Comments by "Ascot252" (@jjsmallpiece9234) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1. As we currently see in the Ukraine war, Russian tactics are crude. Hence 1 reason why they lost so many people in WW2 - poor tactics, poor training, poor troop quality. The current Russians never admit to that. They simply don't care about their own casualties
    6
  2.  @thorstenmanfred6622  It tells me you believe nonsense and are probably a Russian/Putun supporter. Attackers usually lose at least 3x as many troops as defenders. With such poor tactics attackers losses are probably 6-7 to 1.
    3
  3. MG was a complicated plan that relied on too much to 'go right' for it to be successful. The Allies still under estimated the German's fighting ability as late as 1944. Even 3mths later they still counter attacked in the Ardennes. On the other hand, instead of an Allied defeat it could be argued that MG was 75% successful.
    1
  4. Good historical points, but poor commentary style. Don't give up your day job.
    1
  5. I've read this book. yes a good book. Although given the military pedigree of the author, the book surprisingly has various technical errors - if I recall correctly stating a Panther tank had a 105mm gun. Not sure if its just poor proof reading, but it doesn't take much checking to discover a Panther had a 75mm gun. So if the book makes such basic errors, are they any more errors about the Arnhem battles?
    1