Comments by "David Himmelsbach" (@davidhimmelsbach557) on "If the Soviets and the West went to war in 1945 - who would have won?" video.

@MeteorBIG All in all, they DID get mercy from the Western Allies. They didn't deserve it, but they got it. The American soldiers found -- to their shock -- that conquered Germans were easier to live with than liberated Frenchmen. It turns out that it's easier to admit defeat than to admit -- to yourselves -- that you had to be saved -- the feminine role.
11
The war would not last a month. No Lend Lease for Stalin. No aviation fuel! So much for the Red air force. The USAAF would've gutted Stalin's war machine. The Sherman was twice the tank that the T-34-85 was. That's why the Reds kept using Shermans in their elite spearhead tank divisions. You can see photos of them in Nazi propaganda footage -- and the occasional wartime Soviet news reels. After 1945, most of that footage went straight down the memory hole. And then the West had trucks, trucks, trucks -- and more trucks. American logistics would've been an eye-opener for the Reds. It certainly was for the two Soviet generals stationed with 1st US Army in Normandy. (1944)
5
@AlexanderUnit-731 Wait... wait... you actually BELIEVE Stalin's statistics. The USSR made the CIA -- et. al look like total boobs (they were) for analyzing USSR statistics. They are GARBAGE. Any soul stupid enough to publish accurate stats when Stalin was in charge -- went to the GULAG. Yup. Lend Lease was providing Stalin with essentially ALL of his aviation fuel.Yup. The British were sending very high grade stuff up through the Caspian Sea which the Reds blended into their much inferior stuff to create the final product that the Red Air Force could fly with. Lastly, the CRITICAL supplies were OFF THE BOOKS. You'll never find them. They went on oral orders ONLY. The first priority was given to tungsten carbide tool tips and bits. This was a Swedish/American invention. The US paid to have Swedish bits flown over Finland into the Soviet Union quite immediately. The Swedes were never going to accept Stalin's money -- of course. It's over historians heads that TC bits increase the tempo of machining 8:1. They never took engineering and never spent five seconds in a production facility. This is why the biggest single source of Stalin's massive war output goes right on by. Until the US financed there use, Stalin didn't have a SINGLE tungsten carbide bit. Like his oil drilling tech, Stalin was a generation behind every nation in the West. This was also true for his refineries. Actually, Stalin didn't have refineries -- he had distilleries -- what American oil men derisively term 'tea pots.' Again, the USSR was a full generation behind the Americans. Think thirty-years behind.
3
@stas_from_haisyn The West beat the stats to DEATH. The T-34 series has THIN frontal armor. The enemy was popping T-34 with Mark III tanks mounting a 37mm gun all during 1941. Indeed, that gun, that tank was the NUMBER ONE killer of T-34c tanks. The Soviets made a huge blunder in its deign: they spread is defense equally all the way around. No-one else did so -- and the Soviets stopped doing so in subsequent designs. ALL German, British, American and later Soviet tanks used thicker steel up front. The Sherman -- in American use -- lost 0.8 men per lost Sherman tank 1944-1945 in Northwest Europe. When a T-34 was lost, most of the crew had absolutely no chance to get out. For a side by side comparison go to the Chieftain's videos here on YouTube. You have been dealing with survivorship bias. All of the ghosts that the T-34 created are not with us to lay out to you how its armor let them down. There are NO END of German and American crews that survived their tanks -- going on to command yet another. The same can not be said of T-34 crews. When they were hit, only the commander had a decent shot at jumping out in time. There are no end of German accounts telling of trapped and burning T-34 crews. Yet the T-34 ran Diesel fuel. The fires were ammunition fires -- that's why. AFTER victory, the Red Army pulled and filed all wartime photos of Diesel Shermans in Soviet use deeply penetrating German lines. Why always Shermans? Reliability. BTW, these tank corps were not used to break German lines. They were saved for exploitations, only. The gambit was to break the German line -- then race deep into a critical position -- a rail or road junction -- and then establish a killer defense, in all directions. Time and time again, the Germans found that they simply could not deal with this gambit. While the mechanized corps was doing its 'thing' the rest of the Red Army surged forward -- pretty much everywhere. When the Reds reached Kiev, the Germans were pinned against the Dnieper -- losing all kinds of stuff. Today, the Soviet Shermans are omitted from virtually all Russian war heroics. Said videos don't ever mention the horrific break-down rate of the T-34, either. BTW, the German heavies -- especially the Tiger -- had horrendous break-downs, too. It was nothing for a Tiger battalion to lose 75% of its effectives within two-days of action...all due to break downs -- not combat. When you use forced labor to build your machines of war -- it's a mistake! For your amusement: decades after the war, American hobbyists have restored a few Panthers, etc. Without exception they have found production sabotage. The German slaves were always putting clogs in the lubrication systems. These were partial clogs intended to break free after so many hours of running. That's what was happening. American production lines were state-of-the-art, never bombed, no sabotage, with a lot of the labor performed by wives and lovers of the boys in the USA. They were meticulous.
