well you have still to prove a valid reason why it is other then citing propaganda
well I admit it, teaching russian is harder than teaching fish to fly but I still try.
Yeah, if it only was the soviet shit it probably would have been cake walk for germans. Unfortunately US backed the soviet industry.
Yeah it indeed did, most advanced technological marvel of ussr. Much like outhouse during space time.
Did just fine, untill US gave the means for soviets to move shit. In 1:1 USSR couldnt even handle winland.
So he invaded & occupied baltics but the only country that fought them off he decided it doesnt have strategical value ? Oh please stan, try harder.
Thats continuation war. Last time we spoke about winterwar.
Try harder stan.
Well winland didnt have german equipment when continuation war started.
So its just as much ally of german as USSR was when invaded poland.
No matter how much you try to squeel off.
if the alternative is being soviet russian. Definitely.
Just proves point that shit equipment requires 10:1 superiority.
Cba to fact check, 1939 USSR had largest army. Probably took so much casualties during winterwar that it was decreased quite significantly.
In category of shit, no doubt it was best.
Oh right, neither did germany annihilate entire USSR because they just wanted to move slightly border.
Google.
1 Like
Your endeavour was faulty from the beginning since only you got taught here.
Cura te ipsum.
Germany got stopped before any US aid reached Russia.
Mmm not even trying to hide your rooting for uncle Adolf. Team Nazi, what can one do. Old habits are hard to break.
Go on name a better tank in 1940. Iâve literally been waiting for 2 days for an answer. Best case made was Crusader but itâs obviously crap.
Going back to âFinland winâ mantra? Deal with reality, Finland lost. Could have lost even worse, but lost.
You really think Stalin saw Finland as an equal worhy opponent? The pants were shat during the initial invasion but then Finand survived on the ropes and by Stalinâs decision to end at that.
The whole time I was talking about Siege of Leningrad and being buddies with Adolf? Do you even history bro?
Your generals literally had meetings with German army staff developing a common strategy and sharing plans. Then suddenly StuGs appeared out of nowhere⌠hmmm Adolf buddies naybe after all?
Weâve established you love losing, clear.
When Germany & friends have numerical advantage and get bonked = misfortune
When USSR has numerical advantage and wins = shit equipment
Thatâs some wehraboo copium levels.
As always.
But speaking of 1939 levels yes, USSR was the largest, Germany (without friends) - close second, had to call up its buddies Italy, Finland, Romania and Hungary to try and overwhelm, still failed.
Winter War Soviet losses were big per stuff gained but barely significant in proportion to army size.
As always you CBA to fact check, as always. Come back when you find a better tank in 1940.
Germany tried what they wanted and lost (together with suomi buddies)
USSR tried and got what it wanted (but suomis canât move on and still look for fantasy excuses)
Research late 1930s tank designs then and be less ignorant online if you know what that is.
we have named three, and ohh so we have to name a tank that YOU think is better? seems a arbitrary
ohh a military thats not even half the size lost?
2 Likes
Ah yes, T34 bestestest tank. Thanks.
and USSR hardly advanced any before the assistance.
Well, i get it your bit mad due to fact that USSR alone couldnt do much. But really, nazi cards here and there credibility +100.
Id go far as saying even Pz2 did its job better.
Did anyone deny they lost war ? Subject was that USSR failed to conquer it.
No, which was hes first mistake.
Much like Germany decided not to annihilate the entire USSR ?
Land demands are actually part of winterwar, the ones you were referring to.
Winland actually got its first stugs -43 so your pathetic attempt to squeel off the alliance with hitler & mutual invasion to poland still stands.
Well, winland kept the independency currently happiest nation in world if I recall. Hows things going in soviet russia ?
I dont recall making such statement, you may quote me freely.
Well Im quite sure we have gone thru the soviet gear now enough many times.
And ofc you should add your own argument,
when soviets fail to conquer country
âthey totally really wasnt even trying. I promise seriouslyâ
No need to be butthurt over the facts.
1.8million
1.8million men, casualties about 300k extreme estimates goes even beyond 500k.
Yeah just tiny dent.
In country they totally seriously wasnt trying to conquer in all seriousness. really seriously.
Pz2 did its job with far less casualties. So even that is better.
I suppose a communistboo would suit as reply to this. But fear not i shall not downgrade myself to such childish insults.
Well tank usually has armor in order to keep its occupants alive. T-34 did rather terrible job in this task.
So pz2 ?
??
Crusader is paper.
Sherman doesnât exist.
Third one you didnât name.
Finally someone who understands they didnât âwinâ or ânot loseâ in any universe.
still a better tank objectively
sherman designed 1940
Matilda 2
Finally. Good boy.
lol what German high command planning was to end the whole campaign in summer-fall, yet they got hit so hard, lost so many tanks and troops, then got hit super hard and counter-attacked at Moscow, that it was gg.
Allied help was important, but Germany was initially stopped without it.
Lietreally stopped the Axis.
Itâs you whoâs saying âunfortunately US helpedâ, not me.
lmao you really are clueless arenât you
Good boy, finally weâre getting somewhere.
Not all wars are designed to conquer the other side. There were goals and the goals were met. Admittedly, with a lot of unnecessary pants-shittery in the process.
It obviously never has been. Thatâs why conquering all of it wouldnât have been impossible at all if need be.
Germany got pushed back, and lost.
USSR pushed as deep as ever into Finland when the finns sued for peace, and won.
You really donât see the difference?
Land and reparations were gained by USSR after both wars.
Britain literally declared war on Lossland in 1941 hmmm I wonder why.
Takeover of Eastern-Poland-at-the-time (nowadays parts of Ukraine and Belarus, just like before WW1, who would have guessed) after it got rekt by Germany being labeled as alliance with nazis is the pathetic part here.
