Comments by "Seven Proxies" (@sevenproxies4255) on "Military History not Visualized" channel.

  1.  Scott Joseph  Their weight must've certainly contributed a lot to that. Pretty big tanks after all. Also, I think the tracks themselves on tanks probably contributes to the issue. They give good traction obviously, but generally in all things mechanical, the more traction you have, the more friction and strain it will put on the engine and transmission. A car is not nearly as heavy, but what it also has going for it is that it only have two, pretty small contact points with the road. Accelerating the car puts the most strain on engine and transmission. But once you get it up to speed, it can lazily roll onwards by it's own momentum, only requiring a little extra gas to maintain the desired speed. Can't really "roll" along on tracks as easily, so the engine has to work more during movement.
    10
  2.  @MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized : Thank you for the clarificartion. I didn't want to assume anything because from your videos I've learned that the german forces were hard pressed for resources in Stalingrad, so I thought that perhaps they didn't have such ammunition at the time.
    10
  3. Akvavit vs Vodka. ;)
    10
  4. You don't think like soldiers think. Their motivation was that if they didn't fight the russian hordes or advancing western armies, then they would reach their families and loved ones. And seeing as how the russians indulged in mass rapes of civilan german women, I'd say that their motivation was well founded.
    10
  5. Why shouldn't they justify it? They were soldiers. It was their duty. It's not a soldiers place to question or disregard their duty because they may or may not have a problem with the nature of the orders or their commanding officer/supreme commander. German soldiers who fought did nothing wrong. They just happened to find themselves on the losing side of the conflict.
    9
  6. Niels Vantilburg: The SS were not soldiers. The SS were a paramilitary organization. They had nothing to do with the Heer/Wehrmacht. There is only one justification that a soldier needs for killing people: "I was following orders". If he was indeed following orders, then the responsibility of his victims deaths fall on the state, not the soldier himself. Also what you fail to realize, even though the video even brought it up, is the fact that Nazi germany executed soldiers for insubordination. That means that soldiers were subjected to a choice of either killing their targets, or being killed themselves. Are you seriously saying that these soldiers should've just accepted being executed rather than following orders?
    9
  7. "I made a very important discovery at Camp Currie. Happiness consists in getting enough sleep. Just that, nothing more. All the wealthy, unhappy people you've ever met take sleeping pills; Mobile Infantrymen don't need them. Give a cap trooper a bunk and time to sack out in it, and he's as happy as a worm in an apple—asleep. " -Starship Troopers, Robert A Heinlein
    9
  8. My personal dream would be a tank armed with a Vulcan rotary cannon as the main weapon. And I've always wondered if someone ever tried it out. Think of an A-10 Warthog, only it's a tank rather than aircraft. While a single round might not be enough to defeat armour on it's own. Bjt what if you had 15 rounds smacking into the same square inch almost at the same time? 🤔
    9
  9. nattygsbord: That's a very interesting problem. Many officers and privates would say that the chain of command is sacred and has to be followed. The thing those commanders seem to have neglected is that the chain of command does not just apply from bottom to the top, but also from top to bottom. A general or commander in chief is not supposed to issue personal orders or instructions to privates, corporals or sergeants. Even though he technically outranks them, he should never act as their "boss". His orders are to be issued to colonels and other second in commands, their job is then to assign duties to officers directly below them and so on until the chain of command reaches the privates on the ground. That's how a real chain of command works, as opposed to a pyramid of command.
    9
  10. I don't think real soldiers fight with hatred initially. Hatred is primarily taught by governments. Every real soldier in the world knows that their duty is the same, regardless of which country you're fighting for. Yes, enemy troops may kill your comrades. But they do so because they are ordered to and have a duty and obligation to. If enemy troops surrender when they are spent (out of ammunition, out of food, energy or in a hopeless situation), you accept their surrender. Take them as captives and proceed with the strategic mission until the war is over. Always knowing that the men you just took as captives could've just as easily have been you if the tables were reversed.
    8
  11. Trisha: Badass dude that one. There's no shame in surrendering when you've spent all your ammunition and food on the front lines.
    8
  12. I would just like to make a suggestion for interviews. If your subject doesn't feel as comfortable with english, then I for one would have no problem with a interview conducted in another language but with english subtitles. I think most military history buffs would agree if it is more conducive to a smooth interview. Keep up the good work!