2
@AlexanderUnit-731 The Japanese flatly admit that atomics did it. How was Stalin going to swim his tank army to Japan? Stalin's prison was on LIFE SUPPORT all during the Great Patriotic War. Stalin had hugely de-populated his prison, too. The survival statistics for military aged men in the USSR are horrific. The blood lost was so staggering that 12-year old boys are working horizontal milling machines (from America) in Siberia. A photo of same is still in the archives -- and on the Web.
2
@yardogyuh2049 Germans who faced off against both Soviet and American artillery stated that there was absolutely no comparison. The Americans had the proximity fuse! An ENTIRE SS battalion was destroyed by American artillery in December 1944. It NEVER LEFT ITS TRENCHES. VT fuses showered the entire formation from directly above so that digging in merely speeded up grave digging. This event so terrified the SS that it took 48 hours before a scout was sent over to find out what had happened. Only an officer would go. The adjacent forest was shredded into kindling. Even Patton complained that the VT fuse was too brutal. It eliminated heroics. American artillery had advanced to such a degree that it was a slaughter-machine. BTW, the Russians -- under Putin -- are using staggering artillery against their fellow Slavs in eastern Ukraine... and proud of it. The NATO counter to Soviet artillery was the MLRS. When it was fired off in 1991, a single volley was enough to have Iraqi brigades collapse and run away -- from their top officers on down. (!) The nic named it "Steel Rain."
2
@richardvernon317 At the time, the USSR had spent years fending off Luftwaffe recce aircraft. They didn't even know what an Allied strategic air strike could be. (Hamburg--Dresden--Big Week) And all of that was nothing compared to Nagasaki.
2
@AlexanderUnit-731 Your numbers are goofy. Nazi cruelty and crazy Stalin killed a LOT more than you're willing to admit.
2
@Jagermeister_Sta A staggering fraction of Soviet war production was via Lend Lease machine tools. ALL machine tools were sporting TUNGSTEN CARBIDE tool bits... and those bits were 100% IMPORTED. Until Lend Lease aid kicked in, Stalin's war machine didn't have a SINGLE T.C. TOOL BIT. So what? T.C. is universally used today... because it cuts metal 8 times faster than High Speed Steel. T.C. WAS the Soviet production miracle that we all read about. The typical historian// poster has no conception of the difference -- having not ever operated a lathe or a milling machine. Don't argue with me. Argue with your local machinist. That way at least he can get a terrific laugh. Lastly, ALL Soviet statistics are LIES. Stalin made it ILLEGAL to EVER publish// release correct statistics on ANYTHING. This is why the CIA, MI5, MOSSAD looked like total IDIOTS when the Cold War ended. They'd been using book-loads of totally fake statistics. So they never saw the end coming. Whereas, I figured the end-of-times TO THE DAY: Augus15, 1991. Yeah, little ol' me. Internal bickering did the trick. It works virtually every time. (Internal bickering did in the French monarchy, too.) Wikipedia has been corrupted wherever, whenever it counts... especially by state actors. ANYONE quoting Soviet statistics is a fool, for that soul can't be any smarter than the CIA. Good grief, is that dumb!
1
@crownprincesebastianjohano7069 The propaganda for the T-34 is miles ahead of reality. FYI: The frontal armor of a Sherman puts that of a T-34 to shame. It's approximately 80% of the defense rating notionally given to the Tiger tank. (!) Yeah, since all of these machines are still sitting in museums, go check their glacis plates out. The critical metric for any tank is crew survivability. For the T-34c there was virtually NO surviving a German hit. Even 37mm pop-guns destroyed such tanks at ordinary shooting distances. Krauts only need aim at the hull -- with the sides being sweet spots. The T-34c has a totally inferior optical suite, too. Its range of view is so restricted that it's only slightly better than looking down a straw. German and American optics beat the Soviet design every which way. Shermans come with crews. The typical American Sherman crew had a FULL YEAR of tank training before shipping out to Europe. ( The original intent was to invade France by May 1st, 1943 -- 13 months before D-Day. The British had put on the stall. ) The typical Soviet crew was given 300 meters of training in their new machine before shipping out. Soviet crews were short on training straight through to the end of the war.
