Blogs 4 Brownback

July 14, 2007

Great Moments in French Military History

We shouldn’t forget to tip our hats to the geniuses who gave the freedom-loving peoples of Europe the Maginot Line.

Happy birthday, France, you incompetent poltroon of a nation!

(By the way, I have no idea what those Germans are saying, but I know what they’re talking about- French shock-surrender troops, otherwise known as catch-em-alive-o’s.)

40 Comments »

  1. It’s a German propaganda movie: the guy says that German troops have just conquered Paris and they’re now beginning their assault one the Maginot Line (which was so impenetrable the Germans had to invade through Belgium to go around it FYI.)

    Now that they’ve got all the time in the world the Germans are finishing off the line with bombers.

    Sisyphus, you have to understand that France held its own four 4 years during WWI and that during WWII Germany was the strongest military power in the world (yes, stronger than the Unites States or the Soviet Union at the time), due to their insane defense budget (German slogan: Cannons before butter.)

    Had the United States been next to Germany it would have been overrun as well.

    Comment by Skeptic — July 14, 2007 @ 10:14 am | Reply

  2. Rubbish. America wouldn’t have built a pointless wall, then left a corridor open to the sea. We’d have stopped the Germans at the Mississippi, at worst.

    Comment by Sisyphus — July 14, 2007 @ 10:15 am | Reply

  3. I thought October 27, 2005 was going to be the start of something great happening to France. God was just about ready to teach those pinko-commies a big lesson but there were just too many fire trucks. Next time the Lord won’t be go so easy on them.

    Comment by Mrs. T.D. Gaines-Crockett — July 14, 2007 @ 10:31 am | Reply

  4. “I thought October 27, 2005 was going to be the start of something great happening to France. God was just about ready to teach those pinko-commies a big lesson but there were just too many fire trucks. Next time the Lord won’t be go so easy on them.”

    You mean like New Orleans and the yearly hurricane season are signs that God doesn’t like America?

    Comment by Skeptic — July 14, 2007 @ 10:39 am | Reply

  5. Let them eat cake.

    Comment by Psycheout — July 14, 2007 @ 10:49 am | Reply

  6. Vive La France!

    Comment by Joan Dark — July 14, 2007 @ 11:41 am | Reply

  7. The French and Germans were the Sunnis and Shiites of the last century, mindlessly slaughtering each other at every opportunity. We saved them from themselves twice just as we will save the idiots in Iraq under the leadership of Presidents Bush and Brownback.

    Comment by dadaclu — July 14, 2007 @ 11:45 am | Reply

  8. Now honestly, NO ONE except the Germans realised how warfare had changed at the end of WWI. All others only implented their tactics for armor the reasoning that a single defensive line can´t hold the enemy AFTER the sickle cut.

    (Albeit the french were a bit weird with their predictment of the germans not coming through Belgium and the Netherlands. That was the way they used the two times before, too.)

    Rubbish. America wouldn’t have built a pointless wall, then left a corridor open to the sea. We’d have stopped the Germans at the Mississippi, at worst.

    Let´s see: The russian forces the Wehrmacht was assaulting in the beginning of Operation Barbarossa were far bigger than the US Army at that time. They got trampled beyond recognition and the push finally ended at the gates of Moscow stopped not by the Red Army but by the harsh winter.
    Sorry, the USA were VERY unlikely to survive in the french´s place, either.

    (By the way, I have no idea what those Germans are saying, but I know what they’re talking about- French shock-surrender troops, otherwise known as catch-em-alive-o’s.)

    They are talking about the heavy fighting that ensued when german infantry crossed the Rhine and managed it to take out the first line of bunkers.

    @Mrs. Crockett: Then sure the lord must hate the people in the bible belt, seeing that they´re right in Tornado Alley and hit by Tornadoes on an anual basis.

    @dadaclu: “Saved”? Like you “saved” eastern Germany in ´45? SOmehow I think people can do with out such “salvation”.

    Comment by PG — July 14, 2007 @ 12:43 pm | Reply

  9. SO why exactly are those blockqoutes again not working?

    [Ed Note: Well, if you spelled it “blockqoute” that would explain it. Fixed.]

