Youtube comments of Military History Visualized (@MilitaryHistoryVisualized).
-
1900
-
1500
-
1400
-
1400
-
1300
-
1200
-
1200
-
1000
-
994
-
950
-
795
-
785
-
759
-
710
-
709
-
652
-
647
-
635
-
632
-
595
-
589
-
584
-
534
-
510
-
508
-
505
-
490
-
489
-
480
-
479
-
473
-
472
-
469
-
461
-
457
-
443
-
443
-
439
-
429
-
428
-
423
-
407
-
393
-
390
-
388
-
388
-
387
-
378
-
376
-
372
-
369
-
365
-
365
-
360
-
346
-
346
-
344
-
344
-
340
-
340
-
340
-
329
-
328
-
309
-
306
-
306
-
304
-
300
-
300
-
294
-
290
-
284
-
284
-
278
-
278
-
276
-
267
-
266
-
264
-
263
-
253
-
248
-
248
-
246
-
245
-
244
-
244
-
241
-
239
-
238
-
238
-
236
-
235
-
232
-
231
-
227
-
226
-
219
-
214
-
209
-
206
-
201
-
199
-
199
-
199
-
198
-
195
-
194
-
194
-
193
-
187
-
187
-
185
-
181
-
179
-
177
-
175
-
175
-
174
-
173
-
172
-
171
-
171
-
169
-
168
-
168
-
164
-
163
-
159
-
159
-
158
-
158
-
158
-
158
-
157
-
152
-
148
-
147
-
145
-
145
-
143
-
143
-
143
-
143
-
141
-
141
-
141
-
141
-
140
-
140
-
140
-
140
-
139
-
139
-
138
-
138
-
138
-
137
-
137
-
136
-
136
-
134
-
134
-
133
-
133
-
132
-
131
-
130
-
130
-
129
-
129
-
128
-
127
-
127
-
126
-
125
-
125
-
124
-
124
-
123
-
121
-
120
-
119
-
119
-
>> CORRECTIONS <<
1) The statement/quote about the height seems to be wrong. Thanks to Tankolad, to quote his article:
"Externally, at first glance, it seems that the T-62 is both wider and taller the T-54/55 by a few inches but surprisingly, the height of the T-62 up to its turret roof almost did not change at all compared to the T-54 - it increased only negligibly from 2,235mm to 2,248mm. Like the T-54, the total height of the tank up to the top of the commander's cupola is 2,400mm."
https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/2015/12/t-62.html
2) The statement/quote about using the T-62 in Afghanistan due to lower-powered engine and wide-ratio five-speed transmission is not really backed up by Soviet sources, so this might be an interpretation from outside yet the quote implies otherwise. Additionally, it is even questionable if the technical reasoning in that quote is actually correct as well. Thank you to Tankolad for pointing this out.
119
-
118
-
118
-
118
-
117
-
116
-
115
-
114
-
112
-
112
-
111
-
111
-
110
-
109
-
109
-
108
-
108
-
108
-
107
-
107
-
107
-
106
-
106
-
105
-
103
-
103
-
103
-
103
-
103
-
102
-
102
-
102
-
101
-
100
-
100
-
100
-
99
-
99
-
99
-
98
-
98
-
98
-
97
-
97
-
95
-
95
-
95
-
94
-
93
-
93
-
93
-
93
-
93
-
92
-
92
-
91
-
91
-
91
-
91
-
91
-
91
-
90
-
90
-
90
-
89
-
89
-
89
-
88
-
87
-
87
-
86
-
86
-
86
-
86
-
86
-
86
-
86
-
85
-
85
-
85
-
85
-
85
-
84
-
84
-
84
-
84
-
83
-
83
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
81
-
81
-
81
-
80
-
80
-
80
-
79
-
79
-
79
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
77
-
77
-
77
-
77
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
75
-
75
-
75
-
75
-
75
-
As far as I know, they called them "Guards Mortars" for deception. Also the angle of fire was not that high, if I am not mistaken.
“The title was a designation that would continue to protect the true nature of the new weapon, and offer some deception in the Red Army order of battle.” (Armstrong, Richard N.: Red Army Legacies. Essays on Forces, Capabilities, & Personalities. Schiffer Military History: Atglen, PA, USA, 1995, p. 16) More here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OiPfWkLGgI&vl=en
75
-
74
-
73
-
73
-
73
-
73
-
73
-
73
-
73
-
72
-
72
-
72
-
72
-
72
-
72
-
72
-
71
-
71
-
71
-
71
-
71
-
If you like in-depth military history videos, consider supporting me on PayPal, Patreon or SubscribeStar or PayPal:
https://paypal.me/mhvis --- http://patreon.com/mhv/ --- https://www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» TIMESTAMPS by 101jir «
2:00 Battleships (Before this is introduction and disclaimers)
5:20 Aircraft Carriers
7:55 Battlecruisers
9:10 Heavy Cruisers
12:00 Light Cruisers
13:35 Escort Carriers
15:20 Destroyers
17:15 Submarines
19:35 Destroyer Escorts
» SOURCES - since the description field is too small... sigh «
Symonds, Craig L.: World War II at Sea. A Global History. Oxford University Press: New York, 2018
Evans, David C.; Peattie, Mark R.: Kaigun – Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the IMPERIAL JAPANESE NAVY 1887-1941. US Naval Institute Press: United States, 2012.
Wayne, Hughes P. Jr: Fleet Tactics. Theory and Practice. Naval Institute Press: Annapolis, Maryland, 1986.
Chesneau, Roger; Gardiner; Robert: Conway’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1922-1946. Naval Institute Press: Annapolis, 1980
Gardiner, Robert (Ed.): The Eclipse of the Big Gun. The Warship 1906-45. Conway’s History of the Ship. Conway Maritime Press: London, 1992.
Gardiner, Robert (Ed.); Lavery, Brian (Con.Ed): The Line of Battle – The Sailing Warship 1650-1840. Conway’s History of the Ship. Conway Maritime Press: London, 1992.
Evers, Heinrich: Kriegsschiffbau. Ein Lehr- und Hilfsbuch für die Kriegsmarine. Zweite, verbesserte Auflage. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1943.
Loose, Bernd; Oesterle, Bernd: Das große Buch der Kriegsschiffe. Maschinengetriebene Schiffe des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts. Motorbuch Verlag: Stuttgart, 2. Auflage, 1997.
Milner, Marc: Battle of the Atlantic. The History Press: Gloucestershire, 2003 (2011).
Rielly, Robin L.: Kamikazes, Corsairs, and Picket Ships. Okinawa, 1945. Casemate: Newbury, UK, 2010.
Willmott, H. P.: The Last Century of Sea Power – Volume I: From Port Arthur to Chanak, 1894-1922. Indiana University Press: Indianapolis, USA: 2009.
Boyd, Carl; Yoshida, Akihiko: The Japanese Submarine Force and World War II. Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, MD, 2002 (1995).
Stern, Robert C.: Type VII U-boats. Brockhampton Press: London (UK), 1991.
Skulski, Janusz: Battleship Yamato. Anatomy of the Ship. Conway Maritime Press: London, 1988.
Williamson, Gordon: German Light Cruisers 1939-45. Osprey Publishing: 2003.
Konstam, Angus: British Battleships 1939-45 (1). Queen Elizabeth and Royal Sovereign Classes. Osprey Publishing: 2009.
Breyer, Siegfried; Koop, Gerhard: Schlachtschiff Bismarck. Eine technikgeschichtliche Dokumentation
London Conference of 1930 -International Treaty for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval Armament
Scan: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000002-1055.pdf
Text: http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-089_London_Treaty_1930.php
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull_classification_symbol#United_States_Navy_hull_classification_codes
https://www.britannica.com/technology/cruiser
https://maritime.org/doc/subsinpacific.htm
70
-
70
-
70
-
69
-
69
-
69
-
69
-
69
-
69
-
69
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
67
-
67
-
67
-
67
-
67
-
66
-
66
-
66
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
64
-
64
-
64
-
64
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
62
-
62
-
62
-
62
-
62
-
61
-
61
-
61
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
There are various errors in this video, since some of the sources contained errors. Big thank you to Konrad Anderle for pointing them out:
1. The imperial Austrian Cavallerie-Geschütz-Batterien were not a mounted artillery (Horse Artillery), but a conventional artillery: The operating crew only mounted and rode the sausage for tactical movements during the battle. Otherwise it marched alongside the gun. The Cav. 6pounder was manned with six horses, the 7pounder Cav. howitzer with four horses. A part of the ammunition was carried by pack horses.
2. There were no fundamental differences in artillery tactics between the countries at the end of the Napoleonic Wars. Large Batteries were also faced by Napoleon at Leipzig, for example. The artillery was effective when it engaged the enemy's infantry at canister range. Outside these it usually made little more than noise. Battery fire was intended to enfilade the enemy. The batteries were therefore supposed to act from the flank.
Moreover, an effect was only given when the fire of several guns could be concentrated, for example around the perimeter of a battery. Then 3 canister layers of six guns were sufficient to stop an advancing enemy to force him to withdraw. Enemy infantry tried to stay out of the canister shot range as long as possible or avoid it completely.
All powers employed their field artillery offensively whenever possible. To this end, the gun was advanced. Thereby one wing advanced a certain distance while the other covered it. When the distance was reached, the other wing advanced under cover of the first. The fire was directed - if necessary - against enemy ordnance. The fire was concentrated on the enemy gun on one flank of the enemy battery. This was fired upon until it was useless; then the next enemy gun was targeted.
The mobility of the artillery was essentially determined by its weight. Thus, 12-pounders could hardly be maneuvered during the battle.
The aiming angle for howitzers was 15° at most. Elevation beyond this resulted in rapid destruction of the gun carriage. For this purpose, powder charges of different weights were also used, which allowed different ranges. The howitzer was used to fire on the enemy's towns and covered formations.
4. In French and Austrian artillery, the tactical formation of the battery was not introduced until 1803 and 1809, respectively. Until then, there were only line and reserve artillery. These batteries existed only for the duration of the campaign.
Administratively, the french and Austrian artillerymen were divided into companies, battalions and regiments. Only in the Russian and later in the Prussian Artillery introduced the battery as a tactical and administrative formation.
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
Original Quote 5:32
„46. Als Nachrichten- und Führungsmittel werden angewandt:
a) zu anderen Fahrzeugen:
das Funkgerät,
die Flaggen,
die Führungszeichen nach H. Dv. 472,
die Leuchtpistole,
die Taschenlampe;
b) innerhalb des Panzerkampfwagens:
Kommandos durch den Sprechschlauch,
Berührungszeichen.” (H.Dv. 470/5b: Die Ausbildung am Panzerkampfwagen II (2 cm), Sonderkraftfahrzeug 121 (Sd. Kfz. 121). Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn, Buchdruckerei: Berlin, 1939, S. 32)
Original Quote 6:09
„67. Zum Anfahren ist vorheriges Anlassen und Durchwärmen des Motors erforderlich (im Sommer nach etwa 5, im Winter nach 10 Minuten).
Auf das Ankündigungskommando (z.B. Erscheinen des Flaggen- oder Handzeichens) kuppelt der Panzerfahrer aus und schaltet je nach der Fahrbahn auf Straßen und im ebenen Gelände den dritten, in schwierigem Gelände den ersten oder zweiten Gang ein.“ (H.Dv. 470/5b: Die Ausbildung am Panzerkampfwagen II (2 cm), Sonderkraftfahrzeug 121 (Sd. Kfz. 121). Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn, Buchdruckerei: Berlin, 1939, S. 40)
Original Quote 6:35
„69. Geschwindigkeitsstufen sind: 10, 20 und 30 km/h. Der Panzerfahrer hat stets den größtmöglichen Gang zu wählen. Falls Gelände und Feindlage nichts anderes erfordern, wird grundsätzlich ohne besonderes Kommando mit 20 km/h gefahren. Andere Geschwindigkeiten müssen ausdrücklich befohlen werden, z.B.: ‚30 km!‘“ (H.Dv. 470/5b: Die Ausbildung am Panzerkampfwagen II (2 cm), Sonderkraftfahrzeug 121 (Sd. Kfz. 121). Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn, Buchdruckerei: Berlin, 1939, S. 41)
Original Quote 7:15
„77. Das Maschinengewehr ist als Waffe mit großer Schußfolge, guter Treffleistung und moralischer Wirkung der Hauptträger des Feuerkampfes. Es wird eingesetzt gegen lebende Ziele, wie Schützen, M.G.-Nester, Panzerabwehrwaffen, Artillerie u.a. Besonders gegen Massenziele (Kolonnen, Reserven, auffahrende Geschütze) hat es große Wirkung.“ (H.Dv. 470/5b: Die Ausbildung am Panzerkampfwagen II (2 cm), Sonderkraftfahrzeug 121 (Sd. Kfz. 121). Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn, Buchdruckerei: Berlin, 1939, S. 47)
Original Quote 7:45
„79. Die Kanone (2 cm Kw. K. 30) dient als Waffe mit hoher Durchschlagsleitung und Schußfolge in erster Linie zur Bekämpfung von Panzerzielen. Die Bekämpfung von feindlichen Panzerkampfwagen erfolgt in der Regel vom stehenden Wagen ab 600 m. Die Kanone dient außerdem zur Bekämpfung von Panzerabwehrwaffen auf Entfernung von über 500 m, wenn ein flankierendes M.G.-Feuer nicht möglich ist.“ (H.Dv. 470/5b: Die Ausbildung am Panzerkampfwagen II (2 cm), Sonderkraftfahrzeug 121 (Sd. Kfz. 121). Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn, Buchdruckerei: Berlin, 1939, S. 49)
Original Quote 8:51
„Sie [2 cm Kw. K. 30] dient gleichzeitig, vom Zug- oder Gruppenführer angewandt, zur Zielanweisung für den Zug oder die Gruppe. Kurze Feuerstöße von 2 bis 3 Schuß bilden die Hauptfeuerart vom stehenden oder fahrenden Wagen. Befinden sich dicht neben den Schutzschilden von Panzerabwehrwaffen oder Batterien noch Ziele (z.B. Bedienungen oder Ansammlungen), so werden Kanone und M.G. zusammen angewandt.“ (H.Dv. 470/5b: Die Ausbildung am Panzerkampfwagen II (2 cm), Sonderkraftfahrzeug 121 (Sd. Kfz. 121). Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn, Buchdruckerei: Berlin, 1939, S. 49)
56
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
54
-
54
-
54
-
54
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
as someone who grew up in Upper Austria, went to University in Salzburg, worked in Hamburg, Lower-Saxony, did an internship in Potsdam, lived in Leipzig and went to numerous Heavy Metal Festivals in Germany, I would say there is a difference. The people from Hamburg would have no chance understanding my sister, yet a Bavarian would have no trouble at all. Even within Austria someone from Vorarlberg going full dialect is incomprehensible for most other Austrians. There is a clear difference in mentality and language between the Northern Parts of Germany and the Southern Parts of Germany (Bavaria + Baden Würtemberg) including Austria. Not to mention that a lot of people from "Eastern Germany" are atheists, that the South has a high rate of catholics, whereas the North is mainly protestants.
Oba wanst moanst, dass des bessa wast, doan is des dei Soach.
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
thank you very much!
About Guderians prediction of Soviet tanks in his book, well that is funny, I read that he didn't even mention the Soviet Union... luckily, I got a copy of it: it is for motor vehicles and in percent: USA, England, France, Germany, Canada, Italy, "the rest" (übrige Länder)... so it seems Guderian was referring to book he didn't wrote ;) or maybe there were really two. My source: "Die Panzerwaffe - Ihre Entwicklung, Ihre Kampftaktik und ihre operativen Möglichkeiten bis zum Beginn des großdeutschen Freiheitskampfes" (which I think is the "war title" of "achtung Panzer" / the 2nd edition from 1943.)
In the part about Russia he assumes 10 000 tanks and 1200 armored cars.
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
you simply don't outright disband a source, you see how valid it is on a certain element. The chances of wikipedia being mostly correct or even more correct than most book on this issue is that various service men can check the data and correct it. Also, good luck finding a book that contains all the countries that use the MG42 or its direct descendants. Also there are studies out there that showed that wikipedia is as valid as various other encyclopedias.
Similarly German historian often use books from the former "Eastern (communist) Germany" on various issues, usually with the footnote: the various perspectives are too heavily political driven to be of any use, but the various numbers are a good foundation. You see, I wouldn't use wikipedia as a source for a qualitative analysis, but for technical data and other stuff, it is usually good or ok. There will always be a margin of error and I also corrected various articles, e.g., technical data of the A7V, but it stayed within reasonable bounds. In short it is a trade-off and takes consideration and NOT: "not a viable source", black-white thinking bullshit.
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
@1978ajax to make things clear, his post is NOT preventing improvement. I am very aware about my pronunciation as can be seen in my trailer and also my 9 things you watched too much MHV, also one of patreon goals includes a speech trainer, e.g., I got rid of the extremely wrong pronunciation of comparison, which I probably had for 20 or more years. The thing is a large amount of "pointing out" here (the whole channel not just this video, where it was ok, but reading the same thing 20 times is a bit tiresome) is done not in the manner you speak off.
Whereas with specific words the comments are helpful there are like 5-10 times "fix your pronunciation, cause I can't understand you", which come from non-native speakers. Not to mention those that "recommend" to just get a different narrator completely ignoring the whole logistics, copyright, financial and other issues involved with such an arrangement.
Fun fact: for this video I checked the word "mizzen", because I thought, well that might probably sound odd, but I didn't, I never would have thought about "forecastle" being pronounced so differently, now I know and I am happy that it was pointed out, but this occasion was probably one of the rather few times where it was helpful.
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
in a few years maybe. Many reasons: 1) I don't know anything about it, this means a) a video on it will take 5-10 hours more than a "regular video", b) I don't knoe which sources are good and c) I don't have sources that cover it, whereas d) I have many sources that cover a lot of topics I didn't do yet. 2) I know the conflict has a "dedicated fan base", but I suspect it is rather small, which means 3) it will probably only get a low amount of views, which brings me to the conclusion that 4) it is a high investment with rather a lot of risk attached, not to mention the demotivation when I spend a lot of time and just have a low view number. Something that happened, e.g. with the WW1 vs. WW2 submarine warfare video. Before the adcocalypse this was less of an issue, but since then I have to manage my resources more clearly again. Also cancelled quite a few museum trips and post-poned purchases for the channel. Nothing dire, but I rather be safe than sorry.
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
@AKUJIRULE: of course I am pushing an agenda, so far I have been accused of being a nazi, working for the jews (they claimed I was hasbara funded), political correct, brain-washed, merkelized, anti-German, pro-Allied, etc.
Based on those remarks, I guess my agenda must be really fucked-up.
But I think you may have a point, so far no-one called me a communist, well, at least not directly, just everything around it.
Yet, you could also get into a library, get Alexander Hill's book and read the chapter on the Great Purge and then tell me that I portrayed the information he provided as incorrect / slanted or whatever. Since he speaks Russian, visited Russian Archives, cites correctly and is published by Cambridge University Press this is as good as it gets "here" ("Western World").
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
thank you, yeah it seems it is an old source that was digitized but not properly edited. I corrected various errors in the geodata, e.g., sometimes a 1 was missing or an E/S/W/N was wrong, but I forgot to check the ship names etc. I actually looked up a few ships like the MUTSU, which sank rather early in Japanese waters and I was like "maybe that is an error" and I think one carrier I never heard of too, both were correct. Also there are some sorting errors with the dates, which I don't now yet, because they were correctly sorted at one point and it makes little sense that some parts are not sorted.
I pinned your comment and for the upcoming video that will show both IJN & US Navy I hopefully most of the errors, although with a data set of more than 650 entries, some will occur.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
+Lowtac Sjord well, the organization was not an AT company, but a weapons company. You can use AT guns for shooting everything. Not sure how the intelligence and doctrine was on this, but they encountered a lot of pillboxes etc. where anti-tank guns can be quite useful. So see it more like a direct fire weapon and not just an anti-tank gun. One thing you should also consider the US was very much into standardization unlike the Germans, which usually were very specialized. E.g., the US used the .50 cal on their halftracks, tanks, fighters, bombers, etc. see more here about the anti-standardization of the German air force: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgGXRJg-NNU So just hand them a bunch of guns that can do any job and be produced easily instead of creating something new. Furthermore, Marine Divisions for landings were still a pretty new concept. The shore party concept as far as I remember was first tested under fire, because there was not enough time after the changed it.
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
+Xuan Vinh To yeah, I will address those issues in a special video. But about the logistics, well I only know how it was treated in the Luftwaffe and well, someone pointed out: this is basically a how to NOT do logistics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgGXRJg-NNU Their military intelligence was crap and they knew it. They totally underestimated the Soviet Army in resolve and regeneration, furthermore they had a tremendous win-streak, thus they started to believe their own bullshit.
Do you have a source for c)?
about b), a found something that was even worse: they had a lack of trains even for their own gauges! d) they just assumed that the Soviet Union would fall apart, which is an assumption that is optimistic but not utterly stupid, considering the trials, famine, how easily France broke, the performance in the Winter War, etc. Even hard to tell if a proper military intelligence could have predicted that resolve.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
haven't found a suitable T&OE for the 101st yet (I have a special idea). For the German Paras there are loads of low quality books out there and then there was 3 volume killer out there, which was high quality, but very descriptive from what I remember, which means it is usually an extremely inefficient source.
For a comparison, copied from my FAQ:
http://militaryhistoryvisualized.com/faq/
Are you going to do a video on [COMPARISON BETWEEN ARMIES/DIVISIONS/VEHICLES/ETC]?
Yes, but there needs one of the following criteria fulfilled:
* I have a certain amount of knowledge on this topic already, e.g., if
I have done like several German Tank Division layouts and a few of the
Allies, I am probably able to do a comparison video at one point.
Basically, I won’t start with comparison videos, I did it with the
Shokaku and Yorktown Class carriers, but this was also the video I spent
the most time on so far (out of around 65 videos as of writing).
*I have a proper article / book that covers such a comparison that is
of good quality and ideally (not mandatory) I know the topic well or
have another good source to “counter-check”.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
ok, I get that, but BBC & Co are often funded by the public. And in some cases they spend millions on visiting various locations etc. You know, they could also do a low-budget version with just a guy and a desk, etc. but let me guess? The spot is too expensive to risk it...
Yet, I find really despicable about public funded tv that it produces this over-simplified crap, but when I have to fill out my tax forms, I need a tax advisor etc.. Thanks government, in front of a tv you assume I am fucking moron, but once I have to pay for your fuck-ups, you suddenly treat me like I am a tax advisor with 5 years of experience... but I guess some can have it both ways.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
thank you, well, I can only speculate on it from my limited information on both organizations. First, the USMC is a far smaller organization, thus this usually means better communication, trust, more regular updates, less bureaucracy and "spirit". Second, from my very limited impression on the /r/usmc subreddit the Marines there seem to be far more inclined to read and considering their praise of Mattis and his extreme positive stance on books and education, I assume this also has an influence that people see books and manuals in a more positive way. Of course my experience is extremely limited, so I might be terribly wrong here.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
@ Игорь Костоев
> you have agenda, i do not listen to ones with agendas, nither I'm read source material of the topic.
> continues on transitioning american's biased view
so, so suddenly I have an agenda, I didn't have before? Like the last 180(?) videos?
Suddenly, I use "american biased views" I didn't have before?
You know what, my sources were and are WESTERN sources, US, German, UK, etc. this was ALWAYS the case and very likely will be always the case. Because I trust them (mostly) and these are the languages I speak & read.
And everyone is biased per definition, so am I. There is NO objectivity, there is always bias. Only the "media" claims to be independent, which is the most ridiculous claim ever unless one completely ignores every single piece of psychological and brain research.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
Rammstein well, there are many "problems" here. First, they were popular from the get go, this is rare for metal bands. Second, for non-natives the German may sound bad-ass, for me it doesn't. Third, they were really popular with the popular kids, I was not a popular kid. I don't dislike them anymore, but I guess, those factors heavily way against them in me having a "neutral" stance on them. Saw them once live, but I am not into "show".