1
@Jagermeister_Sta Watch out on ANY Soviet statistic. The Soviets DID produce a ridiculous amount of T-34-85 machines -- AFTER the war was over. Because for Stalin, the war was NOT over. He was cranking out tanks for his post-war invasions -- namely Korea. He started that war. Without his jets and jet pilots, Korea could never be a Soviet success. During WWII the Soviets produced just about as many T-34c and T-34-85 as the Americans produced M-4//Shermans. Modern production experts do NOT rate the T-34c or T-34-85 as cheap to produce. Their aluminum Diesel engines were NOT cheap. Stalin built thousands -- anyway. Diesel engines are ALWAYS more expensive than gasoline engines. Visit an auto lot even today. The primary reason that Stalin had to love Diesels is that back at the oil refinery Diesel fuel can be naturally distilled -- straight off -- as his crude oil ran about 33% middle distillate. ( That's refinery-speak for Diesel fuel.) To craft gasoline from middle distillate is no simple thing. Only the West could do so in staggering volume. Once built, a Diesel engine is almost always going to be more reliable than a gasoline engine. It's totally counter-intuitive, but the burn-stroke of a Diesel is SMOOTHER than the explosion stroke of a gasoline engine. When this factor is combined with the more robust components required for Diesel compression -- you end up with engines that run for millions of miles. (trains, trucks, MV ships) But in war, the enemy destroys your stuff a lot quicker than that. That aspect was critical in American war-designs. Diesels were considered -- and then rejected -- straight off because they'd be too expensive a choice when projections showed that tanks have short lives due to enemy action no matter how they're constructed. The same logic dictated US truck designs. Every machine was designed to be cheap to produce, quick to repair in the field (by harvesting elements of other - ruined - machines) -- and as close to civilian machines in conception as possible. The latter was so that the boys off the farm could be handy with a wrench -- and most trivial repairs could be performed by the crews. Sega -- this is no place to cover the horrific errors of Stalin -- how he started WWII in Europe -- See YELTSIN'S press conference a generation ago -- or the suffering inflicted by the two tyrants. These topics fill libraries. My grand-father was at home in bed on D-Day. It was my father that had that pleasure. His outfit took 90% casualties just that very morning. So his experience was restricted to saving the wounded and burying the dead -- which went on for days. In the summer, the dead become very ripe after three-days. So it was a memorable experience. Since he's still alive -- and got national press coverage 6-6-2019 -- his fan mail is still coming in. The T-34c is a wildly over-rated tank because it's 'hip' in the West to down-grade the M-4. For the Nazis, straight from their propaganda reels you can see that Berlin was much more concerned about the M-4. They were SO MANY and pretty effective. The primary role of main battle tanks is the destruction of enemy infantry divisions -- since these form the vast bulk of the enemy's armies. The basic M-4 had terrific stats WRT chewing up German infantry divisions. They famously climbed up slopes, hills, mountains that the Krauts couldn't believe possible. The only other Western tank in its league was the Churchill. In both cases, merely climbing was enough to trigger the collapse of a German position. Strangely, the Russian film industry keeps using wooded terrain in its WWII/ Great Patriotic War footage for tank-on-tank fighting. This is phoney. The Red Army defeated the Nazi Armies in OPEN COUNTRY. By the time the Reds attacked up in the North, Nazi Germany was strategically defeated. Force ratios had become absurd. By the Summer of 1944 most Germans were just running around throwing up their hands... unwilling to die for Hitler and Nazism. In Bagration, Hitler lost entire armies in a few weeks. That was mass-surrender. The West would not see its equal until 1945. (Ruhr Pocket)
1
