|
I'm sure that Stalin preparing for an invasion totally justifies you invading him first and killing civilians left right, and driving hard into the heartland of the country. That's totally what I would do.
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 02:39 |
|
|
JcDent posted:I'm sure that Stalin preparing for an invasion totally justifies you invading him first and killing civilians left right, and driving hard into the heartland of the country. That's totally what I would do. mein fuehrer, we must not allow a war crime gap!
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
The entire concept of war crimes is moronic and pointless. Evidently the governments of the United States, Russia, and Israel at least partially share this view as they have to date refused the rulings of the ICC (or, less charitably, they just don't trust each other and don't want to cede any power to an international court, considering their strong position relative to other nations). The sole value of the laws of war in my eys are in protecting the sanctity and trust of truce flags and non-combatant medical personnel, and similar de-escalation options for war, but there must be a better way to do this than letting politicians and public opinion dictate correct military conduct. For example, why not amend Article V of the UN constitution to exclude retaliation for nuclear strikes? It could only result in less death, on the whole. I wouldn't want to see the whole world reduced to ash for the sake up upholding an agreement. At least then some greater proportion of the planet would survive intact. Prosecuting people for war crimes after the fact, I fear, does little to prevent them in the future, and it's hard to look at these things and not be reminded of the unpleasant taste of reprisal. And then of course, you will never have an impartial court for war crimes. It's a mockery of an impossible ideal of justice. e: Ok, come on. Surely you are not suggesting, that, for example, the Nuremburg trials were fair and impartial, and a dutiful carrying out of justice by an international body? This whole discussion is mined, as it were. For example, a large part of the German massacring of civilians on the Eastern Front was due to a belief that this sort of harsh treatment would cow the partisans into ceasing their sabotage actions. We're all humans, we all have the same flaws. You can't just say that these guys were evil and there's no way our own actions and rationalizations could never produce such an abhorrent result. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) Keldoclock fucked around with this message at 11:25 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
And here I was just thinking "Man, this thread got so much better since keldoclock stopped posting"
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 11:15
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:And here I was just thinking "Man, this thread got so much better since keldoclock stopped posting" Mmm-mmm, ignore function. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:And here I was just thinking "Man, this thread got so much better since keldoclock stopped posting"
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 11:56
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:And here I was just thinking "Man, this thread got so much better since keldoclock stopped posting"
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
Let the man speak! He's just laying down Harsh Truths!
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:19
|
|
|
You know, things would still be pretty good if you people stopped reacting to him. Can anyone talk a bit about non-standard WW2 artillery? I just saw band of brothers and dug the wheeled Raketenwerfer 43. Also, Stukas Zu Fuss! Can't forget the various petard mortars either. Were there other artillery pieces in the area that diverged from the standard Large-bore gun/mortar/rocket rack carrier? Tias fucked around with this message at 13:27 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
Tias posted:You know, things would still be pretty good if you people stopped reacting to him. The Soviets had the oddball Ampulomet, which was briefly used in the desperate months of late 1941. It launched a 125mm spherical glass projectile filled with incendiary liquid. It looks like something you could knock together in a shed, and probably was. The projectile was filled with self igniting KS fluid, which consisted of gasoline mixed with white phosphorous and sulfur, as well as a thickening agent. KS ignites on contact with the air and burns at 800-1000 degrees C for 2-3 minutes. The projectile was launched by a common 12 gauge shell filled with gunpowder. The Ampulomet was intended for anti-tank use but the projectiles were undoubtedly effective against infantry as well.  Ampulomet and projectile.  It could also be used to launch rolled up propaganda leaflets like some sort of communist t-shirt gun. "I got BLITZED on the Ostfront and all I got was this crappy shirt" Polikarpov fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:41
|
|
|
You probably already know, but machineguns were also used as indirect fire weapons by pointing them up more, and PIATs were converted into macguyvered rocket batteries by strapping a bunch together as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:42
|
|
|
Tias posted:Can anyone talk a bit about non-standard WW2 artillery? There were of course tanks like the T34 Calliope if you like rocket racks bolted on to armored vehicles, the rail cannons, and naval guns. Plus, whatever the gently caress this is, if it's even real.  spectralent posted:You probably already know, but machineguns were also used as indirect fire weapons by pointing them up more Why stop there?   (for certain definitions of "use", anyways. The Praying Mantis was a prototype built on the UC) Speaking of , if you like the Ampulomet you'll like the Northover Projector, a honest to god black powder cannon that launched incendiary grenades.
