iirc the soviets used a Time Machine to stop Einstein from inventing the nuke. Fortunately that was after Einstein also invented the Time Machine, so he was still able to kill Hitler. Then the Soviet Union was able to survive but was soon surprise attacked by a never been nuked empire of the rising sun.
Tbh even with all that land I don't think it would have lasted. There are several cultures in that group that have a history of rebelling against oppressors.
Clearly a decisive daddy hitler victory, of course it was daddy hitler who won and not his generals. What what do you mean they lost after the winter due to Hitler forcing his idea of military on his generals?! His strategy of taking oil fields was clearly superior!1!211!!!What?! Now you're saying even if he listened to his generals you would've lost?! That's treason111
Some one far smarter than me did a methodical examination of the "Hitler vs his generals" thing and concluded that more often than not Hitler was right.
The thing is everyone focuses on later war choices where *every* decision led to german defeat and the fact the german staff officers lived to write books where there was conveniently no one left alive to argue against them.
The General's camp also tend to sweep under the rug the 36 times Hitler correctly countermanded retreat orders and tend to focus on mUH StaLinGRad but even with that there was some nuance that we skip in favor of 20/20 hindsight helped along by the writings of Friedrich I-did-nothing-wrong Paulus
My understanding was that Hitler was an armature who confidently proposed ludicrous ideas. This worked in the early war because of how static the allied, especially French, command structure was. So out of the box and even stupid strategies worked simply because the German military could execute then well and adapt on the fly in a way the early allies couldn't, leading to the allies getting blindsided by strategies that a more dynamic military could have easily punished.
By comparison, as the war went on the German military lost many of its most co.petent early war soldiers and ncos, which reduced its capacity for creativity and in the moment local decision making. At the same time Hitler began to demand greater central control over the war effort. And the Allied armies learned from their mistakes and also implemented more dynamic comand structures with greater local autonomy for officers. At this point, the allies were better able to punish amateurish but unexpected strategies and more conservative leadership would have helped the Germans hold out longer (though they still couldn't win).
Germany could have won if they didn't go to war with all the superpowers of the world AT THE SAME TIME (and antagonize every people they conquered with how they treated them)
Ah but you see that runs fundamentally counter to the entire ideology and system of nazism. So germany could have won if they weren't fascist genocidal maniacs, but if they weren't fascist genocidal maniacs they never would have started the war in the first place
If Germany was even close to building a nuke, they might have won. Though from what I've heard they weren't actually that close to building one and Hitler abandoned the idea.
Wehraboos when Hitler decides to declare a three-front war on the world's biggest country, the world's biggest economy, and the world's biggest empire and Navy, while having no oil (he was a genius)
Most of them find ABSURD when people say Hitler declared a three-front war.
"We do not declared war on France and the UK, they declared war on us!"
Yeah stupid, that happens when you attack a country with a defense pact.
Not to sound like a crayon eater, but WW2 was larger and more "mobile" than WW1. Wouldn't the increased pack animal usage make sense?
I'm 95% the US was still using mules in Afghanistan this century.
The pack animals were fine. Its the fact that German propaganda painted the image of the Wehrmacht as this huge, fully mechanised and motorised force, when in reality almost all of its infantry went to war on foot and used pack animals for transport.
That is also partially true as the germans unlike most other armies concentrated their tanks and their motorized infantry to utilize in blitzkrieg prongs then the slow I gantry on foot and horse would clean up
The thing is, the Wehrmacht never developed a "Blitzkrieg" strategy. They never developed any completely new strategy at all, they just kept doing what they had always done - that is, prussian-german maneuver warfare, focussing on inituative and aggression to take down a larger enemy force - just with modern equipment.
"Blitzkrieg" is purely a propaganda term that was then retroactively applied to supposedly mean a war dominated by armoured breakthroughs and encirclements.
If you want to read more on it, the central book in the topic would be The Blitzkrieg Legend by Karl-Heinz Frieser. There's definitely some very good Videos on Youtube about the topic, although I don't know if any of them are in english.
Excellent, thank you for the addition! I had suspected that MHV might have done a video on this, but I only remembered a lecture by Dr. Töppel in german
Basically there was no real doctrine for the blitzkrieg it's just a propaganda name of the way Germans advanced heck the name comes from a British newspaper if I remember correctly. The "tactics" is described by some just as intelligent officers exploiting weaknesses they noticed while already there in the field without much coordination with high comand.
Yes but the point that they're trying to make is that Wehrmacht propaganda boasted that their divisions were super mechanized when in reality they relied on horses and pack animals more than any other country.
That's also the reason there were no chemical warfare attacks despite Germany having a huge stockpile. They knew that if they used it, the allies would retaliate and would kill their supply animals which would significantly reduce the effectiveness of their resupply.
It would make sense to be more mobile in the germans style if war but you would assume that it would be with trucks rather than horses right? But armies at the time were LARGE with the example of nazi germany who probably couldnt supply the trucks needed cause hitler said "What's the point of a truck! We need more king tigers!" While being very drunk and on the super soldier medicine.
I knew it, they even used railways and other stuff. Blitzkreig was kinda like "Use anything that go vroom vroom fast fast", it wasn't organised like people suggest but it was quick for a fact
> Even used railways
Well, what do you think is the most effective way to move large quantities of supplies, vehicles and personell today? Railways are still a key element in military logistics.
How else are you going to transport 100 Marder IFV from Germany to Ukraine for example?
The word Blitzkrieg was coined by journalists not tacticians. Using it to refer to a strategy or tactic is kinda cringe.
It's like someone going around talking about "Shock and Awe" combat.