@Jagermeister_Sta Stalin screwed everything up for everyone. It took the ordinary Soviet trooper to set things right. BTW, the typical hero was in the infantry -- where most everyone fought. Regardless of the nation, tank troops and pilots were in the extreme minority. They were also in a VERY dangerous position -- surviving the war was very iffy. The USAAF fighter pilots over Germany suffered 25% casualties -- per month -- month after month -- compounded. The statistics showed that anyone could get shot down. My favorite Soviet tale is that of a single KV-1 that blocked an entire panzer-corps for three-days in the first days of Barbarossa. That crew wiped out an astounding number of German gun crews and tanks. It, the KV, was sitting astride THE critical path required for a German advance. It took the Germans the better part of a battalion of motorized troops to finally eliminate it. It was the Krauts first contact with the KV-1, BTW. So naturally, the Krauts brought in their experts to study it. They freaked out. They were obviously a full-generation behind the Soviets in tank design. The German Tiger tank was nothing but their version of the KV-1. Check out the side-by-side stats. The Krauts didn't need to conduct much fundamental design. They merely needed to copy -- as best they could -- the general statistics of the KV -- which they DID. The Panther was the Nazi knock-off of the T-34c. The T-34-85 was Stalin's response to the Panther. As for the M-4 -- once Rommel saw what the M-4 was all about -- he retired the Mark III panzer PDQ. This is significant, as the T-34c did not cause the Krauts to abandon the Mark III wholesale. As I posted already, the Mark III was killing T-34c tanks straight through Barbarossa, was the number one killer of such tanks. This stat shows just how rare 50mm gunned Mark IIIs were, in the field, early on during 1941. The T-34-85 was the corrected version of the T-34. It got rid of that terrible T-34c turret -- a TWO-MAN turret. All two-man turrets are duds. Even the Germans had such machines -- but even when designed -- the Mark II was supposed to be strictly a training tank. Hitler launched his war too soon for Guderian -- the chief designer of the Mark III and Mark IV panzers. For the record: Stalin, not Hitler, started WWII in Europe. This was established by Yeltsin in the 1990s -- to the complete shock of the international press. Stalin intended that Hitler should exhaust Germany and France in a repeat of WWI -- while the USSR would stand aloof. It was his intent to then swoop in and conquer ALL of Western Europe. This gambit is of record within the writings of Soviet elites -- in the Spring of 1941 -- such writings still being held in the national archives. The Soviet-Nazi Pact was a CONTRACT FOR WAR. Until May 10th, 1940, Stalin had attacked more nations than Hitler -- and had grabbed far more land. Stalin is why France fell in May. For it was Soviet oil that powered the Luftwaffe. Paris could NOT figure out where all of the enemy planes were coming from -- as their internal calculations told them that Germany couldn't possibly fuel up that many machines. In this, they were right. Neither Britain nor France ever figured on Stalin and Hitler becoming love-birds. WWII didn't start September 1, 1939 -- it started August 23rd, 1939 with Stalin's signature and his own crayon making how much of Poland he wanted. Stalin dictated EVERYTHING. Hitler had NO IMPUT AT ALL. The Nazis had to settle for a copy!!!! Hitler was itching to start a war so badly that he only needed a partner to set his demon free. Until the Pact, the British, French and Americans had Adolf boxed in. They controlled the world's RUBBER. You can't run a truck-based war without it. In the late 1938s, Germany was so short of rubber tires that major firms would purchase brand new trucks -- just to get their tires! Once the tires were removed, the entire brand-new truck was sold to a junk-yard to be consumed for repair parts! That's just how short Hitler was for rubber -- and how crazy the Nazi economy was. Yeah, just as insane as Stalin's economy. America fixed Stalin's economy -- and destroyed Adolf's. The amount of fixing performed for the USSR is so great that today neither nation can comprehend it. In both cases it's due to national embarrassment. For the Russians, their extreme dependency on the USA is unbearable. For the USA -- the question and shame is -- "How could you give THAT MUCH STUFF to that tyrant?" That transfer established the: Soviet atomic bomb Soviet Tu-4 -- aka B-29 strategic bomber Set the stage for Korea -- and the entire Cold War. So, anyway you figure it, it's a taboo topic in both nations.
