Youtube comments of josh thomas-moore (@joshthomas-moore2656).

  1. 657
  2. 405
  3. 327
  4. 285
  5. 281
  6. 228
  7. 227
  8. 212
  9. 209
  10. 191
  11. 168
  12. 147
  13. 118
  14. 107
  15. 86
  16. 85
  17. 81
  18. 80
  19. 78
  20. 76
  21. 71
  22. 68
  23. 67
  24. 55
  25. 54
  26. 52
  27. 47
  28. 42
  29. 40
  30. 38
  31. 36
  32. 35
  33. 34
  34. 32
  35. 31
  36. 31
  37. 31
  38. 28
  39. 28
  40. 28
  41. 28
  42. 27
  43. 26
  44. 26
  45. 25
  46. 25
  47. 25
  48. 24
  49. 23
  50. 23
  51. 23
  52. 22
  53. 22
  54. 22
  55. 21
  56. 20
  57. 20
  58. 19
  59. 19
  60. 18
  61. 18
  62. 18
  63. 18
  64. 17
  65. 17
  66. 16
  67. 16
  68. 16
  69. 15
  70. 15
  71. 15
  72. 14
  73. 13
  74. 13
  75. 13
  76. 13
  77. 13
  78. 12
  79. 12
  80. 12
  81. 12
  82. 11
  83. 11
  84. 11
  85. 11
  86. 10
  87. 10
  88. 10
  89. 10
  90. 10
  91. 10
  92. 9
  93. 9
  94. 9
  95. 9
  96. 9
  97. 8
  98. 8
  99. 8
  100. 8
  101. 8
  102. 8
  103. 8
  104. 8
  105. 8
  106. 8
  107. 8
  108. 8
  109. 8
  110. 8
  111. 8
  112. 7
  113. 7
  114. 7
  115. 7
  116. 7
  117. 7
  118. 7
  119. 7
  120. 7
  121. 7
  122. 7
  123. 6
  124. 6
  125. 6
  126. 6
  127. 6
  128. 6
  129. 6
  130. 6
  131. 6
  132. 6
  133. 6
  134. 6
  135. 6
  136. 6
  137. 6
  138. 6
  139. 6
  140. 5
  141. 5
  142. 5
  143. 5
  144. 5
  145. 5
  146. 5
  147. 5
  148. 5
  149. 5
  150. 5
  151. 5
  152. 5
  153. 5
  154. 5
  155. 5
  156. 5
  157. 5
  158. 5
  159. 5
  160. 5
  161. 5
  162. 5
  163. 5
  164. 5
  165. 5
  166. 5
  167. 4
  168. 4
  169. 4
  170. 4
  171. 4
  172. 4
  173. 4
  174. 4
  175. 4
  176. 4
  177. 4
  178. 4
  179. 4
  180. 4
  181. 4
  182. 4
  183. 4
  184. 4
  185. 4
  186. 4
  187. 4
  188. 4
  189. 4
  190. 4
  191. 4
  192. 4
  193. 4
  194. 4
  195. 4
  196. 4
  197. 4
  198. 4
  199. 4
  200. 4
  201. 4
  202. 3
  203. 3
  204. 3
  205. 3
  206. 3
  207. 3
  208. 3
  209. 3
  210. 3
  211. 3
  212. 3
  213. 3
  214. 3
  215. 3
  216. 3
  217. 3
  218. 3
  219. 3
  220. 3
  221. 3
  222. 3
  223. 3
  224. 3
  225. 3
  226. 3
  227. 3
  228. 3
  229. 3
  230. BK Jeong i would argue against that whole battleship were totally pointless during the Second World War. The Meditaranian and Atlantic had a good numbers of surface action between capital ships Cape Matapan as an example, and the Scharnhorsts proved what happens if a carrier gets suprised by battleships or battlecruisers. The Pacific is much larger and open by comparison so like all battlefeild terrain is important. Now the issue the Kongo's have is they are in the Pacific which is really a Carrier battleground being so open by comparison to the Med so they have that problem to begin with, then the Japanese appalling application of them which just exacerbated the problems. Now i'm not saying the Kongo's were perfect, far from it, personally i would really have up armoured the poor things and try and turn them into something like the Renown, but they were the only capital ships the Japanese had that could counter American Battleships (As bad an idea as that was) the Fuso's and Ise's were to slow and the Yamato's were far to big and expensive to risk at Guadalcanal (all that armour on the Yamato's would have really been useful on the Kongo's). But they could do a fair amount of damage if they got the chance USS South Dakota and as you said Henderson field as examples. For me if i was going to use them, i'd try and use them as a hit and run force, targeting cruiser forces and landing areas so like the British