I think they are a good band, but they are not "my" band.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
+True North you are welcome, so I did a bit of reading. Basically, the scope of WWI was beyond anything the Germans anticipated. There are some numbers from the war in 1870/1871 vs. WWI: 1,4 Mio vs. 13 Mio; on a "big day" (Großkampftag) in WWI the German Army used more ammo than in the whole war of 1870/1871 with around 356 000 shells. For bullets: 20 Mio in 1870/1871, in WW1 about 200 Mio by average per month. They also had a very operational approach, which some assume was based on their focus on Clausewitz, who strictly kept two issues separated. Yet, he couldn't foresee the future. Schlieffen ignored must logistical troubles or "diminished" them in the planning, but their seems to be a bit of controversy. One aspect is certain, the logistical aspects weren't given enough thought. During the war it seems they adapted and acknowledged the need for logistics, sometimes they even were a bit too cautious. The problem is most primary sources are lost. Another aspect is that due to the trench warfare (Western Front), logistics had a different (less) impact in World War I. (Source: Rohde, Horst: Beispiele für den Einfluß der Logistik auf die Operationsführung des deutschen Heeres im 1. Weltkrieg; in: see description)
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
thank you. Well, independence comes at various stages, also I have other revenue streams (merchandise, sponsorship, affiliate, etc. . I would say at 2000 $ / month on Patreon, I basically can "relax", since a) my basic expenses are covered and b) there is an overhead that would allow me to save some money in case there is a "break in". The main issue with Patreon, advertiser money, merchandise, sponsorhips etc. vs. a regular employee income is that there is a) no guarantee what happens the next month (or even next day) and b) taxes, I still haven't paid taxes for 2016, because the officials at the tax office didn't get back to my tax advisor (and in Austria the law is so fucked up, that you need one) and c) since we have a progressive tax system, it gets even more complicated since more revenue doesn't translate to the same amount of money after taxes.
Of course, this would be "basic Independence", this means a few field trips a year and also a few books a month.
I would say around 3000 $ / month regular field trips could be an option, but not entirely sure, main problem with field trips is they take a lot of time, cost quite some money too and the views are so low that the ad money often doesn't cover the expenses for food. Of course, I will aim more for videos like the Flak Tower, where I incorporate footage into "regular" videos.
Of course I did mention Lisa Ann :)
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
thanks for the input. This question was the only "troubling" one so far, but even considering that, it was a very fast video nevertheless and seems to be doing reasonable well, whereas many other regular videos, e.g., the American Expeditionary Forces took way longer and only gathered "very mild" interest. Since I use a stop-watch for measuring time on reading, scripting, design, editing, etc. etc. I am also very aware of everything and with the Patreon questions it is definitely far too early to judge.
Additionally, I also know that a complete rundown of ALL powers would take ages to make.
Also "troubling" questions help me "step up my game", while at the same time reduce the overall "risk".
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
> Laboe
well, I thought that would be France, but well Germany.
the main challenge with Museum visits is money, since they take a lot of time (in which I can't produce videos/scripts/designs, thus loss of money) and of course considerable amount of investment for tickets, food, transport and accommodation.
Also I need to check with the museums if I am allowed to take footage AND use it, because in Germany and Austria this is usually not the case. And contacting the staff and getting everything in order usually takes another few hours, which I can't spend in videos. In this and previous I was lucky, because one mail sorted it out, but other Museums often have required paperwork (Munster, Heeresgeschichtliche Museum Vienna, etc.).
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
extremely hard to say, because every unit is different. You have a good NCO in bootcamp and it will be completely different to a shitty NCO. The same goes with "comrades". I wasn't fast, I have a fast brain, but I am rather clumsy. We had to put on the gas mask & protection gear, was to slow NCO ordered 2 "comrades" to help me. Basically, the force the whole shit upon me and it wasn't really faster... a few days later, out in the field, similar scene. Yet, this time a guy helped me alone and helped me, it was faster, I didn't get shoved around etc. I didn't know who that guy was, because he had a gasmask on and I think it was a bit dark too. For me it was like: oh someone can actually help you putting on that shit without hurting you.
And you have this on every level: squad mates, NCO, Platoon Commander, Company Commander.
We got one guy from a really though unit (13er - Panzergrenadiere - Ried), where he did bootcamp. I had a lot of trouble during bootcamp and I said to him, I would have no chance in his unit. He noted, that he disagreed, because his NCOs would have recognized that I put in the effort, thus they wouldn't treat like my NCO did...
another thing is, there were a lot of changes.
But quite many of that stuff is not unheard of. Yet again, it is a society issue, just look at some "Kommission" in Austria, which Fischer gave a Verdienstkreuz...
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
I just copy my response from the FAQ here:
What is your opinion / will you cover on Einsatzgruppen/Extermination War/Holocaust/etc.?
I very briefly covered the Extermination War (“Vernichtungskrieg”) in
my Barbarossa Blunders video. The little paragraph took me about 3
rewrites and ages to write. This topic is just a minefield, also YouTube
is quite problematic with just “normal” Military History, thus at this
point I will make no more videos or comments on this topic unless
necessary. Not to mention the “ability” (better inability) of society
and politics in Germany and Austria to properly deal even with simpler
issues surrounding World War 2. Thus, I will only mention these topics
when they are really important like Barbarossa, because they were a
central part of the campaign, but even then I will keep it short. See
also the follow-up question.
Will you make a video about [INSERT ss-division here]?
No, nope, NEIN, nyet, I have very little interest in the waffen-ss.
Furthermore, it is just a political minefield and also YouTube policy is
quite insane as it is. Not to mention the “ability” (or better
inability) of society and politics in Germany and Austria to properly
deal even with simpler issues surrounding World War 2. In short: little
interest + loads of trouble.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
you are indoctrinated, Wikipedia for many subjects is a quite reliable source, especially on such mundane matters like which country uses which weapon etc. Also just take a look how many "professional" historians basically copied the German Generals views on Barbarossa for decades... "reliable source" is a very vague term. Everybody makes errors and every source should be weighted carefully.
I have a Master Degree in History and Computer Science, I had classes in law, philosophy, economics, political science, etc. some of them after I got my Masters. I realized that usually the most imprecise fields and professors were usually the most "anti-wikipedia", they were outright doctrinal by stating it was not a "scientific source", whereas those guys from the "hard sciences", usually had no qualms about it... interesting. The thing is real scientist/thinkers can determine when to use what source in what context and how much it is worth, because they always weigh in the argument and the whole picture, whereas those "professors" that can't tell the difference between an apple and a tank were outright "doctrinal".
In the end I choose what sources are fit for what topic and this video was mainly about the arguments, thus wikipedia was and is perfectly fine. Also the introduction and service dates are usually quite on the spot.
7
-
luckily I only had a very limited of History classes in school. My professors at university didn't care about dates, for them it was all about processes and context. I think I asked exactly once in an exam about a date, it was about the church in the middle ages and I think the prof wanted to know the date of the "Konzil of Konstanz", I gave the date and follow-up dates, to which he replied, that the initial date was sufficient :)
yeah, well, I guess am I am a bit picky in that regard. It is like going from denial to guilt. Also they actually use quite a lot of dates that are exact to the day, whereas I avoid this usually, because I know that those dates are usually unimportant for the most part. Year + month is sufficient in 98 % of the time. So for me they are cutting the wrong corners... but that was the same for most of my colleagues at university, some dude in the thirty-year-war and the first thing they tell is date of birth.... year would have been sufficient. But yeah, I am a prick in that regard.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
The issue is with counter attacks is that one has to take the initiative and the Germans particularly in the west got regularly pounded by artillery in counterattacks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mElnH-U9Q0w
In Band of Brothers there are plenty of examples with blunders, e.g., the one were Speirs is called in, but those are explained, the other commander froze. In Fury, there is no explanation given for the errors etc.
If Brad Pitt would have been portrayed as a glory hound that was reckless or if he was not informed about the AT guns, etc. that would have made more sense. Yes, errors happen all the time, but generally, there is an explanation why people acted that way and two simple ones are emotions or ego.
My main issue is with the logical inconsistency in the movie itself. The scene alone without context is far less jarring, but with all the additional information: briefing, etc.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Sorry to break your bubble: this video was uploaded 1 week ago, your comments were made this Monday, if I remember correctly.
You should not forget that I change a lot of stuff all the time, just look at my first video, then my 20th, then my 40th etc. some changes stick, some not, some are post-poned, some are refined, etc. a lot of stuff is cut short or delayed due to time-constraints. Other stuff due to bad views, problems with demonetization, etc.
just look at the Binkov video, it was recorded in May. Or the Navy Corpsman Interview, it was done in 2016...
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
+Merlijn Pieron (The Devils Advocate) the comparison was intended to be a bit controversial, because many ignore shortcomings of the Tiger, yet many others (maybe not the same people though), just say that the A7V was bad. It was more against the common or popular view than against the vehicles themselves. Especially since my source on the A7V was excellent, but appeared quite biased itself in repairing its reputation. Yet, my knowledge about WW1 tanks is quite limited, so I had a hard time to "out balance" the perceived bias. The downvotes just happen. I basically upvote 80 % if not 90 % of all content and probably downvote like 2 to max 5 %, but I am a content creator, I sometimes even upvote if I disagree, but can see the effort the person put into. Although from stats I know that very few people up/downvote at all, maybe they are not logged in or just do it for exceptional content.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
there are several reasons for this.
in short: 1) mentioning atrocities is highly discouraged by YouTube policy and politics. 2) My knowledge and interest in them are also limited. 3) Considering that even the military losses are highly debated, well, I would mostly talk out of my ass. 4) This channel is focused on several aspects of Military History like vehicles, organizations, operational aspects, blunders, myths, yet war crimes is not one of them.
Furthermore, out of my FAQ:
What is your opinion / will you cover on Einsatzgruppen/Extermination War/Holocaust/etc.?
I very briefly covered the Extermination War (“Vernichtungskrieg”) in
my Barbarossa Blunders video. The little paragraph took me about 3
rewrites and ages to write. This topic is just a minefield, also YouTube
is quite problematic with just “normal” Military History, thus at this
point I will make no more videos or comments on this topic unless
necessary. Not to mention the “ability” (better inability) of society
and politics in Germany and Austria to properly deal even with simpler
issues surrounding World War 2. Thus, I will only mention these topics
when they are really important like Barbarossa, because they were a
central part of the campaign, but even then I will keep it short. See
also the follow-up question.
Will you make a video about [INSERT ss-division here]?
No, nope, NEIN, nyet, I have very little interest in the waffen-ss.
Furthermore, it is just a political minefield and also YouTube policy is
quite insane as it is. Not to mention the “ability” (or better
inability) of society and politics in Germany and Austria to properly
deal even with simpler issues surrounding World War 2. In short: little
interest + loads of trouble."
http://militaryhistoryvisualized.com/faq/
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
yeah, I originally wanted to mention something on this, but I cut it. Veb R pretty much sums it up correctly.
“The terms “bunker,” “pillbox,” and “dugout” have been used fairly loosely, and it is sometimes
difficult to do more than roughly differentiate between them.”(War Department: Handbook on the Japanese Military Forces, 15
September 1944, p. 156)
“Usually Japanese pillboxes are constructed over, or near, dugouts, to which the enemy can
flee for protection while being shelled or bombed. Some have been described as having front and rear compartments—the front part for firing and the rear for protection, storage of supplies, and rest or sleep.
Some of the dugouts are 10 feet deep or more.” (War Department: Handbook on the Japanese Military Forces, 15 September 1944, p. 160)
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@manictiger: since I have the data. For Stalingrad it was 1 hour reading, 5.75 hours scripting (which includes also reading, but now with notes or cross-checking), 10 hours design (including 3 hours for the PzIVf2 model, which took far longer than usual, 1.5 hours is normal; 0.75 for the Pak38, 0.25 for the Pak40, other models and all the slides; the comparison slide took 1 hour alone...), animations was just 0.75 hours, recording 0.5, complete first cut .75, which is cutting away all stuff that was wrong + 0.25 for the final cut (usually addding some missing pieces, cutting out breathing, adding the extro sound) and 0.5 misc stuff.
So editing was just 1 hour, which is actually quite fast. (Riverine Warfare had 2.25 editing, but this also included cutting together the various footage clips).
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
it's pretty weird, especially if you look at "Panzerschreck", in 1941/1941 as mentioned in my Anti-Tank Tactics (Infantry) Video, the word actually meant the psychological effect the tank has on the troops, but in 1944 the "German bazooka" was called "Panzerschreck", which is translated as "tank terror". So, basically it is open the interpretation and change. Yet, some people like to tell me that "Panzerfaust" doesn't mean "tank fist", but "armored fist", which makes little sense, because it is not armored.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
thanks, I think the background information on the Assistenzeinsatz is crucial in understanding the differences between Austrian and German politics among other things. And considering that the French Army is on duty since several months or years inside of French territory in order to provide security in cities, the "Europe is under attack" doesn't seem so far fetched as the "don't worry, everything will be fine".
The main issue is that there is no line between those two extremes. In other words we lack a "strong center" that doesn't "sugar-coat" but also doesn't "doomsday" everything. With videos like the one about Rommel, I aim at creating a basic understanding for a more center-balanced view.
About the comments, well, I have been called a nazi, Hasbara-funded, self-loathing, etc. after more than 1,5 years one gets a bit dull towards the comments. I provide my insights, how people deal with it, is another issue.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
yeah, I really "dislike" numbers, cause in German we pronounce 56 six-fifty (sechs und fünfzig) not fifty-six, additionally, we very rarely use M 2 0 3 (I use it for the Bf 109, because I heard it so often). Actually, I thought I used two O three in this video, but I assume it was for some other number or I had a slip at the first version and then switched to the two hundred three.
Thanks, I will keep it in mind, I was kinda aware, but rather inconsistent with it. Since you carry around those things: Godspeed! (or the proper equivalent you use for it)
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@schnuersi I wouldn't be so sure, first off, I also assumed that the NBC protection would be important, BUT Tankolad particularly noted to me that already the T-54 was hardened against molotovs and that was before the NBC protection stuff. Second, I talk to a western tanker, who also asked a mechanic and they were more along the lines there is not much protection, although they never looked into it. Third, the Soviets lost tanks to Molotovs in the mentioned uprisings, the West didn't. So, I simply can't make that conclusion, it could be but everything so far points does not support it.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
hey, well, I don't consider it a conspiracy at all, for one simple reason: corporations fight each other and coordinated actions and alliances usually help, does that mean my assumptions are correct, absolutely not, but conspiracy for me implies something is going on "happens behind closed doors and is secret", I don't think anything of this is secret. Also the alignments don't necessarily indicate direct cooperation, but in some cases not taking action or support someone else action, e.g., I share videos from other channels as well I don't actually cooperate with, although rarely.
thx, I didn't knew that about the WSJ. Are they doing this also usually in a way that is so out of context?
I also assume both will survive as mentioned they are basically trying now to get market share in each other's "territory" (YouTubeTV in cable). Originally I had also a view on the WSJ YT channel, it was quite interesting to see how much views their PewDiePie video got compared to others, but that was the first version of the video, which was "merely" tactical.
rant on
yeah, the EU... oh boy, they try to regulate everything freaking shit, especially in combination with Germans and Austrians... spent already countless hours on a law and will visit a workshop soon. At the same time they complain about "no startups", yeah, maybe killing every motivation with forms and regulations isn't good for small business.... something that those bureaucrats will never get in their square heads.
rant off
yeah, I assume it is about bargaining to a certain degree. I am too new on YouTube to know if there was an increase in ad revenue after the enforcement of the advertiser friendly rules, but I assume YouTube didn't do this and then didn't ask for more money or some other concessions.
One part of this was to show some other aspect to the whole "it's all about political correctness" and of course to "talk strategy". Again, I see it as a "strategic theory" not conspiracy, because I don't see any conspiracy actions in it, just non-friendly business moves. Would be interested why you see it as "conspiracy".
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
I rarely use "nazi" and I don't use the term "nazi germany", which is very common, but the later is clearly wrong. I don't use "Bolshevik" nor "Jap[anese]", because there were racial and/or genocidal components included. "I know your country likes to be politically correct on many things!" Not sure were you are coming from, but in Austria we are still far away from the sjw craziness that is happening in the United States, maybe it is delayed or maybe we are too conservative in that regard, we will see. There are different approaches to various topics depending on the country, e.g., most Austrians and Germans are just "those Americans and their gun laws", well, I usually tell 'em that they should shut up (if they are talking shit) or why they care anyway, because it is none of their business and usually can't even understand the language properly let alone speak/write it.
I also use "Kraut", which I don't consider derogatory or derogatory "enough", mainly because there was no real "hatred" on the Western Front, unlike to the Eastern Front. Thus I usually weigh which terms I use and which not. Also my approach might change.
I would use the term "commies", e.g., for the Cold War, but I think it is a bit too cute.
Also it made a clear impact on me reading German documents for Barbarossa etc. they were "not nice" and use "Bolshevik" quite often if I remember correctly.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
+bloodlazio Frieser argues in his book (link in the description), which I used as main source for this video that it was controlling the Generals. Also the move that he gave Rundstedt the authority which surprised some contemporaries seems to be a typical manipulation and control move. One thing people seem to forget about Hitler is that he was an excellent manipulator, this also explains many of his diplomatic "victories".
the Rundstedt infantry general argument I am not familiar with, but yes he was "old school". I think it has more to do with the generation and psychology, Rundstedt felt threatend, mistreated or whatever and then come the arguments that are infantry based. Rationalization is almost always pure bullshit. I assume only a tiny fraction of debates are really about the topic itself, usually it is about personal issues in one way or another. Humans are first and foremost social animals that have a rationale subunit attached, but that sub-unit isn't very determining, even the most rationale humans make quite a lot of irrational decisions.
Frieser worked through the German and French source material. Planning on a book report on the book, here are some preliminary excerpts from the script:
"
This is an academic work, thus the bibliography is
substantial with about 40 pages and like the rest of the book very well
structured it includes unprinted sources from archives, private collections,
eyewitness reports,
It also contains a large amount of footnotes that are in a
separate part of the book and make about 80 pages. These footnotes are either
detailed references to source material or additional information."
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
What is your opinion / will you cover on Einsatzgruppen/Extermination War/Holocaust/etc.?
I very briefly covered the Extermination War (“Vernichtungskrieg”) in
my Barbarossa Blunders video. The little paragraph took me about 3
rewrites and ages to write. This topic is just a minefield, also YouTube
is quite problematic with just “normal” Military History, thus at this
point I will make no more videos or comments on this topic unless
necessary. Not to mention the “ability” (better inability) of society
and politics in Germany and Austria to properly deal even with simpler
issues surrounding World War 2. Thus, I will only mention these topics
when they are really important like Barbarossa, because they were a
central part of the campaign, but even then I will keep it short. See
also the follow-up question.
Will you make a video about [INSERT ss-division here]?
No, nope, NEIN, nyet, I have very little interest in the waffen-ss.
Furthermore, it is just a political minefield and also YouTube policy is
quite insane as it is. Not to mention the “ability” (or better
inability) of society and politics in Germany and Austria to properly
deal even with simpler issues surrounding World War 2. In short: little
interest + loads of trouble.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
thank you, well, I hadn't but I read up on them. Once you know how to determine a good or viable source then it is just about reading and producing a script from it, the later is usually the problem. In those cases there was an official book from the US on riverine warfare and for the helicopter tactics it was a lessons learned if I remember correctly, so it was quite "easy".
Of course, for non-WW2 stuff I often have to double check on some basic data, e.g., Vietnam War was from ?? to ??, then other stuff like "hmm , Vietcong alone is wrong", thus finding a proper term without getting too much into detail, etc. such small parts can often take up 15 or 30 mins, but are tiring and slow the overall progress. At least I noted that non-ww2 videos take at least a few hours more on average.
4
-
endlich mal jemand der kapiert, dass es nicht der Akzent ist.
Ja, ich versuche das jedesmal. Ich schaue seit 2001 defacto ALLES auf Englisch, allerdings ist mein "Aussprachen-Gedächtnis" wohl leicht beeinträchtigt, weil ich hab für jedes Wort 3 Varianten... hatte mal explizit ein Video mit sehr korrekter Aussprache probiert... das Ergebnis: es waren viel mehr Wörter falsch als sonst.
Hat nichts mit Markenzeichen zu tun, sondern eher damit, dass ich zu einer Zeit Englisch gelernt hab, wo kein Englisch in der Umgebung war. Alles war deutsch oder deitsch (.at) in der Aussprache, ABER viele Texte in Computerspielen etc. waren Englisch. Also hab ich angefangen die auszusprechen etc. lange bevor ich passende/richtige Vorgaben hatte.
Dazu kommt noch das Gehör, ich höre zum Teil keine Unterschiede. Im Spanisch Kurs hat mal der native-speaker 5 Minuten versucht mir den Unterschied zwischen "s" und "z" im Spanischen hörbar zu machen... ich weiß jetzt wie ich die Zunge bewegen muss, aber ich hör den Unterschied nicht.
Im Ausland leben könnte helfen, in Hamburg konnten die meisten nicht mehr hören, dass ich aus Österreich bin.
so, it's complicated und wohl die Kombination aus vielen Faktoren.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
I was referring to World War 2 were "we" fought together. I am not one of the Austrians that denies that Hitler and others were Austrian nor that in 1918 we called the Republic "German-Austria" (Deutsch-Österreich). Nowadays we are two different nations, back in 1918, well not so much and I am referring here to the "Nations" volume of the Austrian Academy of Sciences publication on Austro-Hungary, which doesn't list "Austrian" but "German" and explains it. Quite complicated subject, most Austrian nowadays will freak out if you call them Germans and would never choose "we" / "us" even in a historical context. Also there are many parallels even nowadays, but there are also some clear differences, where I would never use "we", additionally sympathy is important, if I don't like the German speaking to, I would rarely use "we".
Also don't take anything I do as a measurement for other Austrians, I am quite an odd ball.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
the why is really important, I actually was thinking about doing a "motivation speech" for recruits. Something along the lines of: "yeah, I know, you think this is all useless, there will never be a war and who should invade us, there are only friends around us. Well, you know this guy? You know Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Terminator, yeah, well. He was a bodybuilder, an actor and everyone laughed about his accent. Then he became Governor of California which has a GDP higher than X + Y combined. You know who predicted that: no-one." Then something else, which was also rather unlikely, probably Ex-Yugoslavia, data on how many Austrians were on vacation in the years before the war.
And I would address the why of every freaking fucking action. Now, we are running one more line, you know why? To learn what you are actually able to do. etc. etc.
Ideally with performance measurements and encouragement, e.g., fitness tests day 1 vs 15 vs 30. etc.
Probably combined with "gamification".
Or more play-like that the whole training is for a huge competition in squad engagements or something.
And classes with "Call of Duty" vs. "real life".
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
thank you!
copy / paste from the FAQ:
Are you going to use photos and/or footage?
Yes, if they fit and if I have some where I don’t have to add loads
of copyright information in the description or video itself, this means
photos I took.
The reasons for this are simple, I sit in the European Union, which
has rather weak fair use rights. Furthermore, I am also located in
Austria, which is neighboring Germany, where lawyers have a strong
tendency for suing people about minor shit like that. Copyright
law-suits are expensive, because they require a lawyer. Also most photos
and footage I could use, was already used a bazillion times by others
anyway, so I couldn’t add much novelty anyway. Thus, the risk is not
worth the benefit. Although I have some ideas for footage videos in the
future, but I have so many plans and ideas, which are far “safer” too.
TIME!
http://militaryhistoryvisualized.com/faq/
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
yeah, for several reasons: 1) those books were usually written by people directly involved, 2) a lot of the documents weren't available back then, 3) the academic standards changed, 4) basically these were usually the first books on the topic, etc. etc.
A lot of the "Wehrmacht" Myths that crawl around nowadays, are the result of many historians just taking at face-value what German Generals told them after the war. Even if you filter out intended lying / sugarcoating, the human memory is pretty inaccurate - see Daniel Schacter the Seven Sins of Memory...
Another thing, back then they had no internet, no proper copying machines, etc. the amount of information available was extremely limited, so even with the best intentions etc. it is quite hard to be accurate.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
+bloodlazio I wonder how many dictatorships had no internal rivalries from what I read under Stalin it was quite limited or at least nowhere as crazy as in Nazi Germany.
yeah, didn't read "Lost Victories" from Manstein neither, only years ago the autobiography of Guderian. Yeah, the radio part was crucial, both for external and internal communication.
> My impression at least is that Hitler often not just did things for one reason ... and several reasons more.
well, I assume there was also a high amount of unpredictability involved, usually social manipulators keep everyone on their toes, because suddenly they do something completely unpredictable and everyone starts running, "great" for controlling but doesn't really work with strategy. Steve Jobs is probably another great example of this,although he seemed to have manage to use the unpredictability in social situations and not on a strategic level.
no worries, it is kinda hard for me when to answer and when not, because it takes quite some time, which I can't spend into making videos, still learning to find a proper balance here. Also I like long quality comments and discussions.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
the Swedish have (or had?) one, but I guess since the numbers were reduced significantly there is "no need", Assault guns and TDs were usually cheaper and faster to produce, nowadays this isn't so much of an issue anymore. I assume it is mostly a "war-time" thing, although a lot of vehicles are modular nowadays, e.g., tracked vehicle with AT configuration / Anti-personnel, etc.. So, I guess one part is that the TDs/Assault guns are replaced by different dedicated vehicles, e.g., tanks with ATGM (Anti tank guided missiles).
So I would say, it is a combination of several factors: tech(missiles), numbers, cost, scale of war, different missions.
