NationStates

The Huskar Social Union wrote:

Novus America wrote:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Soviet_War
Not really. Poland fought two war in the last 100 years. Won one and lost the other. And the one it lost it still held out about as long as France, despite being hopelessly out numbered, out gunned and attacked from all sides. (France and the UK actually had superiority in tanks and troop numbers during the Battle of France.)

Plus who is laughing now? Poland beat the Soviets when they did not have German help, and Poland is doing fine today while the Soviet Union is long dead.

Looks like when compared with Poland the Soviets were the loser.

The allies lost the battle of france as badly as they did because the Germans outplayed them by doing a gamble that would have been disastrous for them if they were caught doing it and because the French military was still very much in a WW1 mindset. France also was not that politically stable

Very true. My point is simply that unlike it is often portrayed the Poles did not fight badly. They just had no chance given their lack of numbers, equipment and horrible geographic position.

Novus America wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:The allies lost the battle of france as badly as they did because the Germans outplayed them by doing a gamble that would have been disastrous for them if they were caught doing it and because the French military was still very much in a WW1 mindset. France also was not that politically stable

Very true. My point is simply that unlike it is often portrayed the Poles did not fight badly. They just had no chance given their lack of numbers, equipment and horrible geographic position.

Aye the poles were fucked and stood no chance of winning but they gave a good fight, as well as they could.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:One good thing they did was give us this beauty.

Good target practice so it is.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:One good thing they did was give us this beauty.

In awe at the size of this lad. Absolute unit.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:One good thing they did was give us this beauty.

Ah another example of something interesting but impractical that could not actually be deployed in a way to change the outcome of the war.

Obviously the American and Soviet approach of good enough weapons in massive numbers was much better than trying to develop super weapons that were not pratical to actually build or use.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:One good thing they did was give us this beauty.

Good target practice so it is.

Target practice that would wreck your face because there's nothing at all wrong with the concept of superheavy tanks and we should have made those instead of this gay MBT nonsense.

Duvniask wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:One good thing they did was give us this beauty.

In awe at the size of this lad. Absolute unit.

This was even more awesomely cool for a video game but not actually very practical

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwere ... ay-gun.jpg
Or this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkre ... 1000_Ratte

It is true the Nazis did have ideas and uniforms that were very cinematic and awesomely cool.
Of course this does not in anyway forgive their brutality and often stupidity, but does explain the appeal they can have for some who look more at the aesthetics.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Good target practice so it is.

Target practice that would wreck your face because there's nothing at all wrong with the concept of superheavy tanks and we should have made those instead of this gay MBT nonsense.

*Sigh*

Wash.

Like i know you too are a fan of the Baneblade, because it is fucking cool and awesome beyond imaginable.

But in real life it just wont work. We know this, its time to stop pal.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Good target practice so it is.

Target practice that would wreck your face because there's nothing at all wrong with the concept of superheavy tanks and we should have made those instead of this gay MBT nonsense.

Except for their size and lack of mobility would have made them easy targets for aircraft.
Mobility is key, and why the MBT concept won out.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Good target practice so it is.

Target practice that would wreck your face because there's nothing at all wrong with the concept of superheavy tanks and we should have made those instead of this gay MBT nonsense.

Dude, the Maus was a mess that was barely able to move and function. It was susceptible to bombing, could barely cross a ditch, etc.

Just you wait, one day you'll all get what's coming to you and it'll be delivered by a 250 ton tank.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Target practice that would wreck your face because there's nothing at all wrong with the concept of superheavy tanks and we should have made those instead of this gay MBT nonsense.

*Sigh*

Wash.

Like i know you too are a fan of the Baneblade, because it is fucking cool and awesome beyond imaginable.

But in real life it just wont work. We know this, its time to stop pal.

B-but the ELEVEN BARRELS OF HELL...

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Just you wait, one day you'll all get what's coming to you and it'll be delivered by a 250 ton tank.

Its not happening

Worth noting that, by the time the Maus Panzer VIII designs came around, Germany had already begun to run short on basically everything, from raw materials to fuel to ammunition. So, aside from the concept of a superheavy tank being in itself ridiculously ineffective in real life, they couldn't afford to mass produce this massive gas resource waste even if they wanted to.

I know it's tough. I own a Baneblade and a Shadowsword myself. But we have to come to terms with the grim realization that the elevel barrels of hell will always stay a pleasant fantasy.

