I really want to buy I'm a cat person t shirt...but I didn't see one for sale on the web site with the link provided and this video is 1 month old.Am I missing something??
10:06 - "... strongly massaged infantry..." ah yes, I do enjoy my soldiers well relaxed with a proper massage :P I believe that was supposed to be massed
Sometimes in the native language the word can have both meanings, so it’s quite an accurate pun. In Romanian for example you say: The troops are “masate” (the last word means either that they are amassed or massaged. Only in context you determine which sense was intended. :p)
My reading of history is that the Germans were great when it comes to equipment/technology and operations. Their Achilles heel was intelligence. Everything I have read about their invasion of the East has left me startled with how much they did not know about the basic makeup of the Red Army and the Soviet economy and industrial capacity. It seems to me that historically the Germans make for lousy spies.
Well, there is the theory that Canaris was working for British - so he "conveniently" preferred not to see plenty of nuances about Soviet Union which could affect the decision to attack it at all.
The German General in the beginning wasn’t denigrating the Russian soldiers fighting abilities, he was praising them. How you use period documents to support your conclusions is outstanding, but how you manage to even find your source materials is even more amazing. Thank you for another interesting video.
A conversation at the bus stop German: "Ah solches grausames Wetter heute, na?" Adrian: "Ja, dann macht die verdammte Russe immer seine Angriff." German: "Entschuldigung? Ich versteh's nich-" Adrian: "Wir mussen uns zum Gegenstoss bereithalten."
@@DiggingForFacts lol I can understand that is a joke about a misunderstanding I only understand the words yes, the, Russian, sorry, I, we, and I believe nich- was going to be the word not
You forgot inventing anti-freeze. All of these small problems made it a huge slog towards the end of 42, and it cost them dearly. If Japan had invaded from the South (as agreed), the Soviet reserves would never have arrived to prevent Moscow falling. The world would be a very different place.
I appreciate you taking the time to make the translations. I'm not always sure I would have translated the German into English in the same way you have, I suspect the meaning would be the same. It is educational (even fun) to see how a native German speaker translates this technical language into English. Thank you.
Thanks for translating a little known German document. Absolutely brilliant, this is the super value of your channel, love learning new things from the sources. Not rehashed opinions. This video also backs up tactics learned from playing AH Squad Leader for many many years.
Thank you. I've been wargaming & 'studying ' the Eastern front for several years. Your posts are well researched ,enlightening and humourous too. Thanks so much
MrTryAnotherOne That's because the Soviets had far more to learn. After the purge of most of their officers, they had few veteran commanders. The Germans on the other hand had many veteran officers from the first world war.
The Germans didn't just learn less, they learned the completely wrong lesson from the Winter War. To them it just confirmed the idea, that the Red Army and the Soviet state itself would be pushover, because of its low combat effectiveness. The lesson they should have taken home was, that even in the face of catastrophic losses and immense hardships, the Red Army would not just continue fighting but be highly aggressive, and the military command structure would remain functioning.
I have a story fact for example, that Finnish gave an advice for Germans that you should put a little plank or something under AT mine otherwise it won't trigger under the snow. Germans didn't do that and Soviets managed to cross some of the minefields. That was during Battle of Moscow stage of war.
@@Finkeren One aspect of Winter War was that encircled Soviet forces north of Lake Ladoga kept on fighting. This tied Finns and drew their reserves there. So when the main assault in Kannas came, finnish forces were misplaced. Red Army could turn tactical disaster to strategic advantage. On the whole it was like, Red Army was playing Chess and Wehrmacht Yatzy (roll the dice and see what happens)
These are outlines in doctrine made by a well practised army. Lessons learned by actual combat and gained by painful experience. Thank you for the research and detailed review. I found this very fascinating. (Also, I ordered teh T Shirt before I even finished the video. heh)
5:33 The SVT-40 was a good weapon overall, the main issue the Soviets had with it was that producing them required far more resources than the older MN-91/30, so they used the SVT as a "premium" weapon.
I agree with you just said having official documents; I read the memoirs of Sepp Allerberger, the austruan sharfschutze, where he complains about the lack of support in the Wehrmacht to develop the sharfschutze units and weapons in the Wehrmacht until they realized they had to do it, around the end of 1942. The way the soviets attacked was as you said, and Allerberger was the scouting team for his regiment. In the book by Patrick Agtee, The Chars of the Leibstandarte, the Waffen SS used to attack the russians at night, at full speed, Also, is true that the soviets were master of camuflage. Very good video.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Information on fighting the Americans based on experiences in Tunisia and Italy would also be interesting if you have or find such documents.
Why? They Baptized the Allies with the realities of combined war. A headgegrove held up the Allies until a soldier came up with a blade that was attached to tanks
Thank you for your work and teaching often ignored history and facts as much as can be supported by the information that has been suppressed or destroyed. Always a joy to watch..
1:49 I read somewhere that German soldiers and commanders were suprised that Russian continued fight even encircled what was effectively different than in some previouse campaigns.
unübersichtlicheit: Übersicht means overview. un means un, and lich and kept both kind of mean ness , so pretty much un-overview-able-ness, if that gives anyone more clarity on that word.
Brilliant exposition on tactics and operations for the squad through regimental operations, and particularly insightful on Russian (and German) tactical mindsets.
I had a grandfather and a grand uncle in stalingrad. Lesson learned: There is no god. Mothers can't hear their sons cry. War sucks. War in russia sucks much more.
I had my 18yo grandfather defending Russia, while his mother died from hunger in Leningrad in blockade. You're right. War is something you don't really want to experience for real.
i've been recently studying the years 1939-1941 before barbarossa. interestingly, the german high command, the german elite, the nazis, and even the british and the french, underestimated the russian military strength. they were unware of the tank, air force and even the infantry strength and numbers of the red army. great britain, for instance, was so bold to even almost starting a war with the soviet union in 1940 during the finnish winter war, through an invasion of norway. fortunately, internal political difficulties and german movements early 1940 prevented it, but it is stunning how ideologically blinded the western countries, not only the germans, were in this regard.
