@@kingnewyork2118 yea sure ye did buddy, the only thing I remember from this video is physically cringing at what burgers believe. Literal government propaganda.
You probably would've never seen an STG as a German soldier. mp40's were definitely technically better than thompsons or m3's but submachine guns have niche use, but the best rifle of ww2 was without question the M1 garand, and the m1 carbine was a decent weapon which had no real similar design made by the axis powers, both gave the ability of highly maneuverable suppressing fire at any likely combat distance, not so true with manual action stripper fed rifles, or pistol caliber submachine guns. We atleast had the best common issue rifles. Not so much when it came to submachine guns (mp40), pistols (p-38), and squad level machine guns (MG34/42).
@@berryreading4809 I've started buying firearms recently. I really like the feel of the m1 carbine my only problem is it's an Ivor johnson reproduction. Would love to find a ww2 one. I also recently bought a type 99 Arisaka. I have to say for a 85 year old price of history it shoots very accurately. I would love to get a garand, or Mosin in my collection in the future.
M1 garands are so incredibly cool, and I love them, but I would also rather have an stg44 or an mp40. Both of these guns are mechanical marvels, and it’s pretty incredible how good they were, and not to mention that they’re so much rarer than M1s.
My great Grandad fought against Rommel in Africa. He was part of the infantry that was meant to support the tanks. He fought at Anzio, Monte Cassino and another battle but I always forget. His brother was a Japanese POW for 3 years My great Grandad also went blind from shock near the end of the war, remained that way for years even after but his sight did come back.
@@oban6051 Lol no. The Lee Enfield was easily one of the best rifles of WW1, but it had _nothing_ on the M1 Garand. The M1 allowed the US infantry squad to operate unsupported by a dedicated LMG (contrary to popular belief, the BAR was not supposed to be a replacement to something like the Bren or MG34/42) due to the significant increase in volume of fire. This allowed the US infantry squad to be far more maneuverable than the British or German squads, which used their rifleman as support for their MGs. The mad minute was impressive in WW1. By WW2, the M1 made the mad minute look like child's play.
He wasn't facing an opponent of equal strength, most germans were in the east dying. If he had went against the same force that went in to the soviet union in 41 he'd need a hell of alot more men and equipment. His biggest flaw was over extending himself
Guy at my local indoor range looked through my ammo. Noticed many of what I brought were similar to his firearms. He collects old firearms his newest is from 1945. He showed me his Kar98k with the origional symbols on it.
I’ve always been really into history and WW2 was always the most intriguing to me. The reason German WW2 memorabilia is so sought after before others is because not only the history but the rarity and quality of a lot of things they manufactured, usually before 1943 as the tides were really starting to turn against them and manufacturing became very rushed. Germany was very technologically advanced compared to almost any country at the time, most projects they had could have completely changed the tides of the war but due to cut funding and bad timing a lot of very ambitious projects just didn’t work out in the end. People can be mad or deny all they want but Germany really did change and impact the world more than they may realize. 3am PKA binge watching really hitting different rn
Nah the tides of war really changed after the failure of Operation Barbarossa in 1941. And Germany was not technologically advanced since like less than 20% of their divisions where panzer divisions. German guns are rare not because of quality or because they didn’t make a lot of them because the Germans made a shit ton of Kar98ks that they didn’t know what to do with them. Most where destroyed after the war because they had no use to modernized military’s.
@@theprodigy6713 It’s pretty crazy to think what a change in leadership could’ve done for Germany. They were technologically advanced, the problem is like I said the many things were either not produced enough in time or were just cut all together. When I brought up 1943 I was just talking about specifically production of pretty much everything and how it was all being rushed together at that point so things weren’t manufactured the best they could be.
@@BasedRedpilledMasterJ they where not technologically advanced though, they where using horses and carriages to carry their AT cannons and soldiers. Again less than 20% of their divisions where mechanized through the entire war. The only thing they where ahead of their time was the MG42 and the Mauser bolt action system (not the rifle itself because that was outdated since the beginning of the invasion of the USSR) and maybe the stg44 but only for like 2 years.