    7
  13. Yes, the orders came from higher up. Therefore the individual soldiers are not to blame. They did what they were told, and therefore their actions are completely justified. The responsibility lies with their commanding officers, and if these officers had their orders from the leading politicians then it is the politicians responsibility. Soldiers do not declare war. Politicians do. Soldiers are just there to supply the violence. It's not their duty nor right to determine where, why or how much violence is used. So yes, EVEN during the holocaust, the soldiers actions were completely justified. The only instance where soldiers are individually responsible is where they take actions upon themselves or disregard standing orders and act completely on their own accord. And yes the concept of warcrime is completely fucking ridiculous. Wars are not societies or "games" which you can hope to enforce "rules" or "laws". The state of war is by definition a state where two or more nations have completely abandoned rule of law with the goal of getting their enemies to surrender. Also germany and german soldiers were not sentenced for "warcrimes" during the post-war trials, they were sentenced excessively harshly for LOSING the war. The Nürnberg-trials were nothing but kangaroo-courts with the sole intent of adding insult to injury after the germans had lost. German soldiers didn't do anything more severe or terrible than their enemies did. Yet German soldiers got sentenced with harsh punishments by the victors, while the equally reprehensible and murderous soldiers of the victors got celebrated as "war heroes".
    7
  14. SantiFiore: It's hard to blame people praising Hitler seeing as how these people are forced to live in a regime that's basically the complete opposite to Hitlers vision, and that regime is hardly working out very well for native Europeans. In fact, it's leading straight to their doom.
    7
  15. A pin seems like a very unreliable method for a detonator since it can be bent. If I were to design it, I would've made the nose of the torpedo out of a sphere sticking out from a hole in the front that is large enough to get the sphere to stick out, but small enough for the sphere to fallout. Basically it would be like a ball point pen. Then the sphere would rest in front of several pins positioned at different angles behind the sphere. So when the sphere is pushed back hard enough, it will push in at least one of the pins and make the torpedo explode. And it wouldn't matter much which angle the sphere is pushed back, because even if the angle of impact isn't 90 degrees the sphere would be pushed back enough in a particular direction to depress at least one pin.
    7
  16. Clergy was nobility in practically everything but name: substantial land holdings, obesity and diabetes being the their primary cause of death, insane amounts of wealth, influence with kings and rulers etc.
    7
  17. Klobi for President: I don't speak german (I understand bits and pieces only), but I prefer to watch films in their original language with subtitles. I watched Das Boot in german the first time, even though I've heard there's a dubbed version as well. Finding films with subtitles, either in my native language or with english subtitles tend to be easier.
    7
  18. You're absolutely right. I try to get my squad mates to apply real world squad tactics in PUBG as well, because they do actually work in the game.
    7
  19. wood1155: It's sad how deplorable the treatment of POW's was in Germany as well as the soviet union in WW2, compared to WW1 when the Hague Conventions had recently been signed and ratified by most of the countries involved (except for the Ottoman Empire). Soldiers of different nations might be enemies on the battlefield. But that doesn't mean you have to mistreat or be disrespectful towards captured enemy soldiers doing their duty. There's some great examples of professional courtesy between enemy combatants in WW1. Of course being a POW will never be a fun experience, but the rampant sadism and purposeful mistreatment of POW's in WW2 wasn't as prevalent in WW1. Even though it may sound strange to some people to treat a captured enemy with decency, it does make a lot of sense. For all they might be, they still have a lot in common with you as an individual soldier, and you've got to respect a person putting their own life on the line in service to their country, even if they might be your enemy.
    7
  20. Niels Vantilburg: The concept of warcrime is utterly ridiculous and also used completely arbitrary so it holds no merit whatsoever. And no I don't hold individual soldiers responsible for the holocaust. The people responsible are the leaders of the nazi party and the higher officers who ordered the holocaust to begin with.
    6
  21. Strategy: National, division and army level warfare. Tactics: battalion level and below.
    6
  22. The tank drinks diesel. The crew drink vodka.
    6
  23.  @TheRedandWhit  Exactly. All the more reason why national leaders shouldn't go to war over vague and abstract geopolitical goals and pissing contests, but instead choose war as a last resort for situations where goals and conditions are clearly defined and which have the full support of the public.
    6
  24. I like trains Choo choo! 😏
    5
  25. Töppel is quite the devils advocate. XD
    5
  26. Famously known among the troops as "asskisser of the commander"
    5
  27. Well you can disagree all you like but the fact remains: a soldier or an army will not be able to function if they were run your way, where the individual soldier is being forced to make "Moral decisions" during wartime and choosing to disregard some orders because they don't fit with his own moral conviction or conscience. That is why states justifiably liberate individual soldiers from responsibility of their victims deaths. Soldiers are state sanctioned killers. When a soldier enlist, the state assumes his individual responsibility of any ordered murders he commit in the line of duty, in exchange for the soldiers obedience.
