's authentity as information source.
Because it is quite questionable at times.
Doubly so when it comes to politics.

Again, wikipedia is not the source.

That is a different topic as of now.

Not really.

No.
Do not play the "so you're saying" game with me, it will not work.
What I said was "people at war commit atrocities".
And if you are trying to make it look like there is no difference between a german soldier of that time and a soviet one, then you might be somewhat off with your judgement.
As in, completely fething off.
20 millions of citizens massacred in cold blood.
The Holocaust.
The genocide of Polish(?) people.
Forced labour.
Experiments upon living people.
Auschwitz.
You do not compare it to what soviet soldiers did.
Somewhat off a scale to compare.

So how exactly were the soviets different? They did all the same things minus auschwitz and gas chambers (that we know of).

[Tackhisis]

There was no forced labor in USSR, for starters, as there was no massacre of civilians, genocide, and experiments upon living people.

[Gaaz]

Holy fucking whataboutism, fuck off lol.

Lacking in intelligence / education / both to offer a constructive rebuttal? Typical wiki quoter, I see... Please consider yourself intellectually raped, just to be in sync with the topic of discussion.

[Morally Grey Storm]

I will not sully myself any further with responding to that puupi bas.

[McFuu]

Just a few corrections here.

1: The British Navy at the time had the reputation of being one of the best in the world, this was due to having "ruled the seas" for over a century. However the reality was somewhat different, due to not being challenged for so long the RN had ended up in a situation where almost none of it's captains had ever fired their guns at an enemy, hell the most important aspect in becoming promoted to captain of a ship at that time was how clean the ship you served as first officer on was (no joke, they sometimes even paid to have the ship painted out of their own pocket to boost their chances).

This is why you got messes like Jutland in WW1, where the RN managed to contain the German Navy and win the battle but you wouldn't know it from the amount of ships they lost needlessly in the process. And things hadn't improved all that much by WW2.


2: The Bismarck was escorted to the Atlantic by a heavy cruiser, all that stood in it's way was a weaker British battleship and a WW1 battlecruiser (which for some reason was our flagship because why would you want to have one of your good ships as your flagship lol), during the encounter the British battlecruiser was sunk as you would expect but the battleship managed to land a critical blow to the Bismarck that damaged it's fuel and made escape into the atlantic impossible.

At that moment the Bismarck's fate was essentially sealed, it had nothing to do with lack of protection it was a lucky hit that crippled the ship and made it easy to hunt down as it limped to port, sending more ships to help it then would just have increased the German losses.

3: The Tirpitz spent the war sitting in dock because due to its size there was only one port on the Atlantic side where she could dock (St Nazaire) and the British having seen the Bismarck in action made sure to blow it up, that meant that if Tirpitz suffered any damage it would be unable to repair.


Bismarck and Tirpitz are somewhat comparable to the Maus and E-100 tanks, in that Germany had good designs but instead of producing as many as they could they insisted on wasting time creating bigger/better than their enemies when they knew full well from Blitzkrieg that it's numbers that win battles.

1. To be fair the situation was similar around the world, Germany only had the UK to fight on the seas. Still the UK had a much larger Navy and newer ships. They also had the air superiority from both post battle of Britain German losses and a better naval policy which was embracing aircraft carriers and air support as the future.

2. The Prince Eugen, a Hipper class heavy cruiser. In the vicinity of the north Atlantic the British had 2 battleships, all new, the Hood, a carrier, and a couple of cruisers.
Selling the Hood short is a mistake. All of the Bismarck sea trials and training were against the Hood as an enemy. The Hood herself was a fast, powerful battle cruiser that was actually getting ready to be refit to fix the issue that got her sunk. Her decks were essentially wood. The ships armor profile was more than adequate, but the deck armor was extremely thin and she took a plunging fire hit which detonated a magazine store.
Bismarck still had a chance to make it to France after the hit to her fuel stores in the bow. But the was no help to be sent to her, the Eugen and U boats were the only German ships in the North Atlantic at the time. Uboats don't provide fantastic cover... they made a break for France and what little close air support they could get. But she was hit by atorpedo from a bi plane that locked her rudder hard over and allshe could do was spin in the water. The crew still fought on, against waves of planes, multiple battle ships and cruisers. The Eugen lost contact with the Tirpitz in a storm during the trip back to france.

3. The British knew of both the Bismarck and Tirpitz, they were constantly hunting the Tirpitz after the Bismarck sunk. Yes they destroyed her dry dock, but Germany couldn't afford to lose the Tirpitz because of propaganda for the most part. They kept her hidden away. Her death is as much a shame as anything. I don't think she ever fired her guns in anger.