@@theprodigy6713 Again that leads to my previous statement they were technologically advanced, I didn’t say they utilized certain things well. At the end of the day I think we can both agree that those scientists truly shaped the world we know today.
@@BasedRedpilledMasterJ you keep saying that they were at the time and I’m literally providing evidence that they weren’t. Just because you say “they’re technologically advanced it’s common sense” doesn’t help your argument because you provided no evidence. America and USSR was WAY more advanced at the time than Germany by a long shot with guns, tanks, and bombs. You say “because of leadership” or “if they had more material” like yea maybe but they didn’t and I can say America could have been way more smarter and built the bomb earlier or something if they had more X, Y, and Z. It’s alternative history at that point.
I mean I'll hold to the point that we had the best rifle, but that's pretty much it in my opinion as far as small arms go. Though it we're including the 50 browning that slaps too
@@duderitoz6953 I think most of those things are subjective. Although I will say the Germans definitely did have the best small arms, they just didn’t have the money to produce them. The mg-42 was an incredible machine gun. The German military still uses it to this day, although it’s called an mg- I think, and all they did was re chamber it. The stg 44 was also an incredible assault rifle, but again, Germany just didn’t have the funds to produce them. Similar thing with the mp 40. Although I do think that Sherman was much superior to the German tanks, but they all excelled at different things, so it’s really hard to say which country had the better weapons.
@@tonyflamingo8113 We definitley had the best Main Battle Rifle, the only thing wrong with it are the godawful peep sights, which were terrible for night fighting.
@@tonyflamingo8113 we had really really good tanks actually american tanks are pretty good Germany had cooler tanks but the ones that were actually impossible to kill were bad and rare
Hitler wouldn't authorize redeploying the panzer divisions stationed in Calais to Normandy for like 2 weeks because he was certain the June 6 landings were a diversion and the real invasion would come at a later date further up the channel from Dover to Calais. Rommel always said the landings would be in Normandy but Hitler just wouldn't have it. We benefited from Hitler being such an authoritarian. He wouldn't grant his generals or field Marshalls the agency to take any strategic initiative in the battle space without his approval. That guy was a real jerk!
Fun fact Patton slaps a soldier in the 15 evacuation hospital that later became the 115 combat support hospital that in 2008-2009 I serviced in Iraq in. We always brought it up on promotion boards.
The best bad guy actor that really made you hate him in real life was Frank Burns from the TV show MASH I forgot the actor's name but as a kid I remember hating him so much and then realize he was just an actor but he was a very good actor he did exactly what he was hired to do
My grandad was injured by shrapnel at Dunkirk and luckily got back was given 3 weeks leave after leaving hospital then was shipped off to Africa and he was landed on sword beech at 08:15 on D Day. He also brought back some war trophies 1 been a Mauser Gewehr bolt action rifle and one day when only me and my cousin were by ourselves at our grandparents house we got the gun out from behind the wardrobe and decided to shoot it out the back bedroom window over the fields. We propped it on the windowsill and because we were both only little we were 9 and 10 none of us could reach the trigger so I held the gun against my shoulder and my cousin pulled the trigger. Next thing I know all I can hear is ringing in my ears and I’m on the bedroom floor in agony. The kickback knocked me off the bed and I broke my collar bone and fractured my shoulder. As soon as my grandad came in he went running upstairs and found out we had shot the gun he smelt it. My cousin got a good hiding on the spot but I didn’t because of been hurt and I thought I got away with it. How wrong I was when I had healed and stopped needing the collar and cuff sling I went to my grandads and as soon as I went in he said time for you to get belted and he put me over his knee and gave me 6 whacks with his big thick heavy belt but I deserved it we could of up to a mile away.
in the battle of Stalingrad most German soldiers would pick up the Russian ppsh mainly for the fact that it was a urban area and the ppsh excelled at urban combat
The whole "Germans had the best K/D ratio" is by and large a myth. For the longest time after WWII, former German generals were allowed to control the narrative on how well their army performed since Soviet records were closed to the west, and US/British leaders were desperate for German expertise in the event that the Soviets did start WWIII. Only recently has research suggested that the German's loss ratio was pretty much proportionate to the Soviets, British, and US. That's not counting the millions of German POWs either.
