whats up with the germans

The question was, why germany suxx atm. I mean it just because there aren´t such monuments for the wehrmacht in germany

 

Germans are very militaristic and competent desgners and engineers.

They however could not figure out the logistical mix of weaponry and the methods of war.


I cannot believe that Rommel for instance really saw the usefulness of the Atlantic and West wall. He went around the Maginot line in May 1940.

So I am sure that others within, saw the fallacy of the German efforts.

If you see a list of all the types of trucks, tanks , AFV, planes and other equpment you will see such an unbearably long menagerie of 'critters' that one knows that the 60,000 parts in a Tiger alone was a disaster.

Intelligent but not smart..

As I have said before, the Tiger was a great tank, but without parts, fuel and ammunition, it is junk.

The notion of the Luftwaffe (Goering) Infantry's existence while miltary aircraft were left unmanned indicates additional piss poor managemennt.




Yeah alot of this German stuff is neat, but ....*


You ignore the real facts about things like the weaponry mentioned above.


The Maschinenpistole 43, Maschinenpistole 44, Sturmgewehr 44 (MP43, MP44, Stg44) were names for a light automatic rifle developed for Nazi Germany during World War II as part of the Maschinenkarabiner (machine carbine) program and developed from the Mkb 42(H). The many names of the Mkb 42(H)'s successor results from the complicated events in the bureaucracy of the Third Reich.

The MP43, MP44, and StG44 were names for a nearly identical weapon with only small production differences and dates. The last, the StG44, was called "Sturmgewehr" literally "Storm rifle", or more commonly translated as assault rifle. It combined the traits of submachine guns (SMG) and automatic rifles. The translation "assault rifle" became very popular to describe this class of weapon, but it was far from being the first of this type


http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Sturmgewehr-44


Among others the 1918 B.A.R. was used in WWI...II and throughout the 1970's etc.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1918.htm

 

Thats an insulting assumption.

 

The BAR was not an assault rifle as it used full power cartridges.

"The first service weapon which can be identified as conforming to the specification of an assault rifle dates back to the First World War; the Russian Federov Avtomat of 1916. This was a selective fire weapon using a short-recoil action and was chambered for a military rifle cartridge of intermediate calibre and power - the 6.5x50SR Arisaka - large quantities of Japanese rifles in this calibre having been acquired by Russia. This was an excellent choice, as the cartridge combined moderate recoil with a good long-range performance, but only about 3,000 Avtomats were made. They were used in action in the Russian Civil War and thereby earned their place in small-arms history. "

From out very own Mr. Tony Williams, http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Assault.htm.

So, I was wrong the Avtomat didn't predate the Mp43 by 50 years, a mere 27, but the fact remains the same, the Germans did not invent the Assault Rifle.

 

My head just exploded.

 

OH , I dunno, mildly insulting, I suppose.. but not without a grain of truth..

"Germanus' was a popular Roman General..

maybe there is something to it..

I couild go on about it but I won't..


You however did post something that implied as such in reference to Prussia..


:bang:

 

you can say what you want but the germans impressed my a lot and everybody that is intressted in war stuff must confirm that they are born
"war guys"

Well I am interested in "war stuff" and I disagree, Mr Phelps is interested in "war stuff" and he disagrees, so thats not everybody for a start.

Starting off with "you can say what you want" kind of implies that you have your viewpoint and are going to stick to it regardless of contradictory evidence, makes it kind of hard to debate sensibly if you are going to disregard anything that goes against your pre-existing views...

 

5000 aces with 5 kills each that's 25,000 , most of them must of been soviet , and I personally think a lot of those kills were exagerrated for propaganda purposes, allthough it isn't impossible considering the poor training of a majority of soviet pilots.

 

Yes, but there is a different between were and are.
Time has changed and if you say germans are very militaristic you say indirectly that I´m a militaristic. Don´t know, but in germany "militaristic" is an insult.


Regards,
Che.

 

I don't think it's an entirely unfair thing to say, Germans still seem to have an instinctive respect for authority and rules which is the sort of thing being a part of the military instills into an individual (Or at least they did when I lived there, but then that is 9 years ago now...). It really depends on what you mean by Militaristic.

Discipline and respect for authority are arguably the most important things for military training to enforce on it's recruits and cadets, once you have that providing your cadets are basically intelligent (And most of the Germans I met were intelligent, possibly because the first two aspects seemed to have been instilled into them from Kindergarten), a self-disciplined intelligent recruit can be easily trained.