    Comment by PG — July 14, 2007 @ 12:48 pm | Reply

  10. PG, you’ve got it exactly right. America just didn’t have the stomach for warfare in the late thirties. If they were right next to the Germans, they would’ve been trampled. You fail to realize that Hitler’s biggest mistake was signing a non-aggression pact with Russia, then invading it.d

    America’s defense spending was incredibly minimal during Hitler’s rise to power. Not only did the US have far less enlisted personnel than Germany, but their equipment was post-WWI at best. There’s a reason that all the best Allied hardware was of British origin: because the American military (navy notably excluded) was quite backward, poorly equipped, and decidedly un-advanced compared to the other Allies. Russia had sheer numbers and the killer T-34 tank, and Britain had an incredible air force and commandos (SAS), PLUS they invented Radar. Name any piece of US military hardware and I’ll name a better British equivalent.

    America’s army wasn’t terribly strong in WW2. In terms of population over enlistment, Canada had five times the personnel compared to America. Also, as a British Commonwealth, they had access to far better equipment, and had their own beach on Normandy (which went flawlessly. The slaughter on the American beaches, however, was a different story and was caused by command staff incompetence). And Russia fought far harder than any other nation.

    Sorry to break this egocentrism of yours, but you just weren’t that important.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 14, 2007 @ 1:13 pm | Reply

  11. “French shock-surrender troops, otherwise known as catch-em-alive-o’s.”

    Oh yeah? Like the “valiant” American army? The guys who complain because the Playstation 3s sent there ahead of production for them to play didn’t work properly? The guys who talk to their families everyday with satellite phones and the Internet, play with PSPs and iPods and generally live like frat boys most of the time? Yeah, they’re SO much more courageous than the French who battled to the death for their homeland. Here’s a more realistic taste:

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 14, 2007 @ 1:58 pm | Reply

  12. Adamnelson,
    Weren’t Fat Man and Little Boy pieces of U.S. military equipment?

    Comment by Dadaclu — July 14, 2007 @ 2:14 pm | Reply

  13. The Germans had their own nuclear program long before the States, but never came of anything. Later, it was determnined that Werner Heisenberg, the great German scientist, was passively sabotaging the project. If it weren’t for that, the Germans would’ve arrived with a bomb long before the Americans.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 14, 2007 @ 2:37 pm | Reply

  14. “The French and Germans were the Sunnis and Shiites of the last century, mindlessly slaughtering each other at every opportunity.”

    That’s an excellent point. Even the moonbats should understand that this is why the current war in Iraq is like WWII.

    “Let´s see: The russian forces the Wehrmacht was assaulting in the beginning of Operation Barbarossa were far bigger than the US Army at that time. They got trampled beyond recognition and the push finally ended at the gates of Moscow stopped not by the Red Army but by the harsh winter.”

    That’s because Stalin put them all at the border. When they were overrun, he marched all reinforcements forward. When they were surrounded, he sent more reinforcements forward. Do you think the Germans won because they were supermen, or won’t you maybe concede that Stalin’s idiocy had a hand in it too?

    “America’s army wasn’t terribly strong in WW2.”

    Yeah, 15 million is a tiny, tiny military.

    “In terms of population over enlistment, Canada had five times the personnel compared to America.”

    That’s because Canada had about 57 people. If 30 of them enlisted, it was the largest military commitment in world history- per capita.

    “Also, as a British Commonwealth, they had access to far better equipment, and had their own beach on Normandy (which went flawlessly. The slaughter on the American beaches, however, was a different story and was caused by command staff incompetence).”

    Mostly, it was caused because the Americans faced the only decent German force on the Normandy coastline at the time. The British and Canadians faced Baltic conscripts; the Americans faced an actual German division. Thanks for spitting on the American dead, though. Classy.

    “And Russia fought far harder than any other nation.”

    Yes, they did. With American equipment, against a country whose economy had been pounded into rubble by the Americans and British. Do you think they walked from Stalingrad to Germany? Do you think they’d have had such an easy time of it without our trucks, against an opponent with a pristine military production infrastructure?

    “The Germans had their own nuclear program long before the States, but never came of anything. Later, it was determnined that Werner Heisenberg, the great German scientist, was passively sabotaging the project. If it weren’t for that, the Germans would’ve arrived with a bomb long before the Americans.”

    Oh, I get it now. You and PG live in an alternate dimension where the Nazis won the war. You’re here to teach us why your dimension is superior to ours, and why the German Army was the greatest Army in the whole world. Morons.