It's not a myth, the largest amount of German casualties were in the latter half when the German army didn't even have food or guns to continue. If you factor that out, Germans performed marvelously in 1940-1941, where they could have won if they just changed their course of war a little.
@@spiritofmodernity9679 The Germans performed "marvelously" in 1940-41 because they were attacking enemy nations that weren't prepared for a modern war. Germany had six years to remobilize their forces and plan the takeover of Europe. If Germany could only make the first two years (give or take a few months) worth the effort they put into modernizing their military, then only shows how weak they really were. They couldn't even achieve air superiority over England when the UK was at its weakest.
Soviet military casualties were still significantly higher even when including the German POWs at the end and the kids and old people in the Volksturm. Even in the latter half of the war when the Germans were greatly outnumbered and outsupplied on the Eastern Front the Soviets still consistently took more casualties in nearly every battle.
He was wrong about the captain . Buck Compton was she’ll shocked but he’s not the one who froze up before the charge. I forgot his name but he ran off multiple times on the troop during bastogne
@@dmonleon24 um........ taylor was using statistics comparisons to point to victory or failure, and his point was that we "barely won" against the germans in comparison to the body count, if you apply this logic to the soviets, the soviets lost the war a thousand times over, but they didn't, did they? My point is that deaths cannot accurately equate to a true failure on the field, and Stalin proved that as well as the allied commanders who sacrificed those young men on the many beach fronts.
Well hell, we consider iwo jima as a victory even though we suffered more casualties than the enemy. The intelligence gathering back then was way off that mark, as they underestimated japanese strength on that tiny island by almost 70%.
rommel wouldve change dday but hitler favored another general i believe von rundsted or sum like that, what he did was basically move the panzer divisions farther away from the beaches, rommel wanted them to be as close as possible so when the landing started they could throw them into the sea, when it started the panzers on the other side of the river behind the beaches were too late, rommel only had 3 panzer divisions at his disposal.
I mean small arms wise no the UD were at least as good as the germans, ee feilded the first actually successful semi auto rifle on a mass scale. I would also say other nations had some really fantastic firearms on par with the US or Germany at the time but the germans sure do know how to advertise.
I love the boys but as a conflict historian they got no clue what they’re talking about here lol. While it’s true that many German designs were excellent, plenty of other countries also had excellent designs. The m1 rifle was the best battle rifle of the war until very, very late in the conflict, and by then most nazi units weren’t using STG’s, they were using cobbled together home defense weapons because we had completely obliterated their industrial base through strategic bombing. Also, while some Nazi units were highly elite, every nation had elite formations. In fact, many of those “elite” German units at the start of the war were almost completely gone by 1943 because the axis didn’t rotate front line units between combat and training nearly as much. This inflated axis kill counts and feats due to being in theatre longer, but those units were almost completely wiped out by the end of 1943, and were completely gone by the end of 44. Not killed to a man, but either so far below max combat personnel that they were disbanded officially, or they simply ceased to exist as a coherent military entity due to extreme losses and communications disruptions and their stragglers were either captured, killed, or joined new units.
These guys collectively know nothing about WW2. Kyle dosent know Rommels nickname it was the " Dessert Fox " not whatever Kyle said and Woody knows absolutely nothing at all. It's amazing for how stupid Woody is he did so well in life financially.
“Germany had the best guns of the war” I mean it’s not really cut and dry like that. Like if we’re talking standard infantry rifles the Germans for the most part of the war had bolt action kar98 while America the m1 grand an amazing semi auto rifle for the time. Know I will say the the Germans did have a better light machine gun. The bar and 1918 were fine but the 1918 was really only good when it came to defensive rolls and the BAR fed from 20 round mags. It was actually for that reason some marines in the pacific made there own light machine gun called the stinger. When it comes to submachine guns. As much as it pains me to say this, the germans were better. While I love the Thompson just because how ironic it is. They did the same thing as every other sub gun. But they weight more and was really expensive. But the real reason the US in my option was better. Was that the troops had more training and are squad level tactics were more adaptable. Armchair history actually has an amazing video on this subject.