Keldoclock fucked around with this message at 12:50 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:43
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:The Soviets had the oddball Ampulomet, which was briefly used in the desperate months of late 1941. It launched a 125mm spherical glass projectile filled with incendiary liquid. It looks like something you could knock together in a shed, and probably was. Reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvpjAyHH490
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
Keldoclock posted:There were of course tanks like the T34 Calliope if you like rocket racks bolted on to armored vehicles, the rail cannons, and naval guns. Plus, whatever the gently caress this is, if it's even real. Its a T-35, a Soviet pre-war heavy tank. Only markedly unusual for having 5 separate turrets, though the turrets themselves were standard designs from various medium and light tanks already in production.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:Its a T-35, a Soviet pre-war heavy tank. Only markedly unusual for having 5 separate turrets, though the turrets themselves were standard designs from various medium and light tanks already in production. quoth wikipedia quote:During Operation Barbarossa, ninety percent of the T-35s lost by the 67th and 68th Tank Regiments were lost not to enemy action but through either mechanical failure or because they were abandoned and destroyed by their crews. The most common causes of breakdown were transmission-related. Yep, sounds about right. Thanks for IDing it. I was incredulous because it looks like a Mark II but is clearly too advanced, and of course the dudes (guarding?) it have shoulderboards which puts them in WWII. Is there ever a time when it's a good idea to put more turrets on one chassis, instead of just going and getting more chassis? e: I guess they needed the spare chassis for more SU-14s, lol! Keldoclock fucked around with this message at 12:57 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:54
|
|
|
spectralent posted:PIATs were converted into macguyvered rocket batteries by strapping a bunch together as well. I never realised how literal this was: Making Tracks - British Carrier Story 1914 to 1972 posted:Improvised by the Canadians in 1944, this consisted of 14 PIAT projectors mounted on a frame at the rear of the carrier in two series of seven. Each row could be fired simultaneously by means of a mechanical contrivance of steel rods attached to the firing triggers. A few vehicles so fitted were used in Europe in 1944-45 lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 13:03
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:And here I was just thinking "Man, this thread got so much better since keldoclock stopped posting" "Strongly concur." -Admiral Prince Louis of Battenberg, First Sea Lord
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:Awesomepoulet This is amazing. Glass bombs with incendiary alchemy, poo poo is right out of warhammer! Polikarpov posted:Its a T-35, a Soviet pre-war heavy tank. Only markedly unusual for having 5 separate turrets, though the turrets themselves were standard designs from various medium and light tanks already in production. Reminds me of that weirdzo multi-gun thingie the Australians built, allegedly more to shore up morale than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
Tias posted:Reminds me of that weirdzo multi-gun thingie the Australians built, allegedly more to shore up morale than anything else. ahem, Bob Semple was a Kiwi tank  Probably the original inspiration for Daleks
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
spectralent posted:You probably already know, but machineguns were also used as indirect fire weapons by pointing them up more, and PIATs were converted into macguyvered rocket batteries by strapping a bunch together as well. I heard that the PIAT was favoured in urban combat because unlike the bazooka or panzerfaust it left no smoke trail, making it harder to spot the firer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:I heard that the PIAT was favoured in urban combat because unlike the bazooka or panzerfaust it left no smoke trail, making it harder to spot the firer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
While interesting info, the relative newness and quantity of things like tanks and planes was not even close to the biggest factor limiting any sort of major offensive action by the Soviets early in the war. It was the lack of non-sexy war gear, particularly heavy cargo trucks, trains, and high quality fuel. Without this stuff available in massive quantities any major offensive action grinds to a pretty ugly halt about 20 miles past the SP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:I heard that the PIAT was favoured in urban combat because unlike the bazooka or panzerfaust it left no smoke trail, making it harder to spot the firer. Panzerfaust wasn't a rocket launcher but a recoilless rifle, so it didn't leave a smoke trail. But it still had a backblast which would kick up dust. But then I'd wager that PIAT also produced some muzzle blast that would kick up dust especially in urban environment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Wouldn't the lack of backblast also be a factor? Apparently yes, since it could be fired from confined/dug-in spaces that would be suicidal for a recoilless weapon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:39
|
|
|
Re: war crimes. The problem is that you can't remove the post WW2 trials from their context in the history of international law. At the time they were looking for any way to hold the Nazis accountable and there was no existing framework for crimes against humanity. War crimes, however, were an established thing. Note that they also prosecuted for things like mistreating POWs. Nuremberg was critical for establishing the evidence for the atrocities and genocide and equally important for creating precedent and a framework for future prosecutions of genocide. Killing the shot out of your own civilians wasn't really something you could bring a nation to task for before that. Now there were parts that were horseshit. The prosecutions bases on submarine warfare are the biggest example. The process was flawed but it wasn't just billshit that can be dismissed out of hand. Also the ignore button is for cowards. Edit also there are some things that are pretty accepted as not being ok in wartime such as killing POWs. Note that like all concepts this is something that evolves over time. Purposefully targeting civilians is much less acceptable now than in the 40s. Cyrano4747 fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
