Comments by "Kameraden" (@Alte.Kameraden) on "Top 10 Armies of All Time" video.

+PhilipTrouble I agree 100% Wehrmacht was perhaps the greatest fighting force in the world between 1939-1943. Even in defeat they still shined. I predict likely in a few more decades the Wehrmacht will have a near Spartan legacy in history when people are just far less bitter about the war itself.
6
TheBrother171 Germany collapsed because they were facing around 30 to 1 odds in over all manpower and resources in the war by 1943. Their defeat was inevitable. They ran out of pilots before they ran out of planes, they ran out of fuel and ammunition before they ran out of tanks. They ran out of soldiers even. The final push to Berlin on the east. Around 180,000 Germans defending against a 3 million strong Soviet invasion force. That is why they lost. Berlin, had around 40,000 defenders, with 40,000 Volksturm conscripts (didn't even have uniforms on average) city was surrounded by well over 1 million men.
2
Wing ling ching We can only hope/pray one never comes that is worse. "Greater" is a horrible word to use. WWII was the a disaster upon humanity and really, WWII is a time when the entire world went Mad.
1
Kami Hun Nukes are a weapon of madness. One of those weapons that was only used because the nation that had them first had no reason to worry about anyone else using them on them. Tragic as it is. Issue is, if the USA was the only nation on Earth with Nukes, I can promise we would of used them again, likely in Korea. We had no moral value and willingly bombed North Korean cities to rubble. Being Russia had the bomb, and was supporting North Korea, we wouldn't "Dare" use them in Korea. But not using them, didn't stop us from killing North Korean civilians and destroying their cities. I often view the USAAF, and now the USAF between 1940-1970 very negative like, as we had a lack of respect for Civilian Life.
1
TheBrother171 USAAF later the USAF was the only major Airforce in the world which took targeting civilians as official doctrine. RAF to an extent, but the RAF never continued doing it after WWII, and only did during WWII as they resorted to night raids making accuracy an impossibility. USAF did, did in WWII, did in Korea, and did again in Vietnam. Luftwaffe never official adopted targeting of civilians and population centers as an official strategy, as most officers in the Luftwaffe believed it had the opposite effect, and had no major impact on the war. Only when Big wigs like say Hitler or Goering demanded it did did the Luftwaffe really target civilians directly, and intentionally. But spent almost all their Air bombing assets on targeting real targets. Almost every bomber designed for the Luftwaffe was designed to support the Army, flying at medium or low altitude to insure better accuracy hitting military targets, like troop positions, defenses, etc etc. Tactical bombing not like Allied Strategic bombing which proved to not be very strategic, but more like drop enough bombs and you're bound to hit something.
1
TheBrother171 Not true really. WWII bombing campaigns did nothing but kill civilians and force Axis powers to be innovative and deceptive. Germany didn't stop building aircraft and tanks until the factories that built them were occupied and over run They were building Me262 in hidden factories in forest for example, not the cities. Japan did the same thing really, moved most of it's manufacturing into under ground mountain fortresses, and already started producing their own rocket/jet aircraft to repel an Allied invasion that never came out of those factories. The only way Allied bombing won WWII was the firing bombing of Tokyo which convinced the Emperor that there wouldn't be a Japan left. In all respects the entire Allied Strategic Bombing Campaign is a Joke. And has been credited well beyond out of proportion to it's effect on the war itself. All it did was force the Axis to move it's manufacturing away from major cities and hidden locations.
1
TheBrother171 Actually they ran out of shit because they lost ground, and that ground had the resources they needed. They lost oil, they lost iron, etc etc. Mean while Allied strength only grew as the war went on. Bombing only delayed really. The Germans were good at rebuilding destroyed infrastructure, getting a bridge up and going in about a day for example.
1
TheBrother171 That is why they moved the factories. But the allies kept bombing the cities anyways, trying to hit what they could find. All bombing the cities did was "piss" people off, increased resistance, and turned piles of rubble into impassable fortresses. That and killed millions of people. USAAF was so horrible at tactical bombing that in France they had to resort to a massive carpet bombing operation just to break out of Normandy. Estimated to have killed around 3000 French Civilians, but hey, it did blast a hole in the German lines, but they were just able to plug it again after a few days.
1
PhilipTrouble Russian man power, + allied resources won the war. Russia couldn't move those thousands of Artillery pieces without American Trucks. Russia wouldn't be able to fuel those T-34s without the Fuel supplied by the Allies. Russia wouldn't of been able to feed those millions of soldiers without the food provided. Russia was able to put a large % of it's man power into fighting the war, and building tanks/guns/aircraft, not trucks, or making fuel, or harvesting crops. lol
1
TheBrother171 Man power in the context that every nation the USSR walked into they conscripted up the wazoo. Almost all of the USSR's greatest victories often cost them 2-3x the casualties to achieve them. When they successfully destroy an entire German Army the cost they suffered doing so would fo been irreplaceable on the west front. .
1
Wehrmacht #4? I feel insulted by that. Who else could of humiliated every major military power in Europe in less than two years? 1939-1943 they were the masters of combined arms warfare, some of their victories are absolutely out standing even to this day. I do not believe any nation on Earth then and even now could of achieved what they achieved in the time they did it with the resources they had. Even in defeat they shined, Kursk a numerical victory, but they still were forced to retreat, and numerical by many times over.
1