mass production of average tanks > minor production of terribly engineered but better fabricated massive tanks that broke down every kilometer off the factory bed
Well German Engineering wasnt some super stuff either,The Axis & The Allies just had differing Manufacturing & Design Philosophies based upon what they wanted vs what was available. Woody wasn't entirely wrong either,as the war progressed manufacturing and engineering standards for the Axis powers plummeted due to lack of resources and skilled labor. So the myth that German had "Superior Engineered" weapons is from a misreading of their design philosophy.
the m1 garand beat any kar98 out there and by the end of the war the germans made their guns out of scrap wood and metal sooooooooooo, we had alot better than them the main weapon they had that was better was the mg42 because that blew the BAR out of the water
@@cyberdyne9480 germans over engineered stuff and we’re just making a bunch of weapons that they thought would give them and edge where they should’ve been making simple reliable cheap guns to make. Extreme modifications to tanks guns and armor hinders their weight speed and transmission reliability, pumping money into fighter jets that didn’t do much at all compared to artillery and more guns and ammo that kind of thing. America’s superior manufacturing policy of make something decent but simple to make on a mass scale and easy to fix and like Sherman tanks was exceptional.
Top Google result "The war in Europe concluded with the liberation of German-occupied territories, and the invasion of Germany by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, culminating in the fall of Berlin to Soviet troops, Hitler's suicide and the German unconditional surrender on 8 May 1945" Sure I agree the bombs ended it in Pacific but in Europe pretty sure it was the Russians
PKA 540 PODCAST CLIPS ►► ruclips.net/p/PL3TI5YrC9y_0xcqnLxMRs0AhlFz2aoeeW
Can't wait for all the historical inaccuracies on this one
Yeah, I hate when my comedy podcast isn't just a historical textbook being read to the audience
#PKAFacts
I went back and fact checked everything there wasn’t a single inaccuracy
@@kingnewyork2118 yea sure ye did buddy, the only thing I remember from this video is physically cringing at what burgers believe. Literal government propaganda.
Ball point pens
German stuff is more sought after because they lost and more rare. I would rather own a Stg or mp40 over a m1 g any day
You probably would've never seen an STG as a German soldier. mp40's were definitely technically better than thompsons or m3's but submachine guns have niche use, but the best rifle of ww2 was without question the M1 garand, and the m1 carbine was a decent weapon which had no real similar design made by the axis powers, both gave the ability of highly maneuverable suppressing fire at any likely combat distance, not so true with manual action stripper fed rifles, or pistol caliber submachine guns. We atleast had the best common issue rifles. Not so much when it came to submachine guns (mp40), pistols (p-38), and squad level machine guns (MG34/42).
Not me. I’d take a m1 over all of them. I love all those guns but the m1.... how could you not? Plus my country made it so ya I’d take that.
@@berryreading4809 I've started buying firearms recently. I really like the feel of the m1 carbine my only problem is it's an Ivor johnson reproduction. Would love to find a ww2 one. I also recently bought a type 99 Arisaka. I have to say for a 85 year old price of history it shoots very accurately. I would love to get a garand, or Mosin in my collection in the future.
@@Scruffy72 I'm amazed you have an Arisaka & shoot it but dont somehow have a garbage rod mosin
M1 garands are so incredibly cool, and I love them, but I would also rather have an stg44 or an mp40. Both of these guns are mechanical marvels, and it’s pretty incredible how good they were, and not to mention that they’re so much rarer than M1s.
I thought Patton was in charge of the ghost army of inflatable tanks where the Germanys thought we were gunna land
Your right
That’s what they’re taking about...
Yeah at the most obvious point to land, the shortest distance from the english channel.
@@sleazyfellow yeah that was calais
Yes, it was his punishment for slapping a soldier with combat fatigue (PTSD).
I want them to discuss the one scene from Airplane! and have a custom intro saying "And were jive!"
My great Grandad fought against Rommel in Africa. He was part of the infantry that was meant to support the tanks.
He fought at Anzio, Monte Cassino and another battle but I always forget. His brother was a Japanese POW for 3 years
My great Grandad also went blind from shock near the end of the war, remained that way for years even after but his sight did come back.
I know Anzio and Monte Cassino were in Italy but the African campaign included Italy too. At least for the British it did.
the m1 garand surely was the best standard issue rifle of the war
I’d say it’s tied with the Lee Enfield.
