Comments by "" (@Crashed131963) on "Germany's Worst Defeat: Operation Bagration | Animated History" video.

  1. It's amazing "Bagration " is not mention even more than smaller D-Day? It was just 2 weeks after D-Day and larger in scale manpower wise. After Bagration the Russians were on a non stop dash to Berlin even if D-Day never happened or even if Britain and the US pulled out of the war at this stage.
    4
  2. There was a ad? Youtube without adblock , that must hurt? Have not seen a commercial on YT in 5 years.
    3
  3. Twice? It was 3 times. 1-Germany invades West Poland in 1939 2-Russia 2 weeks later takes East Poland 3- Russia takes all Poland at wars end.
    2
  4. .It's criminal that "D-Day" is talked about all the time even when "Bagration" was only 2 weeks later and larger in scale.
    2
  5. Being on the losing side sucks. What would the Nazi have done to a defeated Russia?
    2
  6. Your in for a treat watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJAEdLnZsgI The Only full Doc about Bagration I ever seen.
    2
  7. I agree , very good.
    2
  8. It's criminal that "D-Day" is talked about all the time even when "Bagration" was only 2 weeks later and larger in scale.
    2
  9.  @lycaonpictus9662  Also, why do people think the German would have won if they took Moscow? Napoleon took Moscow and still lost. All the Factories where reset far east behind the Ural Mountains. If Japan took over Las Angeles in ww2 , I don't think the US would have lost, there was still a lot of country and Cities left.
    2
  10. True. Bagration was much larger in scale and a much bigger defeat for the Germans than D-Day. Bragration made D-Day not even matter. After Bagration Russian was on a unstoppable dash to Berlin no matter what happened in the West. D-Day was to prevent the Russians from taking all of Europe , not just the East part of Europe.
    2
  11.  @reinersousa2329  Here is a great doc on Bagration. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJAEdLnZsgI&t=9s It was bigger in scale than D-Day by a large margin. 900,000 German troops of Army Group center were defeated totally.
    2
  12. We were bad to. We held off D-day as long as possible so Hitler and Stalin could bleed each other out. Worked too. 11 million Russian troops dead and 5 million Germans troops. The US lost 500,000 same with the UK.
    1
  13.  @atheistyoda8915  We were worried Stalin would take all of Germany not just the east if we did not get on mainland Europe soon. Could not hold off any longer.
    1
  14.  @atheistyoda8915  I thought the Allies did a great job at letting Hitler and Stalin bleed each other out until June 1944. The casualties numbers proved it.
    1
  15. True Where the Russians liberate but for get to ever leave. The Canadians ,British with actually had to shoot at the Russians to keep them from liderating Denmark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWcRl7Q7pGs Great untold story.
    1
  16. The US and UK saved Western Europe from Stalin ,Hitler's twin clone brother.
    1
  17. @inkun2B0\\\X Stalin killed 6 million ukraine before the war started
    1
  18. Here is the best Doc you will ever see about Bagration. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJAEdLnZsgI
    1
  19. By 1944 , it did not matter . The Germans could not stop a attack even if the knew it was coming.
    1
  20. German was only a country of 70 million in 1940. The US alone had 120 million people and 3 times the industrial output. Evern without Russia and the UK.
    1
  21.  John Cornell  Germany was a land base fighting Machine. To their credit how a small county lasted from 1942 to 1945 fighting the USSR, USA and UK at once is amazing.
    1
  22.  John Cornell  Germany after the fall of France could have just ignore Britain. Britain also could never get back to Europe alone like the Germans could not get to Britain. They could only have a air war, which the attackers would lose , since their shot down surviving pilots would be POWs not back in the air again like the defenders.
    1
  23.  John Cornell  Germany should have ignored Italy's troubles in North Africa as well. The Russian were supplying German with oil before Germany invaded Russia. In our 'What If" Britain and German are alone with no direct US involvement , but the US would supply Britain for sure.
    1
  24.  @Tsukuyomi8  Not sure how . Their industrial strength were close and the British navy was larger and the Battle of Britain proved their air power was a match. Britain developed sonar and radar to a point in late 1943 that it was suicidal to be in a U-Boat. Canada had any natural resource britain needed to feed British industry.
    1
  25.  John Cornell  The British ever built more aircraft during the war than Germany. https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II Many being 4 engine bombers. So the number would have been greater if they only made small planes like Germany.
    1
  26.  John Cornell  How you Invade a Island nation that out produces you in ships and planes after already winning the Battle of Britain makes no sense.
    1
  27. Worst yet , now Russia has a GDP below Brazil and Canada. 3 EU member have larger economies than Russia, 4 if you count the UK.
    1
  28. Also how does any county win if fighting the USA, UK and USSR at once? The US "alone" could out manufacture 3 Germany's and had 50 million more people than Germany. The Russian were not that good , they lost 6 million more soldiers than the Germans. How does the winning side lose more troops than the losing side?
    1
  29. I spit up my coffee when he said the Russians were coming to liberate the Poles. Stalin, the liberator who forgets to ever leave.
    1
  30. @Mars Attacks How far back do you want to go? Homosapians stold Europe from the Neanderthal? Denmark took Greenland from the Eskimos?
    1
  31. Your in for a treat watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJAEdLnZsgI The Only full Doc about Bagration I ever seen.