Funny enough, in the Winter War the Finnish soldiers occasionally took saunas. Given the success of the relatively small number of Finns versus Soviets, can one speculate on the efficacy of a good sauna over a massage?
@blacksmith, I have a Finnish friend and he go to a sauna daily lol. Don't think only soldiers did it. You aren't Finnish if you don't take saunas. Finnish tanks need a built in Sauna to be effective.
Would you be able to do a video about the "Jansa Plan" and Austria's potential for military resistance to the Anschluss? To the best of my knowledge the only english-language scholarly analysis of it is a Masters Thesis that can be found on McGill's website, and it paints a rather optimistic picture of Austria's chances. I was wondering if German/Austrian scholars had given the concept much analysis and what their conclusions were, as well as what the Jansa plan called for (assuming it is an accessible document).
As an Ex British soldier, at a Regimental Reunion Our SQN Leader Major Hall ( Tankies) and who is now a General Stated....Never fight in the Balkans- Never march on Moscow - and Never trust the RAF....he got a laugh with that one.
Love the videos. Please, consider reducing the echo effect found in voice track. Voice comes thru muffled and hard to understand. Narrator's English is quite fine; it is issue with voice track.
You do good service to all. These details are totally lacking in the propaganda histories we get. Humans individually, and our political systems have far more in common than not.
But read it with a HUGE grain of salt(aka mount Kali). Guderian after the war had a tendency to both overstate his role in the development of tank warfare and claimed that he objected to decisions that turned out wrong in hindsight even though no documents can be found that would confirm his objections at the time (meaning: in all likelihood he didn't).
"Unübersichtlichkeit" -a thing that is confusing, because of it's depth, scope and what is generally unknown or hidden from view. An American phrase we use: "You don't know what you don't know you don't know." (If that makes any sense.) I love German. It's so deliciously precise, yet simple in it's construction.
Did the Waffen-SS also have reconnaissance troops, or just the Heer? I seem to recall there was a parachute division (battalion?) of the Waffen-SS too.
yes, recon units are regular troops when it comes to combined arms, meanwhile parachute are quite specialized. I think there were some waffen-ss parachute units.
@@pieterwillembotha6719 Watch this video on how a motorized infantry division was setup: th-cam.com/video/e2HD2ZTs_Kg/w-d-xo.html this should you give some basic understanding.
A German officer noted about the war in the East that the russians had a far greater capacity at dying than the germans. And by that he meant that the russians had another mentality and conception of life and death. The didn't fear it as the more modern and secularized germans did.
You have zee funniest jerman AXENT. Do you adopt it on PUHPEZ? You could appear in any WWII movie in a black uniform to amend Patreon... But seriously: Great content. Very good!! Thanks. And great new look with the beard...
As the kar98 without scope was meant to be shot up to like 2km (judging by its iron sights), medium range, with scope, was probably meant to be between 2km and wherever the curve of the planet started to prevent direct sight? xD
@@DagarCoH hi thank you- so the "fronts" were usually less then 300 yds apart? in Russia? I am referring to his comment about sniping being done at medium ranges.
@@samstewart4807 hmm, that referred not to designated snipers as much as to squad snipers. I doubt they got the extensive marksman training 'real' snipers had. But to your question: I don't know yards, but yeah, infantry fights in WW2 were pretty close affairs afaik.
Un-oversighted-ness. To me, it could mean that one battle could be taking place over such a large area, a local commander would have a difficult time keeping track of everything, OR, With the Soviet "swarming" tactics and use of constant counterattack as a defensive tactic, that conditions would be so fluid as to be impossible to direct moment to moment by use of messengers getting to and from the local command structure. Just conjecture, but an educated one. Helps to know enough German to be wrong about almost all of it, but to be able to transliterate it.
I don't see that comment on the Soviet soldier as negative but one of brutal realistic respect given the situation at the time. But then I'm Australian. Our compliments tend to be left handed. Must of been hella disconcerting for the Germans to have to face the Russian drive to fight on his own terms. Hard, deceitful, cruel, up close and personal were some of the few assets the Soviet had available to face that largely mechanized monster. No question, Ivan had the starch for the job. Deepest respect boys.
In German there is "List" (cunning) and "Hinterlist" (deceit), e.g., for the British Commandos at Dieppe the report read used "List", here they used "Hinterlist".
I love your presentations they are concise and to the point but one the major problems the wehamacht encountered and was not prepared for in the osfront was not issuing severe winter clothing and the Luftwaffe not having 4 engine bombers where they could of bombed and shut down the factories in the Ur@ld$
Das könnte Sie vielleicht interessieren: www.spiegel.de/geschichte/alpenwall-mussolinis-heimliche-suedtirol-bunker-gegen-hitler-a-1297565.html Ein Spiegel-Online-Artikel zum italienischen Festungswall, der 1939(!) an der deutsch-italienischen Grenze von Mussolini in Auftrag gegeben wurde und ungeheure Summen verschlang. War zumindest mir völlig unbekannt, aber vielleicht wissen Sie da mehr und machen mal ein Video darüber?
Derselbe Spiegel der das G36 kritisiert hat? Der sich drüber aufgeregt hat, dass Soldaten eine Bar wie einen Bunker bauen... Also, wenn ich was in den deutschen oder österreichischen Medien zu Militär(Geschichte) lese, dann muss ich davon ausgehen, dass jemand seine Hausaufgaben nicht gemacht und ich wohl gerade Blödsinn lese, deshalb lass ich es inzwischen.
