Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

Mightier military vis-a-vis the contemporary competition: Imperial Germany or Nazi Germany?

24567

Comments

  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,855
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW1 Imperial Germany
    Swaye said:

    I'm going with Hitler here. He bitch slapped Paul Von Hindenburg, the German military commander of WWI, into making him Chancellor in 1932. Hindenburg beat Hitler in the elections in 1932, regaining the Presidency, but that was just the first half. Hitler so fucked shit up after the elections that he forced Hindenburg to capitualte to his demands to make him Chancellor, rode it out until Hindy died the next year, and declared himself Der Furor! So independent of what their armies ever did, Hitler > Hindenburg. Winners win.

    Except that's not what we're debating here. Stay on topic Kemosabe.

    Consider: WWI was able to field the best fighter of the war - i.e., Fokker D7 and get it deployed in large numbers. Meanwhile, the Luftwaffe stepped on their dicks for all of WWII because they were being run by an incompetent, homo junkie. They had done test flights of the Me262 in 1941 and fucked around for 3 years before getting a few into combat by 1944. You think we could have bombed the shit our of Germany if they had a competent air force?
  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,855
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW1 Imperial Germany
    I'd love to get @BearsWiin 's hot take after he gets done looking at nothing special chicks at the gym and taking the kiddies to the beach. FTG and FML!!
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 101,159
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW2 Nazi Germany

    I'd love to get @BearsWiin 's hot take after he gets done looking at nothing special chicks at the gym and taking the kiddies to the beach. FTG and FML!!

    His take will be nothing special
  • Options
    BearsWiinBearsWiin Member Posts: 4,947
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    WW2 Nazi Germany

    I'd love to get @BearsWiin 's hot take after he gets done looking at nothing special chicks at the gym and taking the kiddies to the beach. FTG and FML!!

    Kiddies started school today, so I hit the gym early after I drove them and their friends in. Sirius dearth of special chicks; I think the young moms are all still on vaca roadtrips with they're preschool brats

    Both loosers. Who was better, Ty or Gilby?
  • Options
    Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 26,573
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    WW2 Nazi Germany
    dnc said:

    Swaye said:

    I'm going with Hitler here. He bitch slapped Paul Von Hindenburg, the German military commander of WWI, into making him Chancellor in 1932. Hindenburg beat Hitler in the elections in 1932, regaining the Presidency, but that was just the first half. Hitler so fucked shit up after the elections that he forced Hindenburg to capitualte to his demands to make him Chancellor, rode it out until Hindy died the next year, and declared himself Der Furor! So independent of what their armies ever did, Hitler > Hindenburg. Winners win.

    Except that's not what we're debating here. Stay on topic Kemosabe.

    Consider: WWI was able to field the best fighter of the war - i.e., Fokker D7 and get it deployed in large numbers. Meanwhile, the Luftwaffe stepped on their dicks for all of WWII because they were being run by an incompetent, homo junkie. They had done test flights of the Me262 in 1941 and fucked around for 3 years before getting a few into combat by 1944. You think we could have bombed the shit our of Germany if they had a competent air force?
    @CuntWaffle > Luftwaffe

  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,855
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW1 Imperial Germany
    I'll accept it. We're both Dan Carlin fan boys, of course.
  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,855
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW1 Imperial Germany
    Swaye said:

    Swaye said:

    I'm going with Hitler here. He bitch slapped Paul Von Hindenburg, the German military commander of WWI, into making him Chancellor in 1932. Hindenburg beat Hitler in the elections in 1932, regaining the Presidency, but that was just the first half. Hitler so fucked shit up after the elections that he forced Hindenburg to capitualte to his demands to make him Chancellor, rode it out until Hindy died the next year, and declared himself Der Furor! So independent of what their armies ever did, Hitler > Hindenburg. Winners win.

    Except that's not what we're debating here. Stay on topic Kemosabe.

    Consider: WWI was able to field the best fighter of the war - i.e., Fokker D7 and get it deployed in large numbers. Meanwhile, the Luftwaffe stepped on their dicks for all of WWII because they were being run by an incompetent, homo junkie. They had done test flights of the Me262 in 1941 and fucked around for 3 years before getting a few into combat by 1944. You think we could have bombed the shit our of Germany if they had a competent air force?
    Probably. The Cuntwaffle was designed around the CAS mission. They had no heavy bombers I can even think of. Their F/A Squadrons put the A in Attack. Not so much the F. They were built to support the Blitzkrieg, and they were HIGHLY effective in this role, but were MUCH less effective in a strategic role. Even the planes were designed for that role (short range). The RAF punched them in the nose over and over in A2A. I get your point, and I agree that better planes, designed more for A2A than CAS would certainly have helped, but even their training infrastructure was geared toward supporting infantry and tanks, not sustained air superiority engagements. So, in short, I think German losses in the air in WW2 had less to do with incompetent leadership than many think, and more to do with the role this air force was created to fulfill. Hell, I don't think the Germany military in general was built for a prolonged struggle. The Field Marshalls designed this thing to hit hard and quick, and win or lose just as fast.
    In the Pod, Carlin, describes Nazi Germany as being akin to Mike Tyson, and WWI Germany being more like Ali, Frazier, Foreman...
  • Options
    SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,060
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Founders Club
    WW2 Nazi Germany

    Swaye said:

    Swaye said:

    I'm going with Hitler here. He bitch slapped Paul Von Hindenburg, the German military commander of WWI, into making him Chancellor in 1932. Hindenburg beat Hitler in the elections in 1932, regaining the Presidency, but that was just the first half. Hitler so fucked shit up after the elections that he forced Hindenburg to capitualte to his demands to make him Chancellor, rode it out until Hindy died the next year, and declared himself Der Furor! So independent of what their armies ever did, Hitler > Hindenburg. Winners win.

    Except that's not what we're debating here. Stay on topic Kemosabe.

    Consider: WWI was able to field the best fighter of the war - i.e., Fokker D7 and get it deployed in large numbers. Meanwhile, the Luftwaffe stepped on their dicks for all of WWII because they were being run by an incompetent, homo junkie. They had done test flights of the Me262 in 1941 and fucked around for 3 years before getting a few into combat by 1944. You think we could have bombed the shit our of Germany if they had a competent air force?
    Probably. The Cuntwaffle was designed around the CAS mission. They had no heavy bombers I can even think of. Their F/A Squadrons put the A in Attack. Not so much the F. They were built to support the Blitzkrieg, and they were HIGHLY effective in this role, but were MUCH less effective in a strategic role. Even the planes were designed for that role (short range). The RAF punched them in the nose over and over in A2A. I get your point, and I agree that better planes, designed more for A2A than CAS would certainly have helped, but even their training infrastructure was geared toward supporting infantry and tanks, not sustained air superiority engagements. So, in short, I think German losses in the air in WW2 had less to do with incompetent leadership than many think, and more to do with the role this air force was created to fulfill. Hell, I don't think the Germany military in general was built for a prolonged struggle. The Field Marshalls designed this thing to hit hard and quick, and win or lose just as fast.
    In the Pod, Carlin, describes Nazi Germany as being akin to Mike Tyson, and WWI Germany being more like Ali, Frazier, Foreman...
    Good comparison. Now, all of my drivel above is not to say Germany didn't have some kick ass fighter pilots, because they did, but primarily they were built as a CAS arm of the military, which greatly affects everything from plane selection and design, to pilot training, to logistics, etc. They had many aces, and they did teach A2A, but that wasn't their focus, and it showed in sustained strategic engagements with the RAF and AAF.
  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,855
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW1 Imperial Germany
    Swaye said:

    Swaye said:

    Swaye said:

    I'm going with Hitler here. He bitch slapped Paul Von Hindenburg, the German military commander of WWI, into making him Chancellor in 1932. Hindenburg beat Hitler in the elections in 1932, regaining the Presidency, but that was just the first half. Hitler so fucked shit up after the elections that he forced Hindenburg to capitualte to his demands to make him Chancellor, rode it out until Hindy died the next year, and declared himself Der Furor! So independent of what their armies ever did, Hitler > Hindenburg. Winners win.

    Except that's not what we're debating here. Stay on topic Kemosabe.

    Consider: WWI was able to field the best fighter of the war - i.e., Fokker D7 and get it deployed in large numbers. Meanwhile, the Luftwaffe stepped on their dicks for all of WWII because they were being run by an incompetent, homo junkie. They had done test flights of the Me262 in 1941 and fucked around for 3 years before getting a few into combat by 1944. You think we could have bombed the shit our of Germany if they had a competent air force?
    Probably. The Cuntwaffle was designed around the CAS mission. They had no heavy bombers I can even think of. Their F/A Squadrons put the A in Attack. Not so much the F. They were built to support the Blitzkrieg, and they were HIGHLY effective in this role, but were MUCH less effective in a strategic role. Even the planes were designed for that role (short range). The RAF punched them in the nose over and over in A2A. I get your point, and I agree that better planes, designed more for A2A than CAS would certainly have helped, but even their training infrastructure was geared toward supporting infantry and tanks, not sustained air superiority engagements. So, in short, I think German losses in the air in WW2 had less to do with incompetent leadership than many think, and more to do with the role this air force was created to fulfill. Hell, I don't think the Germany military in general was built for a prolonged struggle. The Field Marshalls designed this thing to hit hard and quick, and win or lose just as fast.
    In the Pod, Carlin, describes Nazi Germany as being akin to Mike Tyson, and WWI Germany being more like Ali, Frazier, Foreman...
    Good comparison. Now, all of my drivel above is not to say Germany didn't have some kick ass fighter pilots, because they did, but primarily they were built as a CAS arm of the military, which greatly affects everything from plane selection and design, to pilot training, to logistics, etc. They had many aces, and they did teach A2A, but that wasn't their focus, and it showed in sustained strategic engagements with the RAF and AAF.
    GOAT?? 352 killz


  • Options
    SledogSledog Member Posts: 30,640
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Neither!

    America #1

    They both lost. Winning counts especially in war.
  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,855
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW1 Imperial Germany
    Sledog said:

    Neither!

    America #1

    They both lost. Winning counts especially in war.

    Sure winners win and loser lose. But still....it's not like the USA circa 1941- 45 could have defeated Germany mano y mano. Same with 1917 USA vs Germany. In either instance, other countries killed far more Germans than we did.
  • Options
    ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    WW2 Nazi Germany
    I’m taking WWII in this one. For me it boils down to innovation. No Navy? No problem. They can terrorize the Atlantic crossing with U-boats.

    Tanks were top notch. Artillery was super effective. Infantry was professional and motivated. And the blitz changed the game. If Hitler wasn’t such a dipshit strategically, his scientists would have developed nukes and then its game over. Instead he wasted half his army in Russia, and wasted resources on the V-2.

    I’d argue not finishing off England was their biggest mistake though. Without England as a staging ground, retaking Europe would have been really fucking hard. We didn’t exactly roll through Italy like we had hoped...
  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,855
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    WW1 Imperial Germany

    I’m taking WWII in this one. For me it boils down to innovation. No Navy? No problem. They can terrorize the Atlantic crossing with U-boats.

    Tanks were top notch. Artillery was super effective. Infantry was professional and motivated. And the blitz changed the game. If Hitler wasn’t such a dipshit strategically, his scientists would have developed nukes and then its game over. Instead he wasted half his army in Russia, and wasted resources on the V-2.

    I’d argue not finishing off England was their biggest mistake though. Without England as a staging ground, retaking Europe would have been really fucking hard. We didn’t exactly roll through Italy like we had hoped...

    Except wars are not usually won by technology and innovation alone. In other words these things don't mean shit if your political leadership sucks and you have poor strategy. Again, in WWI Germany's strategy came within a C-hair of winning twice- i.e., Aug of 1914 and Spring of 1918. Germany in WWII never got that close to winning.
Sign In or Register to comment.