in the Atlantic force the US to put battleships to guard them and then use the light carriers to hit the US Battleships do damage and then the Kongo's can turn up and finish the job (Which i believe was the plan for them in the Kido Buti) i accept this is not perfect, but its a better use. Also if i was going with my plan i would have dropped the speed from over 30 to 29 knots and up the armour and i'd maybe upped the speed of either the Nagato's or Fuso's to try and get more use out of them. I will accpet i am slightly biased on the Kongo's as they we're orignially British design and i am British but i do genually feel they could have been useful if used smartly and not how they were actually used.
    3
  231. 3
  232. 3
  233. 3
  234. 3
  235. 3
  236. 3
  237. 3
  238. 3
  239. 3
  240. 3
  241. 3
  242. 3
  243. 3
  244. 3
  245. 3
  246. 3
  247. 3
  248. 3
  249. 3
  250. 3
  251. 3
  252. 3
  253. 3
  254. 3
  255. 3
  256. 3
  257. 3
  258. 3
  259. 3
  260. 3
  261. 3
  262. 3
  263. 3
  264. 3
  265. 3
  266. 3
  267. 3
  268. 3
  269. 3
  270. 3
  271. 3
  272. 3
  273. 3
  274. 3
  275. 3
  276. 3
  277. 3
  278. 3
  279. 3
  280. 3
  281. 3
  282. 3
  283. 3
  284. 3
  285. 3
  286. 3
  287. 3
  288. 3
  289. 2
  290. 2
  291. 2
  292. 2
  293. 2
  294. 2
  295. 2
  296. 2
  297. 2
  298. 2
  299. 2
  300. 2
  301. 2
  302. 2
  303. 2
  304. 2
  305. 2
  306. 2
  307. 2
  308. 2
  309. 2
  310. 2
  311. 2
  312. 2
  313. 2
  314. 2
  315. 2
  316. 2
  317. 2
  318. 2
  319. 2
  320. 2
  321. 2
  322. 2
  323. 2
  324. 2
  325. 2
  326. 2
  327. 2
  328. 2
  329. 2
  330. 2
  331. 2
  332. 2
  333. 2
  334. 2
  335. 2
  336. 2
  337. 2
  338. 2
  339. 2
  340. 2
  341. 2
  342. 2
  343. 2
  344. 2
  345. 2
  346. 2
  347. 2
  348. 2
  349. 2
  350. 2
  351. 2
  352. 2
  353. 2
  354. 2
  355. 2
  356. 2
  357. 2
  358. 2
  359. 2
  360. 2
  361. 2
  362. 2
  363. 2
  364. 2
  365. 2
  366. 2
  367. 2
  368. 2
  369. 2
  370. 2
  371. 2
  372. 2
  373. 2
  374. 2
  375. 2
  376. 2
  377. 2
  378. 2
  379. 2
  380. 2
  381. 2
  382. 2
  383. 2
  384. 2
  385. 2
  386. 2
  387. 2
  388. 2
  389. 2
  390. 2
  391. 2
  392. 2
  393. 2
  394. 2
  395. 2
  396. 2
  397. 2
  398. 2
  399. 2
  400. 2
  401. 2
  402. 2
  403. 2
  404. 2
  405. 2
  406. 2
  407. 2
  408. 2
  409. 2
  410. 2
  411. 2
  412. 2
  413. 2
  414. 2
  415. 2
  416. 2
  417. 2
  418. 2
  419. 2
  420. 2
  421. 2
  422. 2
  423. 2
  424. 2
  425. 2
  426. 2
  427. 2
  428. 2
  429. 2
  430. 2
  431. 2
  432. 2
  433. 2
  434. 2
  435. 2
  436. 2
  437. 2
  438. 2
  439. 2
  440. 2
  441. 2
  442. 2
  443. 2
  444. 2
  445. 2
  446. 2
  447. 2
  448. 2
  449. 2
  450. 2
  451. 2
  452. 2
  453. 1
  454. 1
  455. 1
  456. 1
  457. 1
  458. 1
  459. 1
  460. 1
  461. 1
  462. 1
  463. 1
  464. 1
  465. 1
  466. 1
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. 1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. 1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1
  509. 1
  510. 1
  511. 1
  512. 1
  513. 1
  514. 1
  515. 1
  516. 1
  517. 1
  518. 1
  519. 1
  520. 1
  521. 1
  522. 1
  523. 1
  524. 1
  525. 1
  526. 1
  527. 1
  528. 1
  529. 1
  530. 1
  531. 1
  532. 1
  533. 1
  534. 1
  535. 1
  536. 1
  537. 1
  538. 1
  539. 1
  540. 1
  541. 1
  542. 1
  543. 1
  544. 1
  545. 1
  546. 1
  547. 1
  548. 1
  549. 1