    Comment by Sisyphus — July 14, 2007 @ 5:05 pm | Reply

  15. I’ve read the French surrendered so quickly because the French leaders though the commies would take over if they kept fighting the Germans. Well they couldn’t even that part right, just look at the French government, not a Republican in office.

    Comment by BJ Tabor — July 14, 2007 @ 5:58 pm | Reply

  16. Sisyphus, you and BJ (wonder what that stands for?) can enact whatever historical revisionism you wish, but that doesn’t make you right. Nobody denies that the Americans screwed up their beaches at Normandy. They screwed up the bombing runs, they screwed up the naval bombardment, and they screwed up their land assault. The only reason they were successful was because the Wermacht was distracted by the (literally) cardboard army set up by the British on the other side of the continent, making it appear as if a force twice its size was attacking from the other direction.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 14, 2007 @ 7:28 pm | Reply

  17. BJ stands for “Bobby Joe” Adam. Please keep what ever perverted though you had to yourself sicko.

    “can enact whatever historical revisionism you wish”

    The French government being more concerned about fighting French communists than German Nazis is hardly revisionist history. See the book “Delivered from Evil” by Robert Leike. The only revisionism going on is it the denial it was your ideological brothers on the left that undermined the West in the fighting Hitler at the beginning of the war as a way to make us all commies.

    As for Normandy at lest we didn’t get run into the sea like somebody’s Canadian army did at Dieppe.

    Comment by BJ Tabor — July 14, 2007 @ 7:53 pm | Reply

  18. Adam Nelson,
    Whatever point you may be trying to make doesn’t require you to insult our troops in Iraq. Why don’t you get your sorry cowardly ass over there and see how the frat party is going.

    Comment by Dadaclu — July 14, 2007 @ 8:04 pm | Reply

  19. That’s an excellent point. Even the moonbats should understand that this is why the current war in Iraq is like WWII.

    Not nearly. The sunnis and shiites are not single nations. And they don´t have any huge armies, but a score of militias. It´s a civil war, just like the whole mess on the Balcans was. With the differrence that we´ve got plenty of religious motivations here.

    That’s because Stalin put them all at the border. When they were overrun, he marched all reinforcements forward. When they were surrounded, he sent more reinforcements forward. Do you think the Germans won because they were supermen, or won’t you maybe concede that Stalin’s idiocy had a hand in it too?

    Never said that it didn´t. But then again, the US Army at that time was still a WWI army just like the french, the poles or the russians. And even smaller than what the french or russians had. No chance, no chance.

    That’s because Canada had about 57 people. If 30 of them enlisted, it was the largest military commitment in world history- per capita.

    And still the Canadian divisions were those that were respected/feared the most by german troops, save for the russians.

    Mostly, it was caused because the Americans faced the only decent German force on the Normandy coastline at the time. The British and Canadians faced Baltic conscripts; the Americans faced an actual German division. Thanks for spitting on the American dead, though. Classy.</i<

    And because the bombers dropped too late and because the DD tanks were a flop. Add communications problems and several higgins boats missing their landing zone and you´ve got a disaster waiting to happen.

    Yes, they did. With American equipment, against a country whose economy had been pounded into rubble by the Americans and British. Do you think they walked from Stalingrad to Germany? Do you think they’d have had such an easy time of it without our trucks, against an opponent with a pristine military production infrastructure?

    Actually, more than 90% of their hardware was produced by them. The most important part of the Lend-Lease for them were the food rations that helped them through the winter in ´41.

    Oh, I get it now. You and PG live in an alternate dimension where the Nazis won the war. You’re here to teach us why your dimension is superior to ours, and why the German Army was the greatest Army in the whole world. Morons.

    Actually no (outcome) and yes (best army). If they had not been the best, why did it take 53 nations, including 3 superpowers, more than 3 years (I´m counting from the time the US entered the war.) to get ´em down?

    I’ve read the French surrendered so quickly because the French leaders though the commies would take over if they kept fighting the Germans. Well they couldn’t even that part right, just look at the French government, not a Republican in office.

    Sarkozy is hardly a liberal…

    As for Normandy at lest we didn’t get run into the sea like somebody’s Canadian army did at Dieppe.

    Which was planned as a small raid anyway, with the intelligence screwing it up. And the lesson learned there made the outcome of D-Day possible.

    Comment by PG — July 15, 2007 @ 3:35 am | Reply

  20. “As for Normandy at lest we didn’t get run into the sea like somebody’s Canadian army did at Dieppe.”