Surprisingly, USSR never received StuGs or houses SS units from its âalleged alliesâ but oh whatâs that Finland did, and even waged war against them later.
Idk who can be happy in snow and grey skies but hey to each their own. Soviet Russia ceased to exist in 1991 FYI.
Your logical sequence implying that either Soviet gear was shit or Soviet soldiers were shit, that the only way to win was to throw enemy at the gates before the enemyâs bullets end doesnât hold up to Axis losses during their numerical advantage paired with lack of any allied aid yet.
My own argument is that plan A was to get Karelia and the buffer zone, optional plan B was to set up a pseudo government and if all goes well, get whole of Finland red; all didnât go well so plan A was deemed good enough.
But neither I nor you will ever know for sure unless the archives come up with an official WW directive from Stalin.
Thatâs true, you seem to have had some flaming sensation in the rear upon learning Germany, Finland & friends were losing in the field even when they all had numerical advantage.
But hey it is what it is.
Lol what, secret suomi documents?
Even English wiki states ~150k, and Russian ~67k.
But hey I can hear you typing âree Soviet propaganda because I donât like this numberâ
PzII fought abroad, and against Polish horsemen.
T-34 had to stop the biggest military force of experienced Adolf buddies at the time.
Which it did just as asked.
Hey at least childish level explanation of why Germany didnât annihilate USSR helped you understand.
Heard German stories of meeting T-34s? How effective their standard issue 37mm AT was against it?
After the Germans encountered the tank in 1941 during Operation Barbarossa, German general Paul Ludwig Ewald von Kleist called it âthe finest tank in the worldâ and Heinz Guderian affirmed the T-34âs âvast superiorityâ over German tanks.
âThe T-34 tank was reliable on any terrain,â - recalled Colonel General Johannes Friessner, commander of Army Group South Ukraine: âThe Russian tanks could operate where we thought it impossible. The T-34âs firepower was also impressive. For the Soviet infantry, it served as an excellent path-layer and support vehicleâ.*
But hey who tf is von Kleist, Guderian and Friesner against the expert opinion of TUSUPOLISI69
sarcasm
propaganda to help cover up the short coming of the army
Worse tank by all parameters.
Prototype produced in 1941, early models legendary Tommy Cookers.
Are you actually serious.
No one in their right mind talks about Crusader or Matilda when talking about âbest tank of WW2â.
At best late model Sherman and mid-production Pz IV could be compared.
But would still come after T-34/85.
arbitrary
Much like soviet union planned to conquer winland in 2 weeks.
Meh, barely significant casualties.
For a while, without the assistance they couldnt have counter attack.
Well winland stopped USSR so whats ur point ?
Id say it was quite unfortunate for germany wasnt it ?
Well that was a good argument
Well we were speaking of winterwar so it was.
Except that tiny part of conquering winland.
Yet everything from beginning of invasion / puppet government / testimonys of soviets proves conquering was theyr goal. Which they failed. Hard.
Im just using your own logiCK here, germanys intention was just to move little bit border and due to minor resistance decided to not annihilate entire ussr.
And failed to conquer.
Could ask exactly same as you got quite alot of double standards here.
Yep, and the ones in question are from -40
Because it was demanded by USSR.
Funny how first to become nazi required
A) Alliance with germany
B) Mutual invasion
And as both checks for USSR, now you are required to have stugs. Like everytime you get flagged for your double standards another ârequirementâ appears.
Well lets say soviet union actually had stugs, whats your next requirement for your nazi argument ? Speaking of finnish ?
yeah you wish.
At what point of war germany was suffering more casualties than USSR while having supremacy ?
Which has been proven by pretty much every military person that it was horseshit requirement as it had 0 value in ensuring safety of leningrad.
Or theyr staggering losses against rifles & molotov coctails made them change theyr mind as well as probable joining of france / UK to war.
Oh right, most likely germany just didnt want to annihilate ussr probably those documents accidentally burned with hitler.
Well theres actually that some russian going with wild as million casualties estimate.
Soviet propaganda ? Nooo way.
So pz2 was left to poland instead of coming to ussr ?
Dont really think there were any T-34âs left after few months.
Oh please, german just didnt want to even if they could.
So it was better than what germans had but yet lost ?
SO weâre selecting the B ?
Matilda.
At the same time you dont see T-34s produced in the early 40s either.
Quality control was something not known by the stalinist Soviet union, and in WW2 it showed very clearly how little did they care about that.
Still taking in account the high failure rate of all tanks back then, the T34s wasnât that bad, specially because it was possible to fix it on the field. A feat that would prof impossible to accomplish for most failures in germanyâs wonder weapon tanks.
Over all I would agree that in terms of tactical, logistical and design effectiveness, the Sherman tanks are probably the better ones of the war. As they where quite reliable for the time, where easy to transport to the battlefield and weâre effective in most situations as they should. If you compare that to the panther and the road block (king tiger) that crippled the German army logistics as much or even more than it did the allies. Then you have to ask if they were good tanks.
1 Like
where possible as the parts that each factory made were not standardized, and spare parts were a rarity
Then the Stick PPSh wouldnt exist and the AVT, AKT, AVS and Fed would face (mass) production.
quality control was a thing with the union BUT they had to produce as many tanks as fast as they could so for tanks the quality control was toned right the way down to meet the demand
but with weapons quality control was a thing as they were replacing weapons existing weapons rather then replacing lost weapons
Reports of the field says otherwise. T34s were fixed on the field and they even carried extra parts on the tanks, such as an spare transmission attached on the back of the tank.
German tanks on the other side, tended to get the demolition charge treatment
1 Like