Comments by "King Orange" (@kingorange7739) on "How close was the Soviet Union to Collapse in 1942-1943?" video.

  1. Capitalism: a tank is going to cost a lot of money Communism: no it doesn’t it only costs a a few dollars in our country. Capitalism: ok then why can’t you produce infinite tanks? Why doesn’t everyone get a tank? Communism: 🤫😖🤭
    6
  2. Oil deprivement would collapse them in a year. Equipment is useless without the fuel to run them and soldiers are useless if they just become more mouths to feed with food u don’t have
    2
  3. anton farquar how so?
    2
  4. Well done TIk. Great content as always. I would like to ask your opinion on what you think Germany’s chances of winning world war 2 were if any. Many historians have a view that Germany had no realistic chance of winning. I would like to know if you agree with them or if you have a different view. Also I would like to know on what key decisions Germany could of done differently that would of given them a better chance. Keep up the great work.
    2
  5. Live 4 This definitely agree on that one. I stated to many people that the Caucasus would have to be held for Germany to have a chance but this video does reinforce that Blau may have been the most decisive point the war could of had. Regardless of who won in it.
    2
  6. LikeUnto Buddha yes they did because eventually their production would of been crippled. Also in 1942, there was a near military and economic collapse.
    1
  7. al xhatz The instability of the regime would say otherwise yes the Soviet people were willing to keep fighting for a long period of time because they knew what the German intention was, however if they defeat in the war seemed inevitable then a peace treaty would probably be proposed as long as the conditions did it involve journey annexing the entirety of Russia which Germany didn’t even want as they plan to stop at the AA line.
    1
  8. More than likely stalemate until war fatigue or till the atom bomb is made.
    1
  9. RonnieLeeDuck that’s not the point the point is instability at the regime would hinder the Soviet war effort even further and if it’s a war that all people within the Soviet lost hope in winning then the Soviet union would have no choice but to sooth for peace or else it would lead to a complete state collapse
    1
  10.  @RonnieLeeDuck  Ok? Stopping one collapse does not instantly mean he would be able to stop any collapse.
    1
  11.  @RonnieLeeDuck  Not really. The amount Stalin killed during the war was not the most significant due to him wanting to use as much man power as he could. Look up Tik's video on order 227 for more info. On top of that even with the 26 million killed, that still left the Soviets with 267 million people to feed which after the fall of the Ukraine was very difficult to do, not to mention that had the Caucasus fallen it would hindered the Soviet ability to get food moved that they already had which wasn't much. A Soviet collapse would had resulted with a lack of will to fight as well as their production being crippled. Not even Stalin would be able to force a continued fight if the people and the Soviet high command concluded that the war was loss
    1
  12. greekmarine Capitalism: not when many tanks are low quality. Ha
    1
  13. greekmarine Capitalism: depends on what u define as better.
    1
  14. greekmarine u r really missing that my original comment was only meant to be a joke on the Soviet economy.
    1
  15. greekmarine yeah
    1
  16. Mark12 Strang even though that route is a better option. It would have been unlikely to accomplish it in 1941, due to logistics and supply problems.
    1
  17. Mark12 Strang wait so what are u proposing the Germans do?
    1
  18. P mar no but if the caucuses was secured it would basically leave the Ukraine near impossible to ever take back which would starve them out that way and then on top of that without the caucuses oil fields transportation of already existing food supply would become difficult
    1
  19. P mar to answer the question about the United States yes in theory they could supply the Soviets throughout. But I don’t even think that would be enough to prevent a Soviet economic collapse had the caucuses fallen.
    1
  20.  @Live4This  agreed.
    1
  21. kverkagambo it’s that the amount of food was insanely limited after Ukraine fell.
    1
  22. What?
    1
  23. nowthisnamestaken the Soviets would of economically collapsed.
    1
  24. alejandro casalegno and Mongolia.
    1
  25. Jyxoty again debatable. If u r referring to literally everything being conquered then sure but if u r referring to just beating them military wise, there were many points of history that it could of been done. Also the US could successfully take over Russia now a days if it needed to. Though not without dragging the world into a Third World War in the process.
    1
  26. Frank Oliveri slightly
    1
  27. jack wardley not true
    1