1
@Jagermeister_Sta LOOK. Forget the legal dreams. YELTSIN released the Soviet State Archives that made it CRYSTAL CLEAR to all those present -- which was everybody -- Russian and foreign -- that STALIN started the war -- PERSONALLY. He didn't invite his own government in on his dirty deed. You might note that Stalin's diplomats -- every last one -- were missing from every photo. The next day, Stalin PURGED his diplomatic corps -- pretty much from top to bottom. It was not a pleasant retirement. His 'logical' basis for his move remains in the archives. As I posted, he figured that WWII would be a repeat of WWI. He's also the fellow that purged the Red Army of its best officers -- especially those who advocated Deep Operations -- that is -- tank operations. Stalin's reputation is below that of Hitler -- and that's saying something. He killed more Russians than Hitler -- and Adolf was trying to kill EVERYBODY -- not just Jews. Hitler hated the Christian churches -- Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant -- murdering clerics by the thousand. As for Stalin, he destroyed the Orthodox Church -- turning every last cleric into an NKVD fink -- on pain of death. In the case of both tyrants, their mothers wanted them to be men of the cloth. (!!!) Is that not irony on steroids?
1
@Jagermeister_Sta It was an AGGRESSION TREATY. Now that the actual document was made public -- it is obvious that it was a CONTRACT FOR WAR. The only non-aggression was between the two devils. In its details, the pact lays out which nations are Stalin's to conquer -- and which are Hitler's to play with. Until June 22, 1941 both tyrants followed the contract virtually to the letter. (Yes, Stalin crossed the line; Hitler howled in protest.) So by letter and deed, it was a Contract for War.
1
@Jagermeister_Sta My only quibble: your death toll is LOW. As for Hitler's so-called allies -- many solely existed because Stalin had attacked them out of the blue. Finland only wanted its border back. It would NOT co-ordinate with the Nazi armies. Attacking Finland was a strategic gaff of the first magnitude. Stalin pulled the same stunt with Romania. he even clipped off a slice of Slovakia -- the mountain passes in its East. If Stalin had listened to his own diplomats -- Hitler would have had absolutely no allied armies on his flanks. Romania, the primary source of Hitler's oil -- after the USSR -- was boxed in. They didn't like Adolf at ALL. They only aligned themselves very late in the game. The only tyrant making more bad decisions than Stalin was Hitler. While deep in the snows of Moscow -- he declares war on the USA -- the premier industrial power on the planet -- no other nation remotely compared. You may ask why Putin is messing around with Xi -- who is Stalin, Mao, Hitler -- revisited. Like that ugly trio, Xi and his CCP wants TOTAL global domination. Attempting to conquer America is proof of insanity on its face. Rationally, Russia, Red China and the USA are IMPOSSIBLE to conquer. They're simply TOO BIG. America has one other trump card: it runs best on autopilot. It doesn't even need a genius on top. History proves I'm right. In extremis, our military just cuts loose. Did ANY nation figure on the atomic bomb in 1941? Japanese experts figured on the concept -- but figured that such a beast had to be 25-years into the future. As for digital-electronic warfare... who invented all of that stuff in the first place? Who invented the oil industry? Who invented rocketry? (not Germany) Who invented mass production of automobiles? Who invented mass production of commercial ships? Landing craft? Xi has NO IDEA of what he's really gotten Red China into. Check out his idiocy in the South China Sea. BTW, it's RUSSIA that Xi covets -- not a bunch of atolls in the SCS. He wants Siberia back. That's what hypersonic warheads are all about. Xi is getting ready to nuke Moscow. So Putin is replicating Stalin's folly with Adolf. Perfect, then.
1
@tritonlandscaping1505 Actually, the atomic pipeline was filling up FAST. Your knowledge is distorted because atomic production was Top Secret. Actually, because of the way the atomic chemistry worked, the US was ramped up to crank out two to four atomic bombs PER MONTH in late 1945. So, every week Stalin would lose a critical asset. Britain still owned India and still occupied Iraq and most of Iran. Meaning? B-29s based in India could've turned straight north and destroyed EVERY warplant of value east of the Urals -- right from the start. The rail links through the Ural passes would've evaporated. The USAAF had such a tradition. This gambit was why the Germans retreated north in Italy once their logistics collapsed.
1
@josephmcbloggs8447 The Soviet atomic program would've been IMPOSSIBLE with the USAAF bombing them. All Soviet penetration agents in the West would've been rounded up, BTW. FDR knew all about them and TOLERATED them. They were nowhere near as secret as they thought they were. It's those dang radio emissions that they were widely using.
1
@tritonlandscaping1505 It's EASY. Hindsight is always better than foresight. Duh.