This is a good place to ask about experience. During the early part of WW2, both the Germans and the Japanese not only had the best tactics, equipment and training, as long they stayed alive, but the also had the most experience. The Japanese Naval Air Arm for instance. This would be a good reason for a video. I want to talk about not only armored but really what will be known as mechanized infantry. Tanks must have infantry and they really need infantry trained for it and experience doing it. The infantry tends to die at a faster rate and is harder to replace. And the German stayed ahead of the curve when it came to experience. By the Battle of France and then Barrborrsa the Germans had a lot of experienced men, men who have moved together in vehicles and Combined Arms for 100's of miles. Which is more then any other Nation's Army could do. But with attrition, you not only lose the most experienced, in attacking you lose the most aggressive and some of the best. The Soviets, on the other hand, were like the United States Naval Air. They had numbers of their side. (and a much bigger training system. I feel that the American ramp up in training from nothing to everything is not appreciated) The Soviets did not need tanks or guns or anything that would last a long time and could be taken care of with training. For a while, all the had to do was plug holes and most importantly, kill or would as many of the experienced German soldiers as possible. You look at Stalingrad and at first glance, you see the German have some friendly divisions. But they are men given equipment and put together. IMO, for the Germans and it should be for everyone (The Israelis practice this) that the most valuable "weapon system" and hardest to replace is a trained and experienced crew. In fact, as far as experienced in battle, the Germans lost a lot of the best men that they had and they could not simply afford to lose that many without replacements. And those numbers were impossible to replace. That reminds me. Your video/timeline/build line of why the Japanese could not win WW2 was a masterwork. If it was early 1941 and I could see that Admiral Yamamoto got a copy of that (in the video of that time), he would try hard to stop the war from starting, lol.
Not exactly, never try to conquer Russia or China, it is perfectly possible to attack and defeat these countries, as has happened historically several times, just not to turn the conflict into an ideological struggle to the death and have limited goals. But of course, nuclear weapons have completely changed the rules of the game.
In other words not too much , the issue of Barbarossa and post 1941 german war efforts was their bad intelligence service , Canaris was a traitor how can you learn anything if the head of your intelligence gathering branch is plotting against you , is like if the head of the cia was a soviet mole during the Cold War or an Islamic agent during the war against ISIS or alqeda , I always think of the enigma machine , the British did pass over a lot of intelligence to the Soviets during Barbarossa for instance in the battle of Kursk , because of enigma , it’s very possible that they knew about that but never communicated to hitler imo , the Soviets had a huge network infiltrated in Germany since before hitler came. To power it was dismantled only in later in the war
marty methuselah the problem wasn’t the agency but the people in charge too bad that Hydrich died he would’ve been an amazing head of the german secret service , I’m not talking about modern days I mean Germany after 1945 is out of history
I would translate "grausam" not as "cruel" but as "gruesome," which is even more insulting. Similarly I would translate "hinterlistig" not as "deceitful" but as "underhanded." Grausam, hinterlistig kerlen.
I find it interesting that German language refers to the enemy in singular (Der Russe instead of Die Russen) the same like Russians refer to the enemy (Немец instead of Немцы)
" Amateurs talk about tactics Professionals talk about logistics". (Forget the author). The Red Army won because it had a Superior Military Doctrine. ● This Doctrine prepared the entire country for long term warfare. Joseph Stalin's 5 Year plan enabled the Red Army to benefit from the surge of weapons that made it the largest in the World.i.e. the Army and airforce. ● This Doctrine recognized that defeating a technologically advanced industrial economy took "successive " battles, defences in depth and Deep penetration to surround and destroy the enemy not to mention tremendous casualties. ● These fundamental goals also dictated the design of weapons i.e. reliability, ability to mass produce quickly and complemented the Operational Objectives. ● The Germans Generals being clueless about the Strategic picture (as Hitler observed) could not understand that while they may have won battles they were losing the war as the narrow focus on tactics observed by the narrator confirms this. Col. David Glantz made this observation when he critiqued Manstein's "Lost Victories". Manstein gloated over stopping the 5th Tank Guards Army while not realizing STAVKA blocked Manstein while they destroyed Army Group South. ● Also explains why the Nazi criminals continued to focus on huge expensive unreliable weapons hoping for a decisive victory. These weapons were also counterproductive to the principles (Bewegunskrieg) that won them Western Europe! ● The Cold War obscured the true capabilities of the Red army so we continue to underestimate them and overvalue our pitiful (relatively) contribution in defeating the Nazis.
@@HA-gu1qk you could say the Germans were defeated when they failed to take any of their objectives in 1941. And winter did play a significant part in the failure of that years campaign and their being beaten back from Moscow.
Lesson one. All humanity is one family and should be treated as one family. Lesson two. Love thy neighbours. Lesson three. Thou shall not kill. Lesson four. Life, liberty, property and honour of every person are inviolable. Lesson five. Treat your brother as you will treat yourself. Lesson six.. Fighting must only be done in self defense. All offensive wars are illegal.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Well, I'm semi kidding. It is more of ...well...honestly your size, body types and the fact that you cover a lot of the same topics. You doing EVERYTHING and TIK doing WW2 Germany and you interset there. I'm pretty well-read and was an Army Officer and from the two of you I have learned so much (I believe that there is always more to learn) You have been branching out with others on TH-cam and some that are not and for some reason, I thought, they should do one together! The ones you did with the Chieftain and others are great. You have been knocking stuff out of the park lately. I jump on your new videos. You have answered a lot of those questions in your head. Like "Why not just arm the Ukrainians and others in 1941?" And lately, I've been thinking about Japan, starting at the Coral Sea to the Battle of Midway and on. For me the battle of Guadalcanal was big (it was a campaign) because the Japanese had so far to fly, they got wore down and lost highly trained pilots that they never replaced. (you can't "replace" men with experience) So I saw your "Midway: Why attack the Aleutian Islands?" and I like the "what did the British think" etc. I have a question for you. We American supposedly (one reason) almost never changed the Sherman because it would slow production. So the Soviets could put two new turrets and up their guns on the T-34 but we could not do it. REALLY? Thanks my friend for doing what you do. I have to say that for me, you are living the dream.