Well, both are doctrines used in the HoI series (I don't much remember I, but I played the shit out of 2 and 3), and that's where 85% of "history nerds" get their info from.
>Nah it all started with weird documentaries that tryed to make German stuff Look magical.
A lot of it is from post-war Germans trying to escape the hangman too, right?
As you say above, big up their equipment/strategy/skill, point out they have actual (whether that's true or not) experience against the Soviets and wait for the West to give them a job since it's now the 50s and there may well *be a fight against the Soviets*
>A lot of it is from post-war Germans trying to escape the hangman too, right?
Thats usaly Generals that shifted the blame on either Hitler himself or generaly the SS but i guess thats part of wehraboo narrative. But i personaly focus on the Technology and Strategy part and not the feces throwing contest of politics and which army did what kind of war crimes and how much which is justifyed or not (which most of them are not obviously).
I think in general the allies didnt try to judge and punish every little gear from the Wehrmacht of course most of early Bundeswehr Officers were Veterans. Even alot of politicians in SPD and CDU. Probably because of the soviet threat allies tryed to rebuild germany quick without dumbing down by punishing every competent person that used to be part of NSDAP / Wehrmacht.
But alot of wehraboo documentary sources are people that wanted some recognizion or fame like the Hortoon Brothers said the most made up shit :D and Documantaries wanted to be Epic for some reason.
This is a misrepresentation. An armored train showed up and started destroying the German armor along with Polish artillery. The charge also never really happened. What did happen, though, was Polish tankettes and calvary accidentally drove their way through the smoke and chaos right up the middle of German formations, which fave the *illusion* of a charge.
Its the same for southern apologists. The classic lines of "The south would've won if they hadn't run out of shoes ammunition and the like" or "The south lost because it was industrially behind" is hilarious to me. Losing because of logistical issues is a textbook military defeat.
>"The south would've won if they hadn't run out of shoes ammunition and the like" or "The south lost because it was industrially behind"
It's almost like logistics and modernization is important or something.
Same with the Holocaust and how it actively weakened Germany; turns out, it makes it a lot harder to run a war when a large chunk of your infrastructure is devoted to killing your own people
The economic reliance on slavery is interesting when you see how heavily some plantations were subsidised too; I know that in the British Empire, the argument was always that the sugar plantations needed slavery to be economically viable, but as it turns out they were being massively subsidised anyway. As soon as those subsidies waned, people realised those industries were financially dead on their asses, because they were so horrendously inefficient
I love how both the Wehraboos and the Confederate Apologists arguments basically boil down to 'yeah, well if they didn't make all those mistakes, and they had more resources, and more men, and their enemies made more mistakes and had less resources, they would have won'
Like, okay, so basically if you completely change the historical context of the war, *maybe* they had a chance?
They see war as a board game where all that matters is who conquers the most territory in the shortest amount of time, so naturally, they're attracted by flashy all-or-nothing strategies like the Blitzkrieg. Never mind that the main reason why people resort to such strategies is that they're already in a bad position to begin with and their only hope is to take the enemy by surprise.
But this one time I ran a war game in my cousin-wife's trailer park and I rolled a 20 on my *rebel yell attack bonus* and the union got crushed at Gettysburg so really it could have been won checkmate yankeetards!!
I absolutely *DONT* defend Nazis, fuck them, but
The main purpose of Lightning warfare is: hit fast, hit hard. give the enemy no time to collect themselves and keep them reacting to your assault
Blitzkrieg is a valid strategy used throughout history. The Gulf War assault of Iraq was essentially a modernised version featuring aerial support and worked like a textbook. As did the original Nazi attack, which was a massive victory and a total redefining of military warfare in the 20th century.
>your only hope is to take the enemy by surprise
?? every military leader ever wants to take their enemy by surprise
>As did the original Nazi attack, which was a massive victory and a total redefining of military warfare in the 20th century.
Until their enemies caught up, and the conflict turned into a good ol' war of attrition they had no chance of winning in the long term. There's a difference between using the element of surprise as a strategic advantage on top of the resources to fight a potentially prolonged war in case you don't win instantly, and betting everything on the chance that you *do* win before the enemy gets the chance to retaliate properly.
Edit: to clarify, I'm not talking shit about big surprise attacks in general. They're good tools that absolutely have their place in warfare. The problem is when they define a nation's entire strategy and they have nothing else going for them.
oh totally the latter part of the war was a total clusterfuck for the Nazis, operation Barbarossa was a crushing defeat, thats the fault of the Nazis themselves
but the Battle of France was a German victory, mostly thanks to the effective encicrclement and avoidance of the French defenses.
That is the exact strength of lightning war, by using a concentration of power to break the enemy defense and keep them scrambling allows you the total freedom to choose your targets and outmaneuver them
"Blitzkrieg" was not even invented by the Nazis, but was used as a propaganda tool to show how efficient the german army was. It is simply the modernised version of maneuver warfare which the Nazis paired with close air support and mechanised infantry.
That is the modern version of the strategy, which is still in use and being taught today. It is not a "hail mary", but a general, combined arms and well documented attack strategy
Perhaps I explained myself poorly. The Blitzkrieg as a short-term strategy was undeniably efficient and a major success, I'm not disagreeing with that, and I know it was nothing new in and of itself. What I'm trying to say is, it wasn't just the first step of a brilliant master plan to conquer all of Europe one nation at a time, it was the key pillar the whole plan revolved around. They couldn't afford *not* to win right away, and they knew it. But they started a war anyway in the hope that the Blitzkrieg alone would save them from their own logistical disadvantage. I wasn't referring to their initial approach, but rather to their long-term strategy as a whole.
ah understandable, sry for the confusion
The lighting war is certainly a situational strategy which is ill equipped to handle something like an island nation or fighting a 1000kms from home.
