How accurate is this?
How accurate is this?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
theatlantic.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
accurate. the germans used men from conquered lands as conscripts
en.wikipedia.org
sure, its pretty cool
>forced
My man Spielberg
My man Spielberg.
it's absolutely true. it is a known fact that czech people literally cannot lie
This
More bullshit allied propaganda
>what is conscription
>what are nazi atrocities
/pol/ pls
How accurate is getting together a ragtag group of soldiers to go on a JRPG adventure to rescue some guy? Surely, they would be put to better use doing something of worth on an actual battlefield.
This has bothered me for so long.
Also did they really pull guys out of service if they were the only child left?
Like it's the middle of an operation
No, they wouldn't, but speilberg said he had to take some creative license or else there wouldn't be much of a story to tell. Same with those silly tactics during the bridge scene.
The man who Ryan is based on did get a ticket home after his brothers were killed, but nobody was sent out to retrieve him. High command informed him about the situation after heregrouped with a paratrooper division himself.
not accurate
Utah beach was defended by a fully refitted infaterie division, reorganized from units destoryed in the eastern front
it could have been accurate in another setting since the wehrmatch did have conscipted personel
namely from the volksdeutch, who most of the time were from occupied countries and only had german roots but not actually german
>Soldiers dont lie to try to save their asses
link to the scene?
explain this
en.m.wikipedia.org
The U.S. do have a 'Sole Survivor Policy' in place now (enacted in 1948), and several occasions did occur in World War Two where surviving family members were sent home. Though, as pointed out, I don't believe there has been a case where soldiers have been sent to retrieved them, I believe they've just been ordered to go home.
For introductory reading, en.wikipedia.org
They land on Omaha beach in SPR, not Utah. Also, since troops such as ost-batallionen were present at Normandy, I don't think a couple of czech troops is that far fetched.
i messed up, the film is on Omaha beach and that was indeed defended by a full infanteriedivision
en.wikipedia.org
while Utah was defended by the 709th "fortress division"
a silly name made up to compensate the fact its not a full strenght division
it had several ostbatalions (captured and reconscripted personel) in its ranks
the korean dude was in one of them, probably the georgian one
en.wikipedia.org
Wish I could get that much free travel.
the 352nd were defending omaha, and far as i know there were no ostbattalions in its ranks
they could be, you know, simply conscripts
several thousand czechoslovak citizens were conscripted, mostly due to shenanigans with the borders and shit, from the area around silesia, ger-cze folks etc.
Literal translation:
"Don't shoot! don't shoot! I'm Czech! I didn't kill anyone!"
He didn't say they were forced to fight.
Beach landing wasn't bloody enough.
theatlantic.com
Recent movie about Estonian conscripts
What is the NKVD
Hurrrrr
>How accurate is this?
Czechs weren't drafted, but the Germans in the Sudetenland and the protectorate were. So it's possible that some Czech with some German roots declared himself German at the beginning of the Nazi rule for benefits and then rejected his German-ness as the tides were turning
>Nazis are evil
>HURR BUT DA SOVIETS
How to spot a stormfag 101.
Retards
Czechs were the armorers of Germany, despite the "wir wuz engineers and manufacturers n scheiiiz" meme.
Texel (Dutch island in the north sea) was mostly manned by Georgians forced to work for the Germans. They revolted close to the end of the war (supposedly because if they would be forced to defend it against the incoming allies, they'd get fucked), causing a shit ton of bloodshed among civilians as well as themselves.
I reckon Estonians were more Nazi than the Germans.
Can anyone blame the American soldiers for killing them? All day they had to run across a beach getting shot at and watching their friends die all around them. And when they finally get to the top of the ridge they see the same people who had been slaughtering then all day trying to surrender. I would have shot them too if I was in their position.
and you would have asked for mercy being on enemy shoes
that´s war
You realize that many people hated the soviets? Ukrainians for example welcomed the nazis as liberators during Barbarossa. They most certainly willingly enlisted to fight against the soviets. That's why the waffen ss was able to form several divisions made up of eastern European volunteers.
Bravo
>That's why the waffen ss was able to form several divisions made up of eastern European volunteers.
Waffen-SS was able to form exactly two divisions from Soviet areas (not counting the Baltics, which were only Soviet occupied). One of them mutinied and defected when sent into combat, and the other one was used primarily for anti-partisan roles.
Not for Omaha. On the other beaches it was though.
Sometimes it was a clusterfuck of poles trying to surrender and warn the allies about the mine fields behind them.
Notice how I said eastern Europe, dipshit. There were many more than 2 eastern European divisions, and several legions as well. Also many just went to regular Wehrmacht units, not necessarily as part of a separate unit
I'm not the one slobbering on allied cock here
> but muh Einsatzgruppen
Not even a storm fag, I just know history better than you.
Holy shit that is near Jackie Chan levels of 'I'm not looking for any trouble'.
unlikely, the 352nd were made from the remnants of units destroyed at kurks
Omaha was the most difficult landing, there may or may not be some myth created to justify the poor performance of the invading forces
i think the film wanted to capture the notion that there were many non germans defending the beaches, but omaha is the worst choice for that
>the NKVD existed
>therefore the nazis were gudbois
>I'm not the one slobbering on allied cock here
>Actually implying supporting the allies is a bad thing
Hello stormfront.
Or you could try not strawmaning him? You obviously dont know history if you cannot accept that both sides committed atrocities you fail at both history and being a critical thinking human being. Kys please. Also to prove I'm not him so you can understand how retarded you are:
>unlikely, the 352nd were made from the remnants of units destroyed at kurks
... again, why couldn't those units contain (former) czechoslovak citizens?
there were some who (accidentally, but still) got drafted into the ss, let alone frontline wehrmacht units
Let me put it to you this way.
Saying the Nazis were evil and it's a good thing the allies won is not the same as denying atrocities on the allied side.