@@oban6051 Lol no. The Lee Enfield was easily one of the best rifles of WW1, but it had _nothing_ on the M1 Garand. The M1 allowed the US infantry squad to operate unsupported by a dedicated LMG (contrary to popular belief, the BAR was not supposed to be a replacement to something like the Bren or MG34/42) due to the significant increase in volume of fire. This allowed the US infantry squad to be far more maneuverable than the British or German squads, which used their rifleman as support for their MGs.
The mad minute was impressive in WW1. By WW2, the M1 made the mad minute look like child's play.
@@oban6051 Enfield is imo best bolt action but the round is not great. Give me a m1 any day over any of the bolt actions
@@oban6051I’m sorry but semi auto is better than bolt action.
Patton, completely stompped when he was on the move.
He wasn't facing an opponent of equal strength, most germans were in the east dying. If he had went against the same force that went in to the soviet union in 41 he'd need a hell of alot more men and equipment. His biggest flaw was over extending himself
Guy at my local indoor range looked through my ammo. Noticed many of what I brought were similar to his firearms. He collects old firearms his newest is from 1945. He showed me his Kar98k with the origional symbols on it.
I’ve always been really into history and WW2 was always the most intriguing to me. The reason German WW2 memorabilia is so sought after before others is because not only the history but the rarity and quality of a lot of things they manufactured, usually before 1943 as the tides were really starting to turn against them and manufacturing became very rushed. Germany was very technologically advanced compared to almost any country at the time, most projects they had could have completely changed the tides of the war but due to cut funding and bad timing a lot of very ambitious projects just didn’t work out in the end. People can be mad or deny all they want but Germany really did change and impact the world more than they may realize.
3am PKA binge watching really hitting different rn
Nah the tides of war really changed after the failure of Operation Barbarossa in 1941. And Germany was not technologically advanced since like less than 20% of their divisions where panzer divisions. German guns are rare not because of quality or because they didn’t make a lot of them because the Germans made a shit ton of Kar98ks that they didn’t know what to do with them. Most where destroyed after the war because they had no use to modernized military’s.
@@theprodigy6713 It’s pretty crazy to think what a change in leadership could’ve done for Germany. They were technologically advanced, the problem is like I said the many things were either not produced enough in time or were just cut all together. When I brought up 1943 I was just talking about specifically production of pretty much everything and how it was all being rushed together at that point so things weren’t manufactured the best they could be.
@@BasedRedpilledMasterJ they where not technologically advanced though, they where using horses and carriages to carry their AT cannons and soldiers. Again less than 20% of their divisions where mechanized through the entire war. The only thing they where ahead of their time was the MG42 and the Mauser bolt action system (not the rifle itself because that was outdated since the beginning of the invasion of the USSR) and maybe the stg44 but only for like 2 years.
@@theprodigy6713 Again that leads to my previous statement they were technologically advanced, I didn’t say they utilized certain things well. At the end of the day I think we can both agree that those scientists truly shaped the world we know today.
@@BasedRedpilledMasterJ you keep saying that they were at the time and I’m literally providing evidence that they weren’t. Just because you say “they’re technologically advanced it’s common sense” doesn’t help your argument because you provided no evidence. America and USSR was WAY more advanced at the time than Germany by a long shot with guns, tanks, and bombs. You say “because of leadership” or “if they had more material” like yea maybe but they didn’t and I can say America could have been way more smarter and built the bomb earlier or something if they had more X, Y, and Z. It’s alternative history at that point.
I mean I'll hold to the point that we had the best rifle, but that's pretty much it in my opinion as far as small arms go. Though it we're including the 50 browning that slaps too
We had the best rifle, best SMG & best tank
@@duderitoz6953 I think most of those things are subjective. Although I will say the Germans definitely did have the best small arms, they just didn’t have the money to produce them. The mg-42 was an incredible machine gun. The German military still uses it to this day, although it’s called an mg- I think, and all they did was re chamber it. The stg 44 was also an incredible assault rifle, but again, Germany just didn’t have the funds to produce them. Similar thing with the mp 40. Although I do think that Sherman was much superior to the German tanks, but they all excelled at different things, so it’s really hard to say which country had the better weapons.