  550.  @silverhost9782  (I did reply to this but seems to have gone) You do raise a fair argument, however i think Repulse can do the same, she has the firepower and protection to deal with anything the invasion forces have that are covering the landings at Malaya, however with the added option of being able to run them down if the Japanese do run for it. Now i will grant you Prince of Wales can handle any single battleship or Kongo (I say those are Battlcrusiers not Battleships) the Japanese have with the exception of the Yamato, though Repulse can outrun the Japanese battleships so they would still need to tie the battleships to the invasion in order to make sure Repulse doesn't attack them so she could still tie major resources, the only ships the Japanese have that can catch Repulse are the Kongo's and in that situation i'd say its a coin toss who wins, Repulse as few guns but hers are bigger and its only 8 to 6 so not to big a gap and Repulse does have a marginal advantage over a Kongo in protection but both ships guns can penetrate the other, were as Prince of Wales can comfortabily take on a Kongo or two. Now i will agree Prince of Wales has much better AA defence then Repulse so if the Japanse Carriers arrive Prince of Wales is in a much better posistion than Repulse. However i feel regradless of which of the two ships is holding Malaya, if the Japanese are in the posistion of thinking of sending Kongo's, Battleships and Carriers, they would be using at least part of the Kido Butai to bring overwhemling firepower to sweep the seas clear and in that situation either ship would have to retreat as i don't think either ship could stand up to that. I think it comes down to weather want you a ship to scare and/or fight off what the Japanese had at the time (Which i think is Repulse given she can fight and catch them if they do run) or what they might bring in reponce to that ship attacking the invasion fleet (Which i think is Prince of Wales due to better AA and better protection).
    1
  551. 1
  552. 1
  553. 1
  554. 1
  555. 1
  556. 1
  557. 1
  558. 1
  559. 1
  560. 1
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570. 1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. Ok so personally for me i would rather survivability over strike power, now i can certainly see the argument for strike power but i would rather keep the ships and crew alive then put them more at risk for greater strike potential. (Note: i am British so do take that into account) Taking coral sea as an example, yes the British carriers would likely not have done some much damage to Zuikaku and might have done less damage to Shoukaku then the Americans but i would still have the carriers and the air group can be replaced or replenished much quicker then a carrier would. Remember Lexington and Yorktown were sunk and heavily damaged respectively, now if they were British carriers they might not have been so heavily damaged (I am assuming one is still sunk and i have the same number available at Midway as the Americans have historically) and when Midway comes about i have three active full working carriers rather then two full and one functional but still damaged carriers. But i can see the counter argument that if i have more striking power i could sink more, say two or three more ships and this i do concede, but i would rather keep my ships afloat, so i feel it needs mentioning that the US could much more easily replace a lost carrier then the British could have done as the British were being bombed day and night while the Americans not so much. And i do think Drach has it right over all the best is the middle ground but if i was forced to pick one or the other i would pick surviving.