But don't quote me on that, just my first thoughts on this issue.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
was my first plan, yet, the main problem is: my videos take at least 10 hours to make, yet more often than not they are closer to 20 hours. Setting up an interview can sometimes take up to several weeks, even if it was just take a few days, it is still not really possible, e.g., this video should be published on Friday, but since YouTube suddenly took more than 24 hours to review my video for today, I switched it around. For other videos, I changed the subject and details, e.g. the Winter War video was initially about a battle, but I realized it would take to long, thus I switched. I have quite many of started videos, e.g., I already started a Winter War reading in around September(?) but the sources sucked...
So the only way would be interview loads of people prior and then maybe use the material, but this would be quite a huge time investments for all parties involved.
Right now, my main concern is to adapting to the recent YouTube changes, because before I had a guaranteed viewership of around 20 % of my subscriber base, now it dropped to 5-10% for less popular titles. If you look at this video right now, it has about 2k views with 134K subscribers... I think the request for questions video had 6k views, but back then I had less subscribers. Ofc there is some delays in the views, but it could be really be that the interview itself will get less views than the announcement of it... Also did 2 popular videos this month, which also shows that the initial popularity of a video seems the driving factor.
It is a real bugger, because I would prefer doing more fundamental videos like the organization videos, nevertheless the popular videos are often usually less work without the algorithm change it would be no problem, yet with it, it is right now too "dangerous" (because as far as I know January and February are extremely bad in terms of ad income, so I need to plan ahead, due to a lack of reference values, also YouTube is unstable in many other ways too).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
no, Japan had an army and navy air force. Similar in World War 2, the United States Army also had several Air Forces, the US Army Air Force (USAAF), which after WW2 became the USAF. Germany had an independent Air Force the Luftwaffe. The Brits had the RAF, which is the oldest independent Air Force in the World (1918).
> So i guess mostly belonged to the navy?
I don't know exactly, but both had their own types, e.g., Ki-61 (Army), A6M2 (Navy), etc. this meant different production lines, less efficiency, etc. something that is "ok" for industrial power houses like the US, but deadly for something like Japan. More on the problems of the Japanese Air Forces in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6WIN7Ysygc
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
+YOLO yeah, I got loads of stuff planned.I will do comparison videos in the future. Getting the data for those videos is sometimes quite annoying for the German Tank Division I had to use 3 different sources. For this video it was just one table for the setup and two for the tactics. Right now, I am trying to do one video about one format, e.g., one division, one battalion, intended vs. historical setup, tactics, etc. I haven't done a battle yet, nor any navy stuff, etc.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Key strength of the Germans were that they had rather very-high standards of training and also a lot of experience from pre-war and early war, which most other countries lacked and/or didn't facilitate as effectively. Yet, the Germans had a rather weak replacement system initially. The Western Allies were good in mass-training, whereas the Soviets were good in mass-recruitment. This is reflected in many instances, e.g., see why the Luftwaffe lost, there is the data on training hours for Pilots. Also the video Road to Stalingrad, where the Wehrmacht looks at the combat capabilities of its divisions in summer 1941 and summer/late spring 1942. Additionally, if you fight a more skilled enemy, you will learn likely faster than he does, since the Germans lost plenty of experienced troops and the Allies got better over time, the discrepancy in skill was reduced over time.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
ACHTUNG! Incoming rant!
yeah, the main issue with that approach towards Knopp is that "we" are just getting arrogant and don't do anything of our own, "we" are part of the problem. You know what, we covered documentaries in my intro History courses and I concluded back then for me that the "visual media" (film/movie) is not suited for "hardcore" information... and I never looked back... probably after doing this channel for several months or a year, I suddenly realized that I "proved" my own conclusion from back then wrong.
I am a one-man operation with no background in design or anything, although I am pretty experienced in public speaking.
Now, I would say if I can do such a channel, why the heck can't just a small proportion of the German speaking academics produce something similar of far better quality, reach and depth? And at the same time "they" are telling the students about the function of the "Geschichtswissenschaft" "Orientierung", yeah for whom? The handful of students?
I sometimes have a hard time to determine who pisses me more of Knopp or those historians, who just complain about him. If there is a problem deal with it, at least that would be the responsible approach.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You might want to listen and read more carefully.
> As the Chieftain alludes to, these vehicles were also employed in the divisional anti-tank
> battalions of the infantry divisions.
Chieftain mentions the Panzerjäger I, which was mostly or only employed in independent anti-tank units likely Heerestruppen those are quite "a bit" away from "the the divisional anti-tank battalions of the infantry divisions" that you mention.
From my script: "The first formations to receive them were mostly Panzer-Divisions, a few regular infantry divisions would receive them later as well, especially once other vehicles became available for the Panzer-Divisions and the Marders were replaced."
> Comparing their capabilities to tanks is a fool's errand.
Well, I did not do that, the German report did:
"The report continues that Sturmgeschütz III and Panzer IV with the long barreled 75 mm guns are clearly superior, whereas the Marder can only be used in a defensive role. Although, it is outlined that the Marder is clearly better than the regular Pak 40:"
And I made it also rather apparent that the report has a bit of an "agenda":
"Additionally, it is without question that the writer of the report wanted Sturmgeschütze, which he thought came close to an ideal solution."
3
-
3
-
StuGs should have been ideally in every infantry division, which made up about 90 % of the divisions (depends when, where, etc.). This was simply not possible, at least not, if there were Panzer Divisions with that amount of Panzers.
Similarly, there was a lot of testing around and of course, from my understanding nobody wanted to start a World(!) War in 1939, some even were against a war. Also even in 1941, the General Staff assumed that mixed (so different types of Panzer) Panzer companies would be the future, whereas later on, Panzer companies were usually of just 1 type.
In short, there are many different factors and developments on going: rivalry between arms, doctrine, production capacity, development capacity, industrial structure, etc.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Thanks and good attention for detail!
> 28. light Division - which is the 28. Jäger-Division!
that is actually not that incorrect (as you point out later), since Jäger were light infantry. Yeah, I know of the leichte Divisionen, which were "light tank divisions". Good spots, yet, I have seen far worse stuff over the years from other important authors that had far more importance.
Also be aware, that those changes might not have been done by Citino but editor etc.
I know that one publisher restricts the use of foot/endnotes in a strong way etc.
I have special red post-its to mark such stuff now.
Also error happens, even if one spends a lot of time on details, e.g., in our first book, some translations we revised for our other books although we spent ages discussing them in the first book.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
well, I have hard to time on that one, because so far I have been accused of being a nazi, working for the jews (they claimed I was hasbara funded), political correct, brain-washed, merkelized, anti-German, pro-Allied, pro-German, etc.
Based on those remarks, I guess my agenda must be really fucked-up.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
factors you completely ignore: 1) fuel, 2) range of IJN, 3) Regia Marina could not leave the Mediterranean, 4) every country had problems coordinating its army with navy, then 5) the axis was notoriously bad in coordinating with each other, so 6) coordinating the German Army with the Regia Marina and even with the IJN on top, is pretty much insane.
Yeah, I missed something, namely in your first comment that you included Japan, because that is so out of the world, my brain couldn't process it.
Oh and the list is not finished.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
well, yes and no. There are various issues here, the Germans were far less capable of mass production and standardization. The resource situation was also quite different, I mean for the King Tiger at one point they sent the crews into the factory to help out... I don't think the US Army did that at any point.
The Sherman prevailed not by sheer numbers alone, but also by a lot of spare parts, fuel, oil, food, infantry, air power, etc. If you look at my After D-Day video, it is quite staggering how different the situation was in terms of force ratios and supply ratios as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DX-2mR_FsQ
This is the reason why I don't like mono-causal arguments.
Yes, the big picture is important, but to get to the big picture one has put together a lot of small puzzle pieces and some of them are just tactical ones and jumping from a single puzzle piece to the grand strategic ones is generally flawed.
The Bismarck actually had quite severe shortcomings, although that is quite complicated as well, since some people insist that the all-or-nothing armor scheme was "the best", yet the Germans did not choose it since in the North Atlantic and Baltic Sea it has some severe shortcomings.
> If you are evaluating the effectiveness of a weapon system, how can you ignore it's strategic role?
one needs to understand the basics first to make statement on the strategic level. I am not too happy with that video and there are many open questions as well.
If you want to take a look at some strategic stuff, check out this highly underwatched video, where I try to scratch the surface of various rabbit holes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBYGj1fD4ko
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
thank you, because escorts are more likely to change course, are more likely to notice if a torpedo passes by, are smaller, are faster, are far less, thus less likely to be a target of opportunity, are also very cheap, etc.
So, there is every little incentive to destroy escorts, especially early on, when they were rather weak and later on, they were too many.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
> it's just I see it kind of like double standars
then your perception is wrong; I mean open your ears, do you think my pronunciation of most English words is correct? No it isn't, considering that I wrote both my Masters theses in English, did more than 500 videos in the last 5 years in English etc. how much time do you think I need to invest to get the pronunciation of non-English and non-German words correct? It is fucking pain in the ass, during recording I sometimes come across English words I don't know how and you know what. Of course, someone might argue "just look it up", it just breaks the word flow, takes a lot of time AND there is no guarantee I get it correct in the first place. Ever noticed that a lot of people that moved to other countries even after decades can't get the pronunciation of certain words correct? The reason is most people just can't.
Btw. assuming that my pronunciation of German is generally correct is also wrong, I am from Upper Austria and depending on which German you ask, he/she will tell you he can't hear the difference or that something is a bit or terribly off. Here is a video where I speak Upper Austrian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvHTR-5n2_E
So, before you accuse someone of a double standard do your homework and stop making assumptions and accusations about stuff you have no idea about.
Fact is, I don't have to look up the German pronunciation and everyone will complain about any other language anyway or even German if I make an error.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
> Das Museum ist doch geschlossen und du bist da alleine
beides falsch, das Museum war zu dem Zeitpunkt geöffnet, schau mal auf das Datum oben rechts! Und wenn du nur etwas aufgepasst hättest, dann wäre dir auch aufgefallen, dass da jemand sogar ins Bild gelaufen ist (schwarzer Balken!), du kannst seine Beine sogar im Laufwerk sehen!
Selbst wenn diese Person nicht reingelaufen wäre anzunehmen, dass ich alleine dort war, ist selten unqualifziert!
So, 1) Das Museum war offen, 2) ich hab - einen Großteil(!) - während der Öffnungszeiten gefilmt. 3) Wenn ich außerhalb der Öffnungszeiten 0700-1000 gefilmt hab und es erlaubt war hab ich keine Maske auf.
Ansonsten reise ich aus Österreich an, glaubst du ich wäre im harten Lockdown über die Grenze gekommen und dann hätte man drei Tage für mich extra das Museum aufgemacht?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
well, "Additionally, since a large amount of the old media echoed the WSJ claims, it might be a concerted action or at least not an unwelcome move." Another aspect is that the old media know each other probably on several levels, e.g., studied together, editors, but also owners, etc. so it is likely that they just will stick together based on familiarity. Again for me that is obvious and more likely that not acting. Not even counting jumping the opportunity band wagon. Of course it could be all about the headlines, but the "old media" is threatened by the "new media", so I wouldn't be surprise the use everything available. Of course that doesn't imply an organized effort, but organization can be everything from dropping someone a mail, e.g., I got 2 of those articles from friends and collaborators.
interesting, I didn't know that the WSJ stands up against racism and consistently so. From what I have seen there claims were very much taken out of context and overstated.
yeah, the PewDiePie incident was definitely tactical as mentioned: "Thus, I assume that the WSJ article against PewDiePie was probably an attack to create an initial focus on the issue, which was then followed up by the main attacks by pointing out the serving of ads next to extremist videos." He opened up a flank and they attacked.
2
-
well, I am not getting closer to the truth, because most of that views I held during making of the video. I guess it hinges to a certain degree on the definition of "coordination", I got 2 articles sent to me for me that is cooperation for others not.
yeah, "liberal" means basically something else in every country, "liberals" in Austria are different from those in Germany.
I agree, in Europe we are more into "state loving", quite ironic looking at Hitler and Stalin.
there are some "core beliefs" in both the US & Europe that are to a degree religious, e.g., universal healthcare in Europe is basically like the US 2nd Amendment. For the European people the 2nd Amendment is like "wtf", whereas for many from the US "universal healthcare" is "wtf". Same goes with censorship in Europe everyone is "I am for free-speech, well except for small list, which is actually fucking huge" and in the states it is nearly for everything, well except I think being a communist is probably a bit problematic, whereas that is totally fine in Europe. Well, for us the Democrats & Republicans to a certain degree are both right-wing parties, but at the same time the view of both liberal parties works too. Depends on the issues, e.g., military both the Elephant and the Donkey are off European charts. For other issues it is more complicated. I mean we don't have a civil rights history. Once was at a conference in Poland with many European Liberals, we watched a discussion between a "liberal" Polish guy and a conservative one about homophobia... I sat next to the Dutch, which are very liberal, after the discussion was over the Dutch were basically in shellshock. they stated something along the line: our far-right conservatives are more liberal than this "liberal" guy there... both of the Poles used John Paul II in their arguments...
One aspect which I learned from living a bit in South America is the following "our" value system and law seem to make sense, because we know their history and heard plenty of arguments for them, but I think they are more often than not just random and inconsistent as fuck, e.g., in Argentina plastic surgery is rampant, but sex shops are hidden (rather the opposite over here). Very catholic, but very open and tolerant to homosexuals and trans people, but abortion is illegal and many deaths each year.... and I think "our" laws and rules in Austria/Germany/Europe are probably as inconsitent and illogical for the most part.
2
-
2
-
2
-
+Karl The Karl well, they weren't so rational, after all they didn't even knew how the high command structure of the Soviet Army consisted, the report of the "Fremde Heere Ost" (Foreign Armies East - intelligence unit) included in that part a lot of "probably". But if we look back, basically everything from the retaking the Saarland was a political gamble and all those worked out. Than the battle of France was also a gamble, they had a way more conservative plan. So they had a winning streak and thought they can do everything. Furthermore, they completely underestimated the "regrouping" capabilities of the Red Army, so yeah, in a way they were surprised.
I need to do some research, but the main problem was that Germany compensated on an operational level, what they lacked on a (grand-)strategic level, which includes of course production. Another example, Japan fought against the Soviet Union in 1939, but in 1941 they wouldn't do anything, hence Stalin could move troops from the far east to "German" front. In contrast the Allied grand-strategy of "Germany first", the Axis had no such grand-strategy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
maybe, but I stumbled upon this while reading, but cut it from the script:
“Earthwork remains are difficult to differentiate from the myriad mounds that dot the European countryside: one part of Normandy, 12 × 20 km, has yielded four stone castles and 28 earth mounds, not all of ascertainable date. But there was nosimple transition from timber to stone. Forest was scarce in Spain and parts of Italy, where stone predominated. .”
(France, John: Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades 1000-1300, p. 81)
not sure about the keep, because most I have seen on pictures etc. have one... also maybe the towers etc. increased in size over time, whereas the keep didn't? Furthermore, I think it really depends on the region. I assume that the keep lost its important in the later middle ages, whereas walls etc. got bigger (the later I read for this video).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
well, the Soviet Armed Forces were still in quite some reorganization and after getting a bloody nose from the Finns, I doubt they would have underestimated the German Army. Furthermore, the German military intelligence was really really bad, thus they couldn't know nothing, something I will cover in the blunder video, they didn't even knew for sure the commanders of the Soviet High Command with certainty...
I don't know the book, I only know about the book, but one should also consider that basically every country had plans to invade/attack other countries for various cases, hence also the existence of such planes doesn't necessarily prove anything. This although doesn't mean that Stalin would have not done so at one point in time, but I doubt in 1941 it was the case.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
thank you, well, my video was not intended as complete counter to his video, but to clear up those things that were obviously way too off. As I said, I agree with his intention and several points, but his arguments to underline the points were usually weak, far-fetched or wrong. For some people the general message is important, for others every detail and for me I like them both mostly sound, thus for me "Spandau" was "symptomatic" and not the real problem.
About the accuracy part, I know that the MG34 had single fire and was also very accurate, although I don't know if the Bren wasn't better in that regard. I am no smalls arms expert, thus I mainly addressed the argument.
And yes a response is always about visibility (or at least attention), but also respect, because writing comment is pretty fast, writing a complete script, doing a design, recording, cutting, etc. is "not that fast" and also a better way of discussion, because we are both putting in extra effort. We both know that a certain amount of comments are just WTF? etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+acoo kie danke, ja, gebe dir da vollkommen Recht. Das Problem ist, die ganzen Quellen dafür anzugeben (die description etc. ist extrem nervig selbst ohne zwingende Quellenangaben). In der EU sind Fair Use Rechte um einiges schwächer als anderswo, gleichzeitig können copyright strikes Channel killen. Die Grafiken nehmen extrem viel Zeit in Anspruch, allerdings hab ich genau aus diesem Grund das Format gewählt. Habe schon öfter überlegt das Format anzupassen, aber Bilder copy/pasten kann jeder und die Bilder, die nicht überall verfügbar sind, sind meistens geschützt, etwas das im "Land der Abmahnanwälte" sehr gefährlich ist.
Früher oder später wird es Bilder geben, aber im Moment hab ich noch nicht mal ein Standard Format für Flugzeuge, Panzer und viele andere Themen. Wenn ich nach Österreich zurückgezogen bin, werd ich mich näher mit einem Freund unterhalten, der sich sehr gut im Copyright Bereich etc. auskennt, dann werd ich entsprechende Anpassungen mit besserer Informationsbasis durchführen können, im Moment fokussiere ich in erster Linie auf Content, weil sich über Recht Gedanken zu machen ist extrem demotivierend.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
considering that the artillery in 1914 acted similar to Napoleonic artillery and that all major parties missed their lessons from the American Civil Wars and other wars, it could be that they were ignorant about rockets or that there were still problems that prevented a wide-spread use of them. There could be many reasons for this like doctrine, ignorance, technological limitations, mass production, culture etc. I simply don't know (yet).
well, about the Kassam rockets, you should not forget that modern day chemistry probably produces products that are probably several magnitudes above everything hundred years ago with a fraction of the cost and also our information transfer is not really comparable to anything back then. Also armies are huge organization that are tied to many organizations, thus they have reaction times measured in years and sometimes even decades, especially during peace times. Our world today is about 100-1000 times faster than back then, just look how old some of the major corporations today are: google and facebook. And how fast others basically died: myspace.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
war irgendwann mit der Schule dort auf der Wien Woche... das zählt nicht. Außerdem find ich Museen nur bedingt interessant, gibt Ausnahmen. Das HGM steht auf meiner Liste, aber ich überprüfe da immer die Hausordnung und wenn da steht: ein paar Euronen für ein Erinnerungsfoto und nur privater Gebrauch, dann wirds mal hinten angestellt. Insbesondere nach meiner EXTREM positiven Erfahrung mit Pivka Slowenien, wie auch dem Bunkermuseum. Außerdem ist auch ne Strategie dahinter, das HGM ist groß, ich bin noch relativ klein und videos mit Museum Footage sind auch noch wenig, bei entsprechender Größe etc. wird dann auch eher positiv reagiert.
Mal abgesehen davon, dass ich vor diesem Channel über 10 Jahre nichts mit Militärgeschichte gemacht hab und seitdem eher mehr Zeit damit verbringe Videos zu machen als durch die Gegend zu fahren, letzteres kostet nämlich mehr als Bücher und noch dazu auch Zeit. Die View Zahlen auf die Videos mit Museums Footage waren auch gering. Natürlich hab ich da einiges angepasst und anders geplant.
So gesehen, kein Grund zur Schnappatmung, weil es gibt jede Menge Faktoren warum und wann ich ein Museum besuche, wenn ich keine Erlaubnis für Fotos/Videos kriege, kannst generell davon ausgehen, dass das Teil keinen Cent von mir sehen wird, vor allem nicht bei öffentlich finanzierten/geförderten Einrichtungen in . at & .de.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Icono Clast
thx for the answer.
> Who in the Order of Battle is capable of what?
yeah, which is done in Steel Division, you have I think 8 different types of units - as briefly shown. Of course it is highly simplified, there is no hierarchy nor communication lines. They included some "command units" that have an area in which the increase the effectiveness of the surrounding units, which is very gamey.
> So in the End, Combined Arms is a question of relations, and knowing your place within a system of dependencies.
which is done in the game, because the "deck" consists of 8 types/categories, for each you can arrange several different units into, each category has a limited amount of slots and there is also a total limit on slots, it is rather simple, but it is very different from other systems and probably the best abstraction that is consumer-friendly. You do this before the battle starts. Once the battle starts you are stuck with those units, but only can deploy a certain amount of them, after a while you can deploy more. Also the deck is categorized in 3 phases, something I am not quite sure of it has a "real-life" equivalent, but I asked a Master in Military History, he didn't know neither.
> Did you ever ask yourself how your EngBn is organized?
did you ever looked at my organization videos? yes and no, so far the smallest level was company level for tanks & infantry. Rarely for (combat) support units. I think the main issue is that you look at a complete different level of abstraction. The thing is in other games like Company of Heroes, you can just win with tank spam. In SD you can't and usually you have to combine all those different weapon types and synchronize their effort too both due a limit on each type, e.g., you only get n slots for tanks, m slots for infantry and x slots for support (organization aspect), but also that certain weapon don't work very well against other (which in a way is stone-paper, but these strengths / weaknesses are not arbitrary).
So in other words you need relate your units correctly within your system (deck), which is rather simple and has limited/no dependencies in terms of organization, but have dependencies in being effective.
> Whould that game be any different if it would be called "Steel Battalion"? I say no.
I agree on that part, but who do you think knows what a Battalion is?
> And especially the reality part....
maybe I am wrong here, but I usually avoid the term "reality" like the plague, what exactly are you referring to.
2
-
> Airplanes drop bombs, tanks attack synchronized = Combined Arms. No.This is just different units moving and fighting next to each other., not within a system
they point was if you don't do that, you will lose, thus you have a coordinated approach. Since you also have to build a deck, which has several constraints on the total amount of slots, the different categories (infantry, tank, support, air, artilllery, AT, AA, etc.), a different pool of units for each category, a limited number of slots for each category and then a time constraint (3 phases, only after a certain amount of time, one can deploy units of phase B or C). Yeah, I didn't mention all those aspects, but there is a set of dependencies there even before the battle starts.
I probably should have said "portrays combined arms very well for a game, which is addressed to the mass market".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+UltraMegaSquirrel I was just thinking about different factors that contain all necessities of "total war". The classical: guns, armor (and mobility) is only suitable on an operational scale. So I would add: reliability, maintainability, "producability" (price, time-to-build), usability (after all the early T-34 sucked in that regard; stuff like three man turrets, crew), "command and control"-ability (coordination, e.g., radio for internal communication, but that is maybe more of a doctrine/army-level issue), consumption (fuel), "transportability", etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
well, in general, there are two extremes "theorist" and "practitioners", they usually don't really like each other. The first ones like to write & read, the second don't. Also usually (in the extreme) both think that they others have their heads up the ass. Another aspect is that transferring information from a book into the real world, especially that requires muscle memory, team coordination, etc. is rather LIMITED. So, learning to swim, you don't do from reading a book. So some of their points are totally valid, but I assume the audience for the book was probably at least senior NCO level or above.
Another point is such books are rather broad guidelines and then need to be adapted. This means for the guy moving into a house these field manuals are rather useless, again like reading a book on swimming.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
well, there is a reason for that, for a long time the archives were closed on, thus a lot of stuff was made up from memoirs etc. some of that was wrong on purpose some just due to error (see the Seven Sins of Memory by Daniel Schacter). For the most part stuff written without proper documents is usually hogwash. The thing about military history is that the documents the armies keep of their own stuff is usually very correct, e.g., we know that Corps X had 10 tanks assigned to a region, whereas the enemy claimed 20 tanks destroyed, so we know, well that claim is probably wrong.
Another major problem was the Cold War, which meant closed Russian Archives and the former enemies (Germans) are now friends. Thus, a lot of leverage was given like not looking at their mistakes to bolster their and the Western confidence, because well, who doesn't want to be allied with the guys that could have won if it wasn't for Hitler? (Also beating the dangerous Axis Jet gets you laid more than claiming that they barely had fuel to train in their jets to begin with...)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I have to take a closer look at the topic. The main problem is that the Russians downplayed it quite a bit, probably the US too, because well, shortly afterwards they were the new enemy.
Lendlease is interesting for many aspects, especially the strategic aspects of focusing production on key strengths of the different factions. As far as I know the US had excellent trucks and radios, whereas the Russians had a lack of the latter and/or couldn't churn out that much that fast. I think there was also excellent fuel etc. provided. Furthermore, even resources if I am not mistaken.