Well, the Sherman was - from what I know - constantly improved, e.g., the original one had not a telescopic sight and no zoom. Then the Sherman was fielded in 1942, whereas the T-34 was fielded in 1940. The T-34 was actually scheduled to be improved way earlier to the T-34M (?if I remember correctly), but due to the war the current model was put into mass production. The T-34 had a major short-coming: 2 man turret, no turret basket etc. something the Shermans did not have. The T-34/85 arrived in 1944 at that point the US also had Shermans with the 76mm. Seriously, I think the main problem is that some people are just bitching around about the Sherman or some "poor decision" usually coming from people that have no idea about logistic, industry etc. So some assessment are just based on unsubstantiated and exaggerated claims in combination with a poor understanding of the realities, context and also the RELEVANT details! I suggest watching those two videos first th-cam.com/video/1xTQ-oyo-G4/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/Og2UveOeAVk/w-d-xo.html and then follow up with these two: th-cam.com/video/-ZKxmlpbwqk/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/Bxac3-aVVKQ/w-d-xo.html
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Thanks, I have seen them, lol. It is not the gun, it is the turret that I see as the problem as far as this one, well-beaten horse of a comment. I do get your points and the ones that the Chieftain made where everything made in the US had to be shipped 3,000 miles. For me, the box that they have to cut out and weld on to the back of Sherman turrets shows it was too small. But shipping everything, getting it to the battle was very important. And you and others have shown that you might start with 200 tanks, but if only 100 make it to battle, then you only have 100. For the Allies, it was the hedgerows in France and all of Italy that was a problem. The Germans were very experienced and we just keep running into set up situations. And then when it opened up some, it was a lack of gas. I kept thinking that is Patton had known he was going to run out of fuel, he would have insisted on diesel tanks 5 years earlier. I think we should have been able to backward engineer the Soviet engine. Years ago, Brazil took some Stuarts and made totally new tanks from them. tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/Brazil/Bernardini-X1A.php And then there are the Israelis. I'm just nitpicking and was trying to come up with something to ask about, lol. There are standard things I would do with any WW2 tank (with hindsight and years of reading, experience, and training). Widen the tracks and change the engine to a diesel. But then you have to have a good diesel engine and it was a while before we did. Thanks again!
I should add that your video on the 75 MM round compared to the 76 mm was a clincher, I watched it a couple of times and wrote down the numbers. It reminds me of the study that showed that only 37% of troops actually fired at anyone. Thus, they do not need "rifles". I think it was maybe the perfect tank through its time. It was upgraded as time went on and was what was needed. A moble dependable medium tank with a good all-around gun. And we had a lot of them. They were easy to transport, to fix and to keep running. I remind people that the Sherman (and everything else) had to be transported for 1,000 of miles.
![NISAMANEE - TADA (ท้าดา) [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hcQHEPMmJpU/mqdefault.jpg)
The everpress campaign is over, yet, you can check my regular merchandise here: teespring.com/stores/military-history-visualized
Why are Panther and Puma missing?
@@edi9892 Good observation
what I took away from this:
RUSSIANS ARE SENSITIVE TO PENETRATION 🤣
@@edi9892 There are (were) three shirts. Tiger / Hellcat, Pz II (Lynx) / Puma, and Tiger / Panther. Not missing, just on different shirts.
I really want to buy I'm a cat person t shirt...but I didn't see one for sale on the web site with the link provided and this video is 1 month old.Am I missing something??
10:06 - "... strongly massaged infantry..." ah yes, I do enjoy my soldiers well relaxed with a proper massage :P I believe that was supposed to be massed
Sometimes in the native language the word can have both meanings, so it’s quite an accurate pun.
In Romanian for example you say: The troops are “masate” (the last word means either that they are amassed or massaged. Only in context you determine which sense was intended. :p)
@@healththenopulence5106 Romanian bro best bro
Russian use strongly massaged infantry, while the Finns use saunas.
@@podemosurss8316 ryssalauma references
This is Sasha. She weighs 150 kilograms and massages 10 000 highly trained troops per month. It costs 400 000 rubles to hire her for twelve years.
My reading of history is that the Germans were great when it comes to equipment/technology and operations. Their Achilles heel was intelligence. Everything I have read about their invasion of the East has left me startled with how much they did not know about the basic makeup of the Red Army and the Soviet economy and industrial capacity. It seems to me that historically the Germans make for lousy spies.
Yup and failed to know that their own weaknesses lead to their later losing ground and retreating
ya ya ..... oops I mean da da
Well, there is the theory that Canaris was working for British - so he "conveniently" preferred not to see plenty of nuances about Soviet Union which could affect the decision to attack it at all.
*Loughs in Stasi!* Yeah, joke aside probably more ture in WW2.
German: This is why we let the NSA spy on our chancellors.
The German General in the beginning wasn’t denigrating the Russian soldiers fighting abilities, he was praising them. How you use period documents to support your conclusions is outstanding, but how you manage to even find your source materials is even more amazing. Thank you for another interesting video.
I'm learning so much German from watching you in like 10 years of watching you I will probably be able to get into a conversation in german
Be sure to head over to the DasPanzermuseum channel to get more military history content, entirely in German!
That's gonna be an interesting vocabulary..
A conversation at the bus stop
German: "Ah solches grausames Wetter heute, na?"
Adrian: "Ja, dann macht die verdammte Russe immer seine Angriff."
German: "Entschuldigung? Ich versteh's nich-"
Adrian: "Wir mussen uns zum Gegenstoss bereithalten."
@@DiggingForFacts lol I can understand that is a joke about a misunderstanding I only understand the words yes, the, Russian, sorry, I, we, and I believe nich- was going to be the word not
German? In less than 10 years, but not the 1940's variety, go here, th-cam.com/channels/1-MpIG20o6kzsu1I5SLXpQ.html
*After ostfront experience*
German High Command: ..........Next time we must bring more oil.
And better allies.
And better transmissions
And better generals.
And more men
And more artillery
And more tanks
And more road construction crews
And invest in more railways
You forgot inventing anti-freeze. All of these small problems made it a huge slog towards the end of 42, and it cost them dearly.
If Japan had invaded from the South (as agreed), the Soviet reserves would never have arrived to prevent Moscow falling. The world would be a very different place.
I appreciate you taking the time to make the translations. I'm not always sure I would have translated the German into English in the same way you have, I suspect the meaning would be the same. It is educational (even fun) to see how a native German speaker translates this technical language into English. Thank you.
Thanks for translating a little known German document. Absolutely brilliant, this is the super value of your channel, love learning new things from the sources. Not rehashed opinions. This video also backs up tactics learned from playing AH Squad Leader for many many years.
Thank you. I've been wargaming & 'studying ' the Eastern front for several years. Your posts are well researched ,enlightening and humourous too. Thanks so much
Now im ready to be an infantry soilder in eastern front, thank you very much !!! =)
Looks like the Russians learned more from the finnish winter war than the Germans did.