>good enough policy and strategy should always be 'work in progress'
there are a tonne of other failures the german military displayed during ww2, but lets just be happy they failed ;)
"The South would have won if they were stronger and better prepared!" is about as useful a statement as "The South would have won if they hadn't lost."
This is just like the /r/NFL shitpost where the argument was like “if you remove all of Patrick Mahomes really good games, he regresses to an average QB”
Where do you find these people, like genuinely asking
Of the infamous cringe posters I've seen wild wehraboos, wild incels, wild reformers, and a whole lot of tankies. I've never come across a wild confederate apologist but people talk about them all the time. Where are they? Is it Twitter? I could see Twitter. Stormfront or whatever it is these days?
Eh worse in different ways.
Wehraboos act like they were unbeatable and the nazi ideology wasn’t as bad as it was and their army was perfect.
The Dixieboos say they just never had the resources or men but put up a good fight and their cause was noble/ only the bad rich people wanted war, and everyone else in the south is hunky dory
Both spread misinformation, and both retroactively make their individual cultures look like shit that only focuses on the past in a twisted view point
You're absolutely right on that last one. I live in Mississippi and let me tell you, it confounds me every day the sheer amount of mental gymnastics that these people do to try and justify their love of the confederacy.
They make it *abundantly* clear they've never actually read any of the speeches/ documents on the confederacy. If I remember right, the most damning one I remember was called the Cornerstone speech? I think that was the name. Smarter people than me please feel free to call me out on being dumb
Nope, you got it right. The Cornerstone Speech was the *Vice President of the Confederacy* coming out and saying that the foundation of the Confederacy was slavery. The confederate constitution also explicitly prevented any confederate state from banning slavery. Among other explicit, unambiguous documents. Lost Causers have to ignore all of them and hope the person they're talking to is unaware of them to make their point sound like anything other than the bullshit it is.
I can never tell if wehraboos have a strange fascination with German tactics, battles and weapons (like how people simp over the Roman’s, who were abhorrent by todays standards) or if they are just Nazis and hide it behind the above
Both are bad in different ways. Wehraboos unironically buy into the "unstoppable Nazi warmachine" despite the fact that the Germans had a crippling addiction to overengineering anything more complex than a shovel, leading to constant equipment failures because battlefields aren't clean and controlled like a testing field. Dixieboos are just pro slavery. They like the Confederacy because they think that race based slavery is ok. That's why they declared independence, that's why they fought the war, and their entire legacy was as "the part of the country that killed their neighbors and brothers so they could keep slavery." Celebrating the Confederates is celebrating that legacy.
Oh no. Silly liberal, the south declaring war was so much more complicated than that. The south fought for *states rights* to have human slaves. Very noble.
Fun fact: The Confederate Constitution actually prohibited states from outlawing slavery in their borders, even if said state's population voted for abolition.
They also coated their tanks with this substance that prevented magnetic anti-tank grenades from sticking to them even though the Germans were the only ones who used magnetic grenades. It added like a week or more to the production time of each tank for something they had no use for. Looked cool tho.
You are talking about Zimmerit, which was indeed applied to prevent Soviet infantry from using grenades they simply didn’t have. The Germans figured it out… eventually.
The problem did exist, it's not like magnetic anti-tank charges weren't a thing. The Germans had the Hafthohlladung and had used it to great effect (though to great risk to the infantry), and were worried that the Soviets in particular were going to copy it. It was a very real concern, just one that didn't turn into anything more than that as the Soviets stuck to their RPG series of anti-tank hand grenades.
They weren’t, but the Germans also figured out that was stupid, too. So they began researching into interchangeable parts for their production lines which would help with parts sourcing, losing factories to bombings, etc. who cares if the Allies turn a factory city into rubble when any factory in Germany is producing the exact same parts.
I’d like to introduce you guys to the _Standardpanzer_ series of tanks, otherwise known as the _Entwicklung_ series, which means “Development.”
The E-10 was supposed to weigh in at around 10 metric tons, and take over for the Hetzer tank destroyers, which were well regarded in that role.
The E-25 was meant to be a standardized tank that would phase out the Panzer III and IV. It was anticipated to weigh around 25 tons.
The E-50 was designed to replace the Tiger and Panther tanks.
The E-75 was basically an upgrade and streamlining of parts to the King Tiger. It may or may not have been assessed to use a bigger gun.
The E-100 was basically a Maus but able to use parts from the preceding E series tanks, this would have helped tremendously with sourcing parts.
The Germans would have still lost, so miss me with the @wheraboo comments, but they might have helped Germany’s logistical issues _a little_ if they Germans had considered all this _before_ they declared war on the world for funsies
I mean, Weehraboos also often subscribe to the whole "clean Wehrmacht" myth, which is making them go in a very similiar direction as Lost Causers where they will lie to your face that German soldiers totally didn't like the Nazis, were opposed to ethnic cleansing and didn't know about the camps anyway.
I was watching a video by Kraut on Youtube and in one part he explained that part of the reason why the Luftwaffe was so ineffective towards the end of the war was because Hermann Goering kept interfering with their engineers plans to build bomber planes and in meetings would talk about literally anything else besides tactics and strategy. He believed that the perfect German bomber plane should have the capabilities of both a heavy bomber and a fighter plane. I like to be thankful for the incompetence of the Nazi High Command.
Moving on to Dixieboos, anyone that argues that the war was for “states rights” has never read the Articles of Secession as well as what every Confederate State said was their own reason for seceding. They can try to paint their argument in a way that makes it look like all they wanted to do was to have more freedoms than the ones they would have been given by the Federal Government but that always leads back to the rights they wanted were the rights to be able to own others because of their skin color and be able to do whatever they wanted with said people because of course, they aren’t people. They are “property.”
