Comments by "AFGuidesHD" (@AFGuidesHD) on "The Front" channel.

"He saw them as untermensch and only useful as cannon fodder against the enemy" So not unlike Churchill's opinions of the French then.
271
Wasn't it Manstein that won the war against France ? I know, allied centric history likes to ignore the first half of the war but it was a tide turner none the less.
69
Franz Halder was pretty treasonous lol
63
Ahmet Kadir Yılmaz Given that the Germans lost it seems that rushing Moscow may have been the better option. Though the Soviets still could have been in a bad position had the leader not split AGS.
2
Its known as the eastern front because the enemy was Germany, not because they were the protagonists.
1
@susakuzero It's more stunning that people believe Adolf was a cartoon villain who wanted to "EXTERMINATE EXTERMINAAAATE everyone who wasn't German". His actions, even towards a defeated France, somewhat paint a different story. I am of course referring to the fact that he refused to give Morocco to Spain because he didn't want to upset France. German leaders particularly stressed that Germany should treat it's enemies better than how Germany was treated in 1919.
1
@susakuzero >slaves they used slaves because they had millions of Germans mobilized in the army. They wouldn't have used slaves after the war. In fact German leaders and economists, even H man himself wanted to release soldiers back into the German economy for production. But their strategic or tactical decisions needed the soldiers instead. >Why would people settle in Russia same reason why people settled throughout America. Free real estate is probably a large part of the equation lol
1
@ResidentofVirginia Yeah that was a bit of payback, but not quite dismantling the country style crap that you would expect from such evil monsters. The good guy allies on the otherhand did dismantle Germany lol The French proved inadequate/ unreliable in defending their territory from the Americans in Morocco which is why the Germans then militarized the south as well. Perfectly understandable. Not dissimilar to the British invasion of Iceland.
1
@ResidentofVirginia You do know the Americans also occupied and still does occupy Germany right? You also know Germany was divided from 1945-1991 right?
1
Ahmet Kadir Yılmaz Because Moscow wasn't fortified in August/September 1941. Instead the leader overrid the consensus of the Generals and decided to encircle Soviet armies at Kiev instead of capturing or encircling Moscow. It's a rather common debate in the history of WW2 and alternate history. Had the USSR collapsed in 1941 or early 42 there wouldn't have been a Stalingrad. Heck, the Generals and other historians argue there was no need for Stalingrad as it is and that it was a result of the misconduct of Case Blue.
1
Ahmet Kadir Yılmaz There's also the food issue. Even if we say the USSR collapses "it just takes longer". in 1942 the USSR didn't exactly have much time on the clock in regards to the food supply. If the Germans kept the Kuban region which accounted for about 5% of Soviet food. It would have tipped their food supply even more in the red.
1