Wehramacht power in WW2 is a meme

1.) The early German successes were more a product of Allied unpreparedness than of German superiority. In the West the German successes were as much the result of a military trained up to a wartime footing (Germany) vs militaries in a peacetime mode or just beginning to move towards a wartime footing. To support this view just look at the Japanese, they had been at war or preparing for war since the 1930's. They decisively defeated the militaries of many of the same countries that Germany defeated. Their military conquered more territory, as quickly, if not more so than the German military. Contemporary perceptions were that they were invincible; they went virtually unchecked from one victory to another. In retrospect this can not be attributed to superior technology, very little to superior weapons (Zero fighter, Long Lance torpedo being the exceptions) and not to some inherent superiority of the Japanese soldier or their organizations. They were simply more proficient than their opponents at that point in time due to their level of training and combat experience. Early German success in Russia had as much to do with the Red Army still trying to recover from Stalin's purges of its leadership as it did to any inherent German superiority.

2.) Armored vehicles/tanks When it appeared in the deserts of North Africa, in British service, the M4 Sherman was the best tank on the battlefield, outclassing the German tanks it faced. When the T-34 first faced German armor on the Eastern Front it outclassed its German opponents even though it was still undergoing teething problems. Germany regained an individual technological advantage with its Tiger and Panther tanks (the latter a direct response to the T 34) but both were plagued throughout their service with mechanical unreliability issues. The Allies could have fielded more advanced tanks had they chosen to but they opted for mechanical reliability, mobility and mass production.

youtube.com/watch?v=_7BE8CsM9ds

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Campaign_(World_War_II)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_African_Campaign
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Front_(World_War_II)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkan_Campaign_(World_War_II)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hannut
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>The early German successes were more a product of Allied unpreparedness than of German superiority.

translates to

>if we were as good as the germans we would have won!

>if we had as many men, tanks and guns as them we would have won!

>Early German success in Russia had as much to do with the Red Army still trying to recover from Stalin's purges of its leadership as it did to any inherent German superiority.
That's an important one.

Alexander Novikov, the guy who would come to command the VVS in WW2, ended up rising to prominence for such groundbreaking concepts as
>fighter escort
>actually staying in formation
>not taking the radios out of planes
>coordinating operations between units

Except the Allies were as good as the Germans, better even since they won the war in the long-term.

We get it, the Wehrmacht was romanticized like everything else in history. People did the same shit with Romans and Greeks, who gives a fuck. You sound like some redditor that thinks hes too smart for society and shit.

If i see ONE more thread about it i will pretend to be a romanticizer just to make the OP butthurt.

>If i see ONE more thread about it i will pretend to be a romanticizer just to make the OP butthurt.
DO IT FAGGOT

>Except the Vietnamese were as good as the americans, better even since they won the war in the long-term.

This kneejerk reaction to wehraboos has gone too far

probably
war isn't a clear cut total war auto resolve thing
there's multiple factor that make or break a battle culminating together,something totally irrelevant or overlook could be somewhat of a turning point of a deal breaker such as in Ligny or Poltava where the smallest incidents created a huge rift

>They decisively defeated the militaries of many of the same countries that Germany defeated.

You aren't actually comparing colonial garrisons of inferior quality to the actual armies, are you?

well... yea, so you agree?

depends what the argument is

winning a war or being a better army

undoubtedly the Wehrmacht was a better than any army

I agree. WW2 Germany didn't conquer shit (except maybe France), but were romanticized by the Americans so that they could sell movies. And now, the trash that can't help but killing civilians en masse are being idolotized by teens that take Captain America for a history class.

Reminder that the German tanks, planes (except F190 A8 which was good), and navy were bad.
Source being a rethorical question: what opponent did they outmatch?

Of course, it's not as simple, but you get my point. Yes, the Churchills were worse than the Tigers, and the Hurricanes worst than the BF109s. But the BF109 was worse than Yak3, Spits, D520, P47s.

Uhmmm... No? Gooks continued to Get curbstomped in every fucking military engadgement. US withdrew because of political reasons. Abrams could have steamroll NVA all the way to Hanoi, but His relatively small Force couldn not Deal with 3 million Chinks who waited on the border of Vietnam, ready to swarm on overextended US army. It would have been another Korea.

>3 million chinks on the border of Vietnam
If anything, China was actively supporting a divided Vietnam. This wasn’t another Korean War case. Also, the US still lost lmao

US did not lost you fucking moron. And China was activelly aiding NV with fucking hordes of cannonfodder.

US could have easilly used Hydrogen bombs to literally anihilate that fucking country to ashes, but instead stuck to relatively uneffective Napalm Attack.

The French were the best WWII military on paper. They had the best funding and equipment.

>undoubtedly the Wehrmacht was a better than any army
They lost the war. Why were they a better army ?
(not him btw)

>us dit not lose
>north vietnam conquered south vietnam
lmao they lost hard

Stupid Wehrmacht, nothing special about those idiots

Can't do a goddamn thing right

Hopefully we can recognise they weren't better than any other army

Endlessly proving themselves painfully average at the tactical level

because they took over europe and lasted years with split armies on 3 fronts, if they were able to have 1v1 war with russia they would have won without having to divert forces to italy, africa, normandy.