1
@SP-rt4ig I bed to differ. Humanity has not changed a bit. If you think these posts are emotionally charged, and off base -- check out what was passing for political chatter in the 19th Century -- pick any country. Folks these days are actually calmer than their great-grandparents. Blame the world-wide flow of information and history. As a side note: most tyrants who lead aggressive conflict have never left their country of origin. There are exceptions, but not many. Tojo, Hitler, Stalin, Mao -- these guys were not tourists! They filled their immediate staff with other fellows that had never travelled, either. In contrast, Churchill, FDR, De Gaulle were all men of the world. Famously, FDR practiced collective leadership. Suppressed at the time, FDR was actually too sick -- he was dying -- through most of the war. He kept short hours -- especially from 1943 onwards -- the period when the US really went into high gear. Remember that the US landed two corps in Normandy in June 1944 -- and a Marine corps in June 1944 -- half-the-way around the world -- and only two-weeks apart. BTW, in manning and support, a Marine division is twice as expensive as an Army division. Getting wet cost a ton of money -- and all Marine formations were 'shock' formations... 50% extra man-power relative to an Army formation. All during this frenetic military activity -- FDR was kicking it back with his doctor and Congress. He did not micro-manage the Pentagon.
1
@altman5648 The fight would not be in Siberia, and virtually all Soviet machines would be regarded as mere targets for the RAF & USAAF. Further, Soviet aviation fuel would have almost dried up -- over night. They only had aviation grade fuel courtesy of the British, and to a lesser extent the US. Soviet aviation fuel was coming up out of Abadan, Iran on British rails from British wells via a British refinery. It's with irony the oil of Iran was intended by Whitehall to be a strategic resource for Britain -- with the expectation that it would be shipped around the Cape to Liverpool. Instead, none reached England. The US supplied Britain's needs. Iran's crude went to India, Singapore, Egypt -- just the whole world EAST of the Cape. Plus the USSR -- an event Whitehall never planned on.
1
@austinlancaster5396 Said crude oil was drilled with American lend-lease rotary drilling rigs. These were 21 times faster at punching holes in the dirt.
1
@AlexanderUnit-731 The Emperor and his crew folded. Period. Stop. Even the IJA caved. Curiously, it was the IJN that was most fanatical. We sent in our newest battleship BECAUSE we had intercepted Japanese signals indicating that IJN officers STILL wanted to suicide against our peace delegation.
1
@yardogyuh2049 One ALWAYS has to adjust aircraft, ships and tanks for how long they can last in battle. In the case of the German ME 262 ten-hours was their jet engine limit -- if you babied it. This meant that raw plane count (produced) had to be adjusted way, way down. The American jets lasted hundreds of hours. This same dynamic kicks in Big Time with the T-34c and T34-85. Their crews and running gear simply didn't last -- BEFORE they met the enemy. The Tiger and Panther lasted only slightly longer. In both cases, the Germans and Russians could enter battle with impressive numbers of tanks. Within three-days their tank counts would've ALWAYS fallen 70-80% even without fighting. The American's Sherman would be so quickly repaired that American tank divisions were always up to strength going into battle. Indeed, by late 1944, most American formations were OVER STRENGTH. Famously, one company of infantry in the 1st Division had acquired its own tank platoon! This reality was carried to parody in Kelly's Heroes -- the Hollywood film. The fact is that (see Korean War) T-34-85s just didn't do that well against Shermans. So Moscow brought out the T-54 as fast as possible. The Americans raced through the M-26, M-46, M-47 and M48 -- all due to facing the T-34-85. The most likely sequence would be a repeat of Barbarossa. For the Americans would be chewing through T-34c and T-34-85 as fast as STAVKA could bring them up. Remember that the Germans rolled over the USSR BECAUSE of the Luftwaffe not because they had decent tanks. They really didn't. But the Americans would be bringing competitive tanks and a MUCH superior air force to anything the Soviets had ever faced. As Korea showed, the USAAF would've wiped out the Red Air Force. Then the American tanks would've just torn the Soviets up.
1
@george217 What? By definition, the Anti-Christ is the ultimate False Prophet.
1
@theobserver3753 Where'd you get that? ML was ex-communicated by the Pope BECAUSE he was holier than thou... a "Born-Again-Catholic" who was taking the Pope & Company to task for everything from Indulgences to Simony. He wasn't creating a new religion at all. He was -- in modern terms -- an evangelical. He didn't come up with ANYTHING new -- sourcing all of his indignities based upon long established Church doctrine. Those in high Church office tossed their cookies when they read his indictment// petition nailed to the door... for they were guilty as sin.
1
@RobloxGamer-ml2hs In all fiction and legend, heroes save women. That's why such tales are even told.
1