I doubt that the Germans could have beaten the Russians even without lendlease, but the Russians would also had a very hard time beating Germany without lend lease I assume.
take all of this with a grain of salt, because this is mainly knowledge from my memory on discussions in classes in 2003/2004(?) and even then it was a side-discussion. Furthermore, it is a highly political issue, which always complicates things.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
mixed bag, I loved "bife", the prices, but it always depends I also "worked" a bit and the level of punctuality I know from Austria and Germany is usually non-existent, which is less a problem on vacation, but a real problem if you try to get something done. I was lucky, did some crazy stuff in Cordoba, running around alone and never had a problem, although one close call.
I definitely want to visit it again, once I have enough money and can take around 4-6 weeks off, I probably hop over there.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
fact #1, on this video I did and guess what: google translate has a wrong pronunciation: (click the speaker below the textbox to hear for yourself)
https://translate.google.com/#en/en/riverine
fact #2, I once did a video were I tried to get every word correct, guess what, more words were wrong. The problem is I have heard so many different pronunciations that my intuitive ones are right about 80 % of the time, whereas my conscious ones are off by about 60 %.
fact #3, when I get enough patreon support (see goals) I will hire a professional to work on this, because the main problem is my hearing skills, I can't properly identify what words are wrong and which are right (see fact #2), hence I need an external reference. I probably will go for an US native speaker and trainer to whom I live-stream my recording and then he can correct me on the spot.
fact #4, your approach would probably take me 1-3 hours per video or even more, the worst part of it, it will be just tedious work.
fact #5, more people state that they love that part usually and they are native speakers, which are more than 50 % of my audience.
fact #6, as you can clearly see I put quite some thought and energy into that matter.
> Does not take all that much time to google it or use wiktionary etc.
really, go to my homepage take one scripts, copy it to word and then google/wiktionary about every 20 word, add the information in parentheses to each word and then also check via google translate how that word will be spoken. And use a stopwatch, then send me the script via mail and how long it took you.
http://militaryhistoryvisualized.com/tanks-101-armor-protection-1920-1980/
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
well, 1918 nearly everyone in Austria wanted to join Germany, after 1945 it was definitely a smaller number, a professor put it this way (from memory), although everyone hated to be ruled from Vienna, they even hated it more to be ruled from Berlin.
In terms of language, Austria went a distinct way of using various dialects after 1945 to distance itself from Germany. Basically, if someone speaks "hochdeutsch" in Austria, it is usually not "welcome". Fun fact, when I am in Germany I don't have a problem with "hochdeutsch" yet it feels odd if I hear in Austria. And yes the hearable differences are quite strong, there are also quite many phrases in Upper Austria that people from Carinthia don't understand the other way round, example "feu mi net an" - "geh mir nicht auf den Geist" or "faule mich nicht an" (literally translation). People from Hamburg had a hard time understanding my original "hochdeutsch" and it was certainly far above average in 2008. But some had even problems understanding a heated exchange in TV between a moderator and minister... which showed me that although I didn't thought highly about dialects in Austria, showed clearly that it has quite many benefits, because most Austrian have no problem understanding someone from a different province, unless they go full dialect. Nowadays people from Germany often can't hear anymore that I am an Austrian if they don't know the melody well or certain key distinctions.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
yeah, those crates, I dislike them too. I stopped playing regularly about a year or more ago. Still got almost the whole German plane tree unlocked (I played A LOT before).
thx, the thing is every time I post gaming footage there are several posts that try to tell how I can improve, I guess I will add in the future: footage just for fun, I don't want to improve. I got quite "allergic" to "random" feedback, because I seek it usually, but then I seek out specific people that I consider experts and also are open towards it, because sometimes it is more effective and efficient to just keep moving if it works. Well, and there are areas I don't seek it at all, like games. In university I was seeking out way too much feedback, it probably did more bad than good, because great feedback takes into account once goals, circumstances and capabilities. Also quite many passive aggressive and/or envious people will use feedback to attack you, be aware of this.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+thepilotofpoland So, back from the library. The early anti tank rifles were the so-called "Panzerbüchse 38 & 39" as the numbers indicate, they were just introduced, so very few of them saw action in 1939. My sources are scarce on that one. But for an Infantry Division in 1940, as an example the 9th around April 1940, Alex Buchner lists 90 anti tank rifles referring to the "Kriegsausrüstungsnachweis" (KAN) ("War Equipment Inventory") which is usually the ideal number not necessarily the real one. He also mentions that they were mostly useless even in the early stages of the war.
about the reserve divisions on the Western Front (1939), I don't have any information available, sorry.
I know for sure that there was artillery at corps level, especially the higher calibers, but I don't have any inventory numbers. Wikipedia lists around 1300 guns at the outbreak of the war and a peak with about 2200 guns in 1944. Since Germany was almost all of the time short on equipment, I would guess that those numbers are closer to the actual numbers than the number of 2000 at the outbreak of the war.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+bloodlazio the Vikings were not that bad, they just have a bad reputation, because all those people who could wrote back then were basically pillaged and plundered by them :) those damn monks. I know little about the Vikings, but they were also very successful traders in the Mediterranean and other stuff. Furthermore, all those precious metals lying around in the monasteries wasn't doing anything economically, so basically the Vikings were fueling the economy back then :D wanted to do a video about the Vikings for quite some time, but the articles and books I found at the library were not really fitting.
back to the problem, the main problem is that in Germany and Austria we "dwell" on the past, we don't "work" with it. It is all guilt on the one side and the other side tries to blame others too, which is also guilt... you can clearly see who can deal with that shit when it comes to humor. Humor contains two components: 1) Truth and 2) Pain (something that hurts), if an ("offensive") joke is not funny to people, they usually can't acknowledge the truth or/nor the pain. Because making a holocaust-related joke always implies that it did happen, so basically making such jokes (and even less offensive ones) taboo, in a certain way it is a denial, although in a subtle way and under the umbrella of "political correctness". Once at work I made a quite offensive joke with a Polish coworker, she laughed and every German was like frozen like ice. Well, she had no problem acknowledging the truth and pain, and German/Austrian-Polish History is not a nice one.
2
-
2
-
well, about the "dumb kid", these are not of my concerns and I personally think too many people use that approach as a result we get dumbed down assessments and especially "morally black-white" statements all the time, because "but they could understand that wrong", while completely missing that there will always be people that will get one/something wrong. Quite funny how the state, the media and often teachers treat us all like we are a bunch of idiots, until we need to fill out tax forms and other stuff, suddenly they assume we are geniuses.
I didn't really curate the data, because well, if wikidata had it as battle, I used it.
I think you see this a bit too much from the academic angle, this channel is mostly edutainment. And personally, at least for Austria and Germany the historians have far too less contact to the real-world. Academic work is mostly "stable" and long-term. Work on this channel isn't really stable and videos are produced rather fast. Additionally, I want to use my Computer Science background and the best way - as far as I know - is to use data analysis / visualization.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+ACElicious well, in 1941 the Germans attacked with a huge force and were rather reluctant to use Allies, especially the Italians. In 1942 the situation is quite different the initial plan for the summer offensive is based on 750 000 troops from mainly Romania, Italy and Hungary. The completely overstretch their forces and Stalingrad happens. During the airlift the Luftwaffe loses many of its training personnel, because the Ju52 are also used for training. Basically, the training and experience decreases all the time, not just the Luftwaffe, see the major losses in 1941 (my Barbarossa early date video), because a lot of Germans die and they get replaced with newer troops and non-German troops. Furthermore, the Allies War Machinery gets churning. Russia got around 18 000 aircraft in lend lease alone, furthermore lend lease focuses on providing that equipment that the Red Army needs,but the Soviet union is not so great in producing in good quality, like trucks and radios, thus it can focus on tanks. Whereas early on Germany could tip the balance with their superior troop quality, experience and sometimes also numerical superiority all that gets lost again and again. Also in 1943 the attack on Kursk just wastes a lot of Material, but I know little about Kursk yet. Basically, there was a constant loss and downturn on the Wehrmacht, whereas the Soviet Union and others got started and also learned quickly. Germany couldn't properly exploit its advantages and it was not suited or determined enough to switch to a long war strategy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
thanks for you comment.
Secondly, there are memories that burn into memory, yes, this is also one of the sins mentioned by Schacter and I was referring mostly to casual stuff. Additionally, there is a major problem that veterans have memories "overwritten" by seeing war movies, yeah sounds like bullshit, but there is plenty of evidence out there. There is plenty of prove that even suggestive questions can "create memories", e.g., asking people if the saw air plane X crash on TV. Even though there was never a recording of it many said: yes and quite many could describe the video.
Thirdly, I like Americans, if I didn't I wouldn't speak your language, I wouldn't have written 2 theses in English and also choose American English over British English for nearly everything. Why do you think I convert everything into ft, in, etc.? I make plenty of jokes about German stuff being over complicated, baguettes for French and tea for British. And yes, US documentaries use a lot of hyperbole, I like the "American style" in the clubs and personal conversations, but in documentaries I dislike it, the same way I dislike most German interviews, because they are unfun, unless English ones.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+Firefly I covered those mentioned factors all in my video so far or at least in the outline of it, sometimes I skip certain information in the final video. Also I will grade each factor itself, so basically if someone comes along and says: factor X is way more important than Y, well, I can adapt the grading for that factor, e.g., x2 instead of x1.5 and see if it makes any difference on the final result. Ideally, I determine the grading system BEFORE I even do any research on the tanks and let several people discuss it. So, when finally I add the data - which can be discussed again ofc - then the final result should be pretty "unbiased" (ideally). This is also the reason why I don't want to do any preliminary research right now, because I could produce a framework that would support my initial impression. Also the grading system could be different for each time period (I think I go with 1939-1940, 1941-1943, 1944(-1945))), not sure though if the grading system needs adaption at all.
thx! BTW I think I have sufficient information for a basic video on a Polish division, but no guarantees, cause I am having a hard time deciding which video will come next.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
you obviously don't understand the difference between guilt and responsibility. The German term of guilt is very similar to the English one, it also is a legal term. But I think it is even more insane to charge a generation with crimes they have never committed, don't you think? The main problem is that a lot of war criminals and other fuckers got away in post-war Germany and yes that is full of shit and completely irresponsible.
> I work in a university. We get lots of students from europe over, lots from germany, austria. And I have seen a change in these > young peoples view on the war over the last decade. They are not in the 'guilt' phase, they are in pure revisionism. I dont think > you are any different to them.
well, if you call me a revisionist then you are full of shit. Also I doubt that your observation about the students are correct, at least from what I have seen most Germans still have a major problem with it, maybe it changed with the recent generation, but I highly doubt. But you should understand one thing, Germans and Austrian have a lot of spite and if you press them (which seems rather obvious) then yeah, they will counter you with full force.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+MaxRavenclaw hehe, yeah, since I got your name a bit wrong the first time and you confirmed my suspicions, it was a bit of a "must".
about the British Armoured Division structure, it was pretty high on my todo list, but since I copied some pages from a book and got some further data from a subscriber, well, it lost a bit of priority, because I don't have I don't have to return any books, whereas my other topics I have to return the books. (This also happened to the Soviet Tank Division, had the data very early, but postponed due to the fact that I had copies on it.) Also I got some UK stuff up meanwhile. So, priority for UK topics also went down a bit for now.
2
-
2
-
2
-
thx, I wasn't too happy with my sources in that regard. Major problem was finding appropriate books. In German it is quite easy, academic stuff usually has unpopular titles and "appropriate covers", e.g., the castle builder cover looks like a supplemental book to TV documentary. Also I remember during my university time I also used a fuck-old book for castles and wasn't happy and the professor remarked, well, in this case it is okay, because not much changed anyway.
I skipped some remarks from Kaufmann that were "suspicious" to me like that square towers are more prone to mining, I think his argument were dead angles, but someone in the comment noted it is about structural integrity, which makes more sense. I got 3-4 books on castles right now and I am not happy, I added castle builders to my book list.
Piper is also a reprint that is very old.
About the terminology, well, I can only say that I hate it, whereas in articles it is usually not a problem, it makes video production a pain in the ass, cause I try to be on the safe side and thus leave out anything, because well, most of the audience doesn't care and to a certain degree I am also pretty annoyed. (I really love modern stuff where terminology is usually quite straight-forward.)
> If you do another piece on medieval castles I’d be happy to read, comment and advise on your script.
Thank you, the main problem is that I produce my content in a rather short time-frame. Since you wrote quite many stuff as well, you can imagine how much works goes into those videos. The video took 14.5 hours of only 3.75 hours were scripting, 1.25 reading & notes. Coordination takes time and waiting for anything is a drain on motivation and energy. Also the script usually gets adopted during the design and animation process. On another note, I probably will leave the medieval period for good, because it isn't really my cup of tea and the sources and limited accuracy in general is annoying me "to the core". Although I probably might add some castle videos from Austria if there are no licensing issue etc. since well, there are plenty around.
2
-
yeah, I can imagine, I didn't really believe it, let's say it was certainly a welcome excuse. In university I read up several months on various topics and then did 2-4 presentations each term usually no visuals at all, no script, because I knew my topics in and out. Now I making 2 presentations with visuals a week, scripts are a necessity (previously I despised them, because well, if one knows what he is talking about, no need for script, but with visuals and the amount of content, I am not able to). Hence, it is always a balance between: accurate enough? errors? production schedule? and of course, if I don't publish, someone else will and more often than not they pay less attention to sources and accuracy. It is quite a struggle in many ways.
Well, in my first video I was more focused on the non-military things, I am actually quite interested too, but since nearly all stuff is for my channel, it is different. Of course, it depends there are some areas of "social studies" that am less interested in, but they often have a strong political agenda anyway.
Thank You!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
not yet. Well, I thought so too, but had a discussion with 3 people where we followed the timeline and well, we came to the surprising conclusion that it wouldn't happen. But I need to review that. Lend Lease did a lot in many ways: food, fuel, trucks (those were used long into the cold war), radios, etc. this also meant that the SU could focus on that stuff that was good, like tanks and planes, but lay back on radio and trucks where the US was clearly producing the best stuff. Also I am not sure how the British would have turned the Battle in the Atlantic "so fast" or pull off D-Day and the Invasion of Italy. Same goes for the air forces, the US used day raids this meant a huge diversion of fighters back to the Reich and major attrition of pilots. Just the night attacks by the British would have kept the Luftwaffe losses rather low and more units on the Eastern Front. I guess the war would have taken at least 2 years more.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
> are really you going to keep perpetuating possible historical inaccuracies in your future videos
I correct errors, if I know them and if you watch my videos you should know as well.
Now for context, you might know far more than the average viewer, the problem is, for every expert like you, there are 100 to 1000 people that think that they know better, I have people tell me in the comment section that the depicted Panzer was III not a IV. I have 100 of people commenting about how bad the Sherman was, 1000s that repeat all kinds of shit myths, 100s that tell me that Blitzkrieg was a doctrine, a tactic, strategy, etc. (and usually that Guderian invented it...)
So, please the next you make sure to add that the F-34 and ZiS-3 are ballistically identical in the first place, because I actually thought you were just one of those people that have no idea and mix up all the Soviet 76mm guns or a weird combination of knowledge but little understanding. Luckily I had enough time this time to a) answer and b) now read your clarification of the matter.
Do you have any good written sources on the matter and/or links? if so please drop me an email (see the about).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Here are some aspects covered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTgf3UHMBjY
I would stay away from those memoirs or if you read them, consider them as "historical fiction".
A good foundation is the Cambridge History of the Second World War, 3 books, each has dozens of short articles from leading scholars on important topics that cover fighting, politics, economy, social stuff, etc. Additionally, each author did a bibliographical essay, so if you want to do a deep dive into a topic, they also discuss the various books about it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
hard to tell, also timing is an issue in this question as well, because without Hitler attacking in 1941, it could have gotten worse or be corrected over time, e.g., due to the experiences in the Winter War. Similarly, one need to look at the various levels as well, for discipline it could have positive effects for tactics not, for strategy maybe. Same for the economic level. It is extremely complicated, especially since the different levels usually bring a trade-off, e.g., you can increase tactical effectiveness with more aggression, but that leads usually to higher losses, which is less of an issue for the Soviet Union due to the government and manpower situation, for the United States this option might be detrimental on the strategic level. Yet, then again, every day the war goes on, support for the war in the United States might go down.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
> I'm actually a bit ashamed that no mainstream video games have really tried to have the conversation;
Your shame is completely misplaced. So, politicians, the media, etc. can't have a proper conversation about the whole issue and NOT EVEN computer games? And you think that computer game companies, that investment millions of dollars, years of development time and hundreds of highly qualified people on the line, should risk doing this debate? Seriously:
"On July 4, 2008, Fallout 3 was refused classification by the Australian Classification Board (ACB) in Australia, thus making it illegal to distribute or purchase the game in the country." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_3
You know why? Because there was reference to real-world drug namely morphine in the game...
You should be ashamed that people in Western countries treat video games like they are some kind of dangerous weapon, drug, mind altering device and what not.
2
-
2
-
2
-
sorry, ich bin bei dem Thema schon "abgenutzt", was auch daraus resultiert, weil ich durch die zahllosen qualfizierten(!) Kommentare einfach zu dem Schluß gekommen bin, dass ich da ohne klare Studie wohl einfach nichts glaube, weil beide Seiten sehr gute Argumente, Erfahrungen, etc. aufführen.
> Das du Experten und Analysten gefragt hast kann man in jeden deiner Videos merken und auch selber nachlesen.
Die Infos seitdem, sind für mich halt noch viel krasser.
> haben und du dich in deiner Arbeit gekränkt fühlst.
bin eher generell genervt und gestresst, was auch daran liegt, dass ein Großteil der Kommentare oft komplett unqualifiziert ist (betrifft eher die letzten Videos zu ERA & Leopard... dort ist einfach nur eine lange Liste von kompletten Bullshit Kommentaren). Da passiert es dann auch, dass ich mich im Ton vergreife bzw. Infos falsch einordne.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I don't know, but one issue is that it seems that some of the stimulants are blown out of proportion, nearly everyone goes for one book that has some really un-reflected dodgy statements in it see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=or08ALM1yOs
I guess you haven't done bootcamp, well I did during national service. What I learned at that time is, that the limits my mind told me "before" were rather low and keep in mind, this was just bootcamp, no war, nothing.
The campaign in France also was very short as well. Also pilots then and now, were/are usually "hand picked", a few thousand flying personnel, whereas the ground troops were in the millions.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I had no issues with other movies, e.g., Top Gun, but it goes for a light-hearted and funny approach, not a "grim dark" approach like Fury. In Fury, a lot of time and effort went into making it look as historical accurate as possible. It is just a weird combination.
I have a degree in computer science and history, yet, computer science and even more so engineering is just extremely hard to grasp by nearly any laymen, the stuff I pointed out in this video is comically simple in comparison to anything like maths, physics, etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
well, I mean I can understand that, because like 80-90 % of the time, the person commenting is either completely wrong, has no clue, does not give a source, e.g., people ignoring "operational", logistics or often just making complete wrong statements or referring to some documentary at some point in time.
Then you have like 10-20 %, of these there is a decent amount that are just "dicks" or point out a minor element that is completely irrelevant for the situation at hand, e.g., some minor detail while speaking about the big picture or the other way round, e.g., you make a tactics video and they talk about "but oil"...
Not to mention that you than see other videos or documentaries that are basically utter nonsense and have million of views...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
There was a mention of that in the script I cut, but none of the authors referred to it in that way.
"An enlarged version [of the Luftfaust] was the Fliegerfaust with six tubes of 3-cm caliber."
„Eine vergrößerte Ausführung [der Luftfaust] war die Fliegerfaust mit sechs Rohren von 3-cm-Kaliber.“ (Hahn, Fritz: Waffen und Geheimwaffen des deutschen Heeres: 1933 - 1945. Bd. 1: Infanteriewaffen, Pionierwaffen, Artilleriewaffen, Pulver, Spreng- und Kampfstoffe. Dörfler Verlag: Eggolsheim, Germany, 1995, S. 209)
This likely refers to another variant, Fleischer has a photo of a Fliegerfaust with 3 cm caliber and 7 barrels that was found near Leipzig.
Note also the difference in barrels.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
First off, thank you for a well thought comment that actually has a high-quality and give me some food for though, although I not necessarily agree with you, I respect your opinion.
> The scene you break down and criticize was less about tactics and showing what the threats
> to Sherman tanks were in WW2 and how they dealt with them.
Maybe, or maybe not.
Others have noted that is is basically a "legion of the damned" story / Dante's Inferno and that the war is just a backdrop and not really relevant.
Your explanation might be correct, but it sounds more like how a good computer game is structured and introduces enemies.
> The guns couldn't all open up at once (like they would have in reality) because it wouldn't have made sense on screen.
why not?
> First they see a machine gun and they take it out with HE, which shows how the Sherman was capable in dealing with
> common anti-infantry threats.
All weapons could have opened fire at once, it would not have been that much different and then we see how each weapon is engaged separately. I mean, have you seen many modern movies, they often have so many cuts that 2-3 weapons firing at once is generally the least of the problems.
> I think it has more with people trying to show what they know rather than actually trying to understand the movie.
To a certain degree yes, for me it was also a learning process or better "confirmation process", this is why I asked several people if my basic assumptions or approaches align with theirs and I was happy that in most cases there was a match.
Another aspect is, we make money by making videos.
Yeah, the bridge to far anti-tank gun scene is still in my mind although I saw that decades ago. If I remember correctly, the artillery suppresses the guns and then they crawl back later and shoot the tanks.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Hängt sehr von deinem Interesse etc. ab, Munster hat halt fast "nur" Panzer. MHM Dresden hat einige Panzer draußen, aber wenig drinnen. Ebenso Flugzeuge und eventuell Helikopter, ich glaub der Mi-24 Hind ist weg, weil die Overkill Ausstellung vorbei ist. Im MHM gibts dann noch Panzerfaust, Fliegerfaust, Uniformen, etc. ist aber auch komplett anders aufgezogen, also viele Vitrinen etc. auch diverse andere Fahrzeuge.
Also Breite ist in MHM eindeutig mehr, Tiefe was Panzer betrifft wird nichts an Munster vorbeiführen.
Munster ist auch "persönlicher", MHM eher professionell distanziert, auch wegen der Größe.
2
-
2
-
usually I suspect they were combined, but just a few days ago I read this in primary source of the German Army from around 1944 I think, definitions in a school.
Also post-war the situation is very different, the Germans had more than 200 divisions, how many divisions did your Armed Forces have. I guess less, everything is on quite a different scale.
For Tigers scouting was far more important for several reasons: expensive, heavy, very hard to recover, bridges don't really work, etc. by your time, a lot of those problems were already fixed.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
the problem seems to be that no of you watched til the end, read particularly the last line.
"But considering the low numbers and the bad shape of the currently proposed Leopard 2A4s from Spain. I don’t think it is a particularly good option.
If we are talking about the initial proposed number of 40 tanks, one could argue it might be worth it, but with just 10 tanks at best, so a tank company, I am not sure if the cost outweighs the benefits. It could be the case since I am not fully aware of the situation in Ukraine, their logistical capabilities and many other factors at play here. Keep in mind that Ukraine already has a large mix of different equipment and weapons. And generally big cats like the Leopard 2 are a logistical nightmare, so a complete additional supply and service chain has to be introduced, yet just for a handful of tanks, the question is if it is worth it. If it is part of an initial shipment that will be followed up by more, this changes the situation of course."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
before making stereotypical assumptions that make little sense if you had listened to the conclusion and even more so if you would have looked at my back catalog. Since in the first year(s) I covered the strategic and logistic side quite extensively: Why Barbarossa failed, Combat Effectiveness 1941 vs. 1942 (Road to Stalingrad), Loot Force one, etc. Not to mention that in the conclusion of the video, I specifically talked about the strategic economic aspects.
> rather than the strategic (and operational) one. At those levels, the Russians won hands down.
first, Soviets not Russians. Second, they won, yes, but if they would have won "hands down", it would not have taken them from 1941 to 1945 to reach Berlin, while the Germans where also fighting the British Empire and the United States at the same time.
Videos on Logistics from my second channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIeyq2mE9t8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n0BpQj9jqc
You might also look at Lend-Lease: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJ9PiDvI4pY
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
you assume you have a radio, you assume it works, you assume you can move easily and undetected with a radio, you assume there is a mortar, artillery, etc. nearby. Also, if you call in artillery, the target will likely hear it before and get into cover see Iwo Jima and Okinawa on the limits of artillery. There are probably 50 more points I can bring up, e.g., artillery precision, etc.
Also organization, artillery is usually called in a few level higher than snipers operate, of course this is really dependent on the armed forces and the conflict.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Also das Konzept von einer universellen Flak/Pak gabs schon, soweit ich weiß.
In Truppenführung, stand auch, dass die Flak zur Panzerabwehr genutzt werden kann/soll. Die 2cm und 3.7cm wurde auch auf Durchschlagskraft getestet etc. das müsste im Accidental Tank Killer zur 8.8 cm Flak vorkommen.