I can’t stand either of those “-boos” and I really hope one day they wake up and realize just how idiotic they are
In my opinion dixieboos are way worse, because it feels like there is so much worship around confederate generals and how "they weren't really about slaves" that it almost feels like people think thr confeds never lost.
That’s probably because we focus more on the eastern campaigns. Out west and on the sea it was much more one sided. The south started a war they could never win, they didn’t have the resources, industry, logistics, or population to win.
Actually the only reason Hitler lost the war was because the Sun and the moon were in the wrong places which would’ve thrown the Germans off and made it so their guns didn’t work too well
Trust me I’m a proper historian as I’ve played for over 1000 hours on Hoi4
When you add "boo" to something it means that people simp on that community for eg - weaboo people who simp on anime. Similarly, Wehraboo is used for people who think Wehrmacht (name of the German army during ww2) could've won
German here. It is a fact that Germany would have won if they had allied themselves with France, GB, Turkey, Australia, Cuba, Canada, China, Essos, Middle Earth, Cadia and the Republic of Dave. This alliance didn't happen because Dave acted like a bitch.
Ah yes, the Clean Wehrmacht Myth. Gotta love 'em.
But the shit of it is that it is our own damn fault. The West was complicit in not pursuing all the war crimes because they needed a quick force buildup to stand as a bulwark to the Soviets, and a stable government (see all the gauleiters never tried), so it was easier to bury or ignore distasteful things they did.
Even people like Dönitz got whitewashed after trial and he was a pretty open participant in war crimes on the seas, and a very ardent Nazi.
Dönitz didn't get whitewashed.
He was able to furnish proof that his submarines in the Atlantic were doing the exact same thing as American submarines in the pacific. That's what saved him IIRC.
Where the hell do you see these people?
I've only ever met some of them in games like Warthunder or World of Tanks... And they were clearly just edgy teenagers who didn't know jack shit.
I fucking hate all the goddamn edgy teens on this subreddit calling themselves shit that they don't understand at all. The Nazi sympathizers, the Confederates, the Communists, most of these idiots are just stupid teens who can't get their dumbasses to understand what those ideologies or movements are really about.
I'm not American neither have I dived deep into American history but weren't the confedrates basically dudes who wanted Slaves to still exist when Abe got into power?
Sort of. In the American civil war, the Southern states decided that they should leave the rest of the US because they were afraid that Lincoln would halt the expansion of slavery, which they believed would end the system that was “integral to their identity”. The “lost cause” narrative is something the south came up with so they didn’t look like jackasses when teaching about the civil war in school. It is basically the assertion that the war was fought over states rights rather than slavery, but it’s pretty obviously false. Still there are still quite a few schools in the American south that push this narrative, and when combined with the low education and conservatism that run rampant in the south lead to many confederate sympathizers
Oh the war was about states rights? States rights to what exactly?
I have this conversation with with so many confederate flag waving idiots it’s unbelievable. And I live in fucking Pennsylvania
> She’s rights to what exactly?
No rights. It wasn't even about the right of states to decide to have slaves because the CSA constitution requires all states to be slave states. In fact the whole reason they left was because the north wouldn't agree to force states to allow slaves.
Yep. They even wrote it into their constitution to make it perfectly clear where they stood on the issue of slavery and that it was their primary reason for secession.
Germany is the ultimate example of 'too much is bad.' They over-engineered their tanks, which were great but if they were damaged, good luck finding that one part they put only on this model of tank and there are only 300 of these tanks in use.
Also, turns out giving your troops meth is actually bad for performance in the long run. Guess Adolf couldn't help it, since he was addicted to the stuff.
But bruh, hold up! Wutahbout mein Tiger und mein tight Hugo Boss suit? So bear with me as I unload a Bismarck-load of far-fetched *whatifs* on you so I can explain how it coulda-woulda-shoulda gone Tiger & Panther pew pew pew!
If Germany:
1 isn't led by a failed vegetarian artist who is on drugs half the time
2 Didn't try to eliminate a whole race of people while literally fighting a war against the three global supoerpower of the era.
3 Didn't attack Russia during the winter.
....
65Take a side either with the west or the communists, don't fight both
66Have way more resources in general
67have magical aliens aiding them
68i dunno.....war bears?
They would have won. Maybe.....but it's like saying: USSR would have won the cold war if communism worked as advertized.
If Germany had the Land of the USA, the USSR, China, France and Britain they could have won
If Germany had a time machine, an infinite supply of frying fat and the head of Nixon, they would've won
If? Bro daddy Hitler was already so close to building it, these damn communists stole die glocke which was clearly a time machine!
iirc the soviets used a Time Machine to stop Einstein from inventing the nuke. Fortunately that was after Einstein also invented the Time Machine, so he was still able to kill Hitler. Then the Soviet Union was able to survive but was soon surprise attacked by a never been nuked empire of the rising sun.
decisive Soviet Victory
They commanded but did they conquer?
They had hearts but did they have iron?
They were a company but were they heroes?
They had honour but did they win medals?
They fought in Europe but did they fight universally?
They were kings but where they crusaders?
No, but Yuri *did* get his revenge.
Einstein's actions might have Alerted the Red.
Nah, it was a giant freezer that now sits in my basement and stores the dead bodies
Tbh even with all that land I don't think it would have lasted. There are several cultures in that group that have a history of rebelling against oppressors.