@@tonyflamingo8113 We definitley had the best Main Battle Rifle, the only thing wrong with it are the godawful peep sights, which were terrible for night fighting.
@@tonyflamingo8113 we had really really good tanks actually american tanks are pretty good Germany had cooler tanks but the ones that were actually impossible to kill were bad and rare
@@duderitoz6953 standard issue rifle yes smg no the thompson was too expensive and not as good as the mp40 and german tanks were way better just fewer
Hitler wouldn't authorize redeploying the panzer divisions stationed in Calais to Normandy for like 2 weeks because he was certain the June 6 landings were a diversion and the real invasion would come at a later date further up the channel from Dover to Calais. Rommel always said the landings would be in Normandy but Hitler just wouldn't have it. We benefited from Hitler being such an authoritarian. He wouldn't grant his generals or field Marshalls the agency to take any strategic initiative in the battle space without his approval. That guy was a real jerk!
Fun fact Patton slaps a soldier in the 15 evacuation hospital that later became the 115 combat support hospital that in 2008-2009 I serviced in Iraq in. We always brought it up on promotion boards.
My dad has a Luger but he bought an Uzi to balance it out lol
Yeah this is all pop history myth stuff
No other good way to spend a birthday
Happy birthday Troy!
The best bad guy actor that really made you hate him in real life was Frank Burns from the TV show MASH I forgot the actor's name but as a kid I remember hating him so much and then realize he was just an actor but he was a very good actor he did exactly what he was hired to do
My grandad was injured by shrapnel at Dunkirk and luckily got back was given 3 weeks leave after leaving hospital then was shipped off to Africa and he was landed on sword beech at 08:15 on D Day. He also brought back some war trophies 1 been a Mauser Gewehr bolt action rifle and one day when only me and my cousin were by ourselves at our grandparents house we got the gun out from behind the wardrobe and decided to shoot it out the back bedroom window over the fields. We propped it on the windowsill and because we were both only little we were 9 and 10 none of us could reach the trigger so I held the gun against my shoulder and my cousin pulled the trigger. Next thing I know all I can hear is ringing in my ears and I’m on the bedroom floor in agony. The kickback knocked me off the bed and I broke my collar bone and fractured my shoulder. As soon as my grandad came in he went running upstairs and found out we had shot the gun he smelt it. My cousin got a good hiding on the spot but I didn’t because of been hurt and I thought I got away with it. How wrong I was when I had healed and stopped needing the collar and cuff sling I went to my grandads and as soon as I went in he said time for you to get belted and he put me over his knee and gave me 6 whacks with his big thick heavy belt but I deserved it we could of up to a mile away.
Imagine the feeling of sheer horror as the kid who played Joffrey walks in to your hospital room to discuss your heart surgery?
LOL
in the battle of Stalingrad most German soldiers would pick up the Russian ppsh mainly for the fact that it was a urban area and the ppsh excelled at urban combat
The whole "Germans had the best K/D ratio" is by and large a myth. For the longest time after WWII, former German generals were allowed to control the narrative on how well their army performed since Soviet records were closed to the west, and US/British leaders were desperate for German expertise in the event that the Soviets did start WWIII. Only recently has research suggested that the German's loss ratio was pretty much proportionate to the Soviets, British, and US. That's not counting the millions of German POWs either.
Obviously we won the war idiot
@@Mike10700 Call the people who believe German soldiers were "superior" idiots, idiot.
It's not a myth, the largest amount of German casualties were in the latter half when the German army didn't even have food or guns to continue. If you factor that out, Germans performed marvelously in 1940-1941, where they could have won if they just changed their course of war a little.
@@spiritofmodernity9679 The Germans performed "marvelously" in 1940-41 because they were attacking enemy nations that weren't prepared for a modern war. Germany had six years to remobilize their forces and plan the takeover of Europe. If Germany could only make the first two years (give or take a few months) worth the effort they put into modernizing their military, then only shows how weak they really were. They couldn't even achieve air superiority over England when the UK was at its weakest.