Und in der PzDiv 1939, war die 2cm Flak auch in der Panzerabwehrabteilung und hieß schwere MG Kompanie.
Die Frage ist jetzt was genau meinst du mit Äquivalent... Doktrin, Konzept, Umsetzung, etc. weil nachdem Amerika das Teil bis zum Umfallen produzierte, ist es halt auch etwas schwer vergleichbar.
Dann kommt da noch generell die Frage, was man jeweils darunter Verstand, weil ein schweres MG beim Heer hatte nichts mit Kaliber zu tun.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
> it is noted a week in advance that the Germans were preparing something
1) when was it written?
2) "at battalion level somewhat behind the front lines." well, a) what went on? b) what did the other battalions note? c) Did the regiment inform the the division? d) did the Division inform the corps?
3) Ok, let us assume hat happened: What other formations reported something of significance?
4) If so, how was it different to the "regular stuff" going on?
5) Do you know how intelligence gathering works? It is like the YouTube Comment section, there is A LOT of mundane, irrelevant and also sometimes wrong information out there, it is drinking from a fire-hose and then you need to sort out - fast (without computers, phones, etc.) - what is relevant and what is not. In hindsight it is also extremely obvious.
6) And yeah, one can be right be just making enough "predictions" as well, e.g., see how "The Simpsons" "predicted" Trumps presidency and various other things.
Does this mean nobody fucked up? Of course not, but you jumping to that conclusion is a bit of an overstatement.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
> Who the hell are you, to determine the usage of a word that has entered the common lexicon?
It is not just me, but that should be obvious if you had paid a minimum of attention. But then again, you knew already everything mentioned...
> Oh, and, everything stated in the video, facts wise, is quite "common" knowledge, at least
> to anyone that has ANY grasp of history.
You like to contradict yourself.
Ansonsten wenn du in den ganzen Artikeln von 1936-44 ständig "Bewegungskrieg" liest und vielleicht einmal "Blitzkrieg" allerdings in einer anderen Bedeutung nämlich für einen kurzen Krieg und nicht als Doktrin etc. Jo, dann kann ich sagen, dass das Wort einfach falsch ist.
Ansonsten gibt es jede Menge deutsche Historiker, die sich auch ziemlich gegen das Wort bzw. dessen missbräuchliche Nutzung aussprechen.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
first, thanks for the sources.
> for trucks and tanks. Were referring to SHIPS, which need tons of fuel to operate.
good point
Yet, you complain that we ignored logistics, although if I remember correctly, I looked into logistics for this talk and mentioned also quite some data.
> There are a number of books you can read about the severity of Axis fuel shortages.
For context there are lot of people in my comment section that constantly post "irrelevant because of Axis lack of oil" even on tactics videos etc. So, I thought you are one of those "well-educated" people.
> And finally there is research that crunches numbers which show that without captured French OIl, Hitler could
> never invade Russia (see Military history Magazine Oil & Barbarossa).
how is that relative for this video? Since, we assume a Fall of France anyway?
I mean you pretend that I don't know about Axis lack of oil? I don't, I am well aware of it, but as mentioned I think some people completely blow it out of proportion, those people I call "oilers".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
> Does it make a difference if a vehicle has to cross a bridge in the first, second or third line
yes it does. 1) Not under fire, 2) area is secured, 3) engineers have time, 4) bridges are tested/reinforced, 5) likely several options for other bridges (you assume they need to use the same bridge), etc.
This is the main issue, your understanding of military basics is lacking. Also, in the conclusion of the video the bridges were not even mentioned, since the logistical aspect and the low number of the Leo 2s was the main issue.
> The Ukrainian officer you mentioned in your earlier video
The video about the officer is my latest video, so it is not an earlier video.
> which is the reason why the Ukrainians do request Leopard tanks urgently.
In this video I talked specifically about the 10 Leopard 2 from Spain, which later turned out did not work, but then were brought up again.
The Leopards and many other weapons were requested from day 1 if I am not mistaken.
> These type of analysis are welcome by some German politicians who need excuses not to engage
I don't give a rat's ass who welcomes or does not welcome my analysis and if you think, that politicians use my video as an excuse you probably should visit your doctor.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Thank you for your answer, now, I guess if you have said to me the same thing in real life I would have just politely addressed the issue, but since comments don't cover the intonation (enthusiams, friendliness, etc.), yes, I am a grumpy old man if I think you need to tell me what to do, yes, especially if my decisions are based on a lot of thought, experience and a clear strategy.
1) you noted "fair use", which is a) just a defense, e.g., you already have a law suit (aka LOTS of trouble - see h3h3 productions) and b) does not exist in the EU.
2) I know of the paradox policy (I am subscribed to the forum thread), but you know what? They can change it at any point. Look at Bohica Ice, a company (NOT paradox) decided to claim all the revenue from one of their games he made videos on. So, there is NO guarantee. And considering the coverage I gave paradox and that I not even got a single retweet, although they clearly know of me, is not particularly "reassuring".
3) I put dozens of hours into each video, the mere risk that a company can take away that amount of work, because they have an issue with my content or change their policy would be a very situation.
4) "common practice", it is also common practice among a lot of people to smoke weed, yet, in most countries this is still illegal. I operate a business, I must think logistics, strategy and even about those fucking laws.
In short, I cover my flanks and react very hostile towards the "imperative use of speech", e.g., "Man you need to show the in game screen!" especially in combination with claims that are likely incorrect, e.g., "would generate a hell of a lot more views", "Copyright is no problem, it's fair use.".
Or the other way, I should be more polite and you probably should probably use less strong statements in comments, since nobody can hear if you have an enthusiastic or berating tonality.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Thank you, yet you seem to miss that "my position" is not necessarily the same as "my assessment". This video contains "my assessment" not "my position", the position could be same, but it could also be different. This channel is not a political or opinion channel (with a few minor exceptions).
Additionally, you might want to listen to my summary, I copy paste it, because it was specifically for the deal of just 10 Leopard 2A4 from Spain. You also want to read the last line.
"But considering the low numbers and the bad shape of the currently proposed Leopard 2A4s from Spain. I don’t think it is a particularly good option.
If we are talking about the initial proposed number of 40 tanks, one could argue it might be worth it, but with just 10 tanks at best, so a tank company, I am not sure if the cost outweighs the benefits. It could be the case since I am not fully aware of the situation in Ukraine, their logistical capabilities and many other factors at play here. Keep in mind that Ukraine already has a large mix of different equipment and weapons. And generally big cats like the Leopard 2 are a logistical nightmare, so a complete additional supply and service chain has to be introduced, yet just for a handful of tanks, the question is if it is worth it. If it is part of an initial shipment that will be followed up by more, this changes the situation of course."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
First, off the Germans were aware about Napoleon. Second, I actually did a video on this. Third, if you look at the Summer Offensive they always start around June & July, there is a reason for this, since the "mud period" is not only in Fall, but also in Spring, as such earlier attacks might not have been really possible.
Finally, even if the Germans reach Moscow, what next? Moscow was larger than Stalingrad, no matter what, the Germans would be exhausted when reaching Moscow and unless the Soviets give it up or the system collapses, it won't fall "easily".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1) That video is from 2016, from what I heard my pronunciation improved quite a bit, 2) all videos since around 2019 have subtitles provided by me just turn them on, 3) Native speaker have no problems with understanding it, 4) if you give me the money to higher a lawyer and pay the monthly cost for the speaker, I might think about getting a speaker, money up front of course, since it extremely complicates the whole work process, copyright issues, branding, etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Well, for Korea those numbers make no sense. I remember there were pre-war calculations on losses for Desert Storm for the Coalition(?) Forces (US & co) and they were extremely high. I assume those calculations you mention are based on facing the Red Army and in that case 1st rate troops, nothing else would make much sense. Yet, even for that case I find those numbers completely off. The question alone when combat begins is extremely difficult to determine, from the start of the battle an expectancy of 7 seconds... That would assume everyone immediately has a target and starts firing immediately for direct fire, for indirect fire or air strikes pretty much the same, but it would also mean everything hits or a very high saturation of fire.
The only thing that would make sense is like: if you are on the battelfield and if you are detected by an enemy with a "radio/radar-homing" weapon and he decides to engage you, you have a life expectancy of 7 seconds.
That would also explain the difference to infantry, cause I guess, one would use artillery or mortars to engage them, firing solutions and flight time of those things are longer from what I know.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
different height, different armor layout, different price, etc.
Of course, also internal competition who gets the StuGs, which later also became an issue and than StuG actually replaced to a certain degree tanks in Panzer Divisions.
And to a certain degree you are correct, but you also speak from hindsight, you know what worked and what didn't, e.g., in the interwar years nearly every country produced a multi-turreted tank, it was a dead end.
2
-
2
-
> The generic audience member whose aggregate attendance makes a movie profitable is not.
You are aware that I make money with this video, do you?
If the sole criterion is "makes money", then you are fine with extortion, corruption, drug trafficking, human trafficking, etc. or does "profitable" means "makes money that is created legally"?
> that you're only capable of discerning because you're a student of warfare/military history/armaments/etc
As pointed out several times, the movie lacks internal consistency, something that is generally a problem also with other movies. Do you know the series Andor? It is pure gold, because the characters and organization "act" like real people, although it is in a Sci-Fi setting.
The Top Gun comparison also severely lacks merit, because Top Gun is very light-hearted film, Fury is clearly not.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
> mit meiner Kritik bezog ich mich insbesondere auf das Zitat von
> Pöhlmann
könnte vielleicht Sinn machen, dies zu erwähnen? Jetzt macht Ihr Kommentar um einiges mehr Sinn. Ich habe nach über einem Jahr und 50+ Videos nicht mehr wirklich in Erinnerung was und wen ich aller zitiert habt. Ich wußte gar nicht mehr, dass ich Pöhlmann hier zitiert habe.
Der Kommentar klang eher wie die übliche "Video schlecht, weil du x gesagt hast" und es geht auch nicht wirklich hervor, dass Sie sich auf ein bestimmtes Zitat etc. beziehen.
> Dies impliziert, dass es Leute geben muss, die das Waffensystem "unter dem Strich"/in der
> militärökonomischen Gesamtbewertung für unbrauchbar halten.
halte ich für eine Überinterpretation; Es gibt viel Drama um den Panther ist eher der nüchtere Ansatz.
> Dass Sie so pampig reagieren, ist mir unverständlich.
Vielleicht verständlicher, wenn Sie jeden Tag 1-20 "Negativ-Kommenare" lesen, in denen Ihnen so ziemlich alles unterstellt wird, zB politische Gesinnung das ganze Spektrum.
Oder wo Leute behaupten Sie hätten X gesagt, obwohl Sie das nicht getan haben, dann wird es wohl verständlicher.
Letztens hatte mir jemand geschrieben, sein Großvater würde mir den Gewehrkolben in den Magen rammen, ob meines Akzentes, etc. Ein anderer behauptet ich hätte den Flakturm romantisiert etc.
Ich höre weder Ihre Stimme, noch sehe ich wie Sie aussehen, etc.
Vielen Dank für die Klarstellung,
2
-
2
-
> mit denen ich wissenschaftliche Publikationen beurteile.
nicht wirklich angebracht; es gibt ja die Aussage im Wissenschaftsbereich von "publish or perish", ich bin jetzt nicht mehr so auf der Höhe der Zeit, aber was ist so die Durchschnittsanzahl an Publikationen pro Jahr? Ich publiziere 1 Video alle 2 Wochen auf diesen Kanal und 1 Video pro Woche auf meinem Zweitkanal.
Ansonsten Wissenschaft ist nicht gleich Wissenschaft, ich hab ein Diplom in Informatik und ein Diplom in Geschichte, die Standards sind teilweise Lichtjahre voneinander entfernt. Ansonsten hab ich auch in diversen Diplomarbeiten Sätze gelesen, die hätte ich nichtmal im ersten Semester geschrieben. Ebenso sehe diverse Doktoren die geben Aussagen und Interpretationen auf einer sehr geringen Datenbasis von sich, die ich selbst in einen Vier-Augen Gespräch als "Vorschlag" oder "Ansatz" deklarieren würde, werden aber von denen dargestellt als wären es Fakten.
Zu Militärökonomie, hab ich mal ein paar Gedanken geäußert, das würde ich inzwischen wohl auch noch ergänzen bzw. die Aussage bzgl. "funny money" ist soweit ich weiß inzwischen falsch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq5DViSxKdU
Wollte da mal ein Folge Video zur Thematik 5 Stugs oder 1 Tiger machen, weil da ist auch ein ganzer Rattenschwanz dran, ist schon seit über einen Jahr geplant.
> Nun, das Problem besteht darin, dass Wissenschaftler keine Künstler sein sollen.
Ich bin "content creator", ich hab auch Werke, die eher wissenschaftlich sind, wie zB diese Edition/Übersetzung:
https://www.lulu.com/shop/bernhard-kast-and-christoph-bergs/german-army-regulation-on-the-medium-tank-company-h-dv-4707-mittlere-panzerkompanie-from-may-1941-deutschenglish/paperback/product-24459401.html
Manche meiner Videos sind eher executive summaries des aktuellen Forschungsstandes.
> die Lektionen beim Publikum allgemein fast wirkungslos ankommen, um so mehr muss man sich als
> Wissenschaftler um eine Präzision in der eigenen Argumentation bemühen.
im Kontext von YouTube bin ich in Sachen Präzision wohl am oberen Ende und mindestens ein Akademiker der meine Videos kennt meinte auch, dass dies durchaus akademisches Niveau ist (ist aber auch vom Video abhängig); bitte schauen Sie sich den Markt an.
Ahja, zur Orientierung pro Minute Video, die Sie sehen, stecken 1-3 Stunden Arbeit dahinter.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
> WWII have taken on a level of fascination, almost obsession, with history buffs and interested persons today?
to a certain degree, but I don't see anything out of the ordinary there, there are people interested in all kinds of stuff.
> The best examples are the Yamato and Musashi
well, I disagree there, I haven't any particular strong interests in those two ships on my channels in the last 5-6 years.
> Yet they are the subject of a dedicated museum in Japan,
I don't know enough Japanese culture and the reasons behind that museum, but it could also be for tourism, company, politics etc.
I would say it did not particularly help that the "History Channel" basically covered nearly every Axis weapon "documentary" with the words "could this weapon change the outcome of the war".
And in a lot of cases like Bismarck and Rommel the "hype" was mostly done by the "winners".
I think this aspect is discussed in this video to certain degree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxac3-aVVKQ
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Nope, apparently you did watch the video or at least no the end, read particularly the last line.
"But considering the low numbers and the bad shape of the currently proposed Leopard 2A4s from Spain. I don’t think it is a particularly good option.
If we are talking about the initial proposed number of 40 tanks, one could argue it might be worth it, but with just 10 tanks at best, so a tank company, I am not sure if the cost outweighs the benefits. It could be the case since I am not fully aware of the situation in Ukraine, their logistical capabilities and many other factors at play here. Keep in mind that Ukraine already has a large mix of different equipment and weapons. And generally big cats like the Leopard 2 are a logistical nightmare, so a complete additional supply and service chain has to be introduced, yet just for a handful of tanks, the question is if it is worth it. If it is part of an initial shipment that will be followed up by more, this changes the situation of course."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1) the numbers are rather clear, yes psychology is important, but fact of the matter is the Germans were running low on pilots as well and they did not get their shot downs back, since they were either dead or captured, whereas British pilots could survive and not get caught.
The perception of the time during the battle is something different to what actually happened. We are talking about the later.
2) ex-RAF officer comes to the conclusion that US strategic bombing was useless and what about what Bomber Command did?
> Those exceptions were a. the concentration on transportation and fuel as targets late in the war,
pretty sure I stated that in the video.
> My conclusion, "strategic" bombing was mainly for political, not military, purposes.
so you basically suggest the Americans and British needlessly killed tens of thousands of their own air crews, then likely more thousands of ground troops and civilian in occupied territories, since it prolonged the war etc. just for political reasons. I guess that works in a world where one thinks humans never ever make bad decisions even with a plentiful of information available. Also for the most part they did not know what worked and what didn't was the same for the Germans btw. when it came to strategic bombing a lot of wrong misconceptions etc.
2
-
> were, essentially, wasted, that the cost was disproportionate in terms of shortening the war.
I am not sure if I can follow, first you noted:
> My conclusion, "strategic" bombing was mainly for political, not military, purposes.
and now you stated that it shortened the war?
My assumption is that they were not really aware how effective or ineffective certain aspects were and that there was a learning curve, different interpretations, etc. which is quite normal. In hindsight one can easily call it a waste, if one looks at the available data and go "if we just focused everything on fuel, we could have saved X", but that is not how war works.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
“The use of concentrated cavalry masses for break-through and pursuit became standard feature only during the Napoleonic campaigns.” (Rothenberg Gunther E.: The Art of Warfare in the Age of Napoleon: p. 105)
Thus, besides often deciding the battle, it was also used to turn a tactical victory
into a strategic victory by pursuing the enemy and inflicting heavy losses. Thus, a lack of cavalry
could have dire consequences:
"In the opening battles of the 1813 campaign in particular, Napoleon's lack of numbers and the mediocre quality of the cavalry severely limited his operations, and prevented him from turning his victories at Lützen and later at Bautzen into the decisive triumphs that in previous campaigns they most assuredly would have been." (Bruce, Robert B.; Dickie, Iain; Kiley, Kevin; Pavkovic, Michael F.; Schneid, Frederick C.: Fighting Techniques of the Napoleonic Age 1792 -1815: Equipment, Combat Skills, and Tactics: p. 73)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
first you mention:
> A battle could turn in favor of the Allies by the decision of a Corporal if all the officers were incapacitated.
which is clearly the lower level and then you bring forward this:
> Events like D-Day where Panzer unites could not be released in response to the Allied invasion by anyone other
> than Hitler.
where we talk about operational or even strategic reserves; besides that I am not entirely sure if this is not an old myth.
So, you clearly don't know what level of command you are talking about. Strategic - operational - tactical? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yk0gROTHnI
> maybe it is a misconception and the German and Japanese Officers
first off, stop throwing them into one "bag".
> than was relayed to me by veterans I spoke to
veterans from what side and talking about when? Also keep in mind that a veteran has generally an extremely limited experience, e.g., there was an Armored Division or Corps that loved the stabilizer on the Sherman, another one hated it. The first one was trained on it properly, the other one wasn't. And this just refers to differences within one Army that the veteran served with, knew the language, culture etc.
If you talked to US veterans, please tell me how they should know how the Germans let alone the Japanese acted with their command structure. Also, there is a clear difference between the German Army in Summer 1940 vs. Summer 1944.
> Remember the victors write the history.
oversimplified and wrong trope again, or , e.g., how would you explain the Clean Wehrmacht Myth? Or how many books have you read about the Vietnam War from the Vietnamese side? Of course, this assumes that you think that the US lost, since some people don't think so.
> So apparently the winning side is just plain wrong or lying.
It could also be that you got the "wrong" sources and/or making wrong conclusions, see this video where I contrast veterans statements with statements by historians: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkR3URCU5Uo&vl=en
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
not sure, it could actually be that "we have to evolve" our systems. There is this talk (link below), where the mention that the Internet changed everything about the nation-state, because before publishers were a selected elite, everything cost a lot of money (books, radio, tv, etc.), but now, I mean look at my channel, still very small, but also a 1-man operation. This means probably that there will be a "clustering" of "narratives".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8jWJuNhLcc
the US election had this weird irony were before Trump implied or said something about fraud and everyone was like OMG you crossed the line, but then afterwards suddenly the "same" camp noted there was fraud/manipulation...
maybe it will lead to more consistent and/or reliable politicians in the long run, but right now it seems that everyone can do anything none-theless.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> And I believe I'm not alone in thinking it.
looking at the likes, some long insightful comments from quite many people, well, you are in the minority. It seems the minority that has a problem with this, seems to do a few things: 1) seem to misunderstand what authenticity means, although I covered that in my Stalingrad letters video: "authenticity should not be confused with accuracy." 2) think that I think that new media is better than old media, I don't like the old media for various reasons, but the new media won't or isn't so much different. 3) seem to think that war is about "killing" not gaining resources, 4) seeing the idea that businesses compete for market share and may use various methods to attack each others as a "conspiracy", 5) over-interpreting or ignoring certain of my statements.
You know, I don't want Google nor YouTube to have a monopoly, but that is not the point of the video.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
rather unlikely, my interest in the NKVD is limited and my knowledge about it is almost zero.
Furthermore from the FAQ:
http://militaryhistoryvisualized.com/faq/
What is your opinion / will you cover on Einsatzgruppen/Extermination War/Holocaust/etc.?
I very briefly covered the Extermination War (“Vernichtungskrieg”) in
my Barbarossa Blunders video. The little paragraph took me about 3
rewrites and ages to write. This topic is just a minefield, also YouTube
is quite problematic with just “normal” Military History, thus at this
point I will make no more videos or comments on this topic unless
necessary. Not to mention the “ability” (better inability) of society
and politics in Germany and Austria to properly deal even with simpler
issues surrounding World War 2. Thus, I will only mention these topics
when they are really important like Barbarossa, because they were a
central part of the campaign, but even then I will keep it short. See
also the follow-up question.
Will you make a video about [INSERT ss-division here]?
No, nope, NEIN, nyet, I have very little interest in the waffen-ss.
Furthermore, it is just a political minefield and also YouTube policy is
quite insane as it is. Not to mention the “ability” (or better
inability) of society and politics in Germany and Austria to properly
deal even with simpler issues surrounding World War 2. In short: little
interest + loads of trouble.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
you forget that "available" doesn't mean that they share your interpretation, as stated in the video, everybody back then basically thought in world war 1 terms. France was seen as the major and strongest opponent. The Germans beat the Russians in World War 1 several times even with their second line troops. Then they beat the French in 6 weeks! They were drunken by victory. They assumed that the Soviet Union would break, in World War 1 Russia did in a way break.
Just look what most Western leaders thought in the beginning of Barbarossa, Roosevelt one was of the few that thought the Soviet Union wasn't lost, most others thought Germany would win in a few weeks. Thus, this was not only some nazi or german interpretation but a common view.
It was not a good idea, the question in the title is "just a stupid idea?". It was not a good idea, but it wasn't just a stupid neither. The video is basically a call for nuance, discussion and analysis. (The original idea for it came from a top 10 video list that claimed that attack Russia was one of the most stupid idea Hitler did, which completely ignores they thinking at the time and not only that of Hitler, but of many professionals in and outside of the German Army too.)
> but you mostly presented information in favor of attacking and none against it.
exactly, because in a "just stupid idea video" it is not part of the scope and I have since then planned a blunders/mistake video too, but I wanted a better sourced one and getting sources for about 10 errors that range from military intelligence, logistics, operational errors, etc. is pretty annoying and tiring. Right now the script file has more than 3317 words in it of those are 1374 headlines and more or less finished script lines. According to my log I spent 4.25 hours on the whole script and reading. It has two major parts: preparation & execution. 7 points in the first, 4 points in the second. all subject to change.
Sources:
David M. Glantz Jonathan M. House: When Titans Clashed - HOW THE RED ARMY STOPPED HITLER
Hitlers Krieg im Osten Ueberschär
Pahl: Fremde Heere Ost
Müller-Hillebrand, Burkhart: Das Heer - Band 3 - 1941-1945
Glantz: The Soviet-German War 1941-1945: Myths and Realities: A Survey Essay
Eisenbahnen 2. WK
and probably some more
I can make videos were I ramble on for an hour and cover everything, but I prefer videos that focus on one part and then one with another part.
gotta get back to making script now, spent way too much time on comments the last two days.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
hey, thank you! Well, the ratio might change, but right now I am working on doing more data-centric stuff, thus there will be probably less of those areas. Another point is, outside of WW2 I need to spend way more time in properly researching, because I am not so aware of these areas, also there is nothing like the "Germany and the Second Wold War"-Book-Series that provides an excellent overview with a large amount of depth... usually there is only: overview or overwhelming details. Although, I gathered some excellent books on forts & castles, there will be definitely more on those, also since Austria is "littered" with castles, but there might be more in 2018 on that, I had to postpone a project due to costs and time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think you underestimate the lack of rare materials that were needed for jets. Also jets required way more sophisticated support facilities, proper runways, special mechanics, etc.
I think you operate on a level of too much detail, the video would be around one hour or more. You should also note that my video is basically a summary of James Corum's article in Why Air Forces failed, he is a well-known military historian and he also watched the video and didn't mention any problems with it.