Union of the Great Lakes wrote:They advanced small arms and munitions quite far. I’m no Wehraboo but the famous Panzer line is famous for a reason.

Because people like to stroke German dick and overplay how great German take were, scoffing at the objectively superior Sherman and deriding it as "Ronson".

Vassenor wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:*Sigh*

Wash.

Like i know you too are a fan of the Baneblade, because it is fucking cool and awesome beyond imaginable.

But in real life it just wont work. We know this, its time to stop pal.

B-but the ELEVEN BARRELS OF HELL...

WRA is absolutely right, we're gonna make the biggest and baddest tanks, then you'll all quiver in fear.

Infected Mushroom wrote:

Major-Tom wrote:Well, they act as a perfect villain in historical thrillers, not to mention excellent NPCs in a video game where they're the opposing team.

There's also the whole thing that Nazism is the most repugnant ideology and it's implementation is a fucking blemish on human history that will never dissipate, which is why I find the question the OP poses to be ridiculous.

No Versailles, no Nazis

The British/French are actually responsible

No Versailles was to fucking weak and not enforced. If the British had put aside their distrust of the French and gone with the French version there wouldn’t haven’t been any WW2.

Hell if they had threatened to invade Germany after they rearmed the Rhineland WW2 would have been a total German embarrassment

Oil exporting People wrote:Beat the utter living hell out of the Soviets, probably saving Europe from an even more destructive conflict that would've occurred and directly engendered the formalization of the Western Bloc that ultimately killed them off. Even to this day, nothing makes a Communist shit himself more than a picture of a Panzer.

Considering that Panzers are shit tanks I doubt many commies are taking a crap at the sight of one.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Just you wait, one day you'll all get what's coming to you and it'll be delivered by a 250 ton tank.

All while I out flank it with 20 MBTs

Novus America wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:One good thing they did was give us this beauty.

Ah another example of something interesting but impractical that could not actually be deployed in a way to change the outcome of the war.

Obviously the American and Soviet approach of good enough weapons in massive numbers was much better than trying to develop super weapons that were not pratical to actually build or use.

German engineering - developing an ultimate solution to a certain problem that ends up getting fucked by not solving others.

Thermodolia wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Just you wait, one day you'll all get what's coming to you and it'll be delivered by a 250 ton tank.

All while I out flank it with 20 MBTs

And I have A-10s drop JDAMs on it.

Thermodolia wrote:

Infected Mushroom wrote:
No Versailles, no Nazis

The British/French are actually responsible

No Versailles was to fucking weak and not enforced. If the British had put aside their distrust of the French and gone with the French version there wouldn’t haven’t been any WW2.

Hell if they had threatened to invade Germany after they rearmed the Rhineland WW2 would have been a total German embarrassment

If i remember Hitler actually had orders for the german military to retreat from the rhineland if it was challenged by the French, he only sent a handful of battalions too i believe, nothing that could have taken on the french army in an immediate fight. But france had its own issues at that time.

Not doing so actually kind of fucked over the allies come 1940, as the Belgians switched to a policy of neutrality after the Germans reoccupied the Rhineland and saw that the French did nothing and thus didnt want to rely on them as much as they did before. As the original French plan was to meet the Germans in northern Belgium along the Meuse river with the Belgian army, however they were not able to take up positions in Belgian soil because of Belgiums new foreign policy, so when Belgium was invaded they were not quick enough to take up those positions and had to fight further west in open ground which hampered their plans.

Thermodolia wrote:

Infected Mushroom wrote:
No Versailles, no Nazis

The British/French are actually responsible

No Versailles was to fucking weak and not enforced. If the British had put aside their distrust of the French and gone with the French version there wouldn’t haven’t been any WW2.

Hell if they had threatened to invade Germany after they rearmed the Rhineland WW2 would have been a total German embarrassment

The only thing that making Versailles even worse would have caused is for the French to get marched into the death camps instead of Slavs.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:No Versailles was to fucking weak and not enforced. If the British had put aside their distrust of the French and gone with the French version there wouldn’t haven’t been any WW2.

Hell if they had threatened to invade Germany after they rearmed the Rhineland WW2 would have been a total German embarrassment

The only thing that making Versailles even worse would have caused is for the French to get marched into the death camps instead of Slavs.

Some of them still were.

Others were just straight up executed, such as french colonial soldiers in 1940.