Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "RealLifeLore" channel.

  1. Nah they just take your vodka - they fight 10x harder if they know you have vodka supply - ask the Germans defending food trains.
    5
  2. Neither anyone in Germany nor France loved US plans to blow them up... Especially in Germany. However, when attacked they would have defended their homes - both sides.
    2
  3. Wait central Europe loved Russia in 1939? Really? Which country?
    1
  4. NATO had little chance to stop Soviet advance in conventional way. The reinforcements would not arrive in time. Its not like ships fly and its not like air power can deliver even 1% of stuff needed. This is why there was heavy reliance on 100s of nukes. Soviets "victory" was not exactly anything that would be "great" - after all they would have inherited Germany with around 500 nuclear holes or more in it. Most of their supply lines would be toast. They could push into France and continue extending even more with even more nukes being used. Once they rich border with Spain their lines would be super long and NATO would hide behind mountains with constant nuclear rain. Even limited conflict involving Germany would lead to total devastation on both sides and zero winners - just two losers. Hence "mutual destruction" principle. So what that you reach river Rhine in say more realistic 4 weeks?
    1
  5. Well, neither did US since WWII... so what is your point?
    1