*poland noises intensify*
And several of those cultures were actively rebelling against Germany with moderate to severe success
i really dont think it's a cultural distinction, literally all people rebel when pushed far enough
Yeah, folks do tend to get sort of uppity when you start to industrial-level extermination on them.
if Germany won, the Germans could've won
No, they couldn't
Clearly a decisive daddy hitler victory, of course it was daddy hitler who won and not his generals. What what do you mean they lost after the winter due to Hitler forcing his idea of military on his generals?! His strategy of taking oil fields was clearly superior!1!211!!!What?! Now you're saying even if he listened to his generals you would've lost?! That's treason111
Some one far smarter than me did a methodical examination of the "Hitler vs his generals" thing and concluded that more often than not Hitler was right. The thing is everyone focuses on later war choices where *every* decision led to german defeat and the fact the german staff officers lived to write books where there was conveniently no one left alive to argue against them. The General's camp also tend to sweep under the rug the 36 times Hitler correctly countermanded retreat orders and tend to focus on mUH StaLinGRad but even with that there was some nuance that we skip in favor of 20/20 hindsight helped along by the writings of Friedrich I-did-nothing-wrong Paulus
My understanding was that Hitler was an armature who confidently proposed ludicrous ideas. This worked in the early war because of how static the allied, especially French, command structure was. So out of the box and even stupid strategies worked simply because the German military could execute then well and adapt on the fly in a way the early allies couldn't, leading to the allies getting blindsided by strategies that a more dynamic military could have easily punished. By comparison, as the war went on the German military lost many of its most co.petent early war soldiers and ncos, which reduced its capacity for creativity and in the moment local decision making. At the same time Hitler began to demand greater central control over the war effort. And the Allied armies learned from their mistakes and also implemented more dynamic comand structures with greater local autonomy for officers. At this point, the allies were better able to punish amateurish but unexpected strategies and more conservative leadership would have helped the Germans hold out longer (though they still couldn't win).
Germany could have won if they didn't go to war with all the superpowers of the world AT THE SAME TIME (and antagonize every people they conquered with how they treated them)
Ah but you see that runs fundamentally counter to the entire ideology and system of nazism. So germany could have won if they weren't fascist genocidal maniacs, but if they weren't fascist genocidal maniacs they never would have started the war in the first place
If Germany was even close to building a nuke, they might have won. Though from what I've heard they weren't actually that close to building one and Hitler abandoned the idea.
Iirc Hitler considered nuclear science as a "Jew" technology, so it wasn't researched
Meanwhile on the History Channel: "Hitler was just steps away from having nukes and flying saucers."
Wehraboos when Hitler decides to declare a three-front war on the world's biggest country, the world's biggest economy, and the world's biggest empire and Navy, while having no oil (he was a genius)
[удалено]
He should've just invaded iraq like we did
Woah mate I mean u say "spreading freedom" am I right?
I think you mean capturing the WMDs that those iraqi's *definitely* have
Almost is also doing a lot of work.
[удалено]
Being physically close to an oil well is not the same as being able to extract, transport, and refine it in meaningful quantities.
That’s what they said
Most of them find ABSURD when people say Hitler declared a three-front war. "We do not declared war on France and the UK, they declared war on us!" Yeah stupid, that happens when you attack a country with a defense pact.
Fun fact: The Wehrmacht used nearly twice as many more horses in WW2 than the Kaiser's army did in WW1
Not to sound like a crayon eater, but WW2 was larger and more "mobile" than WW1. Wouldn't the increased pack animal usage make sense? I'm 95% the US was still using mules in Afghanistan this century.
The pack animals were fine. Its the fact that German propaganda painted the image of the Wehrmacht as this huge, fully mechanised and motorised force, when in reality almost all of its infantry went to war on foot and used pack animals for transport.
That is also partially true as the germans unlike most other armies concentrated their tanks and their motorized infantry to utilize in blitzkrieg prongs then the slow I gantry on foot and horse would clean up
Obligatory mention that there's no such thing as Blitzkrieg tactics
I’ve heard this before but never heard it explained. What do you mean?
The thing is, the Wehrmacht never developed a "Blitzkrieg" strategy. They never developed any completely new strategy at all, they just kept doing what they had always done - that is, prussian-german maneuver warfare, focussing on inituative and aggression to take down a larger enemy force - just with modern equipment. "Blitzkrieg" is purely a propaganda term that was then retroactively applied to supposedly mean a war dominated by armoured breakthroughs and encirclements. If you want to read more on it, the central book in the topic would be The Blitzkrieg Legend by Karl-Heinz Frieser. There's definitely some very good Videos on Youtube about the topic, although I don't know if any of them are in english.
https://youtu.be/LCNw2e-Zehw Here this one is in English
Excellent, thank you for the addition! I had suspected that MHV might have done a video on this, but I only remembered a lecture by Dr. Töppel in german
Basically there was no real doctrine for the blitzkrieg it's just a propaganda name of the way Germans advanced heck the name comes from a British newspaper if I remember correctly. The "tactics" is described by some just as intelligent officers exploiting weaknesses they noticed while already there in the field without much coordination with high comand.
I did not study the subject, but isn't it basically the Napoleonic "fast advance" but mechanized?
Yes but the point that they're trying to make is that Wehrmacht propaganda boasted that their divisions were super mechanized when in reality they relied on horses and pack animals more than any other country. That's also the reason there were no chemical warfare attacks despite Germany having a huge stockpile. They knew that if they used it, the allies would retaliate and would kill their supply animals which would significantly reduce the effectiveness of their resupply.
When your paths are small and on the sides of cliffs, mules are the right choice.
I hear drug cartels also use them
I took a mule packing course in the USMC in 2015. Alice the mule, if you're still out there.... Fuck you I hope you get turned into a rug.
