Comments by "Ember Fist" (@emberfist8347) on "Military History Visualized" channel.

  1. Here is another noted failure of mines. They need to be able to be triggered. At Peleliu, the Japanese placed mines (actually repurposed aircraft bombs) on the beach to destroy landing craft and they would be detonated by wires connecting them. The thing is the one thing the US Navy bombardment of White Beach succeeded at was destroying the wires needed to trigger the mines by the amount of shrapnel. It probably wasn’t that much of a comfort for the Marines landing however as they had everything else go wrong for them.
    33
  2. It was actually from what I understand an English propaganda word for the tactic. Hitler caught wind of it thought it was stupid because the combined arms tactics they used is how you win a war.
    14
  3.  @senorpepper3405 Being the number 1 contractor for the American War Effort.
    13
  4. Keeping those troops in Norway made sense. The Allies put a lot of effort into convincing the Germans they would land in Norway and the Pas de Calais again in a two-pronged attack and Normandy was a feint. They went the whole nine yards too with commandos doing landings on beaches and gathering samples of the soil like they did with the real landing beaches.
    8
  5. I always credited the victory on the Abrams on the Coalition’s access to GPS. It was the deciding factor as we could see where the all the T-72s were while they lacked a similar capability.
    7
  6.  @robert-h2x  you do know tanks are much slower off-road and it makes maintenance more difficult particularly with Major Mud gumming up your tracks.
    5
  7.  @bubbasbigblast8563 Buying off Spain was unlikely. Franco was another fascist.
    5
  8. I am not sure if that is necessarily true. Hitler held out hope in negotiating a separate peace with the West.
    4
  9.  @longiusaescius2537 Hitler had a defensive with Japan. There was no obligation to declare war after Pearl Harbor.
    4
  10. Yeah the Sherman hull was a good choice. The Panzer II used on the Wespe was obsolete by that point.
    3
  11.  @nordoceltic7225  Nah the plan was honestly doomed from a purely logistical standpoint. Germany was supremely top heavy from a lack of standardization with almost 2 dozen types of trucks all needed their own supply chains and that isn’t getting into their tanks and such. Plus they assumed that the population wouldn’t grow to hate the Nazis more than Stalin despite them taking their food and killing them. And that is just scratching the surface of Barbarossa’s problems. We could start with the Germans tempting fate by naming the invasion after a man who tried and failed to invade Russia.
    3
  12.  @K_Kara Well you need to secure your supply lines. Also they needed the heavy for their atomic bombs project which were frequently raided by Allied special forces. So naturally they had to send more troops after the successful raids.
    3
  13. The Priest Kangaroo conversion was Canadian. They did in North Africa because they had too many tank and artillery and not enough half tracks. The Sexton was a Canadian conversion that existed since North Africa.
    3
  14.  @louiscypher4186  Because we got better at combined arms tactics than the Germans.
    3
  15. Oversimplified is meant to be taken as a joke and they get details wrong about western history as well. Their World War I video points to the Zimmerman Telegram as the reason the Us joined the war when in reality while it and Luthisasia were factors, the last straw was the Germans sinking American shipping with U-Boats.
    3
  16. The Mujahaideen kicked the Soviets out by the time the movie hit theaters.
    2
  17.  @studentaviator3756  No the Japanese were brutal. Germany at least fought mostly obeying the laws of war. The Japanese treated the Geneva Convention like a war crime to do list and fought tooth and nail for every inch of land we tried to take.
    2
  18.  @studentaviator3756  Well going by OP's dad said, the grass is always greener on the side.
    2
  19.  @allangibson8494 Or Nazi POWs in Denmark’s case.
    2
  20. Agreed. The Germans should have definitely invested more into this stuff than they did. The Operations Room did a series about the Battle of the Bugle and you could do a drinking game every time the narrator mentions that the German advanced stopped due to a bridge not supporting the weight of their tanks or being blown by the Allies.
    2
  21. Perhaps a modified trophy system could work.
    2
  22. It was in widespread use. The British coined it for Germany’s successes in combined arms during the Battle of France in war propaganda.
    2
  23. It was the Canadians who did that. They had more artillery than half-tracks.
    2
  24.  @rick7424 nice strawman he didn’t say that.
    2
  25. Well of course there are different levels of training for Russian tank crews. The best used the T-80 around this time.