Germans definitely had quality equipment, at least from a paper, design stand point. But as I said, never enough. Their supply situation ruined everything they tried to do.

[Mihalik]

The yearly Russian -We were relevant once when we got to rape half the women in half of Europe and steal every single wristwatch! -parade.

Cool.

- - - Updated - - -

There was no forced labor in USSR, for starters, as there was no massacre of civilians, genocide, and experiments upon living people.

You are literally wrong on every single point there.

[Macaquerie]

Germans definitely had quality equipment, at least from a paper, design stand point. But as I said, never enough. Their supply situation ruined everything they tried to do.

It all gets a lot easier to comprehend if you keep in mind that the Nazi leadership was essentially a bunch of childish edgelords trying to play at war, and thus prioritized the exact kinds of weapons that might seem cool to a teenager but were completely unsuited to the battlefield. Granted, they did manage to get some effective designs out of that, because when you're throwing shit at a wall with the might of German industry and engineering prowess behind it, you're bound to get a couple to stick, but nevertheless the vast majority of weapons that the Nazis conceived up ended up as expensive disasters. The Japanese sort of had the same problem, they put ungodly amounts of resources into building up these ginormous battleships all while their soldiers were starving in death in caves, only to see them get sunk in their first real taste of action without manage to damage a single American ship.

[Deleted]

T-14 is the tank. and it not only works but is in production.

So how many T-14 is built? If you cant say the number... how can you say its in production. How do you know the tank work? Is the tank ready for combat deployment?

- - - Updated - - -

No. Ever heard about Stalingrad? The Soviet Union would have won the war regardless of American action,

Stop right there....The encirclement of Stalingrad happen november 1942, The Germans did send Fifth Panzer Army to Tunis to counter the american landing (Operation Torch) in december 1942, the German capitulation at Stalingrad happen in february 1943. So if we remove the american action, the Germans have months to get a freking (not spent and reduced) Panzer Army in postion to break the encirclement.... its mutch what if... but there are also the opportunity to encircl the besieging USSR troops....

Widout the US action USSR loose mutch "soft" equipment, like trucks, boots, radios, the industry will suffer, becuse US did deliver large quantity of steel, aluminum, machine tool, foodstuff and a often forgotten thing shell case and raw-material for explosive etc

Remember USSR did only have the dubbel the population of "greater" Germany and Germany did have superior steel production (as in quantity) so saying USSR could win themselves is crazy talk....it also crazy talk to say Germany could won if they did X (after US join the war)

the old saying US gold and USSR blood won WW2, explaine it very well....

[Zeta333]

You know the sources are linked there for the facts, feel free to check them and debunk if you think they are wrong.

Until then. *farewell*

FUcking people these days seem to live to fucking circle jerk whenever someone links wikipedia and dance around saying its not a free source anyone can change it. Links and sources are added and available at the bottom of every article. Submissions are checked and trolling gets axed before being published 90% of the time. People seem to think some random fucking website from google is more reliable than a website that collects and collates information with sources cited.

- - - Updated - - -

There was no forced labor in USSR, for starters, as there was no massacre of civilians, genocide, and experiments upon living people.

Do you also claim the holocaust didnt happen? Because thats about on the same level as that statement you made there.

[Tackhisis]

Because thats about on the same level as that statement you made there.

What I wrote is a historical fact.

[Deleted]

So how many T-14 is built? If you cant say the number... how can you say its in production. How do you know the tank work? Is the tank ready for combat deployment?

https://thediplomat.com/2018/02/russ...nk-battalions/
They (t14 and t15) are in production to special forces but will take a while yet to go into full mass production for the whole army. Putin has decided to shift greater focus to grow the economy, education n make pensioners happy n will rely on deterrence in the meantime. The idea is that Russia will end up with a bigger bag of coins to spend with. Grow new markets, as for energy exports, recently Russia cut down exports to Europe n increased to China instead. Europe should be worried of such things, methinks its a great way to pressure the EU.
Large parts of the armed forces have been modernized, but the real build-up is next decade where Russia plans to reclaim superpower status, that's when we'll get new stealth bomber, mig 41 stealth fighter, new nukes, new aircraft carriers, etc.
More interesting with the T-14 (and t15, terminator etc) is the robotization of them into drones, and robot vehicles that were displayed yesterday on may 9.