    Dieppe was never meant to be a success.
    The generals sacrificed those men with the sole intention of testing the German defenses.

    “Whatever point you may be trying to make doesn’t require you to insult our troops in Iraq. Why don’t you get your sorry cowardly ass over there and see how the frat party is going.”

    Just watch the video and then tell me your proud of those soldiers acting like frat boys…

    Comment by Skeptic — July 15, 2007 @ 5:52 am | Reply

  21. I watched that video Adam Nelson linked to and all I thought was that it was really cute. If our troops can get those lazy Iraqi children doing something other than watching Atari all day then good for them.

    Comment by Mrs. T.D. Gaines-Crockett — July 15, 2007 @ 6:22 am | Reply

  22. “I watched that video Adam Nelson linked to and all I thought was that it was really cute. If our troops can get those lazy Iraqi children doing something other than watching Atari all day then good for them.”

    What alternative reality do you live in?

    Those Iraqi children are glad if they have enough to eat, they don’t have Atari.

    And that kid was running for the water because he was probably too poor to get his own.

    Mrs. T.D. Gaines-Crockett, enjoying a child’s suffering is very, very un-Christian!

    Comment by Skeptic — July 15, 2007 @ 6:33 am | Reply

  23. I happen to live in America, where the people who truly love this country support the troops 100%. I don’t for one second think that child looked like he was starving or lacking one thing besides some excercise. We have been feeding, protecting, and sacrificing our own for those ungrateful people going on seven years now. It’s time to get them off of their butts and doing for themselves for a change – just like that HERO was doing by teaching those children how to run.

    Don’t you dare lecture me on patriotism or Christianity you foreign hypocrite.

    Comment by Mrs. T.D. Gaines-Crockett — July 15, 2007 @ 6:46 am | Reply

  24. “It’s time to get them off of their butts and doing for themselves for a change – just like that HERO was doing by teaching those children how to run.”

    Well, you are now officially the most horrible person in the world. Seriously, you make Hitler blush. You are SO delusional that you think a bunch of idiot hick soldiers teasing a child with WATER (not chocolate, not some toy, but a necessity of life!) are heroes. Well, Gaines-Crockett, how about after you’ve cleaned the kitchen and delivered yout 16th baby, YOU go down there and fight? I’ve served. Why haven’t you?

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 15, 2007 @ 6:57 am | Reply

  25. PG @ “Never said that it didn´t. But then again, the US Army at that time was still a WWI army just like the french, the poles or the russians. And even smaller than what the french or russians had. No chance, no chance.”

    More liberal revisionism; the Soviet Union at the outbreak of war with Germany had vastly more armor and better quality armor than the Germans did. You just don’t want to admit that your Communist brothers make terrible soldiers PG.

    The communists, and therefore the left, betrayed France to the Nazis to gain control and led the Soviet army to defeat. Thank God Jesus got President Eisenhower to get us into WWII when he did or Germany would have won the war.

    Comment by BJ Tabor — July 15, 2007 @ 8:58 am | Reply

  26. More liberal revisionism; the Soviet Union at the outbreak of war with Germany had vastly more armor and better quality armor than the Germans did. You just don’t want to admit that your Communist brothers make terrible soldiers PG.

    And they got hammered that badly because their tactical doctrines and the way their army was organised was still WWI-style. Just like the US Army in 1942.

    The communists, and therefore the left, betrayed France to the Nazis to gain control and led the Soviet army to defeat. Thank God Jesus got President Eisenhower to get us into WWII when he did or Germany would have won the war.

    Except that the pendulum was already swinging back before you even entered the continent….

    @Gaines-Crockett: Supporting the troops means not supporting every idiot inside the Army playing such cruel tricks on people. Every army has it´s foul apples and here we can see some of the US Army. (And iraqui kids playing Atari? In what world do you live? Those guys wouldn´t run like that for the water if they weren´t desperately short of it.)

    Comment by PG — July 15, 2007 @ 9:34 am | Reply

  27. “More liberal revisionism; the Soviet Union at the outbreak of war with Germany had vastly more armor and better quality armor than the Germans did. You just don’t want to admit that your Communist brothers make terrible soldiers PG.”

    More conservative revisionism. The Soviets had less armour and much older/lower quality armour. The only substantially good armour they produced wa the T-34 tank, and that was mobilized in late 1940. Before that they only had T-26 light tanks and BT series IFVs that were thin-skinned, poor combatants, and even had troubles with their engines bursting into flames!