The military training camps had much less work to do, as they didn't have to take an undisciplined rabble and turn them into soldiers, the rabble was already fairly disciplined.

On the other hand they can just as easily become skilled in a civilian trade, however Germany's record between about 1850 and 1945 showed how well their men could be trained as soldiers.

 

I mean nothin´, it´s just what the people in germany think about militaristic today and they (we) use it as an insult, like nazi and idiot.

Regards,
Che.

 

To me, I have the utmost respect for the Germans as a people, having lived there I feel qualified to say that and I felt more comfortable living in Nordrhein Westfalia than I do in Kent. I can understand people refering to them as militaristic, but as a general rule I do not believe outsiders intend that as an insult, certainly not on forums like these, usually quite the opposite.

 

I didn´t know that.
I thought it would be usual, that "militarisim" is in insult.

 

what??? the mustang was better than the me-262??? are you bullshitting me ??? ok it can turn faster but that doesent count when your opponent flys with 900kph the me 262 can engage and abort the fight and no mustang or tempest could something against it. Its right me has a lot of weaknesses but once in the air and at speed it was untouchable for allied aircrafts .
but i can understand your critical view against the germans because all your countries fought against them or were occupid by them .so its hard for you to say that their war skills are superior
and when i was in england and america in certain museums or other location they mostly dont show something about german aces or succsesfull operations only allied succsese and a beaten german or jap
and i say again the number of german aerial kills is authentic if you are intressted do some researches and you will find out.

ok may be the russians invited the assaultrifle but in fact the assaultrifles of today are based on the stg-44 especali the ak-47

 

Look, germany developed great a/c, yes, like the Fw 190 D-9, Ta 152 and Me 262.

Their (our) tanks were great, however there are two things for warfare:

??Firepower?? (don´t know the real english word, sry), great, germanys guns were the best in WW2.

Mobility, so poor, many Kingtigers and Tiger I were lost because they are too heavy to move damged tanks.

What´s so great if you have a extraordinary firepower and poor mobility. The enemy will get them and their firepower. Yeah and german soldiers were very good fighters, you can say what you want.

 

Oh jeez, oh dang!

 

No, the Mustang was a better alround fighter than the Me262. The Me262 had serious weaknesses, not least of which was its engine which frequently had as little as 5 hours worth of life, that's less than a round trip with a Mustang!

The AKM (Which is infact the most common assault rifle not the AK47), is not infact based on the MP43 at all, it bears a superficial resemblence to the MP43 and that is all, the mechanism is completely different, so no, whichever way you chose to look at it the Germans did not invent the modern assault Rifle.

If the Me262 was so good try seeing how good one was when flying from Berlin to Essex and back... It couldn't, it was a pure short ranged bomber-interceptor when it worked, and that couldn't be relied upon.

My "Critical view" of the Germans is not at all coloured by my nation of origin (Why do people have to bring nationality into things all the time?!?), I lived and grew up in Germany for most of my life and have the utmost respect for the Germans, but I do not buy into this whole Master-race-who-produced-the-best-everything stuff.

Almost all of the equipment produced by the Germans in quantity was average (U-boats (Type VIII?), Bf109, Panzer IV etc), , their pilots at the start of the war were amongst the best (Although I consider the IJN/IJAAF (Which incidentally my nation also fought against :roll: ), and the USN to be superior), but at the end of the war they were forcing boys who were unable to fly properly into the cockpit. Yes, their pilots may have scored the highest, but you have to look beyond just numbers to get the real picture.

Kills/Mission is a far more realistic figure, and in that respect the best of the Allied, Soviet and Japanese Aces score up there with the best of the German, the difference is the air forces they served under which looked Short-term for Germany and Long term for Allied.

As I have said Germany arguably produced some of the best Pilots, they also undeniably produced some of the least capable.

One last thought...

no mustang or tempest could something against it.

So how when confronted by pilots of the Master Race, did they manage to shoot them down?

 

Yeah, like the 650.000 captured russian soldiers in Wjasma and Brijansk?!

Both weren´t propaganda.

 

A major factor that helped Germany during war time was that in her past, she was almost always in conflict be it with the Romans, British, French, Russians, or even with other Germans. (that would be before Germany's unification) If you fight long enough, you will come out with a very good understanding of what it takes to win, much like Israel in the last 40 years. Even though I am German born and raised, it goes without saying that the Israeli's fought with more ingenuity and cunning than the Germans ever did. If one army is truely superior in the sense of tactics, I would pick Israel.