Some robots are in active use
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ists-dead.html

T14 works, because it needs to go through lots of testing before it goes into production and I have yet to read about any single technical error with the vehicle.
Human error during test run, driver testing new vehicle n screwing up in 2015 doesn't count obviously otherwise it would have to keep happening n either all drivers are incompetent by not learning vehicle or its technical error n it breaks down allatime, neither has happpened.

[Shalcker]

Yeah, but the lesson still stands strong. Invading in the winter was perhaps the absolute worst time, period. If Hitler had had any control of his will, he would have waited just a few more months, and had a much better time of it. As it was, the weather itself caused a great deal of strife and death amongst invading German forces, in that first year, which ultimately cost them dearly.

They attacked in first month of summer, June 22, not during winter.

Germans wouldn't be able to move during spring due to mud roads being largely impassable after all thawing snow (or at least slowing their advance quite a bit). They attacked as soon as they had the most advantage.

It still wasn't enough.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay I'm gonna be blunt here, I don't think you understand what broke down/break down means. If a machine fails due to technical reasons that is breaking down, if a machine fails because the operator screws up and breaks it (or in the case of a vehicle crashes it) that's not the machine breaking down that's the operator breaking it.

It didn't even broke down; guy who actually knew the machine came in, released manual brakes that were holding it in place, and it drove off on it's own (brakes were also the reason it couldn't be towed, because with all wheels blocked it would essentially mean dragging it across the asphalt).

[Deleted]

They (t14 and t15) are in production to special forces but will take a while yet to go into full mass production for the whole army.

So its not in general production..... but Russia hope to do it in the future.....that is a huge difference from your OP....

More interesting with the T-14 (and t15, terminator etc) is the robotization of them into drones, and robot vehicles that were displayed yesterday on may 9.

rolling my eyes..... they do not have T-14 in general deployment.... and think they can build a practical drone/robot vehicles out of it .... If they could build a practical drone/robot vehicle... they would have crushed all foreign car brands...

[Uncle]

So how many T-14 is built? If you cant say the number... how can you say its in production. How do you know the tank work? Is the tank ready for combat deployment?

- - - Updated - - -



Stop right there....The encirclement of Stalingrad happen november 1942, The Germans did send Fifth Panzer Army to Tunis to counter the american landing (Operation Torch) in december 1942, the German capitulation at Stalingrad happen in february 1943. So if we remove the american action, the Germans have months to get a freking (not spent and reduced) Panzer Army in postion to break the encirclement.... its mutch what if... but there are also the opportunity to encircl the besieging USSR troops....

Widout the US action USSR loose mutch "soft" equipment, like trucks, boots, radios, the industry will suffer, becuse US did deliver large quantity of steel, aluminum, machine tool, foodstuff and a often forgotten thing shell case and raw-material for explosive etc

Remember USSR did only have the dubbel the population of "greater" Germany and Germany did have superior steel production (as in quantity) so saying USSR could win themselves is crazy talk....it also crazy talk to say Germany could won if they did X (after US join the war)

the old saying US gold and USSR blood won WW2, explaine it very well....

You are rewriting history here. Germany didn't loose in Stalingrad because they sent panzers elsewhere; their weapon, planes, tanks, etc, were litteraly freezing and their troups were dying from cold, the full force of Germany would not have done anything more against USRR.
However, we can be agree about the fact USRR did not won because they were military superior, but because the German army was not enough prepared to the intense climate of Russia; had the German be well prepared and their tanks, planes and weapon build to operate under extreme cold, they would most certainly have won.

[Deleted]

a77, nobody has claimed that Russia is close to regaining superpower status this decade, so I don't see what point that it is you are trying to make. The best systems were for a long time scheduled to come next decade. This decade was upgrades and terminating most old junk n give special forces the top gear today. This decade was to get the ball rolling. It's a huge difference from the 90's still.

Posts in this thread claimed, falsely, that tank doesn't work, it does, it's in production, as for scale of production, less than I want.

[Shalcker]

You are rewriting history here. Germany didn't loose in Stalingrad because they sent panzers elsewhere; their weapon, planes, tanks, etc, were litteraly freezing and their troups were dying from cold, the full force of Germany would not have done anything more against USRR.
However, we can be agree about the fact USRR did not won because they were military superior, but because the German army was not enough prepared to the intense climate of Russia; had the German be well prepared and their tanks, planes and weapon build to operate under extreme cold, they would most certainly have won.

They would still lose; differences in manpower and industrial power were too big even if "extreme cold" was negated.