    5
  28. That's it. I figured that carriers wouldn't have made that much sense for Germany, mostly being locked in a land war. Perhaps they would've been useful for a full invasion of Britain, but they never came close enough to do it.
    5
  29. That being said: if propaganda and morale only end up feeding your troops to the meatgrinder that the enemy creates... Then the propaganda and morale is actually causing your war effort a detriment. The soviets were so sure of themselves that they would win, that they ended up dying because they underestimated their enemy. Pushing forward at all costs, does not make an army great or effective. In fact, pushing forward at all costs can end up losing you the war.
    5
  30. Well, it's your channel and your decision or course. But I want to put it out there that I found it refreshing with the focus on military equipment, tactics, strategies and doctrines without the war crimes. This because, the war crimes are always shoehorned in there somewhere in all the other sources. For a novice with hardly any knowledge at all about WWII, it would be a necessary subject. But for one who has been schooled in the war crimes already and is mostly interested in the military matters, it always becomes a "Here we go again..." moment when the war crimes are brought up. I don't hold this view to be dismissive. I do it because the war crimes have been adressed so much already that I start to feel like i'm becoming desensitized to them. And I don't want that to happen.
    5
  31. Klobi for President: Well, they're a bit strange, I'll give you that. But homo sapiens nontheless. :P Another film I like that doesn't really have much to do with germans or the war, but still makes a great impression regarding nazism and the people involved or affiliated with it is a film starring a very young Russel Crowe called "Romperstomper", where he basically plays the leader of a nazi skinhead gang in New Zeeland. What I like about it is how the film doesn't actively try to portray them as good or bad, but yet again showcases a more human perspective that makes you think and feel for the characters. You want to assume that they're evil due to their ideology, but after the film is over it's very difficult to maintain such a single minded perspective.
    5
  32. Soldiers had a lot of other drugs to resort to. Tobacco to steady the nerves. Coffee to wake themselves up from exhaustion... And alcohol to treat their PTSD when the war is over.
    5
  33. Block the german government approval for sauerkraut, and the jerrys will certainly lose their nerve!
    5
  34. NeoNEET: You do realize that if the Allies had lost the war, it would've been them being portrayed as an "evil empire" utilizing "mindless minions" as their soldiers right? I'm sorry but your entire post is filled with typical 20/20 hindsight. Just a statement like "it was more clear which side was good and bad back then" just goes to show how little you know of the knowledge and perspectives of the people of the involved countries. Your entire post is composed of self-righteous ignorance.
    5
  35. NeoNEET: Do you even know what the Versailles treaty was and how it affected germany?
    5
  36. So, ironically, the daily and constant cyber attacks by the Russians since 2014, probably hurt their war effort since it made the Ukrainians adapt to them and set up procedures for back-ups and restoring systems that had been wiped? Imagine if Russia had conducted limited cyber attacks before only then engage in an all-out cyberwarfare attack during the invasion, it would've probably have had a more devastating impact.
    5
  37. I'm not surprised. Warfare tend to favor the asymmetrical approach. You don't really want to send tanks to destroy other tanks. The most prefarably option would be to send planes or other aircraft to destroy tanks, since the tanks have no considerable means of shooting back. A lot of rock, paper scissors going on.
    4
  38. I doubt the use of Fly Agaric. That said, there are actually mushrooms native to scandinavia of the psilocybe family, containing the psychadelic stimulant known as psilocybin. Which isn't that dissimilar in effect compared to LSD. Of course, you can't really know for certain what effect psilocybin will have on the person ingesting it, since it relies a lot on that persons general psychological state. But it's not beyond the realms of possibility that it could induce a psychotic rage if it is ingested with other substances combined with rituals designed to promote anger and battlelust. Regarding drugs granting users superhuman powers, while probably not available to the norsemen of the time, PCP (aka "angel dust") users and police officers who interact with them have frequently reported things such as reduced to non-existent sense of pain, meaning that they can be shot, bludgeoned with a baton and even smash their hand straight through a windshield of a car without registering the pain that the injuries would've caused in a sober state.