    “The communists, and therefore the left, betrayed France to the Nazis to gain control and led the Soviet army to defeat. Thank God Jesus got President Eisenhower to get us into WWII when he did or Germany would have won the war.”

    First off, you say that both commies and Nazis are left, though they were opposite political parties and hated each other. So one or the other is conservative, which would be Nazism, though communism bears certain Right traits as well. And Russia betrayed nobody: they signed a non-aggression pact before Germany invaded France. Led the Soviet army to defeat? Uh, it was the Soviet army that single-handedly pushed back 80 percent of the Wermacht and broke their backs in the European theatre.
    Sourced: Erickson, John. The Road to Stalingrad: Stalin’s War with Germany, Vol. 1. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1984 (hardcover, ISBN 0-86531-744-5); New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1985 (hardcover, ISBN 0-586-06408-7); New Haven, CT; London: Yale University Press, 1999 (paperback, ISBN 0-300-07812-9); London: Cassell, 2003 (paperback, ISBN 0-304-36541-6).

    BJ, we all know you say things just to incite flame wars. Nobody actually pays attention to what you say, unless they want an easy way to refute you (like me!). Read a book before you open your mouth.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 15, 2007 @ 10:30 am | Reply

  28. And still the Canadian divisions were those that were respected/feared the most by german troops, save for the russians.”

    Only because no one treated POWs worse than the Canadians, except the Russians. Don’t believe me? Read John Keegan sometime. There were whole Canadian divisions that didn’t take prisoners, especially when fighting the SS. Who would’ve thought their grandchildren would one day chastise Americans for lesser shenanigans?

    “More conservative revisionism. The Soviets had less armour and much older/lower quality armour. The only substantially good armour they produced wa the T-34 tank, and that was mobilized in late 1940. Before that they only had T-26 light tanks and BT series IFVs that were thin-skinned, poor combatants, and even had troubles with their engines bursting into flames!”

    The German tanks were awful at that phase in the war, too. The Mark II was particularly pathetic. Even the French had more tanks of superior quality than the Germans did, although they penny-pinched them off to their infantry divisions and tended not to equip them with radios. Bottom line is, Germany didn’t have any substantially superior technological advantage over its opponents. Its troops were willing to fight harder, and it happened to have the single greatest 20th century general, Heinz Guderian. (Well, him or Paul Kagame, what led the RPF to victory in 1994.) Beyond that, there’s nothing for Germany to boast about. They fought a two-front war and lost. America single-handedly defeated Japan while all these fun and games were going on in Europe. America also armed Russia (the T-34 tank was an American design, for starters), kept Britain in the war, knocked Italy out of it, and saved France from her own cowardly puppet government. We also saved most of Germany from Communism. Our thanks come from people like PG, who thump their chests in moral pride and look down their noses at the supposed foibles of the American military. Well, your glorious military inherits the legacy of the 6th Army helping the Einsatzgruppen ferry Jews to Babi Yar. It inherits the legacy of being a willing accomplice to the murder of 11 million people. Heck, there wouldn’t even have been a Nazi party if your noble Army hadn’t been funding Freikorps militants and Socialist anti-Semitic extremists.

    I know the modern German military claims to be different. Very convenient for them, especially since they’ve had little opportunity to actually prove it in battle. Personally, I just think it’s funny that the Germans feel they can hoard morality over ANYONE’s head any time for the next 1,000 years or so. I also think maybe Churchill had the right idea- we should have de-militarized, de-industrialized, and re-pastoralized Germany when we had the chance. Then we should have let Stalin take the whole thing over. Given them something substantive to whine at us about.

    Comment by Sisyphus — July 16, 2007 @ 6:44 am | Reply

  29. Sisyphus, you raise some excellent points, but some things I’d like to point out

    The T-34 was not an American design, actually, and much as the Panzer IV and later Panzers and King Tigers were custom tailored by Hitler, the T-34 was specified by talin himself to combat the incredibly heavy armour and startling mobility of the Wermacht’s line tanks. If there’s one thing that the Germans excelled at, it was armour. The Panzer IV and later were incredibly heavily-armoured and very fast, and the T-34’s 70mm gun (later an 85mm) was designed specifically to punch through their armour. Its designer was a Belgian company called Харківське Конструкторське Бюро по Mашинобудуванню, or simply abbreviated KMDB, who designed the T-44s and T-54s from recaptured factories at the end of the war as well.