Not strange considering the germans didn't partake in the finnish winter war.
MrTryAnotherOne That's because the Soviets had far more to learn. After the purge of most of their officers, they had few veteran commanders. The Germans on the other hand had many veteran officers from the first world war.
The Germans didn't just learn less, they learned the completely wrong lesson from the Winter War. To them it just confirmed the idea, that the Red Army and the Soviet state itself would be pushover, because of its low combat effectiveness. The lesson they should have taken home was, that even in the face of catastrophic losses and immense hardships, the Red Army would not just continue fighting but be highly aggressive, and the military command structure would remain functioning.
I have a story fact for example, that Finnish gave an advice for Germans that you should put a little plank or something under AT mine otherwise it won't trigger under the snow. Germans didn't do that and Soviets managed to cross some of the minefields. That was during Battle of Moscow stage of war.
@@Finkeren One aspect of Winter War was that encircled Soviet forces north of Lake Ladoga kept on fighting. This tied Finns and drew their reserves there. So when the main assault in Kannas came, finnish forces were misplaced. Red Army could turn tactical disaster to strategic advantage. On the whole it was like, Red Army was playing Chess and Wehrmacht Yatzy (roll the dice and see what happens)
1:00 Nazis calling Russians cruel is a bit reich.
I love when you do lessons learned. It's always interesting.
A better term would have been,
Primitive or my wording "basic"
What we in current times,
Forget vocabulary and the use has changed a great deal.
These are outlines in doctrine made by a well practised army. Lessons learned by actual combat and gained by painful experience. Thank you for the research and detailed review. I found this very fascinating. (Also, I ordered teh T Shirt before I even finished the video. heh)
I like the new background.
5:33 The SVT-40 was a good weapon overall, the main issue the Soviets had with it was that producing them required far more resources than the older MN-91/30, so they used the SVT as a "premium" weapon.
Anyone know how it was issued? Im guessing like alot of other armies where semi autos were issued to soldiers who could make best use of them
I agree with you just said having official documents; I read the memoirs of Sepp Allerberger, the austruan sharfschutze, where he complains about the lack of support in the Wehrmacht to develop the sharfschutze units and weapons in the Wehrmacht until they realized they had to do it, around the end of 1942. The way the soviets attacked was as you said, and Allerberger was the scouting team for his regiment. In the book by Patrick Agtee, The Chars of the Leibstandarte, the Waffen SS used to attack the russians at night, at full speed, Also, is true that the soviets were master of camuflage. Very good video.
Did the German army create a similar document based on their experiences post the D-Day invasion?
Something along the lines of
Dear Brunhilde,
I love you,
But all is lost
Maybe?
I have found a few small leaflets.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Information on fighting the Americans based on experiences in Tunisia and Italy would also be interesting if you have or find such documents.
Military History not Visualized
I want to say I really love your channel,
thank you so much!
Why?
They Baptized the Allies with the realities of combined war.
A headgegrove held up the Allies until a soldier came up with a blade that was attached to tanks
Thank you for your work and teaching often ignored history and facts as much as can be supported by the information that has been suppressed or destroyed. Always a joy to watch..
1:49 I read somewhere that German soldiers and commanders were suprised that Russian continued fight even encircled what was effectively different than in some previouse campaigns.
@Kristian Mandrup akhh.Goebbels propaganda again.
7:14 So, kinda like the "breaking point" and "breaking momentum" in the Soviet doctrine...
at first i only saw 'Barbarossa: Lessons...' I hoped it would finish 'in how not to swim'
Thank you for your vids
unübersichtlicheit: Übersicht means overview. un means un, and lich and kept both kind of mean ness , so pretty much un-overview-able-ness, if that gives anyone more clarity on that word.
I like this format and the new background color :)
Brilliant exposition on tactics and operations for the squad through regimental operations, and particularly insightful on Russian (and German) tactical mindsets.
I had a grandfather and a grand uncle in stalingrad. Lesson learned:
There is no god.
Mothers can't hear their sons cry.
War sucks.
War in russia sucks much more.
I had my 18yo grandfather defending Russia, while his mother died from hunger in Leningrad in blockade. You're right. War is something you don't really want to experience for real.
@@anatoly_trifonov But we still have enough stupid assholes on this planet, who really think that war is the weapon of choice to solve problems...
@@ColonelHoganStalag13 Like america
Excellent work and excellent excellent translation thank you very much
i've been recently studying the years 1939-1941 before barbarossa. interestingly, the german high command, the german elite, the nazis, and even the british and the french, underestimated the russian military strength. they were unware of the tank, air force and even the infantry strength and numbers of the red army. great britain, for instance, was so bold to even almost starting a war with the soviet union in 1940 during the finnish winter war, through an invasion of norway. fortunately, internal political difficulties and german movements early 1940 prevented it, but it is stunning how ideologically blinded the western countries, not only the germans, were in this regard.
Bring winter coat
But that will make the soliders think the blitzkrieg will be slow and fail.
I just wanna stream and have a good time. Well yeah, because frozen soldiers don’t think about much at all
Bring TWO winter coats👍
"strongly massaged infantry" 9:45 lmao :D
Should be "massed", the german verb is the same for both :P
Marching all day long can give you sore muscles. The Soviets realized this and massaged their infantry. Definitely to be feared!
Funny enough, in the Winter War the Finnish soldiers occasionally took saunas. Given the success of the relatively small number of Finns versus Soviets, can one speculate on the efficacy of a good sauna over a massage?
UseTheForc3 is right, "massierte Infanterie" eather means "massed infantry" or "massaged infantry". xD
@blacksmith, I have a Finnish friend and he go to a sauna daily lol. Don't think only soldiers did it. You aren't Finnish if you don't take saunas.
Finnish tanks need a built in Sauna to be effective.
Would you be able to do a video about the "Jansa Plan" and Austria's potential for military resistance to the Anschluss? To the best of my knowledge the only english-language scholarly analysis of it is a Masters Thesis that can be found on McGill's website, and it paints a rather optimistic picture of Austria's chances. I was wondering if German/Austrian scholars had given the concept much analysis and what their conclusions were, as well as what the Jansa plan called for (assuming it is an accessible document).
able yes, but I am generally not too keen on hypothetical scenarios and I actually came across basically nothing in German literature.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Understood. Thank you for the swift reply.