Hopefully these idiotic wehraboos can realise they lost the war, so they must have been shit

Really need to hammer it in so they stop

*teleports behind Paris*
Stay mad

>They had the best funding and equipment.

X: Doubt

>defeats most european armies
>lmao they were just romanticized anyone could do that

Behold, The Battle of Kursk! Where the German army proves the inferiority of its military in its greatest defeat of all time.

Second prize going to Stalingrad, where the inferiority of German tactics and training is laid bare and flayed again and again.

HAHAHAHA it only took us 2 years for our whole army to defeat a quarter of your army, how crap is the Wehrmacht honestly hahaha

All their forces were on the Eastern front, moron. And they did not even take Moscow, which the French did while lasting not 4 years but 25, in the same conditions: with the army splitted as fuck. And no allies.
But stay in denial.


I hope you realize we'll find more of the inverse. Also nice memes, fighting Russians against large odds is like fighting niggers in numbers. Sure the figures look impressive, but the conditions behind it... Have you got no pride?

On a serious and final note, the moral of this story is that the army itself was fine. It was tossed into a strategic shitstorm by the political leadership, in which it had minimal chance of success.

They did, however, achieve top prize in 20th century wikipedia screenshots.

>All their forces were on the Eastern front, moron

except it wasn't

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Campaign_(World_War_II)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_African_Campaign
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Front_(World_War_II)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkan_Campaign_(World_War_II)

...

Ah yes, the French army. The army cited as being the greatest and most advanced in Europe.

It's good they have at least one small-scale screenshot to share.

>one vs 2.5
>3 time more tanks, 5 time more artillery
>Supply lines are 4000 km long, under frozen roads and Polish resistance
>Still make a 3 K/D ratio
It's far from being the greatest defeat of all time, especially with the Italians being in the war.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hannut
:^)

No, you've got no shame. >Balkan campaign kept us from winning the waaaaaaaar :´´(

>we wuz great military n shieeet :´´(

Burger spotted. Burgers made this reputation, burgers made the new one after WWII. I still don't know why. We don't think highly of ourselves. But if you're interested in looking for it, regardless of american education, you wont find a more successful military in Europe.
Sadly.

user I love k/d ratios as much as the next guy, but in a strategic context this is where Germany lost the initiative once and for all. I suppose you could argue Bagration was a greater loss.

When I say 'greatest defeat', I mean the German army's greatest defeat.

>lol even if the german army didn't have to divert millions of men and equipment it still would have lost

you have no logic

>indecisive

we wuz victors n sheit

>you wont find a more successful military in Europe.
The OP strictly puts this in a 'Wehrmacht' context aka 1939-1945. I'm not going to bother with an 'of all time' discussion.

This. The "of all time (in Europe)" achievement would go to the Romans, hands down

stay mad

That's seriously debatable.

>WW2 Germany didn't conquer shit (except maybe France)
I'm not a Wehraboo but that's just fucking retarded

This is the part where you get
>but Russians are shit!

No it's not. I'm sorry, but Germany didn't defeat shit, that's a fact. Greece? Luxembourg? Serbia? Give me a fucking break, that's breakfast. If you're going to call yourself a major military, you need to have at least taken a few relevant cities. Not just Paris. They had some progress in Russia, which was good. But they were pushed back before taking any objective. Pretty shitty imo.

...

Lol, no it's not. It's really saddening. Look at this guy's mapItaly is shown the same way has half the German "conquests". But Italy, Finland, Vichy France, Romania, Croatia? They were allies. Not conquests. Dark blue: France, Benelux, Denmark and Norway, plus some Russian land, is what they really conquered. In it, only one major objective: Paris.

Now let's take a step back and compare with other European empires, shall we?

>Now let's take a step back and compare with other European empires, shall we?

>germany didn't conquer shit, serbia, denmark?

>now lets look at some real empires who conquered tribes and villagers

Daily reminder that you're dealing with this guy. He genuinely believes that the French beat Germans and liberated themselves. He also thinks French resistance was better than Yugoslavian or Polish one.

Veeky Forums is contrarian like every other board on Veeky Forums. Amateur historians elsewhere admire Germans, so Veeky Forums hates Germans. Amateur historians admire Rome, so Veeky Forums never shuts up about Byzantines. Veeky Forums is just layers of irony like everywhere else, but posters take it seriously.

>Amateur historians elsewhere admire Germans
Not even remotely true.

>All of North West Europe barring the UK
>Irrelevant, insignificant

You're fucking dumb

>Amateur historians admire Rome, so Veeky Forums never shuts up about Byzantines.

Outside of Leftist academic circles, you don't this level of anti-German butthurt anywhere else. Veeky Forums is full of contrarians.

try harded KIDF

No one sucks their dick either. Everyone is aware of their crimes.