    Also, to show the Russian equipment as constantly cut-corner and less advanced, even their new battletanks were very spartan. Only the division leaders had radios, and their engines, while not prone to bursting into flames like gasoline engines of the day, were still very difficult to maintain.

    A modern comparison between the Russian and German armed forces today would be the American and Chinese forces. While America (like Germany) has stupendous weapons, large budgets and able and willing personnel, the Chinese (like Russia) are ridiculously huge in number, are slightly backward in tactics (watching Korea for 50 years would do that) and are in the process of modernizing their army right now.

    Also, you’re right about Germany being on the wrong side of the fence to talk to anybody about morals, but that just goes to show what happens when an extremist government comes into power playing on people’s fears in a time of crisis. Many blame Hitler alone, or his top command staff for the atrocities, but somebody had to pull the trigger, and almost everybody was guilty then of allowing Hitler to come to power.

    I suggest you read (and watch!) V for Vendetta sometime. It shows a very interesting world where a modern-day Hitler comes to power and the lines between terrorist and freedom-fighter are blurred.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 16, 2007 @ 7:23 am | Reply

  30. “The T-34 was not an American design”

    The chassis was Walter Christie’s idea. I forget who came up with the slanting armor, but I don’t think it was Stalin personally.

    If there’s one thing that the Germans excelled at, it was armour.”

    They excelled a little too much. They overdiversified, and supplying ammunition for the assortment of tank cannons became a miniature logistical nightmare. The Soviets only needed two things- fuel for T-34s, and ammo for T-34s. The Germans had a different calibre gun on nearly every tank model. By 1944, it was chaos, and cost them a great deal of operational efficiency and tactical mobility.

    “A modern comparison between the Russian and German armed forces today would be the American and Chinese forces. While America (like Germany) has stupendous weapons, large budgets and able and willing personnel, the Chinese (like Russia) are ridiculously huge in number, are slightly backward in tactics (watching Korea for 50 years would do that) and are in the process of modernizing their army right now.”

    I’m not worried about war with China, though. We invented Claymore mines to deal with that specific problem. No more human wave attacks will overrun our lines again, any time soon. Anyway, I fully expect China to fall apart long before they become a military threat to us. After the next earthquake takes out the Three Gorge Dam and kills 10 or 20 million people, drowning Shanghai, I think the government is going to collapse along with the economy.

    “Many blame Hitler alone, or his top command staff for the atrocities, but somebody had to pull the trigger, and almost everybody was guilty then of allowing Hitler to come to power.”

    It’s a sad thing, isn’t it? I can’t add much to the theological, philosophical, and ethical debates that have circled the topic for the last 60 years, though. Let’s hear PG’s take on it. He gets bonus points if he refrains from trashing the United States or its military in his analysis. If his track record is any indication, he will not acquire those bonus points.

    “I suggest you read (and watch!) V for Vendetta sometime. It shows a very interesting world where a modern-day Hitler comes to power and the lines between terrorist and freedom-fighter are blurred.”

    Thanks. I’ll get around to renting it one of these days. Work’s killing me now, though. Hence, the dearth of blogging.

    Comment by Sisyphus — July 16, 2007 @ 7:46 am | Reply

  31. sysiphus you don’t know hwat you’re talkin ’bout.

    “America wouldn’t have built a pointless wall”

    neither was the maginot line a ‘wall’ nor was it ‘pointless’ and the french did NOT leave a corridor to the sea.

    1.like the german in the video says was the maginot line impregnable, up to the point when german troops stood behind it. so there was a whole big point.
    2. the corridor to the sea is also could belgium, the netherlands, and luxembourg. three countries between germany and france, who were neutral. the problems were that hitler didn’t give a fig that those countries were neutral and invaded them anyway, and that the french weren’t such lollypop suckers and did not invade other countries to extend their maginot line.

    so think again, you brainless boy and THEN write!

    [Ed Note: I know Germans have bad tempers and love to swear, but please watch your potty mouth. This is a family-friendly site, not Germany.]