    1
  576. 1
  577. 1
  578. 1
  579. 1
  580. 1
  581. 1
  582. 1
  583. 1
  584. 1
  585. 1
  586. 1
  587. 1
  588. 1
  589.  @bkjeong4302  Well their were some very good reasons to do the raid, first the British didn't know Tirpitz wasn't going to sail out and even if they had the Germans could very quickly change their mind and Tirpitz did pose a major risk to convoy's if she got out even a small amount of time running around could have done a lot of damage. Also it has to be born in mind that the situation had got worse for the UK when Chariot was launched in march 1942, first losses, the British had lost HMS Hood during Bismarcks sortie and while in need or repair Hood was still a significant loss in terms of fast capital units also later in 1941 the British had lost the Carrier Ark Royal so the Royal Navy was down two major capital units right off and they were keeping the fast units in the Home Fleet for exact theis reason to stop a major sortie byt the Germans. Second was geography, when Bismarck sailed in 1941 the British had their fleets concentrated in the Med and Home Fleet now while stretched they could support each other as seen with Force H going out to hunt Bismarck, but in December 1941 and early 1942 the Med campaign was getting quite heated so pulling forces from there was a non-option and the Pacific war had kicked off which had taken two more of the Royal Navies fast Capital units and for a while one of its carriers so Royal Navy force were stretched even thiner, plus the US Navy was still smarting after Pearl Harbour and had yet to fight Midway so the US was fleet was worrying more a about the Japanese fleet and early successes the Japanese were having so support from the US would be tricky. Also going back to point one the Royal Navy lost both Repulse and Prince of Wales soon after they were sent and a carrier was damaged before that, also in mid December 1941 the Italians sank HMS Valient and Queen Elizabeth in Alexanderia taking them out of the fight for a while stretching the Med forces even thiner, so they were now down four capital ships sunk permanently and two temporary and all of the permemant ones had been mustered to counter Bismarcks sailing in 1941 as they were the fast capitol unit. So all it took was a bit of luck and maybe something pulling more Royal Navy forces to the Med or far east allowing the Tirpitz to get out and cause havoc and yes the British had and could have got the forces to deal with her quickly but that would mean either waiting till they had the forces freed to deal with her which wasn't an option if she was playing merry hell with the convoy's so they would have to risk weakening areas that really couldn't afford it. So given that i would say yes Cariot was needed, yes a lot of this is hypothetical but its not outside the releams of possibility, but if St Nazaire was out of action the Germans wouldn't have sent her out which meant the Royal Navy didn't need to worry about her, but if they had risked it and Tirpitz had sailed and got out she could have been an almighty headache a short temporary one yes, but the force needed to put her down could have a negative impact on more vital fronts.
