Comments by "No Name" (@NoName-hg6cc) on "The Armchair Historian" channel.

  1.  @joeywheelerii9136  France and uk crushed nobody. Italy was the only one to crush its enemy, uk and France couldn't win 3vs1
    29
  2.  @someguy7723  That's why Italians were pissed, as the only ones who defeated their enemy...
    28
  3.  @anonb315  Italy was quite strong and win the majority of the battles. Entente and the Alliance did the sane in the Western and Eastern front with pathetic results. Italy won alone, France and English had few troops, Italy sent an army in France and still they couldn't win! Nor could Germans against Russia
    27
  4.  @anonb315  I wonder. Italians were always on attack, Entente on defense. And after spring 1918 both English and French run away backwards like the chicken they are, waiting for Americans and still couldn't finish the job, while Italy destroyed AH!
    25
  5.  @anonb315  Without Italy Entente might have lost
    22
  6. "Poor predictable Entente, they probably launch another frontal attack in the no man land" "Frontal assault in no man land, never fails!" Or "Poor predictable 'murica, he is probably launch another search and destroy mission through the jungle" "search and destroy mission through the jungle, never fails!"
    9
  7. Same for Germany and France/uk, fighting over 100 battles in the same places
    6
  8.  @Oligarch-qz4ud  Except Italy did. Alone
    6
  9.  @Oligarch-qz4ud  Italy did. Deal with it
    6
  10. English and Americans were very good at breaking promises and running away
    6
  11. Bulls...
    5
  12. Italy didn't betray anyone and WON
    5
  13. Now we wait one at least 1 minute long for English
    5
  14. It's actually Austrians stupidity. if they accepted Italy requests....
    5
  15. Italy defeated AH
    5
  16. Italians actually finished with taking Innsbruck, only one among the allies to touch enemy's territory. Then allies betrays her and Italy turn fascist. The Allies response: surprised pikachu face
    5
  17. ​ @Seft2_ Nope. Italy saved French, English and Americans on Western Front. Much like Germany saved Austrians in 1917
    5
  18. No, many of those areas are Italians so the right name is Isonzo
    5
  19. Stop it. You want war and destruction again?
    5
  20. Italy didn't change side and won alone With Germany you win battles but lose war 😂
    5
  21.  @05Rudey  Ahahahahahaha the contrary is true. At Singapore there were mostly British, while in North and East Africa Indians saved the day. English were uselall all the war
    5
  22. ​ @frezeryilma5735  Oh please, that's uk thing "bo-hoo wE wERe alOne wIth enormous teRRitories and reSOrces but ReSiSTEd"
    5
  23. And Italians, Croatians, Austrians.....etc.
    5
  24. ​​ @kayagurcu2814 Turkey lost in both 1911-1912 and 1914-1918 😂
    4
  25.  @kayagurcu2814  Successor of Ottoman Empire. loser of bot war aforementioned
    4
  26. ​ @smal750  Nope, Italy fought alone, without Italians French and English would have lost against Germany 😂
    4
  27. ​ @MrBell-iq3sm  because krauts didn't respect the treaty
    4
  28. Except Italy defeated AH, Entente did not defeat Germany
    4
  29.  @Oligarch-qz4ud  Italy did alone. So thanks to no one but Italy
    4
  30.  @reverendnon5959  I heard it about Russians army. Another joke is that the only army Russia army could beat it's itself
    4
  31. You are not a 🤡 you are the whole 🎪
    4
  32. Well said!
    4
  33. Italians hero tried freed their brothers and succeeded
    4
  34. LOL, Churchill should have sit out of the war seeing how incompetent he was, Gallipoli was a mess
    4
  35. They were always Italians. It's Isonzo, Pola, Fiume, TRIESTE. But being nice some areas can use both It wouldn't be fair for the victims otherwise, as you said
    4
  36. No, ignorance is where opinion come from
    4
  37. You mean English, French and Germans sucked in both WW2. And the wars before They were always pathetic fighting. USA is not better: WW2 was won because of USSR mostly. Though Russia sucked in WW1
    4
  38. ISONZO, TRENTO, TRIESTE
    4
  39. Italians tried to free their territories, they were fed up with mistreatment and everyone saw how far slavs can go despite cities being 99% Italian
    3
  40. ​ @lecraftedeaaradhyakashyap4442 Except it wasn't It was still strong and did beat Serbia, held Russia... The "sUPerPoWer" had no contact with colonies and was surrounded, facing three armies. Italy was alone
    3
  41.  @jokekopter2509  Italy did destroy AH at Vittorio Veneto, it was already winning in 1916, the only reason Caporetto happened was because of the Germans. AH didn't win a battle against Italians
    3
  42.  @jokekopter2509  LOL no, Germans fought against Russians, French and Greeks against Bulgaria The only thing AH did that war was losing EVERY battle to Italy, even after Russia was virtually out of the war in 1916, when they'd have lost had not been for Germans.
    3
  43.  @jokekopter2509  False. Italians were the majority in Istria and Dalmatia: the cities of FIUME, POLA, ZARA etc...were Italian
    3
  44.  @jokekopter2509  Italy had a pact with the allies but croats illegally took the former AH navy and the illegaly occupied Dalmazia, which had an ITALIAN majority
    3
  45.  @jokekopter2509  Yes, Germans were there, open a book. That's the only reason AH didn't collapse after Gorizia. Without them, there's be no Caporetto. Cope and open a book. STUDY History
    3
  46.  @jokekopter2509  Yes they were, all Istria and Dalmazia were, from coast to the countryside, populated mostly by Italians
    3
  47. Not really. Italy beat AH. But Germany did make seem Russians competent as much as Entente made Germans seem good
    3
  48. Like it's strange the Allies never thought to cross the North sea to Poland so to help Russians and outflank Germans...instead of losing so many men
    3
  49.  @oliverschlesinger6744  You too! 👋
    3
  50. Meh, Haig, Conrad, Nivelle give him a run for his money
    3