Soviet military casualties were still significantly higher even when including the German POWs at the end and the kids and old people in the Volksturm. Even in the latter half of the war when the Germans were greatly outnumbered and outsupplied on the Eastern Front the Soviets still consistently took more casualties in nearly every battle.
you love Rommel new coverage, best journalist of the war
Buck Compton, he liked baseball. I may be a band of brothers nerd.
It’s 2 miles up 2 miles down.
He was wrong about the captain . Buck Compton was she’ll shocked but he’s not the one who froze up before the charge. I forgot his name but he ran off multiple times on the troop during bastogne
This could almost be an ad for Warpath
I’m a german. The quality of the Wehrmacht in WW2 is greatly overestimated
We go for 6 months to 9 months in today's age, they went there tell the war was over.
Taylor, deaths do not equal victory or failure.
Omaha was an operational success, but look at the numbers, so that was a "failure" in your mind?
human deaths not count in yout mind?
@@dmonleon24 um........ taylor was using statistics comparisons to point to victory or failure, and his point was that we "barely won" against the germans in comparison to the body count, if you apply this logic to the soviets, the soviets lost the war a thousand times over, but they didn't, did they? My point is that deaths cannot accurately equate to a true failure on the field, and Stalin proved that as well as the allied commanders who sacrificed those young men on the many beach fronts.
They also seem to forget that when you are fighting an entrenched defending army, you are going to lose a lot of men.
@@albar428 there is a reason they arnt Generals
Well hell, we consider iwo jima as a victory even though we suffered more casualties than the enemy. The intelligence gathering back then was way off that mark, as they underestimated japanese strength on that tiny island by almost 70%.
The amount of people here that have a lukewarm idea of what they’re talking about but act like they’re historians is infuriating.
Were they calling Rommel Ronald? Lol
Taylor sitting in front of edp being exposed is awesome
Were you expecting some likes on this shit comment?
@@SavingPvtBryan32 no I was expecting to get Taylor to blow me
Americans forget that Canadian and Australian troops were bad bad ass’s in ww2 as well
The wood on early/pre war german rifles is lush if your wood guy
Kyle got SOOTED UP
Pov fml lmao my only interaction with homies rn
rommel wouldve change dday but hitler favored another general i believe von rundsted or sum like that, what he did was basically move the panzer divisions farther away from the beaches, rommel wanted them to be as close as possible so when the landing started they could throw them into the sea, when it started the panzers on the other side of the river behind the beaches were too late, rommel only had 3 panzer divisions at his disposal.
Rommel is overrated.
What's up Woody?
I mean small arms wise no the UD were at least as good as the germans, ee feilded the first actually successful semi auto rifle on a mass scale. I would also say other nations had some really fantastic firearms on par with the US or Germany at the time but the germans sure do know how to advertise.
Is Kyle allowed to own firearms after his conviction?
@Thunderlux could he go to the range and shoot someone else’s weapons or is he never allowed to touch them again. I’m in the U.K. and curious.
unless they expunge his weed charges, no
I love the boys but as a conflict historian they got no clue what they’re talking about here lol. While it’s true that many German designs were excellent, plenty of other countries also had excellent designs. The m1 rifle was the best battle rifle of the war until very, very late in the conflict, and by then most nazi units weren’t using STG’s, they were using cobbled together home defense weapons because we had completely obliterated their industrial base through strategic bombing. Also, while some Nazi units were highly elite, every nation had elite formations. In fact, many of those “elite” German units at the start of the war were almost completely gone by 1943 because the axis didn’t rotate front line units between combat and training nearly as much. This inflated axis kill counts and feats due to being in theatre longer, but those units were almost completely wiped out by the end of 1943, and were completely gone by the end of 44. Not killed to a man, but either so far below max combat personnel that they were disbanded officially, or they simply ceased to exist as a coherent military entity due to extreme losses and communications disruptions and their stragglers were either captured, killed, or joined new units.
Jordan peterson collects Soviet Union stuff but hes obviously red skull so
I can't unsee it now
lmao woody trying to be a gun collector but not knowing about the germans having better shit, at least on paper.