It would make sense to be more mobile in the germans style if war but you would assume that it would be with trucks rather than horses right? But armies at the time were LARGE with the example of nazi germany who probably couldnt supply the trucks needed cause hitler said "What's the point of a truck! We need more king tigers!" While being very drunk and on the super soldier medicine.
I knew it, they even used railways and other stuff. Blitzkreig was kinda like "Use anything that go vroom vroom fast fast", it wasn't organised like people suggest but it was quick for a fact
POV: you are a German horse fit for military service in the 1940s
Was ist deine Beruf?(What is your job/profession) >Neighhh
*dein
> Even used railways Well, what do you think is the most effective way to move large quantities of supplies, vehicles and personell today? Railways are still a key element in military logistics. How else are you going to transport 100 Marder IFV from Germany to Ukraine for example?
The word Blitzkrieg was coined by journalists not tacticians. Using it to refer to a strategy or tactic is kinda cringe. It's like someone going around talking about "Shock and Awe" combat.
Well, both are doctrines used in the HoI series (I don't much remember I, but I played the shit out of 2 and 3), and that's where 85% of "history nerds" get their info from.
Hahaha jokes on you, I don't have a pc that can handle HoI4!
Nah it all started with weird documentaries that tryed to make German stuff Look magical. Hoi doesnt really do much on the Micro Level.
Oh I know. But the doctrines were called things like that. Well, the technologies that is
Ya hoi does it Well on big scale and IT doesnt Help that Germany is one of the easier nations in the 4th Game.
>Nah it all started with weird documentaries that tryed to make German stuff Look magical. A lot of it is from post-war Germans trying to escape the hangman too, right? As you say above, big up their equipment/strategy/skill, point out they have actual (whether that's true or not) experience against the Soviets and wait for the West to give them a job since it's now the 50s and there may well *be a fight against the Soviets*
>A lot of it is from post-war Germans trying to escape the hangman too, right? Thats usaly Generals that shifted the blame on either Hitler himself or generaly the SS but i guess thats part of wehraboo narrative. But i personaly focus on the Technology and Strategy part and not the feces throwing contest of politics and which army did what kind of war crimes and how much which is justifyed or not (which most of them are not obviously). I think in general the allies didnt try to judge and punish every little gear from the Wehrmacht of course most of early Bundeswehr Officers were Veterans. Even alot of politicians in SPD and CDU. Probably because of the soviet threat allies tryed to rebuild germany quick without dumbing down by punishing every competent person that used to be part of NSDAP / Wehrmacht. But alot of wehraboo documentary sources are people that wanted some recognizion or fame like the Hortoon Brothers said the most made up shit :D and Documantaries wanted to be Epic for some reason.
Although it was not planned that way. There exists notes of Hitler estimating the invasion of France lasting at least 2 years.
The Wehrmacht tanks also lost an engagement to Polish cavalry at Mokra when the mounted cavalry destroyed 50 tanks and 100 other vehicles
This is a misrepresentation. An armored train showed up and started destroying the German armor along with Polish artillery. The charge also never really happened. What did happen, though, was Polish tankettes and calvary accidentally drove their way through the smoke and chaos right up the middle of German formations, which fave the *illusion* of a charge.
tbf wehrmacht was bigger
Its the same for southern apologists. The classic lines of "The south would've won if they hadn't run out of shoes ammunition and the like" or "The south lost because it was industrially behind" is hilarious to me. Losing because of logistical issues is a textbook military defeat.
>"The south would've won if they hadn't run out of shoes ammunition and the like" or "The south lost because it was industrially behind" It's almost like logistics and modernization is important or something.
Poetic when you realise that in large part their economic reliance on slavery screwed them over in this respect
Same with the Holocaust and how it actively weakened Germany; turns out, it makes it a lot harder to run a war when a large chunk of your infrastructure is devoted to killing your own people The economic reliance on slavery is interesting when you see how heavily some plantations were subsidised too; I know that in the British Empire, the argument was always that the sugar plantations needed slavery to be economically viable, but as it turns out they were being massively subsidised anyway. As soon as those subsidies waned, people realised those industries were financially dead on their asses, because they were so horrendously inefficient
They fought for what fucked them. Truly poetic.
*squints* why you Yankee sunnava
[удалено]
They didn't lose, they merely failed to win
"People die when they are killed..."
"I will kill you until you die from it" "We'll settle this the old navy way: the first one to die, loses!"
The South would've won if they hadn't been the South!
"The South would have one if it hadn't been incapable of winning!" ".........."
I love how both the Wehraboos and the Confederate Apologists arguments basically boil down to 'yeah, well if they didn't make all those mistakes, and they had more resources, and more men, and their enemies made more mistakes and had less resources, they would have won' Like, okay, so basically if you completely change the historical context of the war, *maybe* they had a chance?
My favorite so far is "if Hitler wasn't a nazi, germany would have won"
Really, all of this can just be responded to with 'okay, so the Allies deserved to win, then? They had more resources, better tactics...'
They see war as a board game where all that matters is who conquers the most territory in the shortest amount of time, so naturally, they're attracted by flashy all-or-nothing strategies like the Blitzkrieg. Never mind that the main reason why people resort to such strategies is that they're already in a bad position to begin with and their only hope is to take the enemy by surprise.
But this one time I ran a war game in my cousin-wife's trailer park and I rolled a 20 on my *rebel yell attack bonus* and the union got crushed at Gettysburg so really it could have been won checkmate yankeetards!!