    4
  39. I've been thinking about a couple of ideas for future tanks. Feel free to give me some input: 1. A primary weakness of tanks have always been the limited visibility from inside the tank. Visions slits and optics have been employed, but tanks still need the eyes of infantry support to gain full situational awareness. So what if the tank crew was equipped with a VR-system that is linked to strategically placed cameras outside the tank, effectively letting the crew to "see through" the interior walls? The loader might not require one. But the gunner, commander and driver could probably benefit from this feature. The technology to pull it off is already avaliable as there are VR-cameras capable of sending a live visual feed to VR headsets. Of course, a point of criticism might be that cameras on the outside of the tank hull would be vulnerable to enemy fire. But tanks already employ external optics (protected as much as they can be) so it's not a bigger weakness than the ones tanks already have. It would just add a greater field of view for the crew instead of being locked to the very narrow field of view that current optics provide. 2. Pyramidal tank hulls. Sloped armour has been proven to be effective protection against many anti-tank weapons. The effective armour thickness is increased, and the angle of the sloped armour creates a greater chance of hits glancing off the armour rather than hitting it dead on. So suppose you shaped the exterior top half of the tank (above the tracks) into an armoured pyramid shape. This would give you sloped armor on all sides, leaving no vulnerabilities on any side. The top part of the pyramid could house the turret and be designed to rotate just as a regular turret on top of the rest of the pyramid.
    4
  40.  @rasmusrw8140 : There isn't any. Because most of society likes to pretend that they don't rely on violent men to sort out their wars and protect their freedoms. So when the war is over, most people just want the soldiers to go away and disappear.
    4
  41. Joseph Ahner: That's just the every day grind of soldiering that you're talking about. It's a different story during such large scale conflicts such as World War 2. Especially when the involved governments controlled information as much as they did back then, compared to today where governments are struggling with controlling the free flow of information. If you're told, every day by every news outlet you have access to that unless the soldiers keep fighting, your women will be gangraped by foreign invaders, and your elderly and your children will be executed by the enemy and you have no reason to believe otherwise then it will affect you and push you to do things that you might not ordinarily have done. The camraderie amongst the soldiers themselves is then added on top of all of that sense of guilt and responsibility.
    4
  42. Trisha: And both were lied to by their governments, because state control of the media was much more pronounced back then, both among the axis and the allies.
    4
  43. NeoNEET: The idea that various ethnic groups were subhuman was not exclusive to germany. Practically all over Europe and the U.S these ideas were accepted practically among the entire civilian populations as well as in academia and the political sphere. Trying portray germany as "evil" because they believed that humans could be categorized according to race looks pretty fucking dumb nd hypocritical when the U.S instituted things like Jim Crow laws that were kept in place until LONG AFTER Nazi Germany had been defeated. There wasn't much practical difference between Nazi Germany and the Allies at all when it comes to ideas and mindsets.
    4
  44. NeoNEET: No, i'm not a neo-nazi. And no, you haven't "refuted" any of my points at all. You've made ignorant statements that clearly prove your loose grasp of history, and have tried to pass them off as facts. You desperately need to go back to the school bench before trying to lecture someone like me.
    4
  45. NeoNEET: So wikipedia and some unnamed "textbook" are your sources, that you have yet to present fully, even after having been asked to do so? Colour me impressed...
    4
  46.  @ungainlytitan1460  But all of this hearkens back to my point. National determination includes political support. A politician in office can completely neuter any army, no matter how well trained or well equipped by simply pulling them out of deployment. So Ukrainian troops may lack the training and the equipment. But they all know they're fighting for their countrys very existence and have the full support of both the population and government. The American troops in Vietnam and Afghanistan were not so fortunate. Both being victims of the hubris of certain presidents believing that they could wage wars without full national support.
    4
  47.  @phunkracy  How would starlink affect the situation?
    3
  48. On the one hand, you want competitive people in your armed forces to make sure you have people with drive and who can push themselves in extreme situations rather than freezing or quitting. On the other hand, more competitive people means more competition, animosity and prestige between different branches of armed forces.
    3
  49.  @AlexanderSeven  Perhaps. But I would argue that the situation is different compared to Chechnya and Georgia seeing as how the Ukranian military is armed and outfitted by practically every western country, while Chechnya and Georgia since they were left to fend for themselves.
    3
  50.  @kireta21  It depends on how you look at it. Do you take Putin's televised, stated goals as genuine or as a ruse? Personally I suspect that his real goal was to take control of the Donbass region. But at the same time he told his own people in Russia that they were going to "de-nazify" and "de-militarize" Ukraine (all of Ukraine). You can't really break a country's military without taking over the entire country.
    3