    Comment by Matou — July 16, 2007 @ 9:55 am | Reply

  32. “The French and Germans were the Sunnites and Shiites of the last century, mindlessly slaughtering each other at every opportunity.”

    bull crap. the french and germans might have slaughtered each other like shiites and sunnites, but not durng the last century. the ‘brother wars’ between france and germany took place during the middle age. later there’s no parallel between shiites, sunnites, germans and french. the three latest wars between germany and france (WWI, WWII + German French War during the late 19th century) where because of the gemran want to expand in europe and later to rule europe/the world.

    so there isn’t any religious conflict involded. the fighting between france and europe could be described as similiar to America’s ‘interventions’ in iraq during the last twenty years.

    but oh well, your historical knowledge is probably as shotty as sysiphos’s

    [Ed Note: Potty language is not allowed here. This is a family website.]

    Comment by Matou — July 16, 2007 @ 10:05 am | Reply

  33. “The chassis was Walter Christie’s idea. I forget who came up with the slanting armor, but I don’t think it was Stalin personally.”

    Well Christie was responsible for having his two Christie tank designs sold to the USSR (erroneously documented as tractors), and the Russians used the template to create their BT tank. The sloping armour was, in fact, Christie’s idea. And I guess that since the T-34 (and later the 85 designation) were evolutions of the BT series, then Christie’s work led to the T-34. Also, he designed the suspension system especially for the T-34 85.

    “I’m not worried about war with China, though. We invented Claymore mines to deal with that specific problem. No more human wave attacks will overrun our lines again, any time soon. Anyway, I fully expect China to fall apart long before they become a military threat to us. After the next earthquake takes out the Three Gorge Dam and kills 10 or 20 million people, drowning Shanghai, I think the government is going to collapse along with the economy.”

    That’s the thing, though, isn’t it? Warfare has changed so much in the last 60 years, and since there hasn’t been total war in the First World, nobody’s really sure what would happen. Both the US and China are nuclear powers with sophisticated delivery systems, but I think China has less qualms about turning other countries into molten glass than the US does. Thier nuclear arsenal and their willingness to use it frightens me the most, much more so than their incredible manpower. Also, it would be next to impossible to occupy/annex China, in part because of their numbers, but also because they’re a propaganda state whose citizens realize everything their leaders say as ultimate truth. It would be many times more bloody for the occupiers than Iraq.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 16, 2007 @ 10:29 am | Reply

  34. oh sysiphus:
    “After the next earthquake takes out the Three Gorge Dam and kills 10 or 20 million people, drowning Shanghai, I think the government is going to collapse along with the economy.”

    fo you really think an earthquake that would kill 10 to 20 million people, let’s say, tomorrow would bother china? do you really think that? please do some math. china doesn’t give a shot about 20 million dead people, it doesn’t have to.

    [Ed Note: No more potty language, please!]

    Comment by Matou — July 16, 2007 @ 10:40 am | Reply

  35. @ editor (or ‘ed note’):

    honestly, i don’t think you know anything…

    [Ed Note: Funny, because it’s obvious that you know nothing other than how to be a filthy potty mouth.]

    Comment by Matou — July 16, 2007 @ 12:21 pm | Reply

  36. “Well Christie was responsible for having his two Christie tank designs sold to the USSR (erroneously documented as tractors), and the Russians used the template to create their BT tank. The sloping armour was, in fact, Christie’s idea. And I guess that since the T-34 (and later the 85 designation) were evolutions of the BT series, then Christie’s work led to the T-34. Also, he designed the suspension system especially for the T-34 85.”

    Thanks, I’d forgotten he designed the armor too, then. So, it sounds like he more or less designed the whole thing, although he was undoubtedly providing something Stalin was looking for- a tough, rugged, well-armored tank.

    “That’s the thing, though, isn’t it? Warfare has changed so much in the last 60 years, and since there hasn’t been total war in the First World, nobody’s really sure what would happen. Both the US and China are nuclear powers with sophisticated delivery systems, but I think China has less qualms about turning other countries into molten glass than the US does. Thier nuclear arsenal and their willingness to use it frightens me the most, much more so than their incredible manpower. Also, it would be next to impossible to occupy/annex China, in part because of their numbers, but also because they’re a propaganda state whose citizens realize everything their leaders say as ultimate truth. It would be many times more bloody for the occupiers than Iraq.”