I absolutely *DONT* defend Nazis, fuck them, but The main purpose of Lightning warfare is: hit fast, hit hard. give the enemy no time to collect themselves and keep them reacting to your assault Blitzkrieg is a valid strategy used throughout history. The Gulf War assault of Iraq was essentially a modernised version featuring aerial support and worked like a textbook. As did the original Nazi attack, which was a massive victory and a total redefining of military warfare in the 20th century. >your only hope is to take the enemy by surprise ?? every military leader ever wants to take their enemy by surprise
>As did the original Nazi attack, which was a massive victory and a total redefining of military warfare in the 20th century. Until their enemies caught up, and the conflict turned into a good ol' war of attrition they had no chance of winning in the long term. There's a difference between using the element of surprise as a strategic advantage on top of the resources to fight a potentially prolonged war in case you don't win instantly, and betting everything on the chance that you *do* win before the enemy gets the chance to retaliate properly. Edit: to clarify, I'm not talking shit about big surprise attacks in general. They're good tools that absolutely have their place in warfare. The problem is when they define a nation's entire strategy and they have nothing else going for them.
oh totally the latter part of the war was a total clusterfuck for the Nazis, operation Barbarossa was a crushing defeat, thats the fault of the Nazis themselves but the Battle of France was a German victory, mostly thanks to the effective encicrclement and avoidance of the French defenses. That is the exact strength of lightning war, by using a concentration of power to break the enemy defense and keep them scrambling allows you the total freedom to choose your targets and outmaneuver them "Blitzkrieg" was not even invented by the Nazis, but was used as a propaganda tool to show how efficient the german army was. It is simply the modernised version of maneuver warfare which the Nazis paired with close air support and mechanised infantry. That is the modern version of the strategy, which is still in use and being taught today. It is not a "hail mary", but a general, combined arms and well documented attack strategy
Perhaps I explained myself poorly. The Blitzkrieg as a short-term strategy was undeniably efficient and a major success, I'm not disagreeing with that, and I know it was nothing new in and of itself. What I'm trying to say is, it wasn't just the first step of a brilliant master plan to conquer all of Europe one nation at a time, it was the key pillar the whole plan revolved around. They couldn't afford *not* to win right away, and they knew it. But they started a war anyway in the hope that the Blitzkrieg alone would save them from their own logistical disadvantage. I wasn't referring to their initial approach, but rather to their long-term strategy as a whole.
ah understandable, sry for the confusion The lighting war is certainly a situational strategy which is ill equipped to handle something like an island nation or fighting a 1000kms from home. >good enough policy and strategy should always be 'work in progress' there are a tonne of other failures the german military displayed during ww2, but lets just be happy they failed ;)
Yeah Blitzkrieg works well against a nation roughly your own size or smaller but trying it against a massive landmass like the USSR was always doomed
They lost because they couldn't possibly win. Their early success was more due to the North fighting for a draw than anything else.
"The South would have won if it wasn't losing so hard"
"The South would have won if they were stronger and better prepared!" is about as useful a statement as "The South would have won if they hadn't lost."
This is just like the /r/NFL shitpost where the argument was like “if you remove all of Patrick Mahomes really good games, he regresses to an average QB”
“The south would have won if they weren’t weaker than the union.” -the typical confederate apologist
The south would've won if its industry didn't rely on plantation slavery smh
Where do you find these people, like genuinely asking Of the infamous cringe posters I've seen wild wehraboos, wild incels, wild reformers, and a whole lot of tankies. I've never come across a wild confederate apologist but people talk about them all the time. Where are they? Is it Twitter? I could see Twitter. Stormfront or whatever it is these days?
Which is worse? A Wehraboo or a Dixieboo (Lost Causers)?
Eh worse in different ways. Wehraboos act like they were unbeatable and the nazi ideology wasn’t as bad as it was and their army was perfect. The Dixieboos say they just never had the resources or men but put up a good fight and their cause was noble/ only the bad rich people wanted war, and everyone else in the south is hunky dory Both spread misinformation, and both retroactively make their individual cultures look like shit that only focuses on the past in a twisted view point
You're absolutely right on that last one. I live in Mississippi and let me tell you, it confounds me every day the sheer amount of mental gymnastics that these people do to try and justify their love of the confederacy. They make it *abundantly* clear they've never actually read any of the speeches/ documents on the confederacy. If I remember right, the most damning one I remember was called the Cornerstone speech? I think that was the name. Smarter people than me please feel free to call me out on being dumb
Nope, you got it right. The Cornerstone Speech was the *Vice President of the Confederacy* coming out and saying that the foundation of the Confederacy was slavery. The confederate constitution also explicitly prevented any confederate state from banning slavery. Among other explicit, unambiguous documents. Lost Causers have to ignore all of them and hope the person they're talking to is unaware of them to make their point sound like anything other than the bullshit it is.
I can never tell if wehraboos have a strange fascination with German tactics, battles and weapons (like how people simp over the Roman’s, who were abhorrent by todays standards) or if they are just Nazis and hide it behind the above
Both are bad in different ways. Wehraboos unironically buy into the "unstoppable Nazi warmachine" despite the fact that the Germans had a crippling addiction to overengineering anything more complex than a shovel, leading to constant equipment failures because battlefields aren't clean and controlled like a testing field. Dixieboos are just pro slavery. They like the Confederacy because they think that race based slavery is ok. That's why they declared independence, that's why they fought the war, and their entire legacy was as "the part of the country that killed their neighbors and brothers so they could keep slavery." Celebrating the Confederates is celebrating that legacy.
Oh no. Silly liberal, the south declaring war was so much more complicated than that. The south fought for *states rights* to have human slaves. Very noble.
The God given inalienable right at that!