As an Ex British soldier, at a Regimental Reunion Our SQN Leader Major Hall ( Tankies) and who is now a General Stated....Never fight in the Balkans- Never march on Moscow - and Never trust the RAF....he got a laugh with that one.
Great video. Full of information 👍🏻.
...GREAT VIDEO!!! I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS!!!
great work. thank you.
Excellent.....a formidable enemy also...
Love the videos. Please, consider reducing the echo effect found in voice track. Voice comes thru muffled and hard to understand. Narrator's English is quite fine; it is issue with voice track.
Wow at 11:52 it says outpost crews have to hold to the last man ..... actually printed out ! How many volunteers for the outposts ?
3:42 that's amazing. We need that in English
You do good service to all. These details are totally lacking in the propaganda histories we get. Humans individually, and our political systems have far more in common than not.
Great video!
Wirklich toll!!
danke!
Don't worry Bernhard, you'll get em' next time.
If only
Good video 👍
So the higher ups always underestimate the Soviets in comparison to the officers serving directly at the frontline
What was the most used German warcry in ww2? Like what soldiers yelled when they charged?
They yelled out the whole of the song "Teutonic Terror" from Accept /watch?v=req-oDf2ZRc
On any of your channels would you be able to do a video on the 13th SS handschar division or the 12th SS panzer division?
13:02 ...and therefore entitled to one of those T-shirts?...
very good info
I suggest Guderian's book 'Panzer Leader ' to some of the commentators. Very interesting.
But read it with a HUGE grain of salt(aka mount Kali). Guderian after the war had a tendency to both overstate his role in the development of tank warfare and claimed that he objected to decisions that turned out wrong in hindsight even though no documents can be found that would confirm his objections at the time (meaning: in all likelihood he didn't).
thank you
Much appreciated. I'm looking at Barbarossa right now in hopes of playing a solo miniature wargaming campaign. Thanx.
Is this game done by yourself or bought?
@@wernerheisenberg71 I play with the Jagdpanzer 2nd Edition rules. But the campaign rules I'm still working on.
Imagine your entire front is based on handful outposts.
This manual from start meant to loose the war.
"Unübersichtlichkeit" -a thing that is confusing, because of it's depth, scope and what is generally unknown or hidden from view.
An American phrase we use: "You don't know what you don't know you don't know." (If that makes any sense.)
I love German. It's so deliciously precise, yet simple in it's construction.
The Dutch word is: onoverzichtelijkheid.
Meaning: Inability to keep a clear overview.
Any chance of getting the Cät Person shirts re-released (whether on Everpress or TeeSpring.com?
Did the Waffen-SS also have reconnaissance troops, or just the Heer? I seem to recall there was a parachute division (battalion?) of the Waffen-SS too.
yes, recon units are regular troops when it comes to combined arms, meanwhile parachute are quite specialized. I think there were some waffen-ss parachute units.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized so there were Waffen-SS recon groups then?
@@pieterwillembotha6719 Watch this video on how a motorized infantry division was setup: th-cam.com/video/e2HD2ZTs_Kg/w-d-xo.html this should you give some basic understanding.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized ty
A German officer noted about the war in the East that the russians had a far greater capacity at dying than the germans. And by that he meant that the russians had another mentality and conception of life and death. The didn't fear it as the more modern and secularized germans did.
Source and elaboration?
You have zee funniest jerman AXENT. Do you adopt it on PUHPEZ? You could appear in any WWII movie in a black uniform to amend Patreon... But seriously: Great content. Very good!! Thanks. And great new look with the beard...
10:08 reads "strongly massaged infantry" lol.
In short: Don't poke the bear or he'll eat your face :D
A great video. what is medium range?
As the kar98 without scope was meant to be shot up to like 2km (judging by its iron sights), medium range, with scope, was probably meant to be between 2km and wherever the curve of the planet started to prevent direct sight? xD
Depends on the weapon systems. Small arms? 150-300m or so. Mid-late war tank fighting? 500-1000m or so.
Dunno, but since snipers rarely shot farther than 200m in WW2, likely closer than that
@@DagarCoH hi thank you- so the "fronts" were usually less then 300 yds apart? in Russia? I am referring to his comment about sniping being done at medium ranges.
@@samstewart4807 hmm, that referred not to designated snipers as much as to squad snipers. I doubt they got the extensive marksman training 'real' snipers had.
But to your question: I don't know yards, but yeah, infantry fights in WW2 were pretty close affairs afaik.
Unuebersichtlihkeit = inability to keep something under close observation?
Hmmm I disagree at least on the "close". Also it is more a trait of the object, inability is too subject focused.
In Dutch we have a similar word: onoverzichtelijkheid.
Inability to keep a clear overview.
is the term "outpost" the same as listening post . or does it have more strength?
nevermind, i should watch the whole video before i ask !
10:20 Ah, a classic... Typical of an army organised by Boris Shaposhnikov...
Un-oversighted-ness. To me, it could mean that one battle could be taking place over such a large area, a local commander would have a difficult time keeping track of everything, OR, With the Soviet "swarming" tactics and use of constant counterattack as a defensive tactic, that conditions would be so fluid as to be impossible to direct moment to moment by use of messengers getting to and from the local command structure. Just conjecture, but an educated one. Helps to know enough German to be wrong about almost all of it, but to be able to transliterate it.
Using this video to plan my Hearts of Iron German playthrough.
For the Kaiser!
I don't see that comment on the Soviet soldier as negative but one of brutal realistic respect given the situation at the time.
But then I'm Australian. Our compliments tend to be left handed.
Must of been hella disconcerting for the Germans to have to face the Russian drive to fight on his own terms. Hard, deceitful, cruel, up close and personal were some of the few assets the Soviet had available to face that largely mechanized monster.
No question, Ivan had the starch for the job.
Deepest respect boys.
In German there is "List" (cunning) and "Hinterlist" (deceit), e.g., for the British Commandos at Dieppe the report read used "List", here they used "Hinterlist".