You called Berliners tribes and villagers first. But I don't personally believe Vienna, Madrid or Moscow were filled with such.

You know a P*le when he compares Polish resistance to Yugoslavian one, and has disdain for the French, and France in general (but not Britain, though they were the ones that refused to go to war for them). Still mad Poland got its relevance from France, Mikhail?

Sure, and Belgium was so relevant it didn't fell in one night. NL was good, don't get me wrong. But when France has half the men Germany has, what is the NL going to do? It's just not on scale.

Krauts were zergrushing for the entire war

>Sure, and Belgium was so relevant it didn't fell in one night.

unlike france

Someone's mad France lasted twice longer in 1940 than Germany lasted in 1806 :)

>unified nation with (on paper) one of the strongest armies in the world at that point
>supported by the Brits
>shielded by one of the most massive fortifications ever seen
vs
>some divided duchies and small kingdoms lead by Austria
Mate, you're really not making a good case here

>US did not lost you fucking moron

Americans need to be banned from Veeky Forums.

>supported by the Brits who refused to engage, and pulled back when we were engaged. And open fired at French troops on several occasions, including Dunkirk.

>shielded by a massive fortification in the wrong place since Belgians did not want to provoke Germany (and so Belgians kept troops on the French border as well as on the German border. To be neutral.)

>Some divided duchies and small kingdoms lead by Austria, including the United Kingdom, an alliance of all German landers, Austria Hungary, and the Russian Empire on a war THEY started.

No, I'm not making a good case indeed.

>if they were able to have 1v1 war with russia

Without the oil from Romania, the steel from Scandinavia the chrome from Turkey and the million strong foreign fighters they got from all over Europe i am pretty sure they would be fucked even harder

GETS DEFEATED BY BONGS

>800 Germans vs 200 Poles
>about six battles with unknown figures
>zerg rushing
Really trying to fill out that meme, hey user?

without the shit allies they would have actually done better lol

>Brits who refused to engage, and pulled back when we were engaged. And open fired at French troops on several occasions
Based anglos at it again.
Also, don't forget Operations Catapult and Grasp

Ok then goodbye

Poland got its relevance by itself in 1919 dumbass.

Polish resistance was an actual thing created by Poles, unlike French "resistance" that didn't do anything during entire occupation.

Except it fucking was, you dumb fuck. Krauts literally had 5 Divisions in Africa. 90% of Wehrmacht was on the Eastern front in 1941-1943.

The fuck are you talking about, you krautaboo fuckstain? Russia crushed krauts by itself, and fought 90% of their army, not ''quartet''

Krautaboos need to be exterminated.

>russia
>by itself

wrong, without lend lease they would not have been able to launch big offensives as they did

Kursk was a Russian victory, you fuckstain. Krauts only attacked for 7 days. Then they reversed to defensive like fucking cowards they were, hence they high Soviet causalities.

LL was 4% of Russian production, dumb fuck.

What battle is that?

Jassy Kishinev

but 90% of its train equipment
40% of fuel
20% of tanks
50% of trucks etc. etc.

Its nothing.

>1919
>itself
Wow, surely nothing exterior to Poland could have had an impact just before. Like never.

How far into denial can you get?

Stay mad.

>it's another Tankie who acts like making allies turn on each other is a battle episode

It WAS a fucking battle you krautaboo sub-human. Just like Bagration where superior Red Army curbstomped Kraut scum.

>Kif, show them the medal I won

>But how could the Red Army be superior when it was filled with untermensch ?

t. Krauts that never built a thing

You are right, Slavic people were SUPERIOR to Krauts, and every battle from Kursk to Berlin proves that.

>or being a better army
If the german army of the night to Barbarossa and the Soviet army of the night to Bagration got teleported to an enormous battleground. Who would win in a fight?

No, they did not you dumb fuck. South Vietnam only got captured fucking 6 years after US withdrawal.

Why are you so mean against the Germans and racist against the Germans? :( That's very mean and wrong. ;( You murdered German babies in Dresden and you killed Germans and then made fun about it. I'm not a Nazi, Hitler was bad and the Holocaust was bad but you are being anti-German and anti-Wehrmacht and that is very mean and wrong.
You make me very sad and I am going to start crying over how anti-German you are being to them. :( Just stop please, the Germans are people too! Why are you being so anti-German and mean to them? Think about how many millions of German women were raped by the Russian Red Army and the allies destroying innocent defenseless German cities. :( Seriously just stop Veeky Forums, stop, I hate /pol/ and Hitler but this is just so mean and wrong for you to hate Germans and Germany, just stop please! :(

I want to see how kraut Pz III deal with Russia T34/85.

Krauts were murderous barbarians who mercilessly killed over 60 million people in BOTH world wars.

Well you saw how they dealt with the regular T-34. The answer is poorly.

Why are so many of the slavs around here so bad at English?

-because they were not invaded by them

But he is right. Zerg rushing is attacking unprepared opponents, and that's what Germans victories were about. Poland, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Belgium, Netherlands, USSR(Barbarossa). They only German victory arguably worth something was battle of France.