    1
  32. Why would stranded Japanese Army matter in distant China in 1945 when the US had the Japan mainland blockaded. The surrender was because more A-Bombs were on the way. http://www.dannen.com/decision/bomb-rate.html Russain did not even have a Navy to get to Japan.
    1
  33.  @ArmorKingEmir  Makes no sense. Its like Germany being surrounded on all sides of their Borders ,but deciding to surrender because their Army in far off North Africa was beaten. The US stopped a loaf of bread from entering Japan with their blockade , but Japan cared about a army in distant Manchuria that made no difference to mainland Japan at this stage of the game.
    1
  34. But the Russian lost 6 million more troops during the war than the Germans. The Russians won but they sure were awful at it.
    1
  35.  @KatyaLishch  Britain also held them off during the Battle of Britain. How the Russian moved entire factories far east away from the Germans needs a video of its own. I work at a large steel plant in Canada, I just can't see how you pick one up and move it .
    1
  36.  @AAAA-zc9gz  The Russian did not lose 6 million soldiers . They lost 6 million more than the Germans, 11 million vs Germans 5 million.
    1
  37.  @KatyaLishch  Even if Britain fell, I think the Russians would still have won, they had more manpower and resources than smaller Germany. When the war was over I'm sure Russia would have gave Britain back. Not so sure about France though.
    1
  38. Declaring war on the US was the final nail.
    1
  39.  @dr.finnegan3949  Hitler made many bad military decisions.
    1
  40. That's why the Russians lost 5 million more troops than the side they defeated. Brave fighters not smart fighters.
    1
  41.  @rvdberg92  You better look it up . the Russian lost 10 million troops 22 million with civilians. The Germans lost 5 million troops and 6 million with civilians. Only idiots would street to street fight in bombed out to rubble Berlin at the closing days of the war. The Russians loss 80,000 soldiers over a surrounded City.
    1
  42.  @rvdberg92  Here you go . Don't blame the messenger for the message. https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war
    1
  43. No B-29 with A-Bombs on their side. The allie's air power was 10 times that of Russia.
    1
  44.  @bobcougar77  The Russians were bleed white from the War losing 10 million soldiers and 12 million civilians. The UK and US lost only 500,000 each and untouched France was now back in the war. . With the allies overwhelming air power and zero supply issues ,Russia could not go any further and would eventually be the outnumbered with the long supply line like the Germans were. And B-29 with A-Bombs would eventually arrive , for that absolute insurance.
    1
  45. True But the Russian would have liberated (Stalin Style) France , Belgium, Denmark, (All) Germany, and Austria. D-Day was just about getting the allies on the Ground in Europe , not winning the war against Germany.
    1
  46. The West would have beat them. Russian lost 10 million troops by 1945 while the US lost 500,000. Plus the US had a air force 6 times that of Russia and the A-Bomb coming online.
    1
  47. Like the Germans were a threat in 1944 on any front. By 1944 the German could not even move in daytime with the Allies air superiority.
    1
  48.  @tuanskywalker8240  There was not much of a difference from being liberated by Stalin and Invaded by Stalin.
    1
  49. OK Grammar Nazi.
    1
  50. After Kusks it was a one way march to Berlin.
    1
  51.  @tuanskywalker8240  There was not much of a difference from being liberated by Stalin and Invaded by Stalin. D-Day was about lot letting Stalin liberate France.
    1
  52. Germany was encircled in 1944.
    1
  53. The Russians were awful at winning. The Germans lost 5 million soldiers in the war and the Russians lost 10 million.
    1
  54.  @huyhoangtahuu9733  The Russian were not that good , they lost 6 million more soldiers than the Germans in WW2. How does the winning side lose more troops than the losing side?
    1
  55.  @black-uh1df  Most figures show the Germans lost 5 million men in the war while Russia lst 11 million. And the Russians lost them on one front , the Germans lost many not even fighting on the Russian front.
    1
  56.  @black-uh1df  Here the best figures I could find. https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war It was confusing in Russia they go from 8 million to almost 11 million. Record keeping of loses was not Stalin's job-1 like other countries.
    1
  57. That is just evil.
    1
  58. The New 2022 "Operation Bagration" against Ukraine is not going so good.
    1
  59.  @randomclouds4404  There is a vantastic full one hour documentary about it though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJAEdLnZsgI
    1
  60. The Russians were awful at winning. The Germans lost 5 million soldiers in the war and the Russians lost 10 million.
    1
  61. With draw to where . The US and UK were coming from the other direction. Outnumbered? The US by themselves could have fought two Germanys.
    1
  62.  @JackoBanon1  The Allies helped. When the Russian reached Germany and all the cities were flatten to the ground did they think Earthquakes did it? Also the A-Bomb and B-29s would have went to Britain and Germany would have surrendered in 1945 no matter what.
    1
  63.  @JackoBanon1  They just wanted to win the War. The City of Pittsburgh makes a lot of steel , it sure would not continue if it was bombed to the ground.
    1
  64.  @c.8276  Even if the US and Britain pulled out of the war, by 1944 the Russians had more of everything over the Germans.
    1
  65.  @c.8276  The USSR in 1940 had a population of 194 million while Germany was 73 million. Today's Russia has 146 million.
    1
  66.  @c.8276  The wars outcome was obvious later in the war. In late 1944 many US factories were slowing or quit war productions. In 1945 Germany was done for, no need to increase manpower.
    1