I never claimed that the Allies gave their Allies good aircraft, but they used the existing aircraft industry to their advantage, there is a clear difference. The point about the He-177 etc. was that Udet failed unlike his predecessor to get rid of those early problems, nearly every plane or tank has problems early on, I doubt the 109 or any other plane just was perfect from the get go.
well, the RAF was never in any real danger during the Battle of Britain, maybe you should take a look a Overy's Battle of Britain Myth and Reality. This is also the view of German Military Historians btw. (see the German source in my Battle of Britain videos)
thank you, please go ahead and do a video of your own, if you reach a level that is more concise and balanced than renowned military historians like Corum, well, I will pay you a drink.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+James Hardy with English in Germany/Austria you are to a limited degree surrounded by it, because most stuff on the radio is in English. In Latin America that was different. Nevertheless, I don't listen to any radio, but I listen to Heavy Metal, which is English :) also I always tried to surround myself with the language and especially do stuff I love with that language: Heavy Metal, Computer Games, Books, Movies, etc. if there is strong emotional connection learning is way easier. With Spanish is was pretty hard, because I am not really a fan of Spanish, BUT once I got a Spanish Speaking girlfriend my Spanish improved immensely.
Not really, sorry.
1
-
+James Hardy was three times there, once internship, working in a youth hostel, Spanish classes, teaching in two schools (English & "computer stuff"), traveling, visiting new friends (who I met on the plane), bungee jumping, sky diving, rafting, downhill... yeah, loads of stuff. 3 trips, 11 months in total. Ecuador, Peru, Argentina, Bolivia and Chile. (sortedfrom longest stay to shortest). English is just easy and direct, also you can do 100 puns in English for every 1 pun in German, but I never knew that. I assume that I had almost no negative feedback from English, when I interact with people in English, I have a way more positive and relaxed attitude. Also back then computer games weren't translated and Heavy Metal is in English, so lots of positive "anchors". English is extremely useful and effective, thus it has a high utility rating, which was and is very important for me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't know anymore, usually source problem, some list Officers, NCOs and Enlisted men, some just total, some Officers and Enlisted Men, now I have a source that lists Officers, Warrant Officers and Enlisted, but not NCOs. Also sometimes I have exact numbers for one unit type, e.g., company, but not division or the other way round..
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
sorry for the late answer this time. bullies, I guess they are the same everywhere :(
yet, since you stuck to it, you "learned"/cultivated tenacity, something that will probably help you more in life than most other stuff. Well, personally, I would recommend to you - although I don't know if it is possible financially - to do a 2 studies. A hard one in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) field and History. I did Computer Science and History, in History you learn the basics in methodology and other stuff. And in the STEM subject you learn what you and your mind can achieve in a short amount of time, this should also make History quite easy. Although I don't know the requirements and course load in other countries, e.g., in Germany you are required to speak another language besides English fluently, not sure if I would completed History in that case. Also I remember a class - in which I was tutor - were one of the best History students did also Biology, sadly he ditched History as far as I know.
In terms of jobs: I think nobody can tell you what will be available and/or required when you graduate. I graduated in summer 2008 and started applying in fall 2008 right at the start of the financial crisis. So I would say: go for it. And since you already have some experience in "going against the grain", you shouldn't care too much about conformity. But I originally choose Computer Science and History in order to get a job and I had experience in Computer Science, yet at university I started to love Computer Science and was quite "shocked" about History or better how "soft" the standards were, especially in comparison to Computer Science, which is one of the easier Engineering degrees out there.
My main recommendation and what I would do differently: start producing content regularly from the get go or even now. There is a huge difference righting your paper for class and putting it out to the world. Also the regular stuff is more important than "perfect", because it is about building a habit and system not about one-time events and/or "epic works", those are created by doing stuff regularly. Just look at my first videos and my latest, there is quite a huge gap.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Buhu youtube policy seit ca. Sommer 2015: politische Konflikte, Gewalt, etc. sind nicht "Werbefreundlich". Das Problem ist die Kriterien sind unklar und alles automatisiert, mein Mörser video hat glaub ich allein in dieser Woche 2mal den Status gewechselt. Manche videos wie dieses sind anscheinend für immer "gesperrt".
Deutsche Untertitel heißt: 1) alles übersetzen, 2) die Untertitel einbauen, beides braucht viel Zeit und ist eine extrem lästige und unkreative Arbeit, die hauptsächlich demotiviert.
Englisch lernen in der Schule ist meistens ziemlich Kacke, ich kann dir empfehlen lern Englisch mit Sachen, die du magst oder sogar liebts, dann gehts viel einfacher, bei mir waren das Computerspiele (du kannst alle Steam Spiele auch auf Englisch spielen), Heavy Metal und Filme auf DVD (Englisch kucken und wenn du es nicht verstehst, dann Untertitel auf Englisch und wenn du es dann nicht verstehst die Deutsche Übersetzung)... glaub mir die meisten Filme sind auf Englisch viel viel viel viel geiler, Deutsch ist leider keine witzige Sprache. Außerdem stehen dir mit Englisch viel mehr Tore offen!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I never doubted that he was a noted historian nor that he did good or even great work. The P-51 was a great fighter plane, but I wouldn't take it into combat nowadays. I put out 2 videos a week, I have to be very focused with what I read, especially since I am a slow reader, thus I will skip works if they are too dated and I have others available. Nevertheless, here I also used Dull's Battle History of the IJN, which is also quite dated, but I realized that this cost me way too much time and haven't it been for Justin I would have made some serious errors repeating the common narrative.
funnily enough basically your last paragraph is exactly what is said by Justin in the Navy Chat on books for the Pacific War: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umAvCMMFUvE
I agree generally, yet, I have very clear priorities: I usually stay away from oral history and memoirs as much as possible, unless I have already a very thorough understanding of the subject, because then I clearly check or already know if something "doesn't add up" and I assume that I needed 2-5 hours more on this video not including Justin's time to get some stuff corrected.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
hey, nice to see you again!
I took Passenger Car, because it was "Personenwagen" in Müllers book. Well, for my research in the motorized and Panzergrenadier division, there were just like 10 or so SPW listed even for the 1944 setup. (another video linked at the end)
Yeah, I trust Niehorster also more, the book from Müller has sometimes weird sources like the dtv atlas for the bombing statistics, instead of MGFA sources. I was like WTF?
The artillery for the PzDiv is 24 but there are 4 Feldkanonen of 10cm listed in Müller, which I personally consider also artillery. I summed up several values here, because the intention is give an overview and as you probably noticed I was running out of space.
not entirely sure about the trucks and passenger cars, are there major differences in the numbers? Or is it the naming?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+MaxRavenclaw yeah, Steel Panthers is turn based and tactical, one of the few :( every part of the tank had a value, I don't know if they took the angling of armor itself into account, e.g., 30 degree, but flanking made a huge difference, also the turret turned independently so sometimes you shot at an unit and kept the hull faced to the bulk of the enemy forces, but the turret turned and exposed its side... return fire and BOOM. Was thinking several times of making a remake, but couldn't find a proper engine so far. I don't want to implement everything from scratch.
yeah, I have the problem with Gothic 1 & 2 too, but I never played the original ones when they were released.
1
-
1
-
1
-
+MaxRavenclaw yeah, time. I know that coding a video game isn't that easy, I made a few simple ones. Nope, not a developer, but I have an MSc in Computer Science. If it was my primary job, I guess I could do it in about 20-50 % of the time and the code would be of higher quality, but still it would take too long, if I need to write it from scratch. The main problem is that the time towards the end increases like crazy. (The guy who did Banished has a nice graph of it on his blog.) Making a game engine is one thing, making it a playable game is another issue. I know from my small games. Here is a link, yeah it is flash, but I coded it in ActionScript3 with the Flixel Engine (which covers a lot of basic stuff): http://www.kongregate.com/games/gladius2metal/escape-from-melakka
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Soliloquy the thing about "best possible" with no set time frame is that it often results in "very good", but it will always be on the safe side. A lot of great work is the result of clear limits in working in those, because we have to leave the safe route. You can't please anyone and if you try, you will please nobody. There are loads of trolls out there, some are conscious, some are unconscious, also loads of envy. Most people talk from their reference of life, which is often completely off. A university professor with a life-long contract and no business experience may be extremely smart, but any advice about freelancing could be totally off. Someone doing personality based video will tell you it is extremely important to show your face. Others will remark it is totally important to lose your accent, others will tell you, they love your accent.
In the end it comes down to several factors: 1) is something functional/dsyfunctional for your it's purpose (e.g., my accent is quite functional in terms of Military History, especially when it comes to German topics, probably it won't work for other areas, BUT Arnold Schwarzenegger could probably do almost anything, so probably I could do it too), 2) is it aligned or ok with your values, 3) is the effort worth it (time, financially, quality of life, etc.) If you want a challenge, do a video in 15 hours total and see how your audience responses, see if anyone notices a difference and remarks it.... I had videos I was not happy with and often one of the first comments was: your videos have improved so much...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Hōtarō Oreki Achtung Drama:
das Problem ist 1) es gibt keinen google support für normale Channels, erst ab 900.000 mins / 90 days watch time gibts nen eigenen Contact Button. 2) Google hat ne policy, dass man nur auf "advertiser friendly"-content videos Werbung schalten kann. Die guidelines sind absolut vage, aber generell ist mal Krieg dabei. Natürlich sind Kriegsspiele und alles andere ausgenommen (oder es liegt daran, dass die Channels groß genug sind). 3) Das System wird vermutlich ständig angepasst, zumindest würde das Erklären wieso mein erstes Video ca. 10 mal den Status gewechselt. 4) Das System ist von einem absoluten Drecks**** designed worden, weil es gibt NULL absolut keine Information bzgl. wieso es gemacht wird oder nicht. 5) Ich kann nachvollziehen wieso gewisse Videos nicht "ok" sind, allerdings ist auch mein Staff Briefing geflagged worden, wo ich NICHT über Krieg, Gewalt oder sonstwas problematisches spreche. Ebenso meine 2 test videos heute, die einfach 20 Sekunden lang waren.
Es ist einfach total frustrierend 20 Stunden an einem Video zu arbeiten und dann einfach mitzukriegen, dass es deaktiviert wird, ohne Angabe von Gründen und in einer Welt wo Milliarden für Waffen und Krieg aus dem Fenster geschmiessen werden, aber wehe man spricht drüber. NEIN.
Drama Ende.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Sebastian Adensam Hallo, kann es sein, dass du den Kommentar unter das andere Barbarossa video geben wolltest?
Bzgl. Deiner Ansicht, die Winterausrüstung war wichtig, aber dies war ein logistisches Problem, weil dass es in Russland Winter gibt hätten die Herren Offiziere aus dem 1. Weltkrieg wissen müssen. Ansonsten geht es nicht um einzelne Soldaten, sondern darum, dass das Gros des Deutschen Heeres schon vor der Schlacht um Moskau getötet wurde. Du darfst nicht vergessen, dass die vorderen Truppen die besten waren, aber die sind zum Großteil gestorben, dh. selbst wenn die Reservisten ausgereicht hätten, dann wären sie auch "nur" front-unerfahreren Ersatz ersetzt worden. Aber es haben ncihtmal die Reservisten ausgereichtet. Ebenso bei Barbarossa wurde wenige nicht-deutsche Verbände eingesetzt, 1942 Fall Blau wäre ohne die Armeen der Rumänen, Italiener und Ungarn nicht möglich gewesen. Im Gegensatz dazu hatte die sowjetische Armee im Herbst und/oder Winter bereits mehr Truppen wie im Sommer 1941. Nachdem der deutsche Erfahrungs- und Ausbildungsstand um einiges höher war, war jeder Verlust auf deutscher Seite bei weitem kritischer und hatte viel stärkere Konsequenzen. Anders gesagt für die Wehrmacht waren die Verluste wie Knochenbrüche, für die Rote Armee waren es eher Schnittwunden, die waren zwar beträtlich, aber verheilen halt schneller.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
well, kinda both. I am extremely picky with whom I work. Also I love to choose / find the right words / phrases / sentences and prefer to deliver them myself. Same goes for the design, the graphics itself I probably could "give away", but the design is something I really enjoy. Some stuff I would probably love to get rid off is uploading, adding annotations, descriptions, links, adding the script, etc. I really dislike that stuff, but that is also an area that is quite critical in term of access.
Also if I find the "perfect partner", I probably would to a certain degree delegate some stuff.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Gaius Baltar thx, believe me really dislike the word "napoleonic", rerecorded a few times, because in German we have a certain pronounciation of Napoleon, which is a bit different from the English... one of the worst words is "rhetoric", because in German "Rhetorik" is pronounced really differently... and worst is Aristotle, because in German it is "Aristoteles", thus no German speaker that hears the English version for the first time will ever understand it... it sounds so foreign and everyone assumes, because it is Greek, it must be the same in English... nope.
if you like, you check the google pronunciation for the English and German version here (click on the little speakers): https://translate.google.com/#en/de/napoleonic
actually the worst word so far was: "junta", because I speak German, English and some Spanish, so my brain has two references: German and Spanish, but the English version is different from both...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+MaxRavenclaw 1. yeah, thx. I started them both together. In Austria at that time we didn't had a complete Bachelor, Master and PhD system, beforehand it was only Master and PhD, no Bachelor, it was included in the Master. Now, Computer Science switched and History had not yet. I was really interested in History, but also had a good IT education. Hence I went for both and I really started to like Computer Science and History. One for the challenge and one as a hobby. After I finished, I didn't do a PhD, which was probably not the best idea.
2. :)
3. nooo what? Claw with UpperCase... yeah, since your name was one of the few I knew thus I didn't copy it, and my brain applied CamelCasing (a standard for naming variables in coding).
4. I don't really know, I guess it was a combination, 1) less gaming since I did the channel, 2) I started watching a lot of channels before that, 3) lately I have a hard time watching all too critical stuff, more into light-hearted stuff like MagZ & Jingles.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
the plan itself had many flaws and they committed quite many errors. And the comparison with Napoleon everyone brings up is quite "interesting", because the Soviets didn't really retreat, if you take a look at their losses, also the Germans didn't just push towards Moscow the advanced on a huge front line. It was a very different kind of war. The funny thing is, professional military historians and historians mention - if at all - Napoleon in one or two sentences in page long articles or even books, but those people that don't know nothing and think they know everything, always bring him up. (This doesn't include you, because you clearly know more than those oversimplifying idiots.)
The Germans mainly assumed that the Soviet Union would collapse, considering that the French did, who didn't break in WW1, whereas the Russians did, well, it was a wrong assumption, but nearly everyone except Roosevelt thought that the Soviet Union was doomed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+jp stevenson not sure, some say yes, some say no, but still, if you plan to invade Russia, you should be prepared to bring proper equipment. I mean the Russian Winter is not really "a new concept". They had equipment, but due to logistics couldn't ship it, well, strategic planning does include logistics. Mild winter would have changed little to nothing, because the Germans were lacking manpower, ammo, fuel and winter clothes, even a mild winter in Russia is deadly enough in Summer equipment.
Moscow wouldn't fall, because it was a huge city, surrounding/besieging it requires a lot of troops and directly attacking it, doesn't really work either. Stalingrad was smaller and it was attacked way earlier in 1942 than Moscow was in 1941.
I read somewhere that Stalin almost gave up, not sure if it is true, but yeah, if Stalin would have given up or the Soviet leadership in another way would have given up that could have allowed the Germans to win, but without that, I see little chances, because the huge amount of manpower and equipment losses the Germans endured in combination with the overstretched supply lines. You should not forget those men were fighting for several months, even with perfect supply lines that is exhausting as hell.
1
-
1
-
1
-
well, the author this video is based on (James Corum) actually argues that the Luftwaffe was to a certain degree feasible for strategic bombing. And in 1940 I think this is true, but by 1943 strategic bombing evolved quite "a bit", we always compare the He-111 with the B-17 and Lancaster, but that is probably a bit off. Also you should not forget that they never expected to beat the French in 6 weeks, they assumed for higher losses and time. They just thought they could do it, also nobody really understood air war back then. Overy writes that both sides assumed that the other side was doing terror bombings, because they couldn't figure out a pattern, although both sides in the beginning had clear instructions to avoid civilian targets. Same goes with massive over-reporting of air kills on all sides. We have the "computer game" / "information age" look, but back then they knew very little. (See my video on the balance of force of the Battle of Britain, there estimates were totally off). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM78_KqcrSY
about Crete I don't know, but didn't the Allies have also problems with losing their weapons/equipment during D-Day and they had a bit more experience already. Not sure how the Paras dropped in Norway, Netherlands, etc. maybe it worked out well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Greg Makropoulos thank you. The movie did a poor job, when I re-watched him after being way more critical and knowledgeable about World War 2 I suddenly noticed a few lines that actually will go unnoticed for the "uninitiated". One soldier clearly tells the officer that the officers knew exactly what they were getting into. Basically to get some stuff in this movie you need vast knowledge of World War 2. 1) The transfer from North Africa (probably the "cleanest" theater of war in terms of crimes) to Stalingrad... there should have been some narration over it that clearly marks this. 2) the victim part, the main problem is, if you view this movie especially with a German background you will see the Germans getting trapped in Stalingrad and it gets mentioned that the Russian broke through the Romanian lines. I am pretty sure that I and many of my school mates probably got the "Romanian failed the Germans/us at Stalingrad" from there, this was also I reason for my video about it. In no point in the movie this gets addressed. 3) the victim part: the main problem is that Germany is still stuck in guilt and blaming about World War 2 and the Holocaust. But nobody is taking any responsibility. The German officers are extremely responsible for what happened, but nobody talks about them. It is only about the Wehrmacht. Mixing Privates with Colonels and Generals is pretty fucking insane, but that is a constant in History, they rarely go for the "big guys".
I think the educational value of the movie Stalingrad for a 12 year old is basically 0. If you think showing the cruelty of mankind is educational, well than it is, but I think they will find out soon enough anyway and I think there are better ways to prepare them, although I don't them yet.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+beaconrider exactly, their military intelligence sucked, but I talk about the general idea of attacking NOT about doing the homework. The video wasn't about the stupid decisions about Barbarossa, I also clearly stated that the plan had many flaws. This video is mostly intended for the "how dumb to attack Russia"-crowd/videos. Thus, the title of "Attacking Russia in 1941" would be more appropriate. I have an upcoming video planned about the stupid decisions and blunders prior and during Barbarossa, I think the list has about 10+ items. Military Intelligence, assuming that the Red Army / Soviet Union would just disintegrate, completely underestimating the "regeneration" ability of the Red Army, not bringing enough trains even for European rails, not adapting after the all reserves dried up after a few weeks, etc. are on that list.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+David J Gill there was I think - an Italian - theorist that influenced many. Well, the accuracy increased immensely during the war and also the bombing effectiveness. The documentary "Fog of War" with McNamara is very interesting in that regard, although it covers only some aspects of WW2. Overy in Battle of Britain states that in 1940 both the Germans and British assumed the other side was engaging in terror bombing, because due to the lack of damage and intensity they couldn't derive a clear pattern and thus aim of the other side. Yet, the actually had clear aims but completely over-estimated the amount of damage they had done and
also their accuracy.
I am not exactly aware who thought that air power, virtually alone, could strike a death blow. Especially sometimes this could have been exaggerated, because some didn't see the possibilities of air power, especially in the Navy. Note that the Armerican Air Force in ww2 was the US Army Air Force, unlike in Germany it wasn't its own branch yet. (just a bit of nitpicking, but also interesting fact in case you don't know)
The assumption about civilian morale was of course completely false (I think the theorist was crucial in that regard) and it still is, it is still a common view by many people nowadays, usually combined with the assumption that they enemy is "decadent and weak". Once the Allied bombers focused on fuel production the strategic bombing was successful.
Air Power is a tool, for some stuff it works great, for some parts it doesn't, for some parts you need to adapt your approach.
Air Power today is also extremely expensive and ready to use, thus it is used sometimes in a way not built for. I think I read that some upgrades like the Longbow version of the AH-64 were quite detrimental for the its performance in Iraq etc. because those upgrades were made for a symmetrical conflict like a war with the Soviet Union and not for asymmetrical warfare like war in Afghanistan and the latest Iraq War.
1
-
1
-
interesting point, Buchner and the manual only mentioned the 300 number, but I did some digging, it seems we are both right: "Bis zum Rußlandfeldzug war noch vorgesehen, die MG-Kästen mit 300 Schuß (6 Gurte zu je 50 Schuß) zu füllen. Dazu wurde der Kasten mit versetzt gelagerten Gurtteilen gefüllt:
unten 2 Gurtteile mit Geschoßspitzen entgegengesetzt zur Schußrichtung, oben 4 Gurtteile
mit Geschoßspitzen zur Schußrichtung. Dies führte dazu, daß unter Umständen während
eines Feuergefechts der Gurt gedreht werden mußte, was oft zu Hemmungen führte. Daher
legte man später die Gurte alle mit den Spitzen in Schußrichtung ein, allerdings fasste
der Gurtkasten dann nur noch 5 Gurtteile, insgesamt also 250 Schuß. "
http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Soldat/Bekleidung_Ausrustung.htm
nope, don't know the film. thank you!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Freddy "These rules make sense in a lot of cases and are not the problem on their own." well, he is clearly referring to the censorship of nazi stuff and sorry, claiming in the next sentence that "are not the problem on their own." just shows the complete acceptance and uncritical approach towards censorship.
Yes, I overreacted, but the problem is that guy is smart and yet he completely denies that there is a problem with censorship. In a certain way this is actually worse. He does not directly defend it, but he isn't really aware that is a totalitarian measure and exactly that is the problem. He is justifying it.
yeah, the toy thing etc. is an important part about informing people, but his attitude towards censorship, which is so common in Germany and Austria is what infuriates me and thus I think it is so important to address. I may be wrong, but I think his view is the majority and exactly that is the problem, as stated in the video: there is a strong tendency in Germany to control media and discourage dissenting opinions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+JuergenGDB thank you, but I didn't mention any numbers on the sabotage part, it was more a trivia information. I agree that the major problems were due to many different factors and sabotage probably a very minuscule one. After all, I am not very happy with the video anymore, nor quality, content nor sources, after all it was my first video and originally should have been only about numbers.
About the begin of war time production, newer research indicates that it began way earlier than previously assumed (see: Tooze: Wages of Destruction), but I learned that in the discussions about this video on /r/warcollege.
Yeah, logistics was a major part. Only did one video about Luftwaffe statistics, but as someone mentioned it is a bit in "how to NOT do logistics" lesson. Additionally, it is based on a very good source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgGXRJg-NNU
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
well that is actually completed outdated, straight out of the Cambridge History of the Second World War from 2015 (or you also check on Overy's Battle of Britain):
“By 16 September,
the day of the last great attack, Germans believed they had driven Fighter
Command down to 177 effective fighters. The true number was 300 per cent
higher, 216 Spitfires and 356 Hurricanes.”
“These assumptions
shaped the Luftwaffe’s turn from attacking airfields and C3I [Command, Control,
Communications & Intelligence] to London – an error, but less significant
than is often claimed. Those early attacks inflicted little damage. Had Germans
continued them, they still would have lost, just less quickly or badly.” (Ferris,
John; Mawdsley, Evan: The war in the West, 1939-1940. The Battle of Britain?
In: Cambridge History of the Second World War, Volume I: p. 326)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
the problem is there is "no correct classification", because every country has a slightly different one, just look at the use of light, medium and heavy, e.g., artillery the Germans had no medium, same goes for MG, but for tanks they had. Yet, other countries had light, medium and heavy artillery... and also MGs... so usually I just go with the countries classifcation, unless I talk specifically about the weapon itself, else my video would get unnecessarily long. I mention it, when it is important for comparison, e.g., in my Stalingrad video.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+ACElicious yeah, the Fw200 is just one huge target, I love to shoot it down, but it is a quite useless plane for the pilot, for the enemy it is an RP-Piñata :D This is also the reason for the BV 222, he already have loads of quite useless planes in it anyway.
The main problem is that War Thunder game mechanics are generally broken. In the "old days" (2013), AB usually lasted until one side ran out of air planes, since ages I haven't seen that at all. Started to play RB a while ago, but the sometimes insane BRs etc. is mutilating this great game.
Yeah, the He177 should be already in the game for ages. For me one of the best ingame bombers are the late Do217s, 4x1000kg + dive bomb ability. The He177 would have that too (at least to a certain degree, it should have).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Omair Iqbal the notion is way too simplified, just look at the definition of "victor" after world war 2: The British won, yet they lost basically their Empire shortly afterwards and faced years of austerity. Poland? Well, they lost and won and lost, being part of the Warsaw Pact was probably not what they aimed for, also their country moved to the west, because the Soviet Union expanded to the West. Now, Germany was cut into two parts, but since the "West" needed Germany, they basically gave many of the nazis and officers (who were definitely responsible for a lot of "crap") a "pardon". Take a look how many people still blame Italy(!) for the failure of Barbarossa, although it was clearly the arrogance and insufficient preparation of the Germans. Look also at the general positive view many people have on the Wehrmacht, especially outside of Germany.
I would say: "History is written so it fits into the necessities of our current politcis." This is also how our personal memories work, we (our "brains") adapt our memory constantly.
