|
I found a really interesting book on the Cold War Soviet Army,which can be read here: http://militera.lib.ru/research/suvorov12/index.html I've heard that the author is controversial for later writing books arguing that Stalin planned to invade Nazi Germany before World War II, but this book is really good. The author claims the reason behind all those crappy soviet vehicles was to build large amounts of less advanced models to equip second echelon forces. First echelon forces would be outfitted with gear the equal of NATO forces and smash through them. But even if they lost, the second echelon forces with their obsolete equipment and manned by reservist would be an entire army the size of the one that NATO had defeated, going up against an army that had had no time to make good their loses.
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 16:13 |
|
|
On a related note, when did they stop using horse archers?
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
I'm watching the history channel and it's just a vague summary of what Hitler, Stalin, Roosevelt, Mussolini Churchill and Patton were doing. Hell, the reason the western front seems to be covered in any more detail is because they talk about Patton. There's no Rommel, D-day is only talked because Patton was involved. Just wow, the history channel is now so bad just writing shows that would barely get a D in High School wasn't bad enough and they decided to go back to revive Great Man Theory and then write shows that would get a D in a High School in the 1800s.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:By "involved" you mean "wasn't at all really" right? Oh no, I mean that according to the history channel , the whole lynch pin to the success of Normandy was Roosevelt placing Patton in charge of a decoy army. It was the only reason Hitler didn't just send in his reserves to crush the allies.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:So do they give any attention to Eisenhower at all? Ah, you still haven't grasped it yet. There was no "allied command", just Roosevelt, Churchill and Patton. That's the entire western front.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
What do historians think of John Mosier and his books Deathride and The Myth of the Great War? Had a run in with a guy who cited Deathride in an argument. Amazon links: http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Great-War-Military-History/dp/0060084332/ https://www.amazon.com/Deathride-Hitler-Stalin-Eastern-1941-1945/dp/1416573488/ Read Deathride, thought it had some interesting points, but didn't make a strong enough case to prove itself.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
I did some more research on my own and not does Mosier cite Victor Suvarov, but also the IHR. So, yeah, it's total garbage. Though the book does has at least one entertaining feature. It comes down rather heavily against German generals and takes Hitler's side against them. Needlessly to say I was arguing with a Wehrmacht fanboy in youtube comments when he used this book as a source and the fact that part of it's thesis is that the military should have done a better job executing the will of its visionary Fuhrer is rather amusing.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Let's not leave everybody's second favorite Nazis general, Gunderian out of this. In addition to the whole bribe taking deal, the never disagreeing with Hitler about all the war crimes things, he also served on the Court of Military Honor that turned over their fellow soldiers over to the People's court. I've just noticed that his wikipedia page has been purged of all references to that, except for a template containing the names of all members at the bottom. All of the other members' pages go in detail about their involvement, but his doesn't even confirm he belonged.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
Deleted cause of spoilers. Monocled Falcon fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Oct 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2014 07:41
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:
Yeah, sorry, that was a mistake. The movie just really creeped me out lifting plot points from Spec Ops: The Line, but then staying a brainless action movie that people found funny. I dragged on too long trying make sense of that poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
Are there any good resources on the Brusilov Offensive? The wiki article on it makes some interesting claims on the quality and nature of Imperial Russian tactics, including claiming that they were a forerunner of german stormtrooper doctrine.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Did he single out officers? I thought he was going after anyone he could safety shot.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Watch on the Rhine was the first book which made me genuinely angry after I had finished it. Later I threw it into my recycling-bin to be transformed into toilet paper. A fitting punishment. The latter, I can assure you. Watch on the Rhine is hilarious when you find out that the guy's main book series is pretty much a charismatic leader taking over a country, training a paramilitary force into an unbeatable army and then taking over the world. And that that charismatic leader is Kratmann in everything but success and name. For a laugh, check out any 1 star review for his books on amazon and you'll probably find him arguing with the reviewer in comments.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
What's the best book for a layperson to read on Napoleonic tactics? Particularly anything that kinda elaborates why it's not dumb. Or for that matter, how they wouldn't lose to medieval armies or a Roman legion.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:tbh we could probably hash that out right here. Like, why do you think they're dumb? It's not me that thinks it's dumb, but me just getting fed up with with other people thinking it was. I am aware of the basics of it, but I wasn't happy with how much I know and was hoping to find a nice pop history book that's not too inaccurate to answer all the stupid questions. I could probably fill up multiple posts with all the stupid questions I have.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Okay, so starting off simple: how decisive was the infantry attack in this time period? Was sending a line of soldiers at an enemy position really expected to do anything by itself? Edit: Both some talk about War of Independence but also something I remembered Dan Carlin saying in his first WWI podcast, about some historian in the last chapter of his book writing about what would happened if Alexander the Great's army was at Waterloo, concluding that it would have done better than the real French army. Monocled Falcon fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:cool stuff. Another question, did Grenadiers ever actually use Grenades? I always heard the title quickly became an honorific because grenades at the time were unreliable and ineffective, and that grenadiers were simple elite shock units.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Next Question: What were the technical specifications of Napoleonic cannons? They gets overlooked a lot in the hypothetical English Longbowman/Mongol Horde vs the Redcoats scenarios.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Something like that, I think. Sorry, I couldn't find the English expression and my translation site got confused by that word. So the "American riflemen versus Redcoats" thing actually happened? I thought that didn't work. Though obviously this was just one tactic among many and not decisive by itself. Pretty sure the actual British army already had a counter for it too.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Can I get an effort post on Napoleonic artillery? I'm mostly trying to get a sense of how many pounds of lead are flying through the air compared to other time periods, like the early modern.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:
