Comments by "Arty" (@arty5876) on "Germany's Worst Defeat: Operation Bagration | Animated History" video.
-
35
-
26
-
Niek Vels more than 50% of all German millitary infrastructure in 1930s-1941 was build on Americian investments. One Americian oil company, that was registered in other country, supplied Germany by oil to 1943. Because due to the Great Depression in the capitalist world ( I am not communist, I am for capitalism and against communism), Americian investors worked in non-capitalist countries, like Germany, USSR and etc., where weren't crisis, because there weren't market economy. (Sorry for my English).
In 1940 ALL European countries, that weren't conquerred by Germany, were or millitary allies of Germany (Italy, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary), or economicial allies of Germany ( Sweden supplied Germany by iron, Portugal by alluminium, Switzerland invested gold into German reichs-marks, USSR supplied Germany by bread, oil, resources).
All Europe was allied or conquerred by Germany, that used for this army, that was build on Americian money. But you say how bad USSR was, but factually it did the same thing that rest of the world and US, because everyone was afraid Germany
25
-
Niek Vels
Germany lost North Africian campagin mostly because German army was out of fuel, because in the Eastern Front at that time was going on the battle of Stalingrad, and Germany spent all resources for it. Italian WW1 era army, that was totaly untrained and backwarded, and wasn't motivated to fight for Mussolini, lost few battles in land before Rommel arrived. Also empty Lybian desert - Axis didn't had supplies because of it, when the British army was supplied from local industry in Egypt, and didn't had problems with supplies. Italians lost nearly 110 000 soldiers, mostly captured. At that time Rommel arrived, and pushed Allies to El-Alamein. But due to the battle of Stalingrad and fuel shortages, Rommel, that didn't had fuel, evacuated his army to Tounisia. French troops in Algeria weren't motivated to fight for their conquerrors, Germans, and when Americians arrived to Algeria,
50 000 French soldiers surrendered, adter losing 1 000 KIA. Italian WW1 era navy, was destroyed by British modern navy, as a result of which Axis was encercled in Tounisia, cut off, where without supplies 110 000 German and 210 000 Italian soldiers surrendered.
After Soviet victory in Stalingrad, where Germans lost 650 000 soldiers only killed, much more injured and 90 000 captured, and German allies lost nearly 700 000, Germans evacuated from Rjew ( city in ~250 km left of Moscow, that was road and raillway knot), for which Germans lost 150 000 KIA in defense during 1941-43. Soviets in the winter offensive liberated Kuban' (placed norther of Caucasus, from Caucasus to Ukraine and Kasahstan), capturing, injuring or killing nearly 600 000 Axis troops, and entered East Ukraine. Only at that time to USSR came normal portion of Lend-Lease - 23% of total. Soviets pushed Geans to central Ukraine, Germans lost 150 000 soldiets, but Soviet offensive from East Ukraine to Belarus was stopped by counter-offensive from south to north - protrusion near Kursk. Germans attempted to encercle Soviets, but general Konev decided to suppourt partisans in German rears, resulting lack of supplies. Also Soviet int. captured few german high command officers, and Soviets knew when Germans would attack, screwing up them by artillery. But due to the German technological advantage, Soviets would suffer 3 times more losses, but artillery decided course of battle. Soviets won battle of Kursk, where were destroyed or captured more than
2 000 German tanks - Tigers and etc., and Germany lost nearly 400 000 men captured, wounded and killed. Germany didn't had soldiers to stop Allies in the Sicily due to the battle of Kursk, and with 3 to 1 numericial superiority Allies succeded, simply landing behind German lines in Italy without serious fighting, capturing in Sicily 110 000 mostly Italian troops. Italian army was disbanded after revolution against Mussolini. If there wouldn't be the battle of Kursk, with no Eastern Front, Germany could deploy several times more soldiers against Western Allies, and in 1943 would be a stalemate, because without battle of Kursk, Allies would face 1 000 000 German army in Italy, but not 160 000, as it was in the reality. The same thing about Normandy landing, Germany hold most of it's army in the Eastern front,
4 000 000 troops army. And only small force of 380 000 soldiers were placed by German command in Normandy. As a result Allied 3 500 000 army, with numericial superiority 10 to 1 simply pushed German forces in flanks, and encercled them in Caen and Marseille. Soviet troops started offensive in Belarus, and Germany simply didn't have reinforcements for the Normandy, because Soviets encercled few armies in Belarus, and all German reinforcements were sent to the Eastern front, and German command decided to not defend France, and German troops after were concentrated in German borders - Allies simply liberated France in 2 weeks without fighting, thanks to Soviets.
Allied contribution in WW2 is Lend-Lease, bombings of Germany, that resulted of lose of 60% of German millitary production and 90% oil, battles in the seas.
Pacific theather wasn't serioius, because Japan didn't had oil production, and Americians won battes in the Pacific after Japanese troops were out of ammo, because without fuel Japan can't resupply them. All battles in Pacific were looked like "the Americians and Japanese WW1 era army are fighting against each other in stalemate, but then Japanese , that didn't have supplies, found themselves out of ammo, and Americians without serious casualities are defeating disarmed Japanese troops on islands. And backwarded Japanese fleet, that limited because Japan can't produce new ships when it don't have fuel to existing ones. After that Americians placed airfields on islands, and bombed Japan, destroying most of it's millitary production, cities, innocent civillian population, including usage of high-tech bombs. At that time UK passively fought against small and unsignificant force in Indo-China, and USSR at the end of the war captured Manchjuria, where everyone surrendered without fighting. China all this time was a stalemate, for which Japan spent half of it's resources. After all that Japan capitulated".
10
-
8
-
6
-
@Sobercapybara I'm not said it. Also, I can't deny the Americian contribution in production power, in battle for Atlantic, in bombings of Germany. There weren't serious victories in Africa or Italy, but big Allied contribution was - bombings of Germany destroyed nearly 60% of all it's millitary production between 1943 and 1944. Most of US supplies to USSR came in 1943-44, when USSR already won few battles and it was obvious that Germany couldn't win, but also this is stupud to deny how Lend-Lease helped to Union, even if Union could won without it.
Allied contribution was economicial power for USSR and UK, strategic bombers, and sometimes victories over smaller and weaker parts of Axis forces, and downfall of Japan.
Soviet contribution was overrated in USSR during the Cold war, and in Russia at now also are existing some Soviet myphs about this war.
4
-
1