And yes the nazis did commit a lot of horrible crimes and I don't think there is much exaggeration going on. The only problem I see is that people keep to bring up the nazi crimes, yet completely ignore the crimes we are still committing all over the world again and again... also nobody really tried to tackle the main problem: how did Hitler, Stalin and many others became the way they were and I have little doubt the reason was because they were treated like shit for a long time in their early lifes...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sarkeesian was invited by the EU, Google, etc. if you only think that law is a force, well, I think you clearly underestimate the power of public opinion and the media. And the old media doesn't like games or other new media, for many reasons, like generational, but also threat/competition. Therefore Anita was and is a valuable ally of the Old Media and vice-versa.
Law is overt force, public opinion is more of a covert force.
For me the connection is extremely obvious, although without Total Biscuits point that the Games are a threat to the old media and thus shunned for that reason too - besides the generational and other factors - was very important, but I learned that years before I started this channel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
well, the German military wasn't bad at all, it was just optimized for a short war, furthermore the industry and resource situation was quite problematic. On the operational level Germany was excellent, due to several reason, but on the strategic level there was a serious lack. Well, they were lucky prior to World War 2 with getting Saarland back, Austria and basically the Czech Republic. In the war itself, well, every side got lucky, but especially in the Battle of France there was quite some luck and errors of the Allies involved.
It is quite crazy how far they got with horse drawn artillery, which also shows that they were not "bad". Yet, they clearly made some stupid mistakes.
1
-
lately I am a bit overwhelmed by the amount of comments, also I need to start making videos.
But basically I my viewpoint is: German military was well-trained and experienced due to early build-up, early combat experience (Spain), early non-combat experience (Austria, Czech), superb build-up prior to the nazis (they only kept the best of the best in the army and prepared for a rapid expansion). Operationally they were excellent, but not strategically. Yes, they had luck, but you can't fight for 6 years with just luck. The problem is that there was quite some "german supermen"-thinking going on especially outside of Germany in military history, but the other wave of "lucky Germans" is hogwash too. Also luck is preparation meets opportunity. The Germans were well prepared and they improvised a lot with captured equipment, bad logistics etc. thus claiming that the military was "bad" is the same oversimplification like saying it was "great".
I guess I will do a video on it at one point. Basically there are a lot of scopes here, I guess we mostly agree, but we are often arguing / looking at a different scope.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
thanks, well, I don't really know that video, I might have seen it, but it wasn't in my mind while working on this one. I mainly fell in love with the potential of this, but viewers are usually as interested in potential as socialites are interested in raw diamonds. Or in other words, I clearly underestimated the shortcomings of the video, I saw them, but I have seen various shortcoming in large amount of my videos before, so yeah, clearly a distortion problem between creator and audience.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
oh wait, he did an English Article:
Urban Warfare Doctrine on the Eastern Front, in: Kay, Alex
J./Rutherford, Jeff,/Stahel, David (eds.): Nazi Policy on the Eastern
Front, 1941: Total War, Genocide, and Radicalization. Rochester,
University of Rochester Press. 2012, p. 45-73.
here is his page:
http://www.vtg.admin.ch/internet/vtg/de/home/schweizerarmee/organisation/hkaneu/milak/militaerwissenschaftliche/publikationen/adrian_wettstein_.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+FireFyfe thank you! Good in degree for what? that is the question. Another question is, can you afford it. Also, you might be disappointed, at least I was to certain degree. It of course really depends on you, the university and the country you live in. I remember after the first year I had my latin exam (prerequisite in Austria for History, but you can do it in parallel), the professor asked how I was feeling about Computer Science and History, I said "well, Computer Science is way better than I expected and History, is kinda odd, I don't know, but I think most colleagues are kinda boring and dispassionate, but maybe I am just an arrogant prick." and her response was something on the line, "don't worry, its not you, its them. I had a similar experience." But I should note that almost all of professors from History, Rhetoric and Computer Science noted a certain lethargy in the students they didn't know from other places and all of them taught also in different countries and universities. The good part of it: I got more attention, because well, it's quite easy to shine in a "dark" place. If you can study for "free" (there are always opportunity costs!) I would recommend doing some science or technical stuff too, I rarely got challenged in a History class, but I was almost always challenged in Computer Science classes, and challenges will help you grow, but note I can only speak for Salzburg and from my experience and I am a bit odd.
yet, in short I would recommend you to follow your passion, but you should check if studying History also matches your passion for History, because well, it can be very different at university, this can be great or terrible, but don't stick around if it isn't your cup. That is also the benefit of hard classes, people who are not passionate about don't hang around, if classes are too easy, people will just hang around and nobody benefits from it.
enough for now, feel free to ask more questions and clarify what you exactly mean with "good degree".
1
-
+FireFyfe I know very little about the UK, but a friend once told me that in the UK History majors often get good jobs, but not sure if it is true or not. Also a German professor said that the Humanities were quite defunded in the UK, but he wasn't a historian and I think History in the UK has quite a different standing/reputation in society. Furthermore, in Germany academics frowned for a long time doing "popular" books, whereas in the UK this is quite common. This also means way more opportunities for Historians. There is quite some debate about what makes a great college/university (in Germany/Austria we don't use colleges, even undergrads go to university, thus I usually only use university). The content is probably not that different, but your colleagues are usually quite different that means you probably will get better opportunities due to your social network being filled with more "upper class" and extremely driven people.
well, I made quite a lot of unwise career decisions and I also started applying for jobs in fall 2008, just after the financial crisis. I basically didn't do history for about 8 years at all and I am passionate about a lot of stuff, which is a great gift, but also leads to challenges like wanting to do everything. Since you are completely into History I would say go for it and also try to establish at YouTube Channel, blog or something else were you created and build something right from the start, because no matter what, you will learn a lot from creating stuff and it also great on your resume for anything you apply for.
I am 35, nope not really, but I think I finally figured out what I always wanted and in hindsight it is obvious. I was always known for my speeches and presentations (I only used PowerPoint when required to, else I just used my voice), also I love to inform people. I can do research, but I am not really into digging really deep, but also not as shallow as journalists. I personally want to establish myself as a academic orator, someone how stands between the universities and the public, because journalist are more on the popular/trivial/fast information side.... I once wrote a small proposal at university to create a portal for the public to ask question and students in their classes would write answers (all those papers that nobody but the professors read could be used in other ways too), but well, he didn't understand my proposal and also I guess it was the wrong professor, he already had plenty of his own ideas.
1
-
+FireFyfe so you have a blog or where do you publish your ideas? (reddit?)
thank you, there are many ways to support this channel. 1) you can share my stuff, every share helps, because it increases usually the rating of video for the search algorithms, well, unless you start spamming it ;) 2) there are usually affiliate links to the books I use in the description and also on my homepage (still work in progress): http://militaryhistoryvisualized.com/book-recommendations/ if use such a link and then buy a product (doesn't matter which one) I should get a small share. 3) research is a double edged sword, because I often correct my own errors, so I am quite cautious with any source, BUT what you probably could help is unit information data. They are usually omitted in all major publications, but those few publications that publish them usually have them in the appendix on a few pages, because they are usually just tables with men / unit + equipment. The "US guys" call them Table of Organization & Equipment (TO&E), they are also the only ones that publish them regularly, unlike Germans, Brits, etc. yesterday I couldn't find any for British WW1 divisions at the library (of one of the German Armed Forces University in Germany), meanwhile I found some information via google books, I need to check out how good they are actually. But generally if you know good sources or know where to find them that would be great. But be aware that their quality varies a lot, quite often I thought I had found the perfect source and at closer look it had so many holes in it that I couldn't use it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
well, if you think it is glorification, well yes my video has a positive undertone, but I also make it clear that the Vikings and their time wasn't really that nice (nor is today, if you are living in the wrong parts).
I think you are one of the moral guys out there, well, I don't think there is not much morality out there in this world, but I know for sure that usually those that have openly "high standards of morality" and preach them regularly also often commit various crimes, e.g., catholic church. You see early Vikings didn't have - as far as I know - a religion that actually should have been quite peaceful like Christianity. I usually judge people by their own reference system, although that of the Vikings is sadly mostly lost to us, so it is hard to tell, but from little what I know it was quite different from the teachings of Christ.
1
-
1
-
1
-
yeah, but nearly everyone on this planet can show you those countries on a map, well, maybe Ireland and New Zealand could be a bit hard. Thus, my trailer states "German speaking people" instead of "Germans", exactly for that reason, because I am not a German. Yet, rhetorically "Germans" would have been "better", because shorter but incorrect and "Austrian dialect" is not that fitting. Also many stated that I am the most German sounding person they heard and also Germans stated "thick German accent" (WW1 Series). For non-native speakers stating that I am the most "german sounding person", I actually assume (to a certain degree) that is due to Hitler having also an Upper-Austrian dialect and intonation, after all a fellow Upper Austrian told me that he could hear that I am from Upper Austria in my English. And his voice is probably the best known, besides Arnold Schwarzenegger. I guess it is mostly an intonation, melody, etc. thing.
Yeah, and for national identity that stuff is important, as a "reminder" in 1918 Austria called itself "Deutsch-Österreich" (German-Austria) until the Versailles Treaty forbade that, yet after 1945 most Austrians assumed a very anti-German stance, which was a nice "way out", because after all Hitler and Eichmann were (once) Austrians.
There is a difference between Austria and Germany, but it really depends Bavaria (province of Germany) and Austria are quite similar, similar dialect, both highly catholic and conservative.
Also I lived quite some time in Germany and I just recently moved back to Austria, usually I am not that picky about being called German here, except if I am a bit annoyed and well, the recent political events had some influence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
yes, but photos would break the style, yet the greatest problem with photos is copyright.
Are you going to use photos and/or footage?
Yes, if they fit and if I have some where I don’t have to add loads
of copyright information in the description or video itself, this means
photos I took.
The reasons for this are simple, I sit in the European Union, which
has rather weak fair use rights. Furthermore, I am also located in
Austria, which is neighboring Germany, where lawyers have a strong
tendency for suing people about minor shit like that. Copyright
law-suits are expensive, because they require a lawyer. Also most photos
and footage I could use, was already used a bazillion times by others
anyway, so I couldn’t add much novelty anyway. Thus, the risk is not
worth the benefit. Although I have some ideas for footage videos in the
future, but I have so many plans and ideas, which are far “safer” too.
TIME!
http://militaryhistoryvisualized.com/frequently-asked-questions-faq/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+MaxRavenclaw well, I am not entirely sure, but I guess you are both right. Germany used a lot of captured stuff, in some cases they adapted it, e.g., some of Russian 76mm guns were re-chambered to use 75mm. I am no expert on this matter, but I guess they looked if there were sufficient numbers and spare parts available to "integrate" vehicles, but if there weren't I guess the "used" them anyway, e.g., on a smaller scale, like only for one division etc. and "used" also means when the vehicle breaks down or can't be replaced, well, then it gets abandoned and used for spare parts of similar vehicles.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
fun fact, for the Cold War one of my professor listed I think 5 "major schools of thought/interpretation" and he noted that there are literally hundreds if not thousands. If you read one author of school X, it usually made a lot of sense, then you read an author of school Y and it was quite different, yet still made a lot of sense.
the other thing is, we know that the German intelligence sucked balls in regards to the Soviet Union. We also know that one of the planners of Barbarossa stated that the Soviets sadly won't do a "Liebesdienst" (love service) to the Wehrmacht by attacking.
Besides for me the whole discussion if Hitler or Stalin shot first is quite ridiculous, because if you see two rabid dogs fighting in the streets, you really care who attacked first? I don't, cause it doesn't really matter considering their crimes and track-records, they were off the charts, as were their regimes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Crag_r I don't think so, I don't have time right now, but I assume that the PBY's in the pacific were part of the US Navy and not the US Army Air Force. Also it seems that fleet air arm, is actually a word mostly used by the British. I am no native speaker, but I think the author was and if I remember correctly he is an American, but if not mistaken teaches at an UK university/college right now.
Fleet air arm in that regard would have implied several things: 1) no Göring messing around, 2) strong coordination with the Kriegsmarine, but 1) is the most important.
It has nothing to do with what targets are attacked, of course you can the USAAF to attack German ports.
yeah, exactly the important part is the command authority. Calling it a Coastal Command under Navy authority would also suffice. I am glad that we are back at discussing :)
I get your point, I usually try to be more precise with my terms, but in this case I just used the one in the article, although I still think it is correct.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aaronjones9826 The issue is, they don't state "for the Allies the Panzer IV was the workhorse of the Wehrmacht", like you do, they state "workhorse of the Wehrmacht". That is one important point, yet, probably far worse point is the following.
If you look into war crimes with the "Western perspective", the vast majority was committed on the Eastern Front etc. so going down the "Western" route, we are back at the clean Wehrmacht myth.
Could be, but at Kursk there were 684 (Panzer II, 38 (t), Pz III) and 622 Pz IV.
The Panther, Tigers, etc. are not included in those numbers.
Additionally, the numbers seem to be in a complete different ratio than all the other numbers.
Curios, I hope Jentz has something.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
well, yeah, I lately discussed this with a German military historian - I think we have it on video - Germany and the Second World War (Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. Weltkrieg) Series was written in a way with this premise. Although, I disagree it is due to "pacifist / anti-nazi education". I think it is more related to the early post-war literature with all the "close-calls" (Battle of Britian, Moscow, Stalingrad, etc.) myths, especially in regards to the Generals memoirs that kinda implied that they could have won, if it was not for Hitler. This is a general pattern btw. that quite often a lot of stuff is written as a counter, I have seen this with papers, e.g., the one used for the Taranto video. Additionally, it is also present in my videos.
I will address it likely at one point, yet, for that I want to accumulate far more knowledge than I have currently.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
yeah in theory it is easy, the thing is, when I record I don't want to stop to find out how a word is pronounced, because it breaks the rhythm and breaks up everything else. I also don't have the time to check every script before recording for "problematic words" and there are plenty in English as well. Finally, I can't remember the pronunciation of most words longer than a few seconds. Ultimately, no matter what you do, someone will complain about it. Fact of the matter is, I had an English native speaker (Canadian) as a guest in 2016, we did a 20-60 minute video, he at one point said "mediocre" the wrong way... the whole comment section was all about that, not about 20-60 minutes of content that was new research straight out of his thesis... Meanwhile there are plenty of channels that note all kinds of bullshit and nobody notices, because they just don't have any idea.
1
-
1
-
Hängt von vielen Faktoren ab: Generation, Einheit, Erinnerung, etc.
Aber wenn ich noch etwas beim Heer gelernt bzw. danach, dass die meisten Kameraden danach entweder vergessen haben was da war oder bewusst alles runterspielen. Kognitive Dissonanz etc.
Hab mal mit einem gesprochen, der nicht in meiner Einheit war und er sagt sinngemäß: "manchmal hab ich mich gefragt, ob dass die Leute waren mit denen ich gedient habe, die erzählen immer wie geil es war, etc."
Hatte einen Kameraden der im Assistenzeinsatz ziemlich aufgedreht war, am Montag nach der Rückkehr behauptete er beim Frühstück, dass es dort eh voll geil war, ich dachte nur was für ein Lügner, glaube inzwischen eher, dass es mit seinem Ego nicht einherging, dass er gewisse Sachen zugegeben hätte bzw. in dem Moment war er auch nicht mehr dort. Manche Leute leben eher im Moment, manche weniger.
Und ja, nach der Grundausbildung kann sehr viel "einfach langweilig und Zeitverschwendung", in der Grundausbildung eher weniger, denke aber die wir am ehesten vergessen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
In der Schweiz steht Verantwortung ganz oben, dort macht soweit ich weiß jeder eine Steuererklärung wie bei uns Selbstständige, dh. die Steuer wird nicht vom "Gehaltsscheck" direkt abgezogen, sondern muss vom Bürger selbst nachgezahlt werden. Ich kann nur für mich sprechen, aber seitdem ich weiß, was ich jedes Jahr dem Staat zahlen muss und dies selbst tue(!), hab ich eine etwas andere Einstellung. In der Schweiz ist sich jeder Beamte sehr bewusst, dass er ein Dienstleister ist. Die Schweizer sind von meiner Beobachtung her um einiges verantwortungsvoller und das System ist auch so ausgelegt.
Finnland, ganz einfach, da stand die Sowjetunion vor der Tür und jetzt die russische Föderation, da hat jeder einen anderen Zugang dazu. Die machen nicht auf Friede, Freude, Eierkuchen, es wird eh alles gut gehen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1) Thank you for being one of the very few that read Suvorov that try to have a proper conversations, most others call me an idiot or outright try to "convert" (a lot of them have a "religious zeal" about it). Which is also the reason, why I really don't like this topic, especially since most of them act like I never heard about it. I read about it and I probably got dozens if not hundreds of comments and messages about it, it is just tiring. Especially since some seem to be politically motivated as well.
2) You can defend at the border as well, the Polish also tried it in 1939.
3) If it was an "offensive stance" or an indication of an upcoming attack, then why were these formations no properly supplied, their equipment maintained, etc.?
4) Finally, the huge Soviet losses continued throughout 1941, as such, the initial positions are less important for the overall question as well. As such, I completely disagree with "Without answering that question, there is no point discussing the other details."
1
-
yeah, I read in a recent article that there is at least one historian that makes some points about this and the author of the article also mentions that the historian is far more "pleasant" (from memory) than Suvorov. I think it is mentioned in 7 Red Army myths video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzsKnKcb1-A . Generally, from what I read and know 1941 is out of question (which I think is also mentioned in this video, I can't remember I did more than 500 videos with my second channel), I mean the Red Army was just doing a major expansion, recovering from the purges and also reorganizing due the experiences of the Winter War 1939/40.
> the Germans simply overrun a whole bunch of stuff
well, if you read the German reports, they particularly note that it was not just overrunning quite on the contrary. The resistance was stiff, the Germans noted this and also in the first 8 weeks that lost as many men as in Poland, France, etc. combined.
> Stalin considered Hitler’s attack as suicidal and was so full of himself
someone told me, that Stalin wrote an insult on the report of a spy about that the Germans will attack soon or something.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Michal8876 "There are many raliable sources in this case and most important - statistics. Combat readiness, repair time, uprage time, how many times vehicles returned to factories, elongated time of crew training etc."
Sources please, I have seen various bits and pieces, all over the place and that is the problem, like the one example you gave.
If you would have read the comments, several point out that data by Jentz that concluded that the readiness numbers were not that different among the different tanks.
The main issue is, I don't trust any of those "data points", because most of them use a limited amount of data and/or don't really show a proper methodology. On top of that, even if we had all the data on the readiness of all the tanks, I still would to do a closer look, since there are other factors as work as well. At least two come immediately to mind.
Also you missed the main point of the video.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> I would have hoped that you would have looked at other sources for consideration and information on this topic.
Feel free to recommend one. Wileck's was recommended to me from a very knowledgeable source, although, he mentioned it on terms of doctrine usage of the Tiger. I let my critical guard down a bit, since knew it was also a thesis. Yet, still, I removed some of the values and pointed out some issues with the data.
So far, it is still the best we have on the topic and the book is already more than 10 years old. Not to mention that lately I find many issues with other books as well, e.g., yesterday I read in a recent publication by a well-known university press book that Rommel's "Panzer Korps" sustained the highest losses during the battle of Arras. Problem he only had a Division and according to Frieser, most the German tanks showed up, after the British had retreated. The highest losses in men, yes, since the British attacked the Motorized Riflemen, yet, Panzers unlikely.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> You could've made the effort to find out who the best one out of the famous ones was, and that would be Manstien.
You can't even write his name correctly, it is Manstein or more correctly Erich von Manstein.
And to be frank, he would have been likely my answer, but at the same time it is a) an utterly cheap answer, because most people that know some German generals would say so, and b) that does not mean that is correct in anyway.
Not to mention that the approach to reduce the pool to "famous generals" is utterly superficial, to be diplomatic.
Others made the far better suggestion to just take the highest ranking ones, which also comes with various problems, e.g., Guderian never got promoted to GFM.
1
-
@ I am doing this since 2016, since then I found so many "default answer" being simplistic if not outright wrong.
A lot of people write and talk about German WW2 "stuff", while not being able to read German, let alone visiting the German Military Archives.
Even those who do, sometimes published very interesting aspects that don't hold up to scrutiny. Other times it is just outdated information. See as an example "Blitzkrieg". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8y-of5WpVA
Fame is not a good indicator, since it often comes down to who wrote a book or not. In German there is proverb for this "wer schreibt, der bleibt" (who writes, stays).
Who are the three most mentioned generals here? Manstein, Guderian and Rommel. Well, all of them wrote books, Rommel "only" about WW1 due to him not surviving the WW2, although there were the Rommel papers published by others. Manstein and Guderian both wrote famous memoirs.
Good that you bring up Keitel, I am actually completely hesitant to make any judgement about him, since most information we have is from the memoirs of other generals that wrote a lot of hogwash and blamed others, e.g., what Guderian wrote about Beck is in many regards just wrong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTgf3UHMBjY
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I personally favor skills above knowledge, cause skill stays with you, knowledge gets lost and skill usually allows you to convert time into knowledge anyway. I did Computer Science and History, the first one is the tough one and it drilled worth ethics, grit, analytical thinking and many more stuff into me. So my advice is, go for STEM, because even if you don't stick with a STEM job or field, the sweat will pay off.
related to hat, one of favorite professor told me: "never study computer science at a regular university, cause you will be the most hard-working guy and you will regret it. So I always studied at TECHNICAL universities, because you will finish your work at 1 AM, whereas the physics, math, etc. students will likely work to 2,3 or 4 AM."
Thus, I guess do a major in a STEM field and a minor in History. Although, your system is different, we don't have major/minors. I just did two "complete" studies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
the mental stuff is the most difficult one and I don't know if there is a way to prepare for it. Well, probably: the question: will I be able to laugh about this in years, the answer usually should be yes. Maybe listening or reading Jocko Willink might be a good idea, heard good stuff about his book extreme ownership, but it might not be suitable in anyway. Here is a short podcast element: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRG4g1cPzvI
On the physical side all "Handgriffe" are far too specific to train for. Of course, endurance, etc. is always good to have, but I can't remember that it was ever an issue, except those that were completely out of shape.
I would recommend getting some cream for the hands or something that helps in dealing with the "damage". I remember that my hands hurt almost all the time and I had dirt under the fingernails after 1 week, which didn't get out even after sitting the in the bath tub for an hour or so.
sorry for the late answer, damn notification don't really work anymore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> wie kannst du behaupten, das die Wehrmacht nie zusammengebrochen ist?
du schreibst, als würde nur ich das behaupten. Die Antwort ist ganz einfach, wenn sie zusammengebrochen wäre, dann wäre nicht um Berlin etc. gekämpft worden. Schau dir mal die ganzen Verluste der Alliierten und auch der Wehrmacht in den letzten Monaten an, wenn sie zusammengebrochen wäre, dann wären diese auf allen Seiten viel geringer.
> Ich meine, wenn Sie nie zusammengebrochen wäre, hätte man keine Kinder oder die Alten in den
> Aussichtslosen Kampf um Berlin schicken müssen, oder doch?
wenn sie zusammengebrochen wäre, dann hätte man keine Kinder und alte Menschen mehr in den Kampf schicken können bzw. es hätte die SS etc. machen müssen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> I don't understand, why there is always a discussion going on, how capable the Leopard 1 is in Tank vs Tank combat.
This is a basic comparison of combat systems employed in the conflict. If vehicle A (Leopard 1) is less capable in situation X, then it makes sense to use vehicle B (T-64) in situation X. Just because I or anyone else compare the basic features of two vehicles against each other, does not mean I focus on tank vs tank combat. When you are going to buy a car, a computer, etc. you also compare the hard data right? Does that mean you will use product A in combat versus product B?
> So why don't we touch the other possibilities? Infantry support, fight soft coated vehicles, fight military
> convoys for example.
3 simple reasons:
1) If I get specific, it gets complicated and stuff might be (terribly) wrong. Also it is basically covered: I specifically noted that employment in special missions and ambushes might make the most sense, also Jens Wehner's tweet about "secondary fronts" covers this as well.
2) Data. Do we have valid information on current tactics and operations? I noted in the video that thermal sights alone and their availability is complicated, e.g., there are some people that claim that Russian tanks rarely have them. That is rather simple data compare to Ukrainian/Russian tactics, doctrine, operations, etc.
3) Time, a lot of "minor" details in this video took quite some time to research and these were often technical details that are usually rather straight forward. The other "stuff" is far harder to research. How do I know that? Well, I made 500 videos in the last 6 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jingles did the first Top 5, I don't know what his guidelines were or if there were any in place, but I got told to keep it short, I could do it longer if I liked too.