Ah, man, that means that the naval missions from Assassin's Creed III were even less accurate than I thought. Great stuff though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
In historical accounts of the late Roman empire, the armies of the Romans and the northern European tribes are often described as becoming more like each other as time went on. My question is did Gothic and Gaul armies really become more professional, adopting some kind of legion-like organization with proto-centurion NCOs? If this doesn't make any sense, this question was inspired by something Dan Carlin said in a Common Sense episode (number 93; with Sam Harris) where he said some historian said that Barbarian tribes compensated for Roman Technology was by being " harsher, more badass and more dangerous on an old school level" Now, Dan probably mangled the exact quote, but it's still a 180 from what I thought the current historical view was. I think the historian was Hans Delbrück, but since it was audio only I just typed what I thought was spoken into google and picking the top result. The context this was brought up in is also pretty interesting in light of the discussion in this thread about how important UAVs were in the Ukrainian conflict. It was about Russian soldiers in that conflict looked "old school badass" and how they'd beat drone operators in fight. If you want to hear it for yourself in was in episode 93, starting at 2:12:10.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
How true was the saying that it only took a few months to train a musketman but a lifetime to train a swordsman or Archer? my dad posted:Wojtek driving a tank destroyer. And how come the US never developed any assault guns?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:
Ah, do the light ones like the SU-76s and marder III have a different name? Because I was mostly thinking about how much more atheistically pleasing those types of vehicles were over ordinary tanks.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Tevery Best posted:
Dam, that really gets me. Has any of his works been translated into English? quote:
Noticed this when editing out Dmowski's quote, I'd prefer the Wilno Operation.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
Tias posted:Okay, so I get that the soviets are portrayed as cartoonishly bad in CoH 2, but is there anything else wrong with it? The original Theatre of War missions were pretty funny in this regard. The Soviets had access to the KV-1 and T-34, the Germans have the Panzer IV and Stug III, both with the short 75mm. I wouldn't even bother building tanks in the German missions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 08:06
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Theatre of War has absolutely no base building, resource collection or unit building Yes it does, in fact most missions in Operation Barbossa were just 2v2 skirmish matches.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Hey Cyrano4747, I'm not sure I'm remembering you wrote this really interesting effort post on how current black poverty in America was caused by post World War II racist practices like redlining. Got a book recommendation for learning more about it?Jobbo_Fett posted:Pretty sure you're thinking of Men of War. Theatre of War features a huge single-player game that, once again, features no base building, resource collecting or unit building.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
My copy of Before France and Germany arrived today and before I start reading, I have one question that's too goony and armchair-general-y for the book to answer: Would a representative "barbarian army" of the Late Roman Empire period pose a greater threat to an Early Roman Empire period than a barbarian army of that period?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
What good milhist books are on audible? Got a few leftover credits.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
That artist is really good at Renaissance military hats.   
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:
So... basically he really was autistic. HEY GAL posted:don't, it's literally nazi propaganda There are a couple of reviews making fun of it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
All this talk of factory production has got me wondering if anyone has written something like 'A machinist's history of world war 2' that really got into the details of that stuff?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
So I posted a question which got kinda lost at the bottom of a page, and is probably too technical a subject to find anything on, but can anyone suggest anything focusing on factory production and metalworking? It's what I'm trained in and I get a kick out of hearing about that kinda of stuff. If there's just nothing out there, could I get an effort posts on Soviet factory techniques. I've heard that one of the most important reasons for the superior production of the Soviet Union over Germany is that they had had American engineers update everything according to the latest mass production standards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
How thick would you need a steel plate to stop a standard rifle bullet and how heavy would the resulting body armor weighted anyway? And I'm mostly thinking about this in terms of exactly what degree of unnatural strength Nazi occult super science would have to impart onto their twisted abominations so they could carry it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
Hey Hegel, what would your guys have thought of Sherman's march anyway?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
So I was wondering, what the lightest tank of that's armored well enough to stop to .50 BMG? I'm watching the new terminator and not to spoil anything, but I'm mentally replacing all the robots with T-70s and it's really improved the movie, in my opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Okay, so this may well be the stupidest question I have ever asked, but what's the green overcoat/cloak of these guys are wearing? It looks really cool in a sort of batman in the red army way.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:That's supposed to be a plash-palatka (raincoat-tent) but holy poo poo is it poorly modeled. Also the textures are missing Guards badges. I think instead of bothering with any research they gave regular infantry PTRDs and called it a day. So it's just poorly modelled? Oh, god, I'm so diappointed. The Coh2 campaign is an abomination, but when you're in game and killing Nazis, these guys were pretty badass. There goes next year's Halloween costume I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 16:13 |
|
|
Extra Credits has just released a new video about the battle of kursk! This should be good.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 02:31
|
|