    2
  26. The Calvary that were killed in Poland were just unlucky.
    2
  27. It is only the latest evolution of using air observation. We had observation balloons coordinating artillery since the 1800s followed by planes then helicopters.
    2
  28.  @Wavy_Gravy  That is not all you need. And they didn't have unlimited ammo.
    2
  29. Actually they did. The reason they didn’t have a workhorse tank was their doctrine called for two types of tanks. The Panzer III would engage other tanks and the Panzer IV would attack enemy fortifications. The roles would eventually switch and then they added the Panther to the mix to counter the T-34.
    2
  30.  @sthrich635 The real issue was Hitler’s attitude of social Darwinism which meant every factory was competing. On paper doesn’t sound too bad but then you realize of the five atomic weapons the Nazis had, the most advanced was the Post Office. That paints the picture of Germany’s wartime problem too many cooks spoiling the soup. Plus they didn’t have the capacity of Britain with its Empire, the USSR or the US who could outproduce them without going all in.
    2
  31. I thought it was Americans using M1 rifles and Soviets with the PPSh-41. These Germans were using K98ks basically a WWI action.
    2
  32.  @michaelsingleton6430  And the facts backed him up. The Soviets actually canned production of the GAZ-64 because they were using Jeeps more than their own trucks and the amphibious Ford GPA was so popular with the Soviets they copied the design with the GAZ-46 which later showed in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The Seep as it was nicknamed was actually more popular with the Soviets than with the GIs.
    2
  33. Don’t forget GPS.
    2
  34.  @wolfdima  No the Mujahedeen were booted out by the Taliban.
    1
  35. The brain drain can be blamed on Adolf himself. There are so many Jews particularly in the sciences who fled to America to avoid the Nazis and made sure we had the atomic bomb before he did. Not he could make one with his heavy water and bureaucracy.
    1
  36. No the issue is that they have trouble maintaining their tools. The Moskva was famously sunk from what should have been survivable hits because they lacked the proper damage control and the CIWS system didn’t work.
    1
  37. And the 5 Shermans were needed. More tanks means you can outflank them Tiger.
    1
  38. I can tell from your comment you are not American. De Facto segregation was a thing for much longer in the South starting with the Blacl Codes shortly after the end of Reconstruction in the 1870s. Also Segregation was codified into law not by Woodrow Wilson but the Supreme Court. Plessy V. Ferguson in 1896 set a standard of “separate but equal” which legitimized and legalized Segregation from its precedent and started it on a nationwide level. Segregation on a federal level was already underway when Woodrow Wilson entered office for his first term in 1912.
    1
  39.  @apo617 Nukes are perfect for everything. Stopping riots, mining, launching spaceships etc.
    1
  40.  @winters1942 No anti-German sentiment was rising from the sinking of American ships. Adolf missed that America was already halfway there when it comes to mobilizing for war. The Lend-Lease we were sending didn’t come from nowhere.
    1
  41. ⁠​⁠ @honkhonk8009 Well I mean they were making the tactics on the fly.
    1
  42.  @mladenmatosevic4591  You could and they did but it took multiple vehicles which went against common sense, but common sense wasn't that common in Germany at the time.
    1
  43.  @MrWolfstar8  And their problem was they stayed with the Panzer IV when they had heavy tanks like the Tiger. Common wisdom is to make sure one tank can be towed by one ARV.
    1
  44.  @MrWolfstar8  Then maybe you shouldn't make tanks with those issues.
    1
  45.  @mladenmatosevic4591  It is either have a number of special recovery vehicles or need more than one recovery vehicle to tow some of your vehicles.
    1
  46.  @mladenmatosevic4591  Yeah they should have just not made a vehicle that heavy unless they were ready to up their ARV to a Tiger based variant.
    1
  47.  @mladenmatosevic4591  Except it wasn't. The Jagdtiger uses the chassis of the Tiger II they had in production and had issues of needing multiple vehicles to tow.
    1
  48.  @mladenmatosevic4591  between 77 and 80 were made. And the gun used wasn't an AA gun either it was an anti-tank gun. None of the Jagdtigers were based on the failed Tiger that was Ferdinand which has a PaK 88 and 91 were converted from the failed Tiger P chassis.
    1
  49. Because one example proves the rule. The exceptions tend to prove the rule. The majority of times where Abrams goes against a T-72, the Abrams wins.
    1
  50. You seriously said on a history video?
    1