The way to combat bad posting is with more good posting 100 Years Ago The blokes return to Salonika, a situation that's good for absolutely nobody involved; Greece continues to destabilise (nice to see the British government upholding their neutrality bahahahahaha you hypocritical fucks), and both belligerents are now down a couple of hundred thousand soldiers who could be doing something more useful somewhere else. In Mesopotamia the Indian Army bumblefucks its way towards an attempt to relieve Kut in what's probably the last update for the year from there, and we've got a BOGOF special on courts-martial: first in Italy where the remnants of the 48th Regiment have unsurprisingly mutinied, and then in a crappy little dugout near Louis Barthas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:When you mean "wrong ethnic groups" you mean we should have been sterilizing the English the entire time, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Mmm-mmm, ignore function.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:The way to combat bad posting is with more good posting Well, that's my posts knackered, then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Mmm-mmm, ignore function. "God this pike is heavy... hey, Franz, you don't mind if I use your head for a sec, do you? Good man."
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Without main guns, at a massive markup, and all the manuals were in German. That's pretty loving cold. I mean, when you look at the whole period (albeit with the benefit of hindsight) between '39 and '41 you can understand why Stalin had a complete breakdown when the Nazis launched Barbarossa. They played him so loving hard. Which is ironic, given that he did something very similar to the Spanish, taking their gold and screwing them over by sending museum pieces instead of modern artillery. Cyrano4747 posted:Based on what? Where are you getting this info that Stalin invading Germany was highly likely? I'm far from an expert on Soviet Russia but everything I've read about it In the 30s points to huge interior development pushes. gently caress they didn't even have pushing for world revolution at that point. Stalin was me socialism in one country after all. Stalin invaded the Baltics, Finland and Poland so he clearly had an extremely aggressive and expansionist foreign policy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
OctaviusBeaver posted:Which is ironic, given that he did something very similar to the Spanish, taking their gold and screwing them over by sending museum pieces instead of modern artillery. ...all part of Imperial Russia 20 years earlier, though. Not the same as trying to invade Germany, necessarily.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Sarrisan posted:"God this pike is heavy... hey, Franz, you don't mind if I use your head for a sec, do you? Good man."
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Re: war crimes. Wasn't there at least one guy who got acquitted on the grounds of 'we should probably be lenient here, given that we [the Western Allies] have been doing the exact same thing?' I forget whether that was in regards to submarine warfare or strategic bombing though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:30
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Cyrano4747 posted:
Is there any real evidence for that? Or is that just one of those things we like to tell ourselves?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Ghetto Prince posted:Is there any real evidence for that? Or is that just one of those things we like to tell ourselves? The Vietnam War and for that matter the Iraqi War and all the outrage about any civilian casualties, I'd imagine. You can call it impotent outrage that doesn't lead to any meaningful change if you want, but compare that to carpet-bombing major urban centers without anyone batting an eyelid in WW2. Edit: Actually, I'm kinda curious about that. In the Nuremberg trials, was the Blitz accounted as a war crime?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Keldoclock posted:Is there ever a time when it's a good idea to put more turrets on one chassis, instead of just going and getting more chassis? This was actually a pretty common thing in the interbellum years and even some early war designs, so I guess someone thought it was a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Wasn't there at least one guy who got acquitted on the grounds of 'we should probably be lenient here, given that we [the Western Allies] have been doing the exact same thing?' That was Donitz as it happens, who got off in part because Nimitz pointed out that yes, we were doing the exact same thing in the pacific.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Wasn't there at least one guy who got acquitted on the grounds of 'we should probably be lenient here, given that we [the Western Allies] have been doing the exact same thing?' Yeah that was Doenitz and charges of waging unrestricted submarine warfare. Not that the guy wasn't a huge Nazi true believer, regardless. e: welp
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 02:39 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:...all part of Imperial Russia 20 years earlier, though. Not the same as trying to invade Germany, necessarily. You could say the same thing about Germany up until Denmark though. If you want to say the USSR wasn't aggressive and expansionist then you have to say the same thing about Germany up until 1940, which clearly doesn't make any sense. I guess with the exception of Austria, but that was a pretty peaceful takeover.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 19:03
|
|