Comments by "Alan Pennie" (@alanpennie8013) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1. I presume the camp was run by Austrians up to 1938, by Nazis up to May 1945, and by The Brits after that date
    1
  2. If Barbarossa wasn't an immediate success the war was lost, because the Germans would no longer be able to obtain all those Soviet natural resources they desperately needed.
    1
  3.  @konstantinkelekhsaev302  2% seems a bit low. I got the impression that there were plenty of Vlassovites in The Gulag after 1945. But it seems hardly anyone was shot, contrary to some British accounts. The days of The Yezhovshina were past, the Soviet Union needed every one who could work. Oh I see you said civilians. Obviously no civilians were Vlassovites.
    1
  4.  @chrisguido1858  Those SS eh!
    1
  5. An all - out assault on German agriculture.
    1
  6.  @matthelme4967  Finland's membership of The Axis was signalled by Finnish adherence to The Anti - Comintern Pact (1941). The Nazis always regarded this as an association of States which accepted their leadership, replacing the old League of Nations.
    1
  7. I'm pretty sure that Alsace at least was annexed into The Reich in 1940. Certainly men of military age living there were conscripted into The German Army, with the result that the province suffered greater loss of life in WW2 than any other part of France.
    1
  8. Yep. Misconceived plan badly executed is the correct assessment.
    1
  9.  @Digiidude  It's extremely useful to have soldiers who can go without sleep. It's bad for their health but in the short run in enhances their effectiveness a lot.
    1
  10. Economics was really his center of interest.
    1
  11.  @caryblack5985  Still people don't know about the Rzhev meat grinder. I was actually surprised casualties weren't higher. Heavy fighting seems to have been confined to August.
    1
  12. The Romanians had most formidable navy.
    1
  13.  @ahmedeox  It is indeed. And, no they couldn't.
    1
  14.  Comrade Kabo  This might be due to Hitler liking the Social Darwinist side of capitalism even while not liking the free.market side. It's a complicated subject.
    1
  15. No doubt it could be repaired eventually but the allies have devoted the spring and summer of 1944 to wrecking it totally employing heavy bombers, light bombers and The French Resistance. If The Allies could reinforce Normandy faster than The Germans the battle there could be won. And if not, not.
    1
  16. Yep. The element of discounting (which made them worth only 96% of their face value) meant they weren't quite cash.
    1
  17.  @tankgirl2074  Probably. They needed to prioritize. Nazi collaborators went to the back of the queue.
    1
  18. He accepted the blame for instructing Gavin to attend first to the threat of a counter attack from the east. He behaved like a gentleman. This may have been because any attempt to blame Gavin would have backfired. He was unpopular with the US airborne commanders long before Market Garden. He certainly behaved very differently to Sosabowski.
    1
  19.  @scottnieradka6836  Make sense. The private plots were small and the peasants would have grown whatever would have sold for the highest price Probably it was 30% by market value not caloric value.
    1
  20. We may wonder whether, if Browning had issued positive orders to prioritise the bridge, whether Gavin would have obeyed them.
    1
  21. Heaven knows. In retrospect the whole operation looks like the height of folly. I suppose it played some part in securiing Antwerp but that could have been done at much less cost.
    1
  22. Henry Ashby Turner says exactly this at the end of , Hitler's Thirty Days to Power, a very readable short book. A hypothetical praetorian government in Germany would probably have attacked Poland. However this might not have led to a world war had the British and French been convinced that The Germans would not attack anyone else.
    1
  23.  @mumin7229  Quite possibly. But it may be The UK (which had never been very friendly to Poland) would have restrained France as long as the Germans made it clear that they were only seeking the restoration of their 1914 frontiers.
    1
  24. There was considerable opposition in France to anyone "dying for Danzig". The attitude of The Soviet Union is the great imponderable. If they had also sought gains that would have meant the effective disappearance of Poland.
    1
  25.  Israel Hands  However much they disliked The Soviet Union they would not wish to be cut off from their families.
    1
  26. What a creep this Graham seems to have been.
    1
  27. A shorter overview of Stalingrad would be a good idea. That way viewers could miss some of the battlestorm videos but still have an idea how the battle progressed.
    1
  28. The Brazilian Expeditionary Force is not much mentioned.
    1
  29.  @kaletovhangar  He dictated them posthumously. They were literally ghost - written.
    1
  30. I think there are two objections to The Table Talk, one major and one minor. The minor one is the obvious unreliability of anything touched by Genoud but this can be avoided by going back to the first German text. The major one is that that text is a reconstruction rather than a stenographic record and is designed (by Hitler and Bormann) to flatter Hitler. Still as a source it's not nearly as bad as memoirs and diaries published after the war.
    1
  31. You have to remember that coal is a plant concentrate, even if it looks like a mineral.
    1
  32. The so - called Memorandum is a very dubious source because again the text is compiled from Hossbach's notes and recollections and not from any stenographic record. As a document it is inferior to The Table Talk which, I believe, was approved by Hitler and so achieved "official" status.
    1
  33.  @TheImperatorKnight  The reports of criminal behaviour by British soldiers are distressing.
    1
  34. It was the same story at Arnhem itself, with the paras being landed miles away from the bridge there. The operation was both badly designed and badly executed.
    1
  35. They were continuously in action from May 1940 - May 1941, and definitely lost some of their edge.
    1
  36.  @electronworld4996  This is true. Plus WW1 had been financially ruinous and the Brits couldn't pay for another world war. Luckily the were able to persuade The USA to underwrite them.
    1
  37. He was pretty brutal. Though less so after he consolidated his rule.
    1
  38. They were presumably told that these people were Nazis, which many of them would have been.
    1
  39. The Brits would not have conceded him anything. That was all decided in May 1940.
    1
  40. I remember an amazing story of a British bomber which became so lost it attacked Bristol believing it to be Hamburg.
    1
  41.  @haroldgodwinson832  The US bombers were very heavily armed, and shot down many attacking fighters. But one Messerschmitt 109 for one much more expensive B 17 isn't a good exchange.
    1
  42.  @davethompson3326  It's sad that Sorel is so little known in England. There's an interesting discussion of him in, Napoleon, For and Against, by the honorary Englishman Pieter Geyl.
    1
  43. The German people mainly. Foreigners wouldn't lend following earlier defaults.
    1
  44. I don't think it was benevolence. The pows were valuable workers and the USSR was desperately short of labour.
    1
  45. You are correct. There was fighting between RSI and partisans in The North and casualties were high.
    1
  46. US submarines played a role in winning The Pacific War which often gets overlooked.
    1
  47. Some of these British actions against The Cossacks resemble pogroms (ironic in more than one way).
    1
  48. Yes. These are good arguments. I think under any leadership Germany would have pursued an aggressive, expansionist policy in the 1930s.
    1
  49.  @SamuelJamesNary  You could say that in the 1930s Germany was aggressive because it was so weak. The Kaiser's Germany was much stronger and could effectively protect the Germans who were governed by non - German rulers (most of whom were German allies, or at the least reasonably friendly).
    1
  50.  @johnburns4017  This looks like the guy was complicit in Gavin's shabby attempt to blame Lindquist for the failure.
    1