Slavic union

Slavic union?


  • Total voters
    65
D

Deleted member 305

Guest
maxresdefault.jpg

as you see here in this (((RUSSIAN))) propaganda video (long live lenin), the average russian joe is better equipped and wears epic camo that also keeps his balls protected from SUBZERO temperatures. america u stand no chance.

Russia_240-animated-flag-gifs.gif
 
Reactions: List

Akula

Sangheili Bias
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
5,443
Nebulae
19,706
maxresdefault.jpg

as you see here in this (((RUSSIAN))) propaganda video (long live lenin), the average russian joe is better equipped and wears epic camo that also keeps his balls protected from SUBZERO temperatures. america u stand no chance.

Russia_240-animated-flag-gifs.gif

when it's actually british camo

 
Reactions: List

Husky

.
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
8,732
Nebulae
4,196
I am saying nowadays an advancing army dosen't have to rely on rail links 24/7, as many armies did during WW2 and WW1.

Also what do you mean


are you saying that they can pussy out as a more 'organised' force slowly advances? i don't understand, this isn't the era where generals are gulliable and fall for greed.
Yes, American generals are not smart.

Let's take a recent example, Afghanistan, how did Americans attempt to conquer the taliban? Murder anyone and everyone that's with them, they won the battles, they have lost the war. British had the right idea of trying to get hearts and minds but this had limited effect.
Vietnam, how did Americans try to win? Bomb them into submission and send in a ton of forces, once land based warfare failed they went for kill count to win, they lost.

American soldiers and generels rely on "We have more men then you do." We know this as when Montgomery was commanding American tank units they were terrified of fighting the enemy when they had less men, Montgomery convinced them that their quality was superior and was able to use their strenghs rather then their numbers, which was what the Americans relied on during world war two (and in part their industrialisation.)
 

Akula

Sangheili Bias
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
5,443
Nebulae
19,706
When German generals were questioned on their fear of Patton after the war, almost every single German officer had never heard of him.

and your point is
 

Ond

Rictal-Approved
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
28,823
Nebulae
72,189
When German generals were questioned on their fear of Patton after the war, almost every single German officer had never heard of him.
source

and also just because they havent heard of him he is apparently not a good general???
 
Reactions: List

Husky

.
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
8,732
Nebulae
4,196

ddæ

`impulse-approved
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
8,352
Nebulae
16,053
guys you're arguing against a person who wanted to play as the brits for the ww3rp generations, give up
 
Reactions: List

Husky

.
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
8,732
Nebulae
4,196
guys you're arguing against a person who wanted to play as the brits for the ww3rp generations, give up
The Brits did much more in WW2 then people realise, Americans just stole the glory and claimed that they won it themselves. RIP those of the Kings Shropshire Light Infantry.
 
Reactions: List

afric

Molecule
B A N N E D
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
7,268
Nebulae
23,748
The Brits did much more in WW2 then people realise, Americans just stole the glory and claimed that they won it themselves.
were in the slavic union thread and you wish to discuss american and british input in ww2

tread carefully
 
Reactions: List

Akula

Sangheili Bias
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
5,443
Nebulae
19,706
[doublepost=1511702919][/doublepost]
That he was not a feared or good generel, during the battle of the bulge he handed every American tank unit over to Monty as he was getting his ass handed to him.

>be one of the first American officers to embrace armoured warfare during WW1
>perfect the early armoured warfare doctrine
>lead the US army through early victories in North Africa
>be instrumental in the Italian campaigns
>be instrumental in the D-Day landings and the march to the rhine

but oh no some autistic british 15 year old says he fucked up one battle guess he's awful
 
Reactions: List

Husky

.
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
8,732
Nebulae
4,196
>be one of the first American officers to embrace armoured warfare during WW1
>perfect the early armoured warfare doctrine
>lead the US army through early victories in North Africa
>be instrumental in the Italian campaigns
>be instrumental in the D-Day landings and the march to the rhine

but oh no some autistc british 15 year old says he fucked up one battle guess he's awful
BAHAHAHA
AMERICANS EMBRACING TANKS DURING WW1.

Yeah it's not like Tanks were introduced by the Brits first and then the Americans joined in the last year of the war.
Haig recognised where tanks were and were not useful (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Passchendaele)

Montgomery got Winston drunk and convinced him to use armoured regiments in Africa, not the Americans, and Monty turned round the African campaign.

Brits mainly did subterfuge work on the Italian peninsula so can't really argue that, although we did get pretty much most of the German tank divisions in Italy at the time due to the operation: The man who never was.

D-Day landings. Winston, Patton, Eisenhower and Montgomery were all planning the attack. Patton's plan was taken opposed to Montgomery's dagger attack which would have shortened the war by a year according to proffesionals but would have cost much mroe civilian and military casualties. The only reason Patton got it was because Monty wanted to invade during the storm and he threatened to resign unless they attacked during the eye of the storm, which Patton was forced to agree to as he wanted to keep Monty, as did Churchill.



Once D-Day was over Patton did basically fuck all.

And I think we've de-railed this enough.
 
Reactions: List