    I can’t envision such a war occurring in a non-nuclear context. As far as naval sparring over Taiwan goes, we’d win it hands down. America hasn’t faced a credible naval threat since Leyte Gulf. (If not Midway, our Trafalgar.) Our air forces could destroy everything of value from the skies, but then what? Bogging ourselves down in a land war would be foolish and costly. Once we’d taken the seas and pounded China’s infrastructure into rubble, I think we’d either have to make peace or nuke them. I don’t think we could occupy a country like that. Maybe we could chop it up piecemeal, though- support Tibetan/Sinkiang independence movements, let Vietnam advance its frontier north, give Russia Manchuria, etc. Still, that doesn’t even begin to address the manpower deficit. It’s hard to see how we could win that one. Then again, I don’t think China could successfully occupy America, even if they somehow magically wiped out our Army, Navy, and Air Force.

    “fo you really think an earthquake that would kill 10 to 20 million people, let’s say, tomorrow would bother china? do you really think that? please do some math. china doesn’t give a shot about 20 million dead people, it doesn’t have to.”

    Yes, I do, if those 20 million people happened to be in the most important cities in the nation. What do you think, they’d all be laughing about it and shrugging their shoulders?

    Comment by Sisyphus — July 16, 2007 @ 12:40 pm | Reply

  37. Matou, I don’t think YOU know anything, especially how to spell Sisyphus.

    Remember the 2004 Indian Ocean Earthquake? That resulted in over 220 000 CASUALTIES (casualties just means somebody killed, injured or displaced; killed would be less), and the entire world mourned their loss. Now try multiplying the losses by 100 and see the reaction.
    The entire world would sympathize with China, potentially giving them unlimited leverage. Granted, they probably wouldn’t be so despicable as to use a grave national disaster to their geopolitical advantage, but the possibility is always there.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 16, 2007 @ 12:41 pm | Reply

  38. “As far as naval sparring over Taiwan goes, we’d win it hands down. America hasn’t faced a credible naval threat since Leyte Gulf. (If not Midway, our Trafalgar.) Our air forces could destroy everything of value from the skies”

    I wouldn’t be so sure about that, Sukhoi fighters pose a credible threat, and they’d outnumber you gravely (a handful of carriers and a Japanese airbase against almost the entire Chinese airforce and anti air defenses.)
    Don’t underestimate the Chinese subs either.

    Comment by Skeptic — July 17, 2007 @ 7:41 pm | Reply

  39. “I wouldn’t be so sure about that, Sukhoi fighters pose a credible threat, and they’d outnumber you gravely (a handful of carriers and a Japanese airbase against almost the entire Chinese airforce and anti air defenses.)
    Don’t underestimate the Chinese subs either.”

    That’s just it, isn’t it? Even the newer F-22 and JSF can’t hold a candle to the flight characteristics of craft like the Su-34 and others that are VERY numerous in their fleet.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — July 18, 2007 @ 8:36 am | Reply

  40. Only because no one treated POWs worse than the Canadians, except the Russians. Don’t believe me? Read John Keegan sometime. There were whole Canadian divisions that didn’t take prisoners, especially when fighting the SS. Who would’ve thought their grandchildren would one day chastise Americans for lesser shenanigans?

    Only with the SS and that´s a special story as those two had a real grudge.
    Otherwise, they were renowned for being the toughest enemies one could face on the whole eastern front.

    America single-handedly defeated Japan while all these fun and games were going on in Europe.

    Fun and games that make the Pacific War look like kindergarden…

    I’m not worried about war with China, though. We invented Claymore mines to deal with that specific problem. No more human wave attacks will overrun our lines again, any time soon. Anyway, I fully expect China to fall apart long before they become a military threat to us. After the next earthquake takes out the Three Gorge Dam and kills 10 or 20 million people, drowning Shanghai, I think the government is going to collapse along with the economy.

    Dream on. The chinese government has survived worse scenarios than that. And their military isn´t human wave anymore, either. They´re actually transforming into a decent modern army of quite a size.

    “Many blame Hitler alone, or his top command staff for the atrocities, but somebody had to pull the trigger, and almost everybody was guilty then of allowing Hitler to come to power.”

    WIthout a doubt, there were many people supporting the bastard. The number fell during the war when people saw what a madman he was, though. And then, he seemed rather harmless in the beginning. If you would travel back in time and tell anyone in 1930 what this guy will do, he would most likely laugh at you.

    @Sceptic: YOu forgot that the newest artillery-rockets and cruise missiles of the chinese could reach Taiwan rather easily, eliminating it as a real base.

    Comment by PG — July 20, 2007 @ 3:22 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: