"I actually agree with what Hitler's thinking here." And that, my children, is why context is really, really, REALLY important.

@robinschicha4712

4 жыл бұрын

😅

@recusantcatholicgroyper101

4 жыл бұрын

And?

@flosset9640

4 жыл бұрын

lmfai

@blake-GD

4 жыл бұрын

@@recusantcatholicgroyper101 there is no and attention seeker 🤷‍♂️

@tjb_6203

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah everyone gave me funny looks when I said this during the Holocaust documentary

"So I actually agree with what Hitler is saying here" -Mr. Terry 2019

@endersdragon34

4 жыл бұрын

Get rid of the last word and it sounds better

@sinoroman

4 жыл бұрын

Hitler: "water is wet" Mr. Terry: "I agree with that Hitler says" Europeans: "You WHAT?!"

@markdillon7543

4 жыл бұрын

@@sinoroman Why just Europeans?

@TheSpanishDon1

4 жыл бұрын

Out of context but ok

@kurumachikuroe442

4 жыл бұрын

On this episode of things taken out of context...

If only the nazis didn't fire the employee who made the indestructible drone

@pyromasteralex

4 жыл бұрын

Employee: hey boss i built this indestructible drone just think what we could do with it! Boss: ... tim, your fired, the world isn't ready for this kind of technology yet, now i have to find somewhere nobody would find it. Tim: b-but Boss: fired.

@thatbird9600

4 жыл бұрын

Under rated comment

@martinthedrainedsedlak

4 жыл бұрын

He was fired because he based the drone off of Nazi blueprints

@dimdimbramantyo7666

3 жыл бұрын

Who, General Wilhelm Strasse?

@donjoey22

3 жыл бұрын

just like how they exiled the jews, their greatest scientists, and lost them to the us.

"Germany should have just build more stuff" Has the same energy as "If your homeless just get a house"

@nickvalentine7443

3 жыл бұрын

Except you can build a house with scraps and a stick, which two Indian guys did.

@PresidentFunnyValentine

3 жыл бұрын

@@nickvalentine7443 Yeah, but the Germans weren't Indians now were they?

@marxel4444

2 жыл бұрын

germany had enough stuff. but no fuel to run it. Like having all electronic devives you could possible need but only batteries to run 3 at a time.

@TheArrowedKnee

2 жыл бұрын

@@marxel4444 I mean they really didn't. They needed more tanks and planes especially to beat the Soviet Union, but obviously that would be pointless in reality, since they didn't wouldn't have the fuel to run them.

@plusxz821

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickvalentine7443 Whys aren't you rich it's so easy to build a company and get your first million bro

You can laugh at the tank camouflage. But I served in a tank for three years. Trust me, it works

@shmeckle666

4 жыл бұрын

rafi sanders especially against aircraft and if used with other tactics of concealment.

@darthimperious1594

4 жыл бұрын

@@shmeckle666 Took the words out of my mouth. The camouflage was for when they heard aircraft approaching, they would stop moving and the aircraft were too high up to really get a good idea as to what they were seeing. If the aircraft did come low enough to see through the camouflage, they'd be exposing themselves to anti-air fire.

@shmeckle666

4 жыл бұрын

Erik Cedergren indeed. And an aircraft only needs to be hit very timed with automatic fire-whereas a tank/armored vehicle needs much more than a few heavy automatic fire rounds to mission-kill/destroy it.

@marquisdelafayette1929

4 жыл бұрын

Dude the movie Fury must piss you off. Like in a “tank” battle with the German concealed they take out the last and middle first? Not first and last so no one can move? And they act like they are death traps when the US made like 69,000 Sherman’s to the 2000 Tigers that were a mess mechanically. So on paper “losing” a few thousand Sherman’s sounds bad while the Nazis “only” lost 900 Tigers. It doesn’t tell nearly he whole story.

@HECKproductions

4 жыл бұрын

not if you are moving down a giant open space like in that clip

They always ask: "what if nazis had nukes?" But they never ask: "how could nazis get nukes?"

@cookiejack2884

4 жыл бұрын

Towards the end of the war how would they use nukes?

@unknown__7753

4 жыл бұрын

Look up heavy water......then slap yourself.

@delacruzstudios9515

4 жыл бұрын

DerpDeHerp Pop n Stuff Vermork Heavy Water Plant

@HECKproductions

4 жыл бұрын

maybe through the german scientists who eventually constructed the nuke?

@Violetenist

4 жыл бұрын

@@HECKproductions will they even make one?

Germany only lost because they were too busy fighting vampires and Aztec gods

@lazush2066

4 жыл бұрын

is that a motherfucking jojo reference???!!1111 hello my fellow jojo fan. Polnareff x Kakyoin handshake intensifies

@NetoKruzer

4 жыл бұрын

Thats the real reason... Those UV lights were very expensive...

@ANKAMedien

4 жыл бұрын

ayayayaaaaiii

@soonlytaing1708

4 жыл бұрын

Or the fact that they spent a gazillion dollar to turn one general into a cyborg multiple times to only have him die in Stalingrad

@CRC-1904

3 жыл бұрын

AND NAZI ZOMBIES! Don’t forget about the Nazi zombies!

Hitler expressed his disbelief in the nuclear bomb. When Speer describe the potential destructive force, Hitler looked extremely surprised and then said that "well at least that's something I won't see in my lifetime". That was technically true. 😂

@kidd32888

3 жыл бұрын

It is also literally true 😂😂😂

@bibleboy1147

3 жыл бұрын

@@kidd32888 That's 4 months true

@shronkler1994

3 жыл бұрын

@@bibleboy1147 he didn't see it in his liffetime, so it's literally true, although usually you'dd think of a time gap of around 20 years+

@michaelmckesson6997

3 жыл бұрын

No the German scientists believe the amount of nuclear materials needed was dramatically higher than it actually was. So they didn't think manufacturing a nuclear bomb was an achievable strategy. Mainly because their math was incorrect. They didn't actually need large quantities of uranium or plutonium. So they didn't actually realize it was achievable amounts of uranium and plutonium.

@LanternOfLiberty

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaelmckesson6997 I read somewhere that when the Germans heard of Hiroshima, they thought that the Americans had managed to detonate an entire Uranium Pile.

"You can't just print more money" Venezuela: *nervous sweating*

@giannispsillias7964

4 жыл бұрын

Every nation at one point: sweats

@shon2365

4 жыл бұрын

Don’t forget Zimbabwe too

@stevenchoza6391

4 жыл бұрын

Spain in 16th Century: Heart Attack.

@Gia1911Logous

4 жыл бұрын

Zimbabwe and the Weimar: first time?

@josukehigashikata8690

4 жыл бұрын

Germany:fucking dies

Why didn't they just win? All they had to do was not lose 🤔😞

@felixgutierrez993

4 жыл бұрын

This really do be like this

@evanhunt1863

4 жыл бұрын

DUDE!! SO DEEP!

@suspicioususer

4 жыл бұрын

Like bruh just fight harder lol

@thenumber-0160

4 жыл бұрын

@@suspicioususer bruh just kill the ennemies lol smh

@mrggare

4 жыл бұрын

Jeffrey Maxson you right

He tried so hard to change his wording to not be "I agree with Hitler". Don't worry, Mr. Terry, we get what you mean.

@unknownalsounknown4238

3 жыл бұрын

I am your 69th like

@zerophantomyt433

3 жыл бұрын

Hmmmm. Debatable.

Two historians agreeing with each other Me nodding in agreement while eating my cereal 1 am in the morning 😐

@dlyc01

4 жыл бұрын

thats exactly what im doing

@herbert4725

4 жыл бұрын

Bruh im doing this

@benjeiy7347

3 жыл бұрын

Cornflæk

@kei5985

3 жыл бұрын

Nick G oops i thought all history teachers were historians...

@benjeiy7347

3 жыл бұрын

@Nick G What's your problem? He makes genuinely well thought out points and actually adds quite a lot to the community. I don't see the problem with that.

"I actually agree with what Hitler's thinking here" *[Algorithm noises]*

@Jordan-Ramses

4 жыл бұрын

Japan is on the wrong side of the Soviet Union. It's hard enough to damage the Soviet Union from the west. It's impossible from the east. There isn't anything of value there and it's a frozen wasteland. Not to mention that they'd be diverting resources from an already hopeless fight against the US.

@totallyaploy1824

4 жыл бұрын

@@Jordan-Ramses people deyeeted their commenta, what'd they say?

@Jordan-Ramses

4 жыл бұрын

@@totallyaploy1824 - Forget, must have been something about how Germany could have won if japan helped invade the USSR.

@totallyaploy1824

4 жыл бұрын

@@Jordan-Ramses ok

@abandonedchannel72929

4 жыл бұрын

r/woooosh all of you

Hoi4 players: hold my focus tree

@Mar_Marine

4 жыл бұрын

Inbefore Iron Guard Romania doesn’t give up Bessarabia and drag Germany into the two-front war early. It’s always the Romanian Players...

@THCLK

4 жыл бұрын

@@Mar_Marine or the goddamn italians... i swear to god if i hear another italy player say:"i just got naval invaded, Germany can you send some help?!" i will lose my sanity...

@suwinkhamchaiwong8382

4 жыл бұрын

True

@generalfred9426

4 жыл бұрын

Also HOI4 players: Everyone knows that whoever controls IWO JIMA will win the war

@russianivan9651

4 жыл бұрын

CrazyCowboyPatton bocucken1

13:40 A common complaint among German tank engineers was that german tanks could kill 10 tanks for each they lost, but the Russians and Americans always had the 11th tank ready to go.

@troytanner4369

3 жыл бұрын

Well yes Germany knew that they weren’t gonna be able to compete with the allies production capabilities so they tried to go for quality over quantity which is where you get the big cats pz 5-8

@11Survivor

3 жыл бұрын

@@troytanner4369 Pz 8?? What have you been smoking? 😂 Regardless, even with the quality over quantity mentality, they still produced tanks that broke down more often.

@troytanner4369

3 жыл бұрын

Survivory Tube pz 8 or classified “Muas”

@MyHentaiGirl

3 жыл бұрын

And Sherman tanks crew would still be alive, ready to fight again

@truthseekerdude

3 жыл бұрын

@Вук Тодић It's a hyperbolic statement, it's not literal.

Regarding your question on Germany's atomic weapons program, much of the infrastructure for the heavy water processing was set up in Norway. The Brits got wind of the locations via intel and damaged the facilities repeatedly, IIRC (via commando raids). The Germans never got past exploring the notion and the allies did their best to stymie their limited efforts. In contrast, the allies inherited many of Germany's best minds plus the Brits and Canadians assisted the American program. The top uranium sources in the world are Kazakhstan, Canada and Australia so the Germans didn't have a geographic advantage for the raw materials.

@dennisvisser3910

4 жыл бұрын

paranoidrodent and the fact that the german program was decentralized. So very unlikely to suceed in time. And the russians took the german research and develouped their own later. So the germans indirectly just boosted the russian atomic project for the cold war.

@randomcrapstudios8398

3 жыл бұрын

I mean even battlefield touched this in the storey mode

@Packless1

2 жыл бұрын

...at the end of the war, Germany had a few grams of Uranium and they tried to get it to Japan* by submarine, but surrendered to the US Navy after VE-Day... ...and b.t.w.... ...the Uranium found its way to Japan... ...but not in the way the axis planned...! *...Japan hat not 1 but even 2 nuclear-weapon programs - one for the navy and one for the army... ...but the navy later stopped theirs, because they found it made more sence to put the money and resources to radar-technology...!

@sigsauer_firearms

2 жыл бұрын

didnt have a geographic advantage? are you forgetting about the HUGE amounts of suitable uranium in Czechoslovakia?

@someguy7629

2 жыл бұрын

Actually. Belgium sold a LOT of Uranium (in Belgian-Congo at the time) to the U.S

Germany could have won if they just completed the asteroids cannon and Nazi zombies smh

@T3ppoPvP

4 жыл бұрын

True

@cargonmat3274

4 жыл бұрын

Don’t forget about the moon base

@SobaYatai

4 жыл бұрын

@@cargonmat3274 lmao

@dedblin8256

4 жыл бұрын

And Die Glocke

@marquisdelafayette1929

4 жыл бұрын

They are alive, in Antarctica. Make Antarctica great again! MAGA 🇦🇶

What If Germany have *10 BILLION SOLDIERS*

@MrTerry

4 жыл бұрын

Oh snap

@incredibilisman2909

4 жыл бұрын

Well, every one of the allies are most likely fucked

@giustinoitaliano22

4 жыл бұрын

How you gonna feed, arm and clothe 10B ?

@incredibilisman2909

4 жыл бұрын

@@giustinoitaliano22 Unless that happens

@0xlamon

4 жыл бұрын

Just having people doesn't really mean much if you are unable feed them. I doubt they would be able to feed this army for more than a week. In another week it would collapse on itself.

26:37 I mean, not invading the USSR wasn't really an option for the Nazis. Their entire ideological foundation was based around the idea of ''Lebensraum'' in the east, the destruction of the ''Jewish conspiracy'' that was Bolshevism, yada yada. The non-aggression pact was always meant to be a temporary thing, from both sides: Stalin considered it a way to buy time and prepare for war better, and Hitler considered it a way to keep the Soviets off of his back while he dealt with the war in the west, and to avoid a two-front war. It was, in large part, the Soviet struggle during the Winter War with Finland that lead to Hitler underestimating the Soviet military prowess - in the same way that the Soviets had underestimated the Finnish military prowess -, and thus lead him to declare war ''prematurely'', so to speak. Yet even if Hitler had waited longer before declaring war, I don't think it would've mattered too much either. The Nazis were, luckily, screwed from the start.

@PyromaN93

4 жыл бұрын

Ironically, not all german generals underestimated Red Army after Winter War. Some of they maked right decision about it - hard landscape, bad weather, good fortifications, competent commanders with good strategy and tactics was make finns hard opponent, but Soviet HQ made great work on mistakes, and broke the nut fast as can.

@axelalvesalo872

4 жыл бұрын

Could not have said it better myself.

@YourMom-vz2qx

4 жыл бұрын

And the fact that they are running out of fuel and the USSR is the only place they can get more from.

4 жыл бұрын

why was it the only place, did they not know about the reserves in the Arabian peninsula?

@werther5757

4 жыл бұрын

plus neither the soviets nor the nazis sqw the pact anything more than buying neccesary time if hitler didnt invaded the red army would have done it

*makes fun of camouflage* "No tank there, move along!" Its a half-track, not a tank, obviously the camo is doing something then lol.

@fives0238

3 жыл бұрын

Haha

@julius855

3 жыл бұрын

THE SPY

"I actually agree on what Hitler thought with that one." *DEMONITIZED*

@dalesajdak422

4 жыл бұрын

Bruh he probably got demonetized for having the word ‘history’ in his name.

@mariocamspam72

4 жыл бұрын

@@dalesajdak422 lmao

@mahpell7173

4 жыл бұрын

More like *demonized*

Hitler not only hated Jews, but also hated communism almost equaly [Edit] Yay more than a thousand internet points maybe dad will come home now

@oceanplanet8160

4 жыл бұрын

People often forget that last part.

@halocapo177

4 жыл бұрын

In fact they are very related in the eyes of nazism because of the alleged conspiration of judeobolchevism that stablishes that the jews created communisim

@heat_of_the_cold

4 жыл бұрын

Exactly the main political goal of the war was to seize land for the spread of the German master race and to destroy the communists.

@sinoroman

4 жыл бұрын

wasn't it a societal thing, not specifically a nazi idea? the kaiser [et al] hated jews before the nazis even existed.

@NihilistSolitude

4 жыл бұрын

It was like the catholic and protestant fighting all over again but instead of the fighting over who Catholicism is correct it was a fight over who socialism is correct.

They always asked: What if Germany took Moscow? But never asked: How could Germany take Moscow?

@Gantradies

3 жыл бұрын

im guessing either stalin, or one of the surviving non-crazy officers would simply have pulled the red army back and waiting for winter to set in whilst moving to sever the wermacht's (infamously fragile- they were using pack animals in the 40's) supply lines- that was what crushed napoleon- he obsessed over taking moscow despite the tsar/the government having long evacuated....

@Battyj

3 жыл бұрын

@@Gantradies nah Moscow would just be Stalingrad 2.0 but probably even bigger

@yep9817

3 жыл бұрын

They could just take it at Agustus 1941, and finish the Ukraine later.

@someguy7629

2 жыл бұрын

Closest they where was about like 30/20 km, wich is actually quite close to Moscow.

@someguy7629

2 жыл бұрын

Keep in mind Stalingrad was much deeper into Russia then Moscow.

The thing I love about the "what if..." is that no one actually asks how they get that miracle event/weapon. Because logistics is considered a boring thing.

@RomWatt

11 ай бұрын

You want to create superweapons? Yeah, cool. How? With what materials? Where? You can't just create bombs out of thin air!

@johnblackrose

11 ай бұрын

@@RomWattexcept they had the materials. Believing they didnt have the materials is a mainstream fantasy to keep sheep from shaking. Italy HAD components. Germany had OTHER components. It is well known germany had 664 cubes of uranium. Some of which were proven to have been enriched. The very idea people believe germany was leading the science on nuclear research and then fumbled during the war only to be gathered up by russia and america is laughable and insane. Its like knowing porsche made neat car designs but fucked up during the war as far as tank designs but for some ungodly reason was hired by america to do just that make tanks. Except...wait...you apprently suck...so why scramble to acquire him? Just as an example of course. My point is germany had nukes of some capability. And worked on other wonder weapons. This is exactly why murica scrambled to gather scientists

Stalin: You underestimate just how many people live here and how little I care for their wellbeing.

@benhurley7366

4 жыл бұрын

yeah because Stalin was the reason the Great Patriotic war was brutal... oh wait no sorry that's completely retarded

@turbowolf302

4 жыл бұрын

@@benhurley7366 ....you're....a special sort of stupid, aren't you.

@benhurley7366

4 жыл бұрын

@@turbowolf302 I see I have jumped the gun with my love for daddy stalin. I am just sick of unnuanced views of events which attribute entire events to one or two people. Stalin was a psychopath and a bit of a jerk, but to say that the great patriotic war would have been much different under a different dictator is silly to me.

@stafer3

4 жыл бұрын

@@benhurley7366 Another dictator might have not help Germany to circumvent the treaty of Versailles so Germany could not have tested their weapons or train their soldiers in Soviet union. Which would lower their effectiveness. Another dictator might have not signed the non aggression pact with Germany. That would keep Germany paranoid about two front war (memories of ww1) and it might have deter them from starting the war in the first place. Another dictator might have sign the pact, but without that clause where they split Poland between themselves. Because Poland is 800km of buffer between Germany and Soviet Union. If Soviet Union did never agree to split it, there wouldn’t ever be any surprise attack. Unless Germany learns teleport, by the time they get through that 800km territory, Soviet army can be ready in defensive position. Or even can send support in resources and soldiers to Poland to make that fight for Germany as slow and protracted as possible to make them too weak to continue on Soviet Union. UK and France already declared war on Germany in 1939, Soviet union could just join on that. Another dictator could have done all those things, and have German soldiers on their borders, but he might not have attack Finland. Without Soviet Union attacking Finland, there would never been “Finland want their land back” so Finland would keep out of conflict and Germans could not use their territory as staging ground to attack Soviet union from that direction. One less front for Soviet union. And those 320 thousand dead Soviets from winter war could be more useful alive during Barbarossa. Another dictator could have done all those things, but didn’t take territory from Romania when they were splitting territory with Germany. Hitler would then have harder time to convince them to help him with operation Barbarossa to retake their land, especially since he sided with Hungary to also take land from Romania. That’s already 1,5 million soldiers less fighting Soviets. More clever diplomat could have even try to earn Romania as ally, by coming to aid against Hungarian demands. Which could bring Romania from German orbit to Soviet orbit, so not only would 1,5 million less soldiers fight Soviets, those same soldiers might fight Germans instead, because Germany was completely starved for oil, and Romania was their biggest source during war. So Germans would have to invade it anyway, if they ever dreamed to attack Soviet union. Stalin beefed up Germany so much in hope that Germany will fight western powers and they all destroy each other so Soviet union could pick up the pieces. Even the first day of Barbarossa, there were still soviet trains on border to supply Germany with resources. So yes, if Stalin didn’t exist, there would be no Great Patriotic War. Tens of millions of Soviets would still live.

@benhurley7366

4 жыл бұрын

@Neil Mo I agree in essence however its not that simple. I feel like Stalin cared less about ideology and more about politics and power. Hitler was an ideologist to the max and and so they are kind of incomparable for their motives in that regard. Stalin didnt commit genocide on the scale that hitler did, its just that anyone who starved to death in soviet russia is attibuted to stalin during a time of massive collectivisation and modernisation, and so thats where the massive numbers come from. The great leap forward in China resulted in tens of millions dead, but you dont hear many people saying that mao killed those people. Stalin was a piece of shit and he directly killed thousands of people, as well as a couple million dying in gulags which you can fairly attribute to 'him'. Mean while Nazi Germany is ethnically cleansing on a whole different scale. So nah, its not that simple. I am only mildly educated on this shit so i am open to rebuttals.

I've made some calculations a while ago. In order to start the two engines that should have powered the Mouse you would have needed 5 l of gasoline. That is half a canister. Every time you stopped, half a canister, when you accelerated to 20 km/h it would have cost you another half a canister, slowing down in order to turn would have cost you almost double 9-10 l. That would have been one of the most expensive vehicles to run in history. That is not a weapon of war, that is a joke

@siva4wotblitzhero531

4 жыл бұрын

IT Has A BIg GUn ANd *THICc* ARM-oR THOuGh

@nistorlaurentiu7533

4 жыл бұрын

@@siva4wotblitzhero531 an 500kg bomb would say otherwise

@Arschlecks

4 жыл бұрын

Im a little late,but ClImAtE cHaNgE aS wEaPoN

@davidlupton2094

4 жыл бұрын

Still wouldn't have to deal with people double parking that's a plus

@phoenix.krevtivex4257

4 жыл бұрын

I'm sorry, I can't help but say that it's " Maus" not mouse. I couldn't help myself, I'm a history nerd.

There was no option for Germany not to invade Russia at all, as the idea of Lebensraum was central to Hitler's outlook on what Germany needs and must do.

@paffpaff6375

10 ай бұрын

Thats True.

26:20 Funnily enough since you mentioned redefining winning, Nazis sort of did that. They had a concept of "Endsieg" which meant "Final victory" or "Ultimate victory." It was many times referred in Nazi rhetoric and it was very vague concept: basically it outlined that Third Reich would be victorious, but excatly how was never really specified. Sometimes, it was when jews and sub-humans were eliminated. Other times it was that when "thousand year reich's future would be secured".

"if germany had an atomic bomb would they have used it?" Moscow would still be a puddle

@ClannCholmain

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, excellent point, it could have been far worse.

@Maddinhpws

4 жыл бұрын

@Amber Hoke Most likely yes, but sure af London would have not nearly as many cultural sites as they do today. And Moscow would likely still be a nogo zone.

@TriggeringOpinionsandFacts

4 жыл бұрын

Maddinhpws they wouldn’t have made it into London or any of the UK for that matter with that bomb. Russia wouldve been hit with as many as germany could produce though.

@Maddinhpws

4 жыл бұрын

@@TriggeringOpinionsandFacts German Bombers did still frequently breach into London Airspace. You only need one bomber to deliver the bomb.

@nicholasburns729

4 жыл бұрын

@@Maddinhpws And most of Germany would have been heavily contaminated with anthrax, mustard agents, choke agents and blood agents. Britain had plentiful supplies of all and an excessive bomber force to deploy them. Given how many atomic bombs existed in 1945 (3) it doubtful that Germany with lesser resources than America could have topped tis number. So either way they were F****d.

"Just print more money" Yeah. How'd that work for Weimar era Germany? Or Zimbabwe?

@joeblow9657

4 жыл бұрын

Zimbabwe is still working on that one

@localextremist2839

4 жыл бұрын

@@joeblow9657 or Venezuela

@joeblow9657

4 жыл бұрын

@@localextremist2839 True further research needs to be done in the name of internationalism !!!

@localextremist2839

4 жыл бұрын

@@joeblow9657 oh okay cool 👌

@joeblow9657

4 жыл бұрын

@@localextremist2839 The KGB senses sarcasm.

"Just make more stuff." No point when you don't have the oil to run the stuff.

@albertofrankdiaz6664

3 жыл бұрын

you will be wonder how many people say germany can win if they make more panthers tanks in facebook groups ...... smh

@Drain_Life_Archive

3 жыл бұрын

@@albertofrankdiaz6664 People that don't understand the economics will always say things like that. The best video I could recommend for WW 2 is from TIK about oil.

@unknownalsounknown4238

3 жыл бұрын

In a sense they could have mode tanks just tanks and made an all for one hardcore assault towards the caucus area they could have gotten the much needed grain and oil

@bas5681

3 жыл бұрын

@@unknownalsounknown4238 That hardcore assault towards the caucasus was called the 1942 summer campaign also known as "Fall Blau". It ended with Stalingrad happening and the Germans losing what limited part of the caucasus they had gained.

@MrSourceMan

3 жыл бұрын

The Clans would've crushed the IS if they just made more Timber Wolves, Summoners and Dire Wolves. Just make more stuff guys, come on. (TBH, the clans actually could have won, if every invading clan came correct like Wolf did. Wolf was the only one who knew war with the IS was going to be drawn out as hell, and that was BEFORE space AT&T (Comstar) got involved. Then again, the Wolves seemed glad to let their Crusader brothers fail, not realising it was a group effort. 1-21/5/3052 - Never forget.

On Germanys nuclear program: much said in the vid is true, (to my knowledge): 1. significant brain drain. Not only from Germany, but also from occupied terts. Fx. Niels Bohr was flown out from Denmark in a secret op. 2. Lack of resources. Germany was not far in the process of developing the bomb. They made conciderably strides in rocket tech however. But the sheer cost of developing the bomb was out of their league - also its true that at that particular time, it was not really accepted IF or HOW such a bomb would work (or not). So made sense to not waste ressources on an expensive "fantasy" project, when in the middle of a huge war. (They did use time on racial projects: concerned with physical traits, archeology and such, which was also a waste in the war effort - but essentially peanuts, compared to a nuclear program). 3. The program they did have was heavely targeted by the british already in the beginning of the war: The germans had they heavy water production facility in northern Norway. The british tried to both send a covert spec ops team in to destroy it - and also carpet bombed it when that failed. Both missions sort of failed, even though they did cause interruptions. However tired of the harressment, the germans decided to send the existing heavy water to Germany in order to protect it. That was the plan. However the british managed to sink the ferry carrying it in a nordish fjord. At the deepest point to - so it was lost. To summarize, it doesnt seem Germany was really all that commited to the nuclear bomb during the war. Was concidered a bit of a fantasy, expensive - and also losing crucial scientists + plus the already limited amounts of heavy water they had, rather early just made them ignore it. And in honesty they were right id say. No way they would have produced any bomb (no matter how small), concidering the circumstances they were in.

@siva4wotblitzhero531

4 жыл бұрын

Ive never heard of a "Heavy Water" water is naturally,heavy,its weight also adds up very,*VERY* fast....could I get some clarification please?

@SonicsniperV7

4 жыл бұрын

@@siva4wotblitzhero531 its water with a radioactive compound added, mostly used in nuclear reactors today

@danielkirpichnikov2007

4 жыл бұрын

4. US and USSR have ability to just steal technology and build their own bombs + they have much more resources to do this

@georgameise1684

4 жыл бұрын

@@SonicsniperV7 Bro. Heavy water isn't radioactive. It has one or more aditional neutrons. It is however used for nuclear reactions.

@FreyR_Kunn

4 жыл бұрын

Christian Thaysen even if Germany had heavy water, they needed ALOT more resources to develop a nuclear weapon, hell they didn’t make heavy water for a nuke, heavy water was more focused on making a fission core that could run U-boats and special vehicles

As always, I subscribe to the idea that Germany would have won if they hadn’t lost

@MrBloxy-wz1zb

4 жыл бұрын

Now THAT'S a good point

@nicolasg7601

4 жыл бұрын

Tacticalsquad 5 That just sounds like a white peace.

@lordmouse9985

4 жыл бұрын

Is that Ed Miliband as your profile picture?

@willmarcheselli1986

4 жыл бұрын

xXLordMouseXx yep

@DarthPoleon

4 жыл бұрын

Oh my god!!!!!! My whole life was a lie!!

“One death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic”- Stalin

@pocky9693

4 жыл бұрын

Stalin actually didn’t say that, it was mistranslated

@jacobhogan3208

4 жыл бұрын

It’s true though

@timeovah9190

4 жыл бұрын

@@canedr7883 made my day

@Dell-ol6hb

4 жыл бұрын

Jacob Hogan I doubt Stalin would’ve thought the death of a single man as a tragedy even if it was his own flesh and blood lol, but the latter is true for the most part.

@thetf8142

4 жыл бұрын

George Kaufmann the quote is assigned to Stalin, it belongs to a German writer though

On the question "What counts as a win?" The winter war is one of those wars where the win is based on your own interpretation. Yes, Finland lost a bit of land, but didn't lose that many men compared to the Soviets. Is it a win for Finland or the Soviets? In my opinion, it was both a win and a loss for both sides.

@MouldMadeMind

3 жыл бұрын

Your opinion is stupid.

@Trololo1121112

3 жыл бұрын

@@MouldMadeMind and yours is cringe

@carpetchair5778

3 жыл бұрын

@@Trololo1121112 they disagreed with an opinion and the first thing that you reply is "cringe"

@Trololo1121112

3 жыл бұрын

@@carpetchair5778 yeah because its cringe to call someones opinion stupid without any argumentation

@carpetchair5778

3 жыл бұрын

@@Trololo1121112 true

“No tank there” There isn’t, it’s ha halftrack.

@Shadowkiller-dq2ju

3 жыл бұрын

I mean he’s right

"You can't just print money." Zimbabwe be like, WHAT!?!?!

@utzius8003

4 жыл бұрын

Mugabe is dead! :D

@damedusa5107

4 жыл бұрын

Kira Yagami but call it fiscal stimulus and it’s ok. Financial crisis was eased by added digital zeros to the reserves. Uk and USA did this without inflation.

@stefanradev7034

4 жыл бұрын

Kira, USA should have got the memo, xD

If they bought just one Bob Semple tank from *N E W Z E A L A N D* they could've won.

@dudebro3573

4 жыл бұрын

@@andrewbergman4783 am i retarded

@rubengray2136

4 жыл бұрын

@@dudebro3573 same

@MOFFS

4 жыл бұрын

@@andrewbergman4783 same thing

@billsugden3734

4 жыл бұрын

@@MOFFS New Zealanders triggered with this comment😃

@chrislaezur730

4 жыл бұрын

@DudeBro Yes you are

HOI 4 players: Are you sure about that?(the title)

@SadisNic

3 жыл бұрын

Green air and heavy tank 2s lol

@unknownalsounknown4238

3 жыл бұрын

@@SadisNic you can rush heavy 3 but I prefer medium 3 spam

@NerdKing2nd

3 жыл бұрын

does this game also include the very real problem of Germany's hard limit on oil, cause games usual aren't good at covering the logistics aspect as much as the actual fighting. Or does it allow for choices that the actual people in power would not have made because of personal beliefs because if not then again as the video states you move from alternate history to fantasy.

@hartingtherealone

3 жыл бұрын

@@NerdKing2nd they do that, i can give you an examole real quick 1 sec

@hartingtherealone

3 жыл бұрын

Thing is, players manage to capitulate the allies really fast in 1940-1941 and not declare war on the soviets until they are done with both France and the UK usually

Wonder weapons? REVIVE ME I HAVE THE RAY GUN😂

@thefourthjuan1981

3 жыл бұрын

I had the same thought 😂

15:01 "No tank there." Of course, its a half-track.

@aidenantley2373

4 жыл бұрын

Bruh I shouldn't even have to explain this

@rommelcandiani6358

4 жыл бұрын

Well, he is not wrong

@trevorphillips8415

Жыл бұрын

Wait you see something? All I see is a big bush.

27:30 my answer is this: Germany could not, in any alternate universe, avoid Russia. They needed more resources and the most logical country to get it is from the Russians.

@lordmouse9985

4 жыл бұрын

Salad Bar, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a non-agression pact between the USSR and Germany, dividing Poland and the Baltics and supplying Germany with Soviet resources. They had the necessary resources when they attack France and Poland: they got them from the Soviet Union. The USSR basically supplied Germany at the start of the war.

@siva4wotblitzhero531

4 жыл бұрын

Unless they could in some magical,ungodly way transported the entire combinated Military forces and Resources of both Germany and Japan on to the U.S. mainland and somehow overwhelm us they were screwed,completely and utterly from the start

@nistorlaurentiu7533

4 жыл бұрын

@@siva4wotblitzhero531 yeah sure, although the Japanese had a sizable navy, Germany not at all, they wouldn't had stood a chance against the British and American navy combined, plus the air war(carriers) where japan lost most of their carriers at midway and germany never had carriers, if they somehow launched an invasion for the us mainland they would just get destroyed

@apenasmaisumdiogo.7115

4 жыл бұрын

Besides, great part of the nazi motivation was blaming the slavs and the "jewish conspiration" of communism

@phoenix.krevtivex4257

4 жыл бұрын

They would of invaded because it was what Hitler believed, he hated communism and Stalin hated fascism so they were destined enemies, Germany not invading Russia would mean you would have to change who the Germans are or as I should say were.

If Terry and Oversimplified do a collab the world would explode

I love how the questions he asks in the end are what is talked about in part 2.

For the record Operation SeaLion (invading the Brits) was 1000% impossible. which is why the high command didn't pursue it.

@Monke1312_

4 жыл бұрын

Ha Yeah for a navy they had like 10 wood boats LOL.

@GroundBack

4 жыл бұрын

The Germans didn't invade the UK because they thought it would have been rude

@LZin-uk5nh

4 жыл бұрын

@@GroundBack Is this some kind of a peasant joke that I'm too smart to understand? :)

@GroundBack

4 жыл бұрын

@@LZin-uk5nh Only the true enlightened will understand

@LZin-uk5nh

4 жыл бұрын

@@GroundBack I beg your pardon, my grace

Could you react to alternate history hubs “the election that ruined everything” where he talks about Woodrow Wilson?

@charlietheanteater3918

4 жыл бұрын

Jeffrey Herrera WILLLLLSON

@Coldfront15

4 жыл бұрын

CommandoDude Why so?

@ThatRatBastard

4 жыл бұрын

*WIIIILLLLSOOOOON*

@wyattcorbin1629

4 жыл бұрын

Coldfront15 mainly because a lot of the things that Wilson did weren’t as bad as he made it out to be, like his federal reserve system or his tax increases, or didn’t give enough credit to the good things that happened, such as the flawed-but-his-heart-was-in-the-right-place fourteen points.

@danielhaden6674

4 жыл бұрын

@@wyattcorbin1629 His 14 points didn't really achieve much did they. This seems to be a common thread when people judge american history, its always the intention that matters, seldom the actual effects of said American intervention. Which as far as WW1 is concerned, was disastrous. (Much like most of Americas "great" campaigns).

Whenever a reaction video is twice the length of the video being reacted to you know it’s a real reaction video.

I remember reading somewhere that when the Allies captured a german nuclear weapons lab site they found that alot of safety concerns had been ignored. Basically said if they turned the reactor on it would have killed everyone around it with radiation poisoning. I will say that tech wise the only nuclear bomb the nazis where close to being able to build was a dirty bomb. But that would not have been that destructive in the short term which is what the nazis needed.

we need to get Mr.Terry to react to Girls und Panzer.

@nikkiisntdum257

4 жыл бұрын

Eat tea Friend! Yes

@Kyure.

4 жыл бұрын

Ah damn, good one.

@doomguy1167

4 жыл бұрын

Hell no

@bengale9977

4 жыл бұрын

Step 1: Make him watch potential History. Step 2: make him watch the history of GUP series. Step 3: GUP reaction video.

@TacticalmailmanII

4 жыл бұрын

Eat tea Friend! Yes we must

"Once the war is over-" *ad plays*

@maswoonmaster7927

4 жыл бұрын

Reich Tangle you see, I would like your comment but you have 69 likes, effectively making this meme status

@HeadsetHatGuy

4 жыл бұрын

im surprised that this gained 94 likes in over 3 days

@maswoonmaster7927

4 жыл бұрын

Bruh, now you need 420 likes

@onekill31

4 жыл бұрын

The ads are always spot on when it comes to cliffhangers.

The Germans nuclear program was based off of heavy water, a rare and expensive substance that they could basically only get in Norway. Along with that, the scientists were much slower and there wasn’t the money or materials to be put into the research. They could’ve had more heavy water, but there was a joint British-Norwegian (resistance) attack on their main heavy water source, basically destroying Germany’s main resource for its nuclear program.

"Dumb Hitler" OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOF

The only effective “Wunderwaffe” was probably the Stg 44 which helped inspire future versions of intermediate cartridge automatic rifles.

4 жыл бұрын

@Pandazzle Pro Those helped greatly after Nazi Germany was already defeated but they weren't really, "wonder weapons" like the SturmGewehr was. That rifle was actually fielded and the V- rocket program was much more experimental.

@trainknut

4 жыл бұрын

The Sturmgewehr wasn't a wonderwaffle tho, it was an issued service weapon in full production, it had been since at least 1943... It was produced in very limited numbers compared to the Kar98s, MP40s and MG34/42, but it was far from wunderwaffe. If you call the STG44 a wonder weapon, then you'd have to extend that to the FG42, or some allied things like the M26 Pershing, at which point the term basically loses all meaning.

@plzfixwolves955

4 жыл бұрын

@@trainknut It was technically an experimental weapon which was given to German units in the Eastern Front to see if the idea of a rifle, and a SMG could be combined into one. It only went into full production once its potential was fully realized by Hitler.

@Lilljehook

4 жыл бұрын

The rocket airplane Me 163 comet, the first jet airplanes, V1 and V2, guided missiles, first anti air missiles. The Germans still use an updated version of the first all purpose LMG MG34/42.

@Violetenist

4 жыл бұрын

@ Me-262? didnt the Americans used their jet technology from the jet fighter and made their own variants?

if Barbarossa didnt happen, Germany would have fell into an energy crisis due to oil shortages.

@stalinium4769

4 жыл бұрын

yes!

@hyperbolic4606

4 жыл бұрын

The Germans had access to the Romanian oil fields which was enough to power a nonactive military.

@stalinium4769

4 жыл бұрын

Ghost Scarf but the grand plan was not to stay as a non active military...

@hyperbolic4606

4 жыл бұрын

@@stalinium4769 If barbarossa didnt happen there would be no reason to go full send on military

@stalinium4769

4 жыл бұрын

Ghost Scarf it was in Hitler’s grand vision that he wanted the obtain living space in the East, Barbarossa or not.

Please more stuff with potential history! They are amazing!

At 17:03, this was just because the failed invasion of Mongolia (I can't remember the name) left the Japanese Navy ascendant in their military, and the Navy chose the option between North and South that would get them the most glory. Japan itself probably would have been fine with invading Russia, so long as the Mongolian invasion didn't happen again.

@sosig6445

11 ай бұрын

The navy and army were at odds and the army DID want to invade the USSR but as you said after a botched skirmish with the Soviets the navy held more sway in decision making

"What if he had kept the agreement with Stalin." Soviets invade axis in 1944 with unstoppable advantages. Or possibly, Germany is at bingo fuel by 1942 due to British blockades.

@jocktheripper2073

4 жыл бұрын

Or 1941 even, check out Operation Groza. And Stalin order 0428

@hyperbolic4606

4 жыл бұрын

The whole reason for the germans in WW2 was to defeat the soviets. The germans cared little for the Allies even towards the end 90% of the German army was on the Eastern front

@grizzlyadams8277

4 жыл бұрын

Why not both?

@nik5626

4 жыл бұрын

Paul Simpson people seem to never even mention operation thunderstorm

@jairon_2518

4 жыл бұрын

@@hyperbolic4606 Casualties were close to 35-65 And the number of soldiers I think goes like 20-80, not 10-90.

Germany: come join the war with us against the Rissians. Japan: Dont poke the bear.bear is asleep.

@Lilljehook

4 жыл бұрын

"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve" Isoroku Yamamoto Before he bombed Pearl Harbor.

@christopherlockwood986

4 жыл бұрын

They did attack USSR right before they signed a non aggression pact with them

@jude395

4 жыл бұрын

GR.zoungkla stfu

@ethanschenck9714

4 жыл бұрын

@@Lilljehook He didn't actually say that; it was made up for Tora Tora Tora.

@MrDragonheart1996

4 жыл бұрын

Germany: You cant attack Pearl Harbor, the US will destroy you! Japan: Hold my Beer

I believe that a lot of failed campaigns like Napoleon's is because their planing was centered around victory they never thought what if we lost that battle

I love when civis laugh at camo, yes its funny looking against a normal backdrop like a open plain or in transport. But take that same camo on tanks, planes or ships and put it against the backdrop its developed for and watch how quickly its not longer a laughing matter. Camo was developed to keep the soldier alive will maximizing killing potential or staying undetected while escaping. During WWII a ship slipped by enemy ships by painting the ship as a island and adding plants to it and moving strictly at night with no lights on internal or external. Camo can save lives and does. I love your videos and wish you where my teacher as a young kid. You bring a view point kids can get into and learn key points of history outside the mainstream stuff that skims over events. Sorry seems I'm late to this party lmao.

@zachj61

4 жыл бұрын

People laugh at a tigers camo, since it appears bright orange, yet it works perfectly in its natural environment

Found this channel 2 days ago. And im a big fan.

Potential History is the KING of history memes. Glad the patreons are choosing some amazing videos!

@Minboelf

4 жыл бұрын

Oversimplified

@agentc7020

4 жыл бұрын

Medin Avdic hell nah both are good

@_wayward_494

4 жыл бұрын

@Medin Avdic thanks for your opinion

@johnravioli4750

4 жыл бұрын

Virgin Potential History vs Chad Mark Felton Productions

I love your content. Keep up the great work. I really enjoy it.

22:22 Just as you said "Got another ad coming in" I got an ad 😆

6:52 *narrows eyes* "employee gets fired for inventing indestructible drone"

For the atomic bomb thing, I watched a documentary stating Hitler was more interested in having weapons created as soon as possible. Creating an atomic bomb would be difficult because of 2 major factors: the radioactive material needed was hard to get at the time (well, they were in the middle of the war) and they have no manual or guide on how to do it as doing it would be their first time (thus developing it would take a long time). Since there was a war going on, Nazi Germany certainly would want to concentrating in getting immediate supplies, ie petrol.

@baxtermortimer1550

4 жыл бұрын

hound3000 need some hugs not to also mention the fact that the German Nuclear program was only ever created to find an alternative to Hydroelectric and Geothermal power or to make them more effective.

@tenofprime

4 жыл бұрын

I recall on a documentary once that part of why they opted not to develop it was in part a time issue. Simply put, they projected late 40s as the earliest it would be available and if had not won the war by then they were screwed anyway.

@hound3000

4 жыл бұрын

@@tenofprime Yeah, I agree and it made more sense to get petrol first as the immediate supply to fuel for their vehicles. So, any sort of radioactive material would be the last thing in their minds.

@tenofprime

4 жыл бұрын

@Call Me Ishmael yep, WW2 Germany did not have the resources to fight a long war. Nowhere is this more evident than the eastern front, the Soviets simply threw more people and equipment at the fight until the other side ran out.

@Lilljehook

4 жыл бұрын

Not really, they "invented" the jet engine, the cruise missile V1 and potentially the first intercontinental missile V2, world's largest canon, the mouse, guided missiles, the first self guiding torpedoes, the rocket airplane Me 163 Komet, the first assault rifle, first mass-produced chopper, first surface-to-air missiles etc. All of those things could potentially have bin a failure or taken a decade to finish. So I don't buy it, if someone promised Hitler a weapon that could annihilate a city he would have given them all the resources they wanted, period.

Commenting on the end there about the atomic program, I think the main concern was that they were too early in the project to even see its potential. They believed that even if there was any sort of utility out of atomic power it would take too long to reap the benefits of the program, basically the war would have been over before they would ever even consider being able to make the bomb. It was seen that the resources were better spent looking into conventional weapons because it would have reaped more immediate benefits

@lachlank.8270

Жыл бұрын

Where were they even gonna do bomb tests right

Even if Germany had the A-bomb, *just how are you gonna fly it to the targets while owning not much long-rang heavy bombers?*

FINALLY (edit) I love potential history, please do more of his videos. Also, there is a part 2 of this video which addresses some of your questions

@jarl8815

4 жыл бұрын

Although he is wrong, to say that Germany could not possibly have won ww2 in any way is just ignorant. Even TIK, (who he referred to in the video) has said that Germany could have won on the Eastern front and therefore the war.

@P99s-s

4 жыл бұрын

@@jarl8815 i mean yeah but for that too happen you would have the improve the nazis a lot with hinsight,like make them use a different production model that proved too be better with hinsight, which might even had brought many new problems they tried to avoid with there original plan(fuel shortages) In the end they had to make decisions with the information they had, based on their ideology,therefore they did what they did and they were always going to do that

@jarl8815

4 жыл бұрын

@@P99s-s I don't think that they had to declare war on the US because of there ideology and that would have made the war very different. If they had captured the oil fields and Moscow at the end of 1942, then it's very possible that they could have won in my opinion. The oil fields were as we now very important and the fall of Moscow would have been a serious problem for Russian morale. I would cal a German victory unlikely bu defenetly not impossible. It's much more likely that the Germans could have won WW1, but that's a completely different story.

@onekill31

4 жыл бұрын

Germany is doomed to fail on both wars.

@P99s-s

4 жыл бұрын

@@onekill31 i actually think germany had a better chance winnning ww1 than ww2, again you would have to massivley alter the decionmaking of many partys involved but for example if germnany had come up with a differrent plan than the schlieffen plan and wilhelm had not contested the british in the navy they might not have joined the war(the only did after belgium was invaded), without the uk in the war we might not see the us get involved(they had a lot of german speaking population and were somewhat simpathetic in the begining pre submarin warfare warcrimes and belgian invasion). IF all of this somehow had happenened we are speaking about a ww1 that had Germany,Austira-Hungary,Ottomans+minor allies vs France,Russia,Italy+Minor allies. seeing as how germany won ww1 in the east with help from the communist revolution i find i plausible that germany could take on france in a war of attrition since no britan means no naval blockade for germany and since britan,france and later the US would share the western front line without its allies france would not have the industry or manpower to win. Again all based on changing how people in hisitory behaved, they would never have done this irl

If Germany had waited and not invaded the Soviets, that would have just gave the Soviets time to build up their army and by the end of the Axis vs Allies war even if Germany won the Soviet would be fully prepared while Germany would be lacking a lot of manpower and resources after their war

@ineednochannelyoutube5384

4 жыл бұрын

I am fairly certain that is the Soviets were the agressors the western allies would have either remained neutral or supported germany.

14:52 that’s right, looks more like a half-track to me, most likely a model of Sonderkraftfahrzeug 251/1.

12:00 the funniest thing about that is Germany literally did do that and got more broke and hitler became a rising force in Germany and that’s the reason why WWII started in the first place

the german nuclear program ended up on the botom of a lake in norway

@basilmcdonnell9807

4 жыл бұрын

Pointless, tragic. The German scientists on their program were a) on the wrong track b) had a tiny fraction of the resources required, and c) were actively sabotaging their own project. The heavy water would not have made a whit of difference.

@bris3582

4 жыл бұрын

@@basilmcdonnell9807 i know, but i didnt say how far they had come on it or if they were gona succeed or not

Some points about the German atomic weapon. Even if they did not give up their nuclear project, when could've they actually finish it? '45? '44? Was the war winnable by that time? What about the resources to actually build it? What about air superiority needed to actually deliver the bomb (especially if they wanted to hit an important target)?

@annab.5724

4 жыл бұрын

Nanaya 7e Apologies for writing an essay to basically agree with you. History is just so fascinating!

@daniloperisic6119

4 жыл бұрын

Maybe v2 rockets could help

@baxtermortimer1550

4 жыл бұрын

Nanaya 7e I think what people confuse the most with the German Nuclear program is that it didn't have any intention to be weaponized as a Atomic program nor did anyone think it was possible. All the sights in Norway where they conducted the German Nuclear program were dedicated to finding a new way to form Hydroelectric power, which had some questionable results in itself and the scientist didn't see this as much to go off anyway. Which when you think about it makes a lot of sense and it makes a lot more sense now put into context on what type of nuclear program the Nazis were actually conducting.

@daniloperisic6119

4 жыл бұрын

@Call Me Ishmael I mean it's a good idea 😅

Bruh, you took a drink of the same drink as me at the same time, that was freaky

At first I thought those are books in your case then I realized that is NES games very nice collection and very nice channel

Your what ifs are answered in part two

@keitht24

4 жыл бұрын

No they aren't. Potential history really didn't back up his views with credible arguments. It was all mostly strawman arguments. They're two key examples. 1. Comparing Hitler to Napoleon. This insanely stupid argument hurt my heads. You can't compare a war fought more then a century prior to a modern war fought with instant radio communication, motor vehicles, railroads & aircraft. It's an objectively stupid premise. 2. The whole "if you take Moscow they'll keep fighting". This argument assumes events after 1941 would just play out exactly the same. This of course is an impossible scenario, because of the logistical importance of Moscow. Moscow control the rail & road network of northern & central Russia. If the Germans take Moscow, Leningrad would be cut off from the rest of the Soviet Union & immediately fall to the Germans. The port facilities would immediately be rebuilt & supplies would flood in by sea. The defensive posture in northern & central Russia would much more secure. This would massively aid the southern offensive toward the caucuses & Stalingrad in 1942. Potential history just ignored the logistical & strategic impact of these alternate scenarios.

@Nicolas-ic5bx

4 жыл бұрын

​@@keitht24 " Potential history really didn't back up his views with credible arguments. It was all mostly strawman arguments." My boy in your examples you are doing the same thing. -Point 1 if you just punch a straight line trough moscow you will leave your sides exposed just like napoleon did radios, motor vehicles, railroads and aircraft cant do much if your strategies are retarded. -Point 2 you cant take fiction for granted. You are just making sentences without even backing them up with some credible arguments making them ironically mostly strawman arguments just taking them as granted. You became the very thing you swore to destroy my dude

@keitht24

4 жыл бұрын

@@Nicolas-ic5bx First off, my Napoleon example speaks for itself. Anyone bringing up Napoleon has already lost the argument in my opinion. Like I said, it's an objectively stupid reference. Second, I didn't say just punch a straight line to Moscow. I never said anything remotely similar to that. The Germans did reach pretty close to Moscow & were only turned back by the last of the Russian reserves from Siberia. My third point wasn't a strawman argument. If Moscow is taken by the Germans, it would have a domino effect. It cuts Leningrad off from the rest of Soviet Union. Without even the most minimal aid, Leningrad would fall almost immediately. Moscow controls the rail & road network in northern & central Russia. This would make it logistically, extremely difficult, if not impossible to mount a major counter offensive against the Germans until Moscow is retaken by the Russians. In actual history, Germany still had the initiative in 1942. With a much stronger strategic position controlling Moscow & Leningrad. The outcome becomes much more plausible for the Germans.

@Nicolas-ic5bx

4 жыл бұрын

@@keitht24 This is still fiction taken as granted facts though

@Nicolas-ic5bx

4 жыл бұрын

@@keitht24 I undestand that these circumstances could make it easier for the germans in some areas but is the realization of those things that in my opinion would not have changed anything in the bigger picture

"You ONLY have russia between the two", simple the largest, most producing, most stubborn and most afflicted in casualties faction of the war, separation both theatres. The axis powers being separated doomed them, it's like fighting back to back, but the biggest bully is in between you two.

@thearisen7301

4 жыл бұрын

Not really the most producing if you look beyond just tanks. US easily made more stuff and made as many tanks as was needed but also needed to build ships, etc, and Russia got tons of trucks from the US which allowed Russia to focus on tank production, etc

@kyle18934

4 жыл бұрын

@@thearisen7301 and many planes as well. there were about 13,000 planes from the usa sold to russia. its not nearly as many as the armored trucks and tanks, but its still a sizable amount of aircraft

@nicolivoldkif9096

4 жыл бұрын

With out American rail cars from Lend-lease, that would have effectively cost the Soviet Union the war. No factory moves would have put the Soviet Union in a severe equipment shortage. The push into the Caucuses could have worked and the fuel issue for Germany would have been significantly less.

@ls200076

4 жыл бұрын

@@nicolivoldkif9096 And without the soviet bodies the war would be more gruesome for the west.

I love how any other youtuber would have clipped the add parts out but he doesn’t I like that for some reason

Video normally: shnort Video when Mr. Terry historys reacts to it: longed

In relation on the A bomb, the point he is trying to make is that Germany wouldn't have had a nuclear bomb to ponder over if they would want to use it because they didn't care much about the nuclear science needed to build one

The Soviets could absolutely afford a war of attrition and win.

@kingorange7739

4 жыл бұрын

That’s why Germany cannot do an attritional war.

@jontyhorton4815

4 жыл бұрын

99% Casualty rate VICTORY

@thehylian6984

3 жыл бұрын

You mean like the cold war

@thesovietduck2121

3 жыл бұрын

I mean, We can afford loses, But we could not afford extremely high loses

@jimmyandtimmy8514

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, the people were used to starving.

It wasn't just jewish physicists who the Nazis alienated, but all theoretical physicists, most of which were either students, friend or admirers of Einstein for example. And when the Nazis and associated experimental physicists verbally attacked Einstein, most german theoretical physicists jumped to his defense, like Max Born for example, since Einstein was known for being rather shy and rarely defended himself against the criticism of advocates of so - called "german science". So Germany didn't just lose their jewish scientist to America, but basically almost all their theoretical physicists, exceptions being Max Planck and Werner Heisenberg. (Max Plancks son took part in the Stauffenberg assassination attempt on Hitler)

One factor regarding the German atomic programme - a British/Norwegian commando force destroyed an important heavy water facility in Norway, which was vital for a German nuclear bomb. They still had other ways of getting the material they needed, but I think this was one of the factors which led to Germany disregarding the programme as a viable solution to ending the war.

@FreyR_Kunn

3 жыл бұрын

Germany had the heavy water program to create nuclear fission engines for vehicles since they had barley any oil, not for a nuke. Hitler didn’t want to expand on Nuclear science since he saw it as Jewish and didn’t want it to be paid attention to. Germany also didn’t have the rest of the resources needed for a nuclear weapon.

"The game was rigged from the start"

You can't change history. Christopher Clark: Hold my book.

@glenncarolus1875

4 жыл бұрын

Hearts of iron IV : hold my beer xD

That camo on vehicles works. I operate a paladin and if the foliage matches the environment it works really well even in the desert

26:27 Hitler probably wouldn’t want to not invade Russia because he viewed commmunism as a threat that needed to be purged

He made a second part, Where he also talked about not invading the Soviet union.

@hyperbolic4606

4 жыл бұрын

its not ww2 without the Soviets

@efancording6363

4 жыл бұрын

@@hyperbolic4606 Well,it is.

@ClannCholmain

4 жыл бұрын

@Ghost Scarf, it became one when South Africa, New Zealand and Canada declared war on Germany.

They had delt themselves a poor hand, played still fantastic but the house always wins.

@ObitoUchihaisgay

4 жыл бұрын

They did not play it fantastic haha. The war against the soviets was hilariously incompetent

@jeltje50

4 жыл бұрын

They really didn't play it fantastically. They had luck in the very beginning. And that kept them going.

@EnigmaEnginseer

3 жыл бұрын

@@jeltje50 German strategy was getting them their victories up to the fall of France.

Really cool to hear @TIK Getting some respect for his work

22:58 Remember, in 1942, noone knew if the atomic bombs worked, much less how colossal its damage would be. The US may have been the only nation that could waste time on such risky projects, as they weren't threatened in America the same way the European nations were in Europe.

The maus guzzled a liter every 30 meters

@MrBloxy-wz1zb

4 жыл бұрын

And people think it could win ww2 single-handedly

Fun fact: "Maus" is german for "Mouse". So the name being given to such a large tank is quite ironic.

@Nonsense010688

4 жыл бұрын

which was done on purpose to mask the size.

@EJW2

4 жыл бұрын

Also the wunderwaffe tank that weighed about 1000 tons was called “ratte” which means rat.

@deptusmechanikus7362

4 жыл бұрын

and their small tracked mine was called Goliath. army humor

@randomguy-tg7ok

4 жыл бұрын

"This tank mounts an 11" gun." (For reference, the King Tiger's gun was, IIRC, 5") "Nice design, Hans. What's it called?" "The Rat."

@randomguy-tg7ok

4 жыл бұрын

(Just gonna preface this with the fact that I know more about ships than I do tanks) 11" is, IIRC the smallest gun ever mounted on a dreadnought or post-dreadnought battleship or battlecruiser as a main battery. (For reference, Dreadnought had 12" guns and Yamato had 18.1" guns.) The (proposed) turret on the Ratte was actually a turret from Scharnhorst with the middle barrel taken out.

I don't think Potential History was saying Hitler wouldn't have used an atom bomb had they developed one, rather that Hitler wasn't interested in pursuing atomic science, period, because he considered atomic science to be "a Jewish science" which, you know, super dumb but then the Nazis weren't exactly known for their high rationality. The nazi atomic program, such as it existed, was tiny compared with the Manhatten project. I think one of the reasons was that the German atomic scientists had miscalculated how much uranium they'd need, and by miscalculated I mean they thought they needed way more than was necessary and would take years to produce.

Sparkling ice! Good stuff 10:16

Saying that Germany should have just make more stuff is like saying: "Hey buddy, why are you poor? Go and be rich!" xD

Not attacking Russia wasnt an option a) for ideological reasons b) for resources and c) if they hadn't attacked Stalin would have. War between Nazi Germany and the USSR was inevitable. Now maybe they would have done better in a defensive war, but I doubt it

@krunske

4 жыл бұрын

You c) point is a very much debated topic amongst historians, so I would recommend you do some reading on that! In context of this video, let me represent a "what if" instance. if Germany would have been in a situation where they were losing against the Allied forces while having maintained the non-agrresion pact with the Soviets, it would make sense what you are saying. Stalin would have every intention of scooping up territory in eastern Germany at the time if the Allies were closing in on the victory. However, would there be a war between Germany and Soviet Union as the aggressor, if the germans had won their western war against the Allies in the scenario where the non-agression pact where upheld by Germany? That would be a very complicated matter, depending on the german economic condition, manpower and readyness. Stalin feared Germany as much as Hitler feared the Soviets. Could it result in a cold war, much like the one we saw in our reality? I would place my bet on that scenario, even without the Nuclear aspect to it. Also, would the occupied western population help Germany in the scenario of the Soviets as the aggressor in such an event as explained in this comment? The Red Scare was already a thing long before the second world war, and conflict in all the western countries between communists and other ideologies were a common problem. It would therefore not suprise me that the western world would stand together in such a scenario against Soviet aggression, but this is all dependent on a german victory against the Allies.

@Avengedtenfold

4 жыл бұрын

@@krunske I think assuming that a cold war would form between Soviet Russia and Germany is suspect. The Cold War was defined by two characteristics; The threat of the massive amounts of damage a nuclear weapon would cause (along with the stockpiling of said weapons) AND the distance of the two nations doing the stockpiling essentially assuring at the time that actual troop fighting would never occur. The logistics of the US and the USSR going to war on the ground or sea was extremely messy and would drag many other nations into the conflict. It is why the only battles in the Cold War were proxy-ish battles fueled by ideology. Germany and Soviet Russia are not that far from each other, especially adding in how weak the militaries of the countries between them were. Neither of them had means of opposing each other outside of bombing and ground forces with the former being a fairly bad option in Russian weather for some seasons. WW1 had taught both nations how important logistics, planning and being the first one to make a move was. THAT is why action by one side is inevitable. Stalin might have feared the German army but that very fear would likely have been what caused him to strike before Germany had a chance to consolidate their newly conquered territory. As for Germany vs. Soviet Russia post the defeat of the allies...I doubt the situation would be that simple. The US hasn't joined the war in this scenario and The Red Scare wouldn't be enough I would think for them to throw in alongside Germany, especially if Japan still intends on attacking the US in order to take their island holdings. Peace with Britain does not mean an alliance, especially for similar reasons. Japan wants Great Britain's holdings in the east and might not have agreed to any such peace treaties before claiming them. But even disregarding that Germany would have difficulty mustering manpower from newly conquered nations, nor would their regime really want to considering how into eugenics they were. Russia and Africa still has the oil they need and a peace treaty with Britain blocks off some of the latter depending on the terms. Considering that an invasion of Britain was considered impossible (having a strong navy works miracles, folks!) the Brits were always going to be the chink in the armor that Soviet Russia needed to stand against Germany.

A country producing a greater number of tanks doesn't necessarily equate to higher amounts of production. Countries produce equipment in different ratios dependant on whats in demand. So the fact that britian was producing nearly as many tanks as Germany actually exemplifies Germany's lack of resources and industrial capacity as Germany would have a strong emphasis on tank production whereas Britain's focus would have predominantly been geared towards air and navel arms production.

Germany's really only lost World War II because of Churchill. Nearly everyone in Europe figured that the war was over when France fell. In fact, when France surrendered they agreed that their POWs could remain under the custody of Germany until the whole war was over. Typically, when one side signs a peace treaty, all prisoners are released between those two states because the combat is over between them--even if a larger war was going on. And this was typical for centuries in European wars where you literally had dozens of countries engaged with each other, and some countries would peace-out before others. The reason France agreed to let Germany keep their POWs is because just about everyone in power thought that England would sign a peace treaty with Germany too and end hostilities at that point. Churchill, however, refused to do so. Hitler had also banked on England declaring peace. Hitler didn't want war with England at all, and one of the big fallacies is thinking that Hitler would have "won" World War II by keeping all the land he had taken in combat. That's rarely ever what happens in war. Land is taken and occupied so that it can be used as a bargaining chip in the peace treaty. Hitler's original intention was only to keep Poland, and he was going to use all the other the captured territories to bargain with the UK to say, "We'll release that land in exchange for you agreeing Poland is now part of Germany." That was the standard way that European powers had fought for at least a thousand years, and you could see it in the details of the armistice with France. He didn't absorb France into Germany--he made Vichy France essentially a *vassal* of Germany, where there was a nominal local government but it was forced to serve Germany and provide conscripts and tribute. With France out of the war, and with Germany not having taken any British territories at all, Hitler assumed (especially given the nature of Chamberlain) that the UK would be willing to sue for peace with Germany and the war would be over. But Churchhill refused to do that. And because Hitler couldn't get his quick peace, which would have ended the war with terms favorable to Germany because of the initial success of their conquest, the war continued for another 5 years as he gradually lost ground. But at the point Churchill refused, it was inevitable that Germany would lose because Hitler never had the ability to wage war against England, and had only hoped that England had no interest in risking her own people to fight on behalf of conquered territories in the continent. It only got worse for Germany when the USA entered the war as well. Incidentally, most of this is covered in a lot of detail if you read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer. I would recommend it if you haven't read it. He compiles a lot of his material directly from capture German documents, including secretarial notes, etc. and it definitely gives a broader view of Hitler's initial plans. Also, regarding the Soviet Union, the reason Hitler invaded when he did is because almost certainly Stalin was about to attack Germany, and his only hope was to attack first, gain enough territory, and force Stalin to peace-out. Obviously, that didn't work out either.