Forgot to link the red army myths video in the annotations/i thing
thx, it is the description, since I am limited to 5 cards by YT.
That was interesting.
Btw, you could have a cät person tshirt with german aufklärer sneaking like cats. Whatever that looks like.🤔
*laughs in deceitfulness and cruelness*
too much USA spam....and Vodka...now Russia is a dumpster fire..
I love your presentations they are concise and to the point but one the major problems the wehamacht encountered and was not prepared for in the osfront was not issuing severe winter clothing and the Luftwaffe not having 4 engine bombers where they could of bombed and shut down the factories in the Ur@ld$
Do not underestimate strategic depth.
German hurrah, that's new, great video.
Das könnte Sie vielleicht interessieren: www.spiegel.de/geschichte/alpenwall-mussolinis-heimliche-suedtirol-bunker-gegen-hitler-a-1297565.html
Ein Spiegel-Online-Artikel zum italienischen Festungswall, der 1939(!) an der deutsch-italienischen Grenze von Mussolini in Auftrag gegeben wurde und ungeheure Summen verschlang. War zumindest mir völlig unbekannt, aber vielleicht wissen Sie da mehr und machen mal ein Video darüber?
Derselbe Spiegel der das G36 kritisiert hat? Der sich drüber aufgeregt hat, dass Soldaten eine Bar wie einen Bunker bauen... Also, wenn ich was in den deutschen oder österreichischen Medien zu Militär(Geschichte) lese, dann muss ich davon ausgehen, dass jemand seine Hausaufgaben nicht gemacht und ich wohl gerade Blödsinn lese, deshalb lass ich es inzwischen.
Ihre Amazon Wunschliste ist leer. Schade. ;-)
danke, mir geht der Platz aus :/
That is an awesome cat shirt
This is a good place to ask about experience. During the early part of WW2, both the Germans and the Japanese not only had the best tactics, equipment and training, as long they stayed alive, but the also had the most experience. The Japanese Naval Air Arm for instance.
This would be a good reason for a video. I want to talk about not only armored but really what will be known as mechanized infantry. Tanks must have infantry and they really need infantry trained for it and experience doing it. The infantry tends to die at a faster rate and is harder to replace. And the German stayed ahead of the curve when it came to experience. By the Battle of France and then Barrborrsa the Germans had a lot of experienced men, men who have moved together in vehicles and Combined Arms for 100's of miles. Which is more then any other Nation's Army could do.
But with attrition, you not only lose the most experienced, in attacking you lose the most aggressive and some of the best. The Soviets, on the other hand, were like the United States Naval Air. They had numbers of their side. (and a much bigger training system. I feel that the American ramp up in training from nothing to everything is not appreciated) The Soviets did not need tanks or guns or anything that would last a long time and could be taken care of with training. For a while, all the had to do was plug holes and most importantly, kill or would as many of the experienced German soldiers as possible. You look at Stalingrad and at first glance, you see the German have some friendly divisions. But they are men given equipment and put together.
IMO, for the Germans and it should be for everyone (The Israelis practice this) that the most valuable "weapon system" and hardest to replace is a trained and experienced crew. In fact, as far as experienced in battle, the Germans lost a lot of the best men that they had and they could not simply afford to lose that many without replacements. And those numbers were impossible to replace.
That reminds me. Your video/timeline/build line of why the Japanese could not win WW2 was a masterwork. If it was early 1941 and I could see that Admiral Yamamoto got a copy of that (in the video of that time), he would try hard to stop the war from starting, lol.
I have two: Never attack Russia, never attack China.
Not exactly, never try to conquer Russia or China, it is perfectly possible to attack and defeat these countries, as has happened historically several times, just not to turn the conflict into an ideological struggle to the death and have limited goals. But of course, nuclear weapons have completely changed the rules of the game.
In other words not too much , the issue of Barbarossa and post 1941 german war efforts was their bad intelligence service , Canaris was a traitor how can you learn anything if the head of your intelligence gathering branch is plotting against you , is like if the head of the cia was a soviet mole during the Cold War or an Islamic agent during the war against ISIS or alqeda , I always think of the enigma machine , the British did pass over a lot of intelligence to the Soviets during Barbarossa for instance in the battle of Kursk , because of enigma , it’s very possible that they knew about that but never communicated to hitler imo , the Soviets had a huge network infiltrated in Germany since before hitler came. To power it was dismantled only in later in the war
marty methuselah the problem wasn’t the agency but the people in charge too bad that Hydrich died he would’ve been an amazing head of the german secret service , I’m not talking about modern days I mean Germany after 1945 is out of history
Barbarossa!
A BRILLIANT FILM! Jane Fonda at her best!
also dieser mann ist perfekt für mich
I would translate "grausam" not as "cruel" but as "gruesome," which is even more insulting. Similarly I would translate "hinterlistig" not as "deceitful" but as "underhanded." Grausam, hinterlistig kerlen.
I heard there are some new cats on Russian front these days, and they are being put down just like those cats of old.
I find it interesting that German language refers to the enemy in singular (Der Russe instead of Die Russen) the same like Russians refer to the enemy (Немец instead of Немцы)
" Amateurs talk about tactics Professionals talk about logistics".
(Forget the author).
The Red Army won because it had a Superior Military Doctrine.
● This Doctrine prepared the entire country for long term warfare. Joseph Stalin's 5 Year plan enabled the Red Army to benefit from the surge of weapons that made it the largest in the World.i.e. the Army and airforce.
● This Doctrine recognized that defeating a technologically advanced industrial economy took "successive " battles, defences in depth and Deep penetration to surround and destroy the enemy not to mention tremendous casualties.
● These fundamental goals also dictated the design of weapons i.e. reliability, ability to mass produce quickly and complemented the Operational Objectives.
● The Germans Generals being clueless about the Strategic picture (as Hitler observed) could not understand that while they may have won battles they were losing the war as the narrow focus on tactics observed by the narrator confirms this.
Col. David Glantz made this observation when he critiqued Manstein's "Lost Victories". Manstein gloated over stopping the 5th Tank Guards Army while not realizing STAVKA blocked Manstein while they destroyed Army Group South.