These guys collectively know nothing about WW2. Kyle dosent know Rommels nickname it was the " Dessert Fox " not whatever Kyle said and Woody knows absolutely nothing at all. It's amazing for how stupid Woody is he did so well in life financially.
He said "Dessert Fox" bro. As you would say It's amazing how illiterate you are considering how much attitude you seem to have in life.
Kyle seems off in this episode
It’s the suit, it’s changed him
@@maddg7471 sharp dressed man
I think it was the guest
Russia played huge part un ww2 win with sheer numbers
Wait when the hell did we have a Second World War? I was always taught that there was only one world war.
Are you serious?
@@samherber9490 yeah. I just checked google and apparently my parents are idiots🤦♂️
@@UnimpressedGoose jesus christ hahahaha tell your parents u dont wanna be homeschooled anymore
Have you never heard of nazis?
@@geschlech I like being homeschooled tho. the fact they forgot some tiny lil insignificant thing like world war 2 doesn’t make them bad teachers.
“Germany had the best guns of the war” I mean it’s not really cut and dry like that. Like if we’re talking standard infantry rifles the Germans for the most part of the war had bolt action kar98 while America the m1 grand an amazing semi auto rifle for the time. Know I will say the the Germans did have a better light machine gun. The bar and 1918 were fine but the 1918 was really only good when it came to defensive rolls and the BAR fed from 20 round mags. It was actually for that reason some marines in the pacific made there own light machine gun called the stinger. When it comes to submachine guns. As much as it pains me to say this, the germans were better. While I love the Thompson just because how ironic it is. They did the same thing as every other sub gun. But they weight more and was really expensive. But the real reason the US in my option was better. Was that the troops had more training and are squad level tactics were more adaptable. Armchair history actually has an amazing video on this subject.
Anything from any reich is more valuable simply due to taboo value.
nice
Only Woody would GENUINELY believe that American engineering was a higher standard than German engineering DURING WW2. Epitome of a Boomer statement.
mass production of average tanks > minor production of terribly engineered but better fabricated massive tanks that broke down every kilometer off the factory bed
Well German Engineering wasnt some super stuff either,The Axis & The Allies just had differing Manufacturing & Design Philosophies based upon what they wanted vs what was available. Woody wasn't entirely wrong either,as the war progressed manufacturing and engineering standards for the Axis powers plummeted due to lack of resources and skilled labor. So the myth that German had "Superior Engineered" weapons is from a misreading of their design philosophy.
the m1 garand beat any kar98 out there and by the end of the war the germans made their guns out of scrap wood and metal sooooooooooo, we had alot better than them the main weapon they had that was better was the mg42 because that blew the BAR out of the water
@@scantrontheimmortal "ACTUALLLLYYYYYYY"
You're wrong. I don't have to cite anything either. People know this because it's literally common knowledge.
Two words. Grease Gun.
Taylor is frustratingly wrong on so many things and bought into the “Germany was sooooo much better” bullshit
How is it bullshit lol
@@cyberdyne9480 germans over engineered stuff and we’re just making a bunch of weapons that they thought would give them and edge where they should’ve been making simple reliable cheap guns to make. Extreme modifications to tanks guns and armor hinders their weight speed and transmission reliability, pumping money into fighter jets that didn’t do much at all compared to artillery and more guns and ammo that kind of thing.
America’s superior manufacturing policy of make something decent but simple to make on a mass scale and easy to fix and like Sherman tanks was exceptional.
It was tactics.. the last General war.
9 minutes of straight cringe
we mainly beat the Germans in world war 2 because we cut most if not all there supply lines for their military
I thought it was the Russians that beat Germany, America's involvement was mostly pacific (ie 2 big bombs)
We sent them a ton of trucks and guns and even tanks. We also blew up a shit ton of their factories using planes
You need to learn a few more things orange...
They certainly put the effort in x)
Put in the effort yeah but we were losing ww2 until Russia decided to fight with us then we suddenly won so...
Top Google result "The war in Europe concluded with the liberation of German-occupied territories, and the invasion of Germany by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, culminating in the fall of Berlin to Soviet troops, Hitler's suicide and the German unconditional surrender on 8 May 1945"
Sure I agree the bombs ended it in Pacific but in Europe pretty sure it was the Russians