    1
  590. 1
  591. 1
  592. 1
  593. 1
  594. 1
  595. 1
  596. 1
  597. 1
  598. 1
  599. 1
  600. 1
  601. 1
  602. 1
  603. 1
  604. 1
  605. 1
  606. 1
  607. 1
  608. 1
  609. 1
  610. 1
  611. 1
  612. 1
  613. 1
  614. 1
  615. 1
  616. 1
  617. 1
  618. 1
  619. 1
  620. 1
  621. 1
  622. 1
  623. 1
  624.  @bloodrave9578  See this is probloatic as a good destroyer captian should be going and either takeing or contesting caps or going and hunting down enemy destoryers, they are the best for capturing after all with their speed and stealth and they are the natural counter to another destroyers. This means they are either being spotted in a gun fight or have been spotted because they got to close or whatever reason and the carrier can just keep them spotted for the team to shoot them while lending a hand to. Or they are basically sending a telegram to a carrier where to look, i'm sure you've seen a cap circle being capped went and looked and seen a destoryer in there, now yes they can use smoke but if you have torpedeo planes they can flush them out or drop a fighter squadron nearby to spot them when either smoke the clears or the destoryer moves on. So if i play like this i either have no choice but to give a carrier an idea where to look by capping or i've got pinged by another destroyer and the carrier can rush over and keep the spot going as no matter how fast a destroyer is a plane is faster. The looking at the minimap to avoid the planes works very well till you have to go to a place the carrier will look, usually the cap or near where you got pinged by another destroyer because your trying to hold or stop a cap being taken, also if i am in a gunfight in a destoryer the last thing i will be looking at is a minimap i'm either dodging shells or torps they will be taking up my attention to much, two destoryers fighting it out is a knife fight everytime (Unless the destoryers doing something very out the ordinary) and they tend to be very fast pace and attention absorbing you don't have the time to look at the map till your out and thats usually enough time for a decent carrier player to have got a squadron over there which can usually finish off the usually damaged destroyer if not got over there in the middle of the fight. This is where i would like better AA on destoryers esspecially in the Destoryer fights (As i'm likely damaged and can only take one maybe two good strike and i might have modjules damaged etc.) as it would give the destoryer a better chance, i'm not saying make it impossiable for a carrier to take out the destoryer just harder.
    1
  625. 1
  626. 1
  627. 1
  628. 1
  629. 1
  630. 1
  631. 1
  632. 1
  633. 1
  634. 1
  635. 1
  636. 1
  637. 1
  638. 1
  639. 1
  640. 1
  641. 1
  642. 1
  643. 1
  644. 1
  645. 1
  646. 1
  647. 1
  648. 1
  649. 1
  650. 1
  651. 1
  652. 1
  653. 1
  654. 1
  655. 1
  656. 1
  657. 1
  658. 1
  659. 1
  660. 1
  661. 1
  662. 1
  663. 1
  664. 1
  665. 1
  666. 1
  667. 1
  668. 1
  669. 1
  670. 1
  671. 1
  672. 1
  673. 1
  674. 1
  675. 1
  676. 1
  677. 1
  678. 1
  679. 1
  680.  @DidMyGrandfatherMakeThis  First my comments were for the unit and Itlian Navy as a whole. Yes the manned Torpedo pilot and the man piloting the boat did commit Kamikaze attacks , but that wasn't the plan it was the situation that caused those, the former was a personal one and is questionable i grant, but the latter was a sacrifice to allow his comrades to try and continue the mission which has been shown many times, the men who mined the British Battleships didn't commit to Kamikaze acts they followed the plan which was what the other two groups did which was place the mines then swim to shore and try walking, back the two men on the Valient were actually very brave they held their nerve till just before the mine went off before requesting to get out from below decks meaning the British couldn't do anything to stop the mine going off. The use of small boats and minisubs was because they could do the job and gave the Italians the best chance to success, the British did the same thing with the X-craft on Tirpitz using a battleship to attack down a fjord was sucide, so the British plan was to use the X-craft to sneak in place the mines then sneak out again, the same was true with the Italians sneak in to the place the explosives and ideaily get out, but the plans went wrong which led to the wiping out or capture of the of the units involved. Also both of these attacks took place in 1941 and in 1941 the Italian Navy was a very potent and effective force, minus the commanders, the Roma's were easily able to beat a QE and R class which is what the Royal Navy had, in fact right up to the moment of the Italian surrender the Italian Navy was still a threat, in fact they possed a much bigger threat to the Allies than the Germans ever did, the Royal Navy had Furious, Ark Royal, Eagle and at least three of their armoured carriers in the Med to hold the Italians back the Armoured carriers took a heck of pasteing during their time there.
    1
  681. 1
  682. 1
  683. 1
  684. 1
  685. 1
  686. 1
  687. 1
  688. 1
  689. 1
  690. 1
  691. 1
  692. 1
  693. 1
  694. 1
  695. 1
  696. 1
  697. 1
  698. 1
  699. 1
  700. 1