● Also explains why the Nazi criminals continued to focus on huge expensive unreliable weapons hoping for a decisive victory.
These weapons were also counterproductive to the principles (Bewegunskrieg) that won them Western Europe!
● The Cold War obscured the true capabilities of the Red army so we continue to underestimate them and overvalue our pitiful (relatively) contribution in defeating the Nazis.
camouflage background
Lessons learned on eastern front by Germans: "We are loosing!"
Firstname Lastname losing...
Lesson #1 : Wear warm clothes in winter
Lesson #2-10 : See lesson 1.
@@HA-gu1qk you could say the Germans were defeated when they failed to take any of their objectives in 1941. And winter did play a significant part in the failure of that years campaign and their being beaten back from Moscow.
Lesson one. All humanity is one family and should be treated as one family.
Lesson two. Love thy neighbours.
Lesson three. Thou shall not kill.
Lesson four. Life, liberty, property and honour of every person are inviolable.
Lesson five. Treat your brother as you will treat yourself.
Lesson six.. Fighting must only be done in self defense. All offensive wars are illegal.
Your mic is more toasty here than usual. Whatever you did to your recording setup, you should undo it.
Toasty?
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Its crackling, making it hard to hear you.
"Bring more mittens."
In the time of war in soviet union every one contributing to the war were soldiers, event using a gun or tractor for food.
I would appreciate more images behind not so much text, its not a criticism just a suggestion. Thank you.
You may have mistaken the channel. This is Military History Not Visualized.
His other channel is Military History Visualized.
AudieHolland you are right! Sorry!
@@varovaro1967 No worries. I made the same mistake and was wondering why no nice schematics, then I checked again and... Huh!
Don`t forget your Long John`s...
I used to get you and TIK confused. Yes, I'm American. Yes, also from Florida. My bad.
how so? Cause I think we sound completely different, but then again I can't hear the difference between a "V" and "W" in English.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Well, I'm semi kidding. It is more of ...well...honestly your size, body types and the fact that you cover a lot of the same topics. You doing EVERYTHING and TIK doing WW2 Germany and you interset there. I'm pretty well-read and was an Army Officer and from the two of you I have learned so much (I believe that there is always more to learn) You have been branching out with others on TH-cam and some that are not and for some reason, I thought, they should do one together!
The ones you did with the Chieftain and others are great.
You have been knocking stuff out of the park lately. I jump on your new videos. You have answered a lot of those questions in your head. Like "Why not just arm the Ukrainians and others in 1941?" And lately, I've been thinking about Japan, starting at the Coral Sea to the Battle of Midway and on. For me the battle of Guadalcanal was big (it was a campaign) because the Japanese had so far to fly, they got wore down and lost highly trained pilots that they never replaced. (you can't "replace" men with experience) So I saw your "Midway: Why attack the Aleutian Islands?" and I like the "what did the British think" etc.
I have a question for you. We American supposedly (one reason) almost never changed the Sherman because it would slow production. So the Soviets could put two new turrets and up their guns on the T-34 but we could not do it. REALLY?
Thanks my friend for doing what you do. I have to say that for me, you are living the dream.
Well, the Sherman was - from what I know - constantly improved, e.g., the original one had not a telescopic sight and no zoom.
Then the Sherman was fielded in 1942, whereas the T-34 was fielded in 1940. The T-34 was actually scheduled to be improved way earlier to the T-34M (?if I remember correctly), but due to the war the current model was put into mass production. The T-34 had a major short-coming: 2 man turret, no turret basket etc. something the Shermans did not have.
The T-34/85 arrived in 1944 at that point the US also had Shermans with the 76mm. Seriously, I think the main problem is that some people are just bitching around about the Sherman or some "poor decision" usually coming from people that have no idea about logistic, industry etc. So some assessment are just based on unsubstantiated and exaggerated claims in combination with a poor understanding of the realities, context and also the RELEVANT details!
I suggest watching those two videos first
th-cam.com/video/1xTQ-oyo-G4/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/Og2UveOeAVk/w-d-xo.html
and then follow up with these two:
th-cam.com/video/-ZKxmlpbwqk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/Bxac3-aVVKQ/w-d-xo.html
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Thanks, I have seen them, lol. It is not the gun, it is the turret that I see as the problem as far as this one, well-beaten horse of a comment. I do get your points and the ones that the Chieftain made where everything made in the US had to be shipped 3,000 miles. For me, the box that they have to cut out and weld on to the back of Sherman turrets shows it was too small. But shipping everything, getting it to the battle was very important. And you and others have shown that you might start with 200 tanks, but if only 100 make it to battle, then you only have 100. For the Allies, it was the hedgerows in France and all of Italy that was a problem. The Germans were very experienced and we just keep running into set up situations. And then when it opened up some, it was a lack of gas. I kept thinking that is Patton had known he was going to run out of fuel, he would have insisted on diesel tanks 5 years earlier. I think we should have been able to backward engineer the Soviet engine. Years ago, Brazil took some Stuarts and made totally new tanks from them. tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/Brazil/Bernardini-X1A.php And then there are the Israelis.
I'm just nitpicking and was trying to come up with something to ask about, lol. There are standard things I would do with any WW2 tank (with hindsight and years of reading, experience, and training). Widen the tracks and change the engine to a diesel. But then you have to have a good diesel engine and it was a while before we did.
Thanks again!
I should add that your video on the 75 MM round compared to the 76 mm was a clincher, I watched it a couple of times and wrote down the numbers. It reminds me of the study that showed that only 37% of troops actually fired at anyone. Thus, they do not need "rifles". I think it was maybe the perfect tank through its time. It was upgraded as time went on and was what was needed. A moble dependable medium tank with a good all-around gun. And we had a lot of them. They were easy to transport, to fix and to keep running. I remind people that the Sherman (and everything else) had to be transported for 1,000 of miles.
Lesson number 1
Do not piss off the Russians
Except if you're Wilhelm the II then GUTEN TAG
Bruh you're literally giving them tips at this point
There is only one lesson to learn from Operation Barbarossa, don't mess with the bear!
because there's always a next time.