Political Crossfire Forums

[Slava]

foadi wrote: Slava wrote: foadi wrote: sovunion won wwii unfortunately. this is the source of most of the problems in the world today. teh wrong side won that war.
Would you be more fortunate if 'the right side' - the Nazi Germany - won the war? I really doubt this.
Yes. Communism is pure evil and must be destroyed. Europe going fascist (not like thats much of a change anyways) is preferable to half of the world going communist.
Well, I personally think that half the world going fascist is much worse, at least for those who are not white.

[Bobicito]

It depends on how you look at communism, which is problably the worst thing that could happen. Like you said Slava its your personal opinion but seeing how you are from Russia I think your prospective is going to be slightly diffrent.

[antonio62]

Slava wrote: foadi wrote: Slava wrote: foadi wrote: sovunion won wwii unfortunately. this is the source of most of the problems in the world today. teh wrong side won that war.
Would you be more fortunate if 'the right side' - the Nazi Germany - won the war? I really doubt this.
Yes. Communism is pure evil and must be destroyed. Europe going fascist (not like thats much of a change anyways) is preferable to half of the world going communist.
Well, I personally think that half the world going fascist is much worse, at least for those who are not white.

Stalin was worse than Hitler after Stalin the Soveit Union was far better than Nazi Germany.

[eynon]

thundertaker wrote: superskippy wrote: Quote: In terms of tactics, this was probably true of conventional forces, as for equipment, allied artillery was almost always superior to that of the Germans. And it was artillery that was responsible for most of the killing on the battlefields.....

In terms of both equipment and tactics, even in artillary the British artillary wasnt better, they just had a more available pallet of guns like the heavy 25lbs. The German Artillary functioned just fine and on an equal level as British guns in fact the famous 88's served as Flak Guns, Anti Tank Guns, and Artillary, its just that in certain fronts they had less of it such as in the Desert.

Nor was Artillary even close to being responsable for the bulk of the casualties.

Small-arms fire accounted for relatively few casualties. From what I have read, artillery inflicted far more, in conjunction with air-power. I read this in Max Hasting's book on the D-day landings. He said that German equipment was superior in just about every field apart from artillery and something else......

I've heard/read that too....in his memiors of the war German Col. Hans Von Luck constantly complained about the quantity and quality of Allied artillery. "We have 88s the Americans have 105s.".

During his service in France and on the Rhine he had a number of veteran troops commit suicide during particularly heavy American artillery bombardments. He also laments that although Americans were often easy to turn back during their first attacks such repulsions would always bring on heavy American bombardments followed up by even stronger attacks.