Now here is the thing, it is about FAVORITE tanks, whereas you note "you never specified why they were relevant or important for you or for the war effort", which doesn't work well together. In other words, since I know that my personal preferences are not necessarily alignment with the importance for the war effort, there is no arguing or explanation there. This is also set and explicitly stated in the intro.
Originally, I thought to feature the Panzerbefehlswagen (Command Tank), BUT I realized although I think it is a very important tank, it is clearly NOT one of my favorites.
Additionally, explaining again and again what each tank did and why it was important is a bit redundant AND the crew of the Tank Museum does that already in their Tank Chats and far better then I ever could do.
So the mission was simply: make an entertaining video where I mix my personal style, delivery with some facts and keep it short.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I thought a bit for a while, I think that the cultural aspect is more important for people with secured incomes, e.g., students, politicians, employees (safe contracts), professors (tenured), but the economic aspect is far more important for self-employed people, entrepreneurs, freelancers, employees with weak contracts, etc.
Both factors are important, but when shit comes to shove most people will go for food on the table, cause culture doesn't fill your stomach, money can.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I have several videos demonetized AFTER manual review, in one case it makes sense in the other cases ABSOLUTELY not. Thus, it is rather simple for me - since my videos take 12-40 hours to make, this was 30 hours - reduce the amount of stuff that is "problematic" unless it is absolutely necessary.
And Games are treated differently, note that before the adcopalypse (April 2017) games were basically "free-for-all", loads of World War etc. content, but no-one reported "demonetization", whereas my videos were hit since the first days (January 2016), yet back then nobody cared, because no big YouTubers were hit. Suddenly after the Adcopalyse, quite many let's Players got problems.
Although, in your case, I think the answer is probably this: it is from a game, thus there is LOADS of reference footage out there that was already processed and cleared.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1) fastest man alive can be rather easily defined in the first place, e.g., fastest runner for 100 m etc. what makes the "best general".
2) You can physically measure "fast", you can't measure "best".
3) There are regular competitions on "fast" in sports all the time. I don't know of any competitions between generals, there are international tank competitions nowadays. Yet, I have yet to see a general competition.
4) Technically, we have the potential to test every man on Earth, whereas we don't have the data - unless I am seriously mistaken - to even evaluate most of the German generals, unless we have a time-machine or something.
> I get the point you were trying to make, it’s just WILDLY relativistic.
I think you underestimate how much information would be required, this video was just the tip of the iceberg.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> Bei mir war's sogar einmal soweit dass ich meinen Englischlehrer korrigiert hab.
wow, gratuliere! Dir scheint es ja nicht an Talent zu mangeln, aber schon mal überlegt, a) dass du vielleicht in überdurchschnittlich gutes Gehör hast? Ich kenn die genauen Zahlen nicht, aber ich glaub es gibt nur 5-10 % der Leute, die selbst wenn sie ein Leben lang in einem anderen Land leben akzentfrei sprechen können. Oder willst du mir erzählen, dass sich Arnold Schwarzenegger "keine Mühe" gegeben hat?
b) Das meiste ist Gehör, dieses ist aber auch davon abhängig welche Laute bis zu einem Alter X gehört werden, danach ist es ziemlich schwer ein Fähigkeit dafür zu entwicklen.
Vermutlich, hast du einfach Glück gehabt was das genetische Lotto betrifft. Das hat wenig mit Mühe zu tun.
Ansonsten bist du wahrscheinlich auch viel jünger, ich bin Baujahr 1980, damals gabs kein Internet, d.h. keinen Zugang zu Medien auf Englisch für die ersten 20 Jahre und ich glaub die ersten 10 oder so sind die entscheidenden.
Gutes Gehör hast du wohl, aber bzgl. Selbstreflexion und Allgemeinbildung, da würd ich mir noch etwas Mühe geben.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is common, Wehrmacht means all German forces (as you know), but the dominant force was the Heer. Particularly in the later stages of the war Wehrmacht makes far more sense, because Luftwaffe ground units: Flak, Fallschirmjäger, Luftwaffefeld Units and even Kriegsmarine units, e.g., particularly in Normandy. For earlier stages, the Luftwaffe was involved with air units as well (and also in the later stages, although far less so). And since we also speak about air superiority, it would make little sense to just say "Heer".
In other words, you are kinda correct in terms of being specific, at same time the ground situation was a mix-up of all Wehrmacht branches.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> die schlussfolgerung ist, daß der panzer einfach nur unbrauchbar ist.
deine Schlußfolgerung ist...
und ja, in vielen Bereichen lasse ich absichtlich meine Schlußfolgerung raus, siehe zB mein Rommel Video.
> zu kommentare; um deine videos zu hinterfragen, muss man schon sehr viel zu diesen themen gelesen haben.
danke, und es gibt auch so einige Historiker und andere Experten, die sich hier (oder via email) rumtummeln,
bisher kam von denen wenig oder keine Kritik.
Das letzte Wort zum Panther ist definitiv noch nicht gesprochen, das Panther video dieses Jahres, war im wesentlichen ein Abgleich/Zusammenfassung von "Hype" und "Thrash". Je mehr ich lese, desto skeptischer werde ich. Nur ist meine Lesezeit sehr kurz.
Du darfst nicht vergessen, ich hab kein Fernseh Budget und ich bring jede Woche 2 Videos raus (Hauptkanal und Nebenkanal). Ich kann hier leider keine Doktorarbeiten abliefern, sonst kann ich zusperren. Ansonsten kommt auch dazu, egal was ich mache: ein paar wird es nicht gefallen und ein paar werden immer was missverstehen etc. Ich hatte schon Videos, wo in den Kommentaren die einen mich ins rechte und andere ins linke Eck gestellt haben...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
? ich bin nicht beleidigt, mich nervt einfach, dass ne Behauptung aufstellst, die einfach auf einer unzureichenden Erfahrung oder begrenzten Wahrnehmung basiert. Wenn du sagst im Englischen hätte ich einen starken Akzent, dann stimmt das, weil man hört da raus, dass ich aus Oberösterreich bin. Bei Schwarzenegger hört man auch raus, dass er aus der Steiermark ist.
Allerdings im Deutschem, wie gesagt, die meisten Deutschen können es nicht erkennen. Und jene Deutsche, die in Österreich leben, die sind meist erstaunt. Mir ist klar, wenn du in Hannover oder so aufgewachsen bist, dass da mein Akzent stark sein mag, allerdings ist das halt vielleicht nicht gerade üblich. Vermutlich bist du auch aus der Mittelschicht bzw. höhere Mittelschicht bis Oberschicht und Stadtgebiet. Komm mal nach Österreich und geh in einem Supermarkt am Land einkaufen, am besten zur Fleischtheke ;)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Michael Moser: "Kein Fehler" hat absolut nichts mit "approval" zu tun!
Wenn du einen grammatisch korrekt Satz schreibst, welchen ich für kompletten Schwachsinn halte und sage der Satz hat "keinen Fehler", bedeutet das nicht, dass ich den Satz "gut" finde. Ebenso wenn du ein Feature in dein Programm einbaust, welches ich oder jemand anderer nicht gut finde und sagen "das ist kein Bug sondern ein Feature", heißt das auch nicht, dass wir das Feature gut finden oder?
Ganz im Gegenteil, die Klarstellung, dass es "not an error" war, macht klar, dass es ein geplanter Vernichtungskrieg war.
Also bevor du irgendwelche unqualifizierten Behauptungen von dir gibts, denk lieber nach.
Weitere Infos gibts hier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oy_Rj8qLcyo
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> Selbstverständlich kann man die Meinung vertreten, dass das Verbot von Nazi-symbolen bezüglich Videospiele gelockert
> werden sollte.
Interessant, meine Meinung ist aber das bisherige Gesetzgebung und die Praxis einfach inkonsistent, kurzsichtig und auch nicht konsequent ist. Desweiteren wird die Grunddebatte zu Zensur komplett ignoriert.
> Gerade deshalb, ist es wichtig, genau und präzise zu sein.
wo war ich denn unpräzise und nicht genau?
> und dich damit einfach selbst als versierten Youtuber disqualifizierst...
du ignorierst KOMPLETT, dass dieses Video 2 Jahre alt ist, ich würde so ein Video heute vermutlich(!) komplett anders machen, ABER ohne all die Videos davor, würden die heutigen Videos nicht so aussehen. Ich hab bisher nur 1 Video neu aufgelegt, kannst die beiden ja vergleichen, ich denke in Sachen "Versiertheit" sind da MASSIVE Unterschiede.
alt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft-dYaZKxwU
neu: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQdjGJJktfk
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bigthoughts2644 no worries, generally you can assume one thing: if a YouTuber puts a disclaimer or something similar somewhere it is either due to 1) laws and/or 2) transparency.
Why? Every addition etc. takes time, in this case "how to word it correctly", how long and where must it been shown, did I put it in the description as well, etc.
I have checklist of about 20 items for every video from editing to publishing with disclaimer, approval, subtitles, cards, end screen, etc.
Just after uploading a video, to add description, tags, sources, etc. takes usually around 5-15 minutes for each video.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> The reason that the 150mm sig 33 was listed as an Infantry weapon, and not an
> artillery weapon is because it was actually deployed to infantry divisions, and
> not specifically equipped by artillery units. Infantry used them as support weapons [...]
You seem to mix stuff up and make wrong assumptions.
1) The 150mm sIG33, 150 mm sFH and 105mm lFH were all used in the infantry divisions, if they were properly equipped.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VY10gfnrTQ
2) The sig33 was part of the infantry regiments, whereas the sFH and lFH were part of the artillery regiment.
3) It is noted in the video that the sIG was used as an infantry support gun.
“Germany had adopted the Sturmgeschutz III [sic! Sturmgeschütz], but this was an assault gun for direct infantry support, and not intended for the standard field artillery role of indirect fire." (Zaloga, Steven J.: M7 Priest 105mm Howitzer Motor Carriage. Osprey Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2013 (2019), p. 5)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
danke
> dass die Legende vom "Wüstenfuchs" niemandem geschadet hätte und daher auch jahrzehntelang
> nicht so schlecht gewesen sei
ich bin mir jetzt nicht sicher, ob ich das überhaupt gesagt habe, das Video ist von 2017 und ich kann mich nicht mehr an alles erinnern; nehmen wir mal an es war so, dann stellt sich die Frage wem genau hat es wie geschadet? (Mythen, Falschaussagen, etc. richten nicht zwangsläufig Schaden an.)
Rommel ist ein Punkt in der "Clean Wehrmacht Myth" und zum ganzen Mythos sagt Prof. explizit in folgenden Video auf meinem Zweitkanal, dass sie seiner Meinung nach notwendig war: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1IVENFSRi0
> Die historische Forschung hat erst seit den 1990er Jahren wirklich in Deutschland damit begonnen,
> mit dieser grundfalschen Legende aufzuräumen, denn bis dahin hatte sich Diese sehr zäh gehalten.
soweit ich weiß ist diese Aussage falsch, ich hab sie nicht nachgeprüft, aber so ziemlich alle Historiker, die ich dazu gelesen hab, schreiben bzgl. der "Wehrmachtsausstellung" und Verbrechen der Wehrmacht, sinngemäß "in der Forschung war das schon lange klar, aber die 'Wehrmachtsausstellung' hat die Sache in die Öffentlichkeit gebracht".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
thanks, you see, it is a bit hard to determine who is commenting here. I am 40 year old historian (if a Masters degree in History count as being a historian). I talked and sometimes worked together with various historians as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mElnH-U9Q0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LKNHckf0hM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PbzVU2vqdI
> The what if Germany invaded Middle east after fall of France has already been explored by experts in the military.
Interesting, because I have seen it come up anywhere, of course, I barely looked at North Africa so far, but still. Was this just done in discussions or was there something published as well? Generally, I have seen only two "legitimate" "what-if"/alternative history books on WW2 so far.
> People who say "what if" normally have no real idea about how logistics work or how they dictated the situation
> in the real world during WWII.
I completely agree with you here, this is the reason why I took quite some time to read through Creveld's logistics book about the North Africa campaign and if I remember correctly also noted the numbers in the video. Looked up how long it took to ship a Panzer Division etc.
I also did various logistics video in the past: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIeyq2mE9t8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgGXRJg-NNU
> the Royal navy was MASSIVE.
well, I was not the Naval expert on the panel;
> And the biggest omission was not factoring in the political environment.
that was not an omission, we particularly noted that we left that out several times, because else this video would not have been possible. I think here is the main issue, you might want to look up some other "what if" / alternative history videos and then compare it with this, because as mentioned they are usually extremely superficial. We tried to do this "the proper way", yet even after spending a combined dozen or more hours, we also had to keep out the complete political realm. While looking into it one source noted that Hitler was just ignorant/"stupid", whereas others noted that he could not just ignore Italy, Spain, etc. and had to be careful. So, there was not even a consensus in the scholarship.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1. Still, pay attention, the source clearly mentioned him critically. Also, "Shameful source", not sure if this is a language problem, but this is moralistic and/or religious terminology.
2. I do videos not a phd thesis here. Most books I used as source looked a Soviet/Russian sources. Most of them are leading scholars, maybe not in Russia, but in Europe, United States et al.
3. "Are you trying to debunk myths, but simultaneously create new, it is not permissible. For example: for example, many Russians consider the command of the red army bloody. In fact, this is the opinion of a few angry marginals. This statement has nothing to do with the representative sample."
I have no idea what you trying to say here.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
well, when I was at University, I was always angry about how lackluster the History department professors were about people submitting their papers on time or doing their presentations to a degree that was sometimes below High School level, whereas at the Computer Science department, there were no such issues, a deadline was deadline, there were no excuses no constant back-paddling from the staff towards the students, unlike at the History department.
Only after listening to Jordan Peterson I finally understood why. The History professors were mostly to the left and they had this strong perspective of victim mentality for their students, which was well "hidden", e.g., one professor stated "the quality of the paper should not suffer under time constraints". Completely ignoring the fact that time-management and many other aspects are completely up to the student. I personally had shifted several exams to deliver that paper on-time and this guy then changes the deadline one week before it runs out, because some people were too incompetent to write a paper over the course of a whole term with the deadline mentioned in October to be in February the next year.
I don't know what you mean with "Marxism", but from what I saw at my Austrian University's History department, I can clearly see how left-leaning professors and staff severely undermined not only the education, but also the advancement of many students. Because I saw what was possible at the Computer Science department, most people grew from the challenges, yes, a few didn't make it, but the situation on the History Department was that nearly everyone got an A. And colleague actually noted smiling "you must really work hard here to not get an A".
So, from my personal experience (I have a M.A in History and a M.Sc. in Computer Science, worked as a tutor and even gave my own class in the last term) Jordan Peterson is spot on that left-leaning Professors undermine responsibility and build up a victim hood mentality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
well, for females you need special facilities, e.g., their own toilets, showers, bed rooms, etc. Additionally, sniper is like: be alone / in a small team out there in fucking nowhere, shitty hygiene, etc.
Of course people will bring up female snipers of the Soviet Union, but that was very different. It was a World War for survival, no political correctness and I would assume those women wouldn't even flinch at stuff that for most "Western" people would be absolutely unbearable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dear Hello World,
first, this video was an extra.
Second, think you hit it spot on with " no context whatsoever, follows no theme, teaches no clearly defined
lesson, and makes no thought provoking, controversial, or otherwise interesting point" but that is NOT "dumb". Quite on the contrary this video required far more skill (yet different ones) than my regular videos. Third, you miss one point, I learn by doing, look up my early 2016 videos, they are quite different from the stuff I do now. My current videos are of that quality since I made HUNDREDS of them. In contrast I made less than 10 data visualization videos, but if you look my first one, you likely see a huge difference and I see a lot more behind the scenes. Fourth, the more I do such data visualization the more I learn, since I need to code stuff and releasing such videos serves the learning curve far more, since the hard and important part is to bring a video from prototype to publication stage. Fifth, I am working on a format where I combine the strengths of my regular videos with the strengths of data visualization, yet, this is hard actually very hard. There are very few that can do this, look at "the Fallen", I think it was a group of several people and it took months if not years to complete that project. I release 6-10 videos per month.
About your "dumb and lazy" comment, you have NO idea how much work went into this nor any other of my videos, so watch your mouth or fuck off.
MHV
1
-
In my first year, I probably released 10-20 videos, where I thought "well, this is clearly worse than my last video". You know what, nearly every time someone noted "this is your best video so far".
The other point is, if I make a "proof of concept" it takes like 1-3 hours, yet, 80-90 % of the learning happens with all the "polish", double-checking, improving, etc. which takes about 10-30 hours. Reaching RELEASE quality IS the practice.
This is the same with papers, computer games, presentations, etc.
The release marks the "end" of the project and that "end" allows for further learning.
Someone wrote a while ago that if one releases something that is "fresh" and "new", there is a lack of distance. I noticed this as well, like the first days upon release I am far more less receptive towards feedback, whereas weeks later, I am "yeah, this was wrong" or I am "oh, I see now what this video did not take off", in some cases in regards to feedback in some cases without feedback. This is why the release is so important from the process of making it ready, but also to get the proper distance and then improve upon it.
Actually, the most down-rated of my videos, was I think the first data visualization at that point, I loved the video and thought "this is the shit", the audience had a complete different opinion. I get it now, yet, still I know how much work goes into such a video and regular videos are "pretty easy" nowadays. Yet, I struggle extremely with adding context to such visualization for now.
Btw. I actually have a book on African Conflicts, but sadly it stopped around 2000 I think and thus had little use for this video. As so often it comes down to data and sources.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
many aspects, Rebellions are often fought on one's "own" or "neighboring" territory. Also those rebellions were usually quite isolated, if you look at Vietnam, the US, Australia, etc. + the Soviet Union, China, etc. put money, advisors, equipment etc. into it. Maybe I am mistaken, but from what I know those peasant rebellions were usually not largely supported by other factions or at least not that extent. Herfried Münkler made a comparison between the "warlord wars" vs. the 30-years-war and came to the conclusion that foreign money and several other factors are quite different and thus the "warlord wars" can't really "burn out".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
the issue with sarcastic is, that I can't hear your voice, see your face, etc. and believe YouTubers get quite some hostile, dumb, etc. comments regularly, so in my case this might lead to "friendly fire".
I get what you mean, for me it was: "well, I have to address this somehow, but I don't really have the time to go into this deeper, also this source which is generally valid and the author speaks Russian actually notes a big influence, so I guess it is correct, so well, lets just make a short mention and research it in the future."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> Note to all those poking fun at professor Neitzel's (mis)pronunciation of Guadalajara:
Correction: I am Bernhard Kast, not Professor Sönke Neitzel, he was a guest on two videos on this channel and four videos on my second channel.
Fun fact, I actually lived and worked in South America, my Spanish isn't the best, but if necessary I get around. Also I sometimes pronounce even German/Austrian locations wrong if I never heard them before.
Also, I had once a native-speaker from Canada, who got one word wrong in a 30 min interview, the word was "mediocre" a lot of people pointed that out in the comment section, so pronunciation errors for some are "most notable offense". Likely, because nearly everyone can point that out, far fewer people can actually point out if the research, sources, etc. are of any quality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> the titular tank's crew has clearly been cycled through many times
pretty sure that Brad Pitt's character was there since North Africa, if I remember correctly and the crew is depicted as a competent.
> there an almost comical account from E company where winters had a close encounter with a german
> soldier and both threw grenades that didn't go off
your example is completely different to the situation I talk about.
They know, there are anti-tank guns there, they know where their own infantry is, they know where the destroyed half tracks are etc.
What you are describing is basically the minuscule details of combat that can always go wrong, I am talking about general tactics that guarantee survival, e.g., suppressing the enemy. If the typist would have been in charge, that would have made a lot of sense, but it was Brad Pitt.
Similarly, not prematurely opening fire, is drilled into soldiers early on, of course they might fire earlier, but if they had been under suppressing fire this would make much more sense.
> as a historian, you know better than to look at field manuals
if you had paid proper attention, you would notice that I also asked combat veterans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
thanks. Well, it is called the German perspective and I am generally known for keeping information brief and on point. I actually, thought it was too much. Additionally, I generally have a rather "relaxed" (or counter-balancing?) view on Ultra, cause in the end, if you play whack a mole without a hammer you can know every time when it shows up and still lose. Let's face it the Allies had a shit ton of hammers in 1944. Interestingly enough I talked about this with Justin - who actually has a focus on intelligence history - and for the most parts we agreed.
Depends, if you want to interview for your channel that could be a possibility, yet, generally I am very picky since I had a some bad experiences. From what I have seen, you have a great voice, great editing and "general style/vibe" seems good too, yet, I didn't have time to validate your knowledge, which is of crucial importance. Are you at Tankfest this weekend?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Erstens, im Krieg sterben Menschen, dass würden viele auch als "geschmacklos" bezeichnen.
Zweitens, ich hatte 3 Cover zur Auswahl, das was du siehst, ein Ehrenmal und ein Balkendiagramm. (Siehe Beschreibung, wo die Bilder angegeben sind.)
Drittens, mich nervt es tierisch das Titel & Cover so einen Einfluss darauf haben, ob ein Video funktioniert oder nicht.
Ausführliche Diskussion hier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssURn2sxJJY
Viertens, werde ich nicht vom Staat finanziert, kurz ich muss für meinen Lebensunterhalt selbst sorgen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
at one point likely. There are quite many issues here, e.g., Zaloga noted rather low operational rates for the Tiger and compared it with the StuG III, yet, the StuG was 1) an assault gun, 2) NOT heavy, 3) different weapon system. So is that comparison warranted? Additionally, Ralf Raths (Panzermuseum) noted that the Tiger operational rates were actually quite high - he gave specific numbers. I think Chieftain also mentioned that the "let's just build Panzer IVs" was actually "disproven" by someone.
Currently, I sit on a large stack of books of all kinds of stuff, e.g., German artillery manuals, organization tables, loads of tank books, etc. and have loads of ideas. Those deep dives like you are asking are more feasible once I have setup a new level of understanding or find authors how did the research there already, because in many ways it is complicated issue. Especially, since the source situation is rather thin - talked about this with Ralf Raths in the Cafeteria of the Panzermuseum.
1
-
1
-
I am not sure what you mean with "European in outlook", since the Germans - as nearly all others - pointed out in WW2 that the infantry often did not push forward if the tanks were nearby, as such the tanks and StuGs often had to expose themselves unnecessarily. Yeah, we didn't discuss that in this video, because it didn't come up. (I think we did in one of the other 2 videos we recorded on that day.)
There is one aspect you seem to miss, namely that this video is to get people starting to think about context, you seem to be the wrong audience, because you already do. Yet, I am rather sure that even you could get something from this video, because Ralf Raths is far better read than I am and you seem to value my content highly according to your other comment.
About your other comment about "good scientific journal", thank you, yet, sadly, a lot of people don't care too much about nuance and in-depth research. I have some "core videos" with very meager view numbers, e.g., World War Management 101. Whereas rather "low-brow" content like hip-firing MG-34 and why the King Tiger had no MG-42 have staggering view numbers. Not to mention that the "core videos" require far more work. The "good scientific journal" quality, is mostly there due to my patreons and subscribestar supporters, http://www.patreon.com/mhv - http://www.subscribestar.com/mhv
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I have been too long to Germany and also heard in university around 2007, so I can't tell anymore. And generally I speak "German" on the channel not "Austrian", exception is the Armored Trains video. Although some Germans might nitpick, in Hamburg, which almost as far as it gets from Austria, most people couldn't tell that I was from Austria. Unless they knew what they were hearing for. I guess on YouTube people are also more conscious about it, also I noticed that I unconsciously modulate my language, e.g., I can speak German and English consciously, yet I almost can't consciously speak Austrian. Of course, when I speak to my mother, then the Austrian pours out again :D but as far as I know this is a common thing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
> What would happen if this re-engineered T-34 showed to everyone in Germany, during trials,
to everyone? You are aware how few tanks were actually used during the war compared to all the other weapon systems?
You also seem to forget that a weapon system once it entered production was usually already outdated?
Additionally, the Soviets actually wanted to improve the T-34, namely the T-34M, but the German invasion put a stop to that and they opted to mass produce what they had and then improved it slowly over time.
> The tank worked. It did it’s job and then some.
? Nobody denied at any point that the T-34 worked. The Panzer IV also worked, the Sherman also worked, the Cromwell also worked... oh look all were built according to the capabilities, necessity and military doctrine of their respective country... I wonder why that is the case.
Nah, of course, it was something else.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The reason in Ukraine is simple, everything is mined. Another might be lack of training and tactics.
Yet, in Fury, Brad Pitt & Co are portrayed as experienced and competent veterans, as mentioned in the video, the problem is the lack of INTERNAL consistency. Same with the Germans "off screen" they are capable, on screen they are mostly bumbling idiots. This also could be addressed simply with, "oh man, these were green troops". It would have fit into the narrative with the "new guy", "you were lucky this was such a weak unit, the one we fought a week ago would have gotten us all killed."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1