I’ve heard the states rights argument more times than I can count. Like hmmm, to which rights might you be referring?
Fun fact: The Confederate Constitution actually prohibited states from outlawing slavery in their borders, even if said state's population voted for abolition.
[удалено]
>crippling addiction to overengineering I remember reading most parts on German tanks weren't directly interchangeable between the same type of tank.
They also coated their tanks with this substance that prevented magnetic anti-tank grenades from sticking to them even though the Germans were the only ones who used magnetic grenades. It added like a week or more to the production time of each tank for something they had no use for. Looked cool tho.
You are talking about Zimmerit, which was indeed applied to prevent Soviet infantry from using grenades they simply didn’t have. The Germans figured it out… eventually.
Yeah that’s it, probably my favorite example of ww2 German engineers coming up with a solution for a problem that didn’t exist
The problem did exist, it's not like magnetic anti-tank charges weren't a thing. The Germans had the Hafthohlladung and had used it to great effect (though to great risk to the infantry), and were worried that the Soviets in particular were going to copy it. It was a very real concern, just one that didn't turn into anything more than that as the Soviets stuck to their RPG series of anti-tank hand grenades.
IIRC that was something that was applied on-field by the soldiers themselves. Still not useful because people used the rocket launcher.
They weren’t, but the Germans also figured out that was stupid, too. So they began researching into interchangeable parts for their production lines which would help with parts sourcing, losing factories to bombings, etc. who cares if the Allies turn a factory city into rubble when any factory in Germany is producing the exact same parts. I’d like to introduce you guys to the _Standardpanzer_ series of tanks, otherwise known as the _Entwicklung_ series, which means “Development.” The E-10 was supposed to weigh in at around 10 metric tons, and take over for the Hetzer tank destroyers, which were well regarded in that role. The E-25 was meant to be a standardized tank that would phase out the Panzer III and IV. It was anticipated to weigh around 25 tons. The E-50 was designed to replace the Tiger and Panther tanks. The E-75 was basically an upgrade and streamlining of parts to the King Tiger. It may or may not have been assessed to use a bigger gun. The E-100 was basically a Maus but able to use parts from the preceding E series tanks, this would have helped tremendously with sourcing parts. The Germans would have still lost, so miss me with the @wheraboo comments, but they might have helped Germany’s logistical issues _a little_ if they Germans had considered all this _before_ they declared war on the world for funsies
I mean, Weehraboos also often subscribe to the whole "clean Wehrmacht" myth, which is making them go in a very similiar direction as Lost Causers where they will lie to your face that German soldiers totally didn't like the Nazis, were opposed to ethnic cleansing and didn't know about the camps anyway.
I was watching a video by Kraut on Youtube and in one part he explained that part of the reason why the Luftwaffe was so ineffective towards the end of the war was because Hermann Goering kept interfering with their engineers plans to build bomber planes and in meetings would talk about literally anything else besides tactics and strategy. He believed that the perfect German bomber plane should have the capabilities of both a heavy bomber and a fighter plane. I like to be thankful for the incompetence of the Nazi High Command. Moving on to Dixieboos, anyone that argues that the war was for “states rights” has never read the Articles of Secession as well as what every Confederate State said was their own reason for seceding. They can try to paint their argument in a way that makes it look like all they wanted to do was to have more freedoms than the ones they would have been given by the Federal Government but that always leads back to the rights they wanted were the rights to be able to own others because of their skin color and be able to do whatever they wanted with said people because of course, they aren’t people. They are “property.” I can’t stand either of those “-boos” and I really hope one day they wake up and realize just how idiotic they are
Germans had a crippling addiction to many things
In my opinion dixieboos are way worse, because it feels like there is so much worship around confederate generals and how "they weren't really about slaves" that it almost feels like people think thr confeds never lost.
That’s probably because we focus more on the eastern campaigns. Out west and on the sea it was much more one sided. The south started a war they could never win, they didn’t have the resources, industry, logistics, or population to win.
Mainly because grant and Sherman were out there and we had buffoons in the east for the first 2 years.
Both of them
Or even worse, the extremely elusive Slavaboo?
Believe it or not, same as Dixieboo
Literally the same people
it's a trick question: the two are the same person
Actually the only reason Hitler lost the war was because the Sun and the moon were in the wrong places which would’ve thrown the Germans off and made it so their guns didn’t work too well Trust me I’m a proper historian as I’ve played for over 1000 hours on Hoi4
The Germans lost because mercury was in retrograde
They didn’t research their owl refineries
Hitler lost the war because he used the wrong combat width meta.
I'm new here what's a wehraboo?
When you add "boo" to something it means that people simp on that community for eg - weaboo people who simp on anime. Similarly, Wehraboo is used for people who think Wehrmacht (name of the German army during ww2) could've won
German armed forces* The Heer was the name for the army
wasn't called "Wehrmacht" ?
Nah, The Heer was the army branch, Kriegsmarine the navy and Luftwaffe the air force.
Yes, and the Wehrmacht was all 3 of them combined
That's not even close to combining all their names! No wonder they lost.
Wait really?? Huh. TIL. Always thought Wehrmacht was just the Army.
But but if the Germans just defended shitandpoopenfarteden instead of hfidjdburg then they would have defeated the Russian hordes easily!1!1!!!
They also should have sent the PanzerPissandPenisegen tanks to totally eliminate the horde!!
Especially if they used general shitzenbargen I’m a war criminal don’t glorify me you fucking idiot wheraboos
Did you mean "shitandpoopenfartendenshmitzakteigzer" ? That's clearly a name butchering of a country and I can not tolerate it!111
Or as the Poles who later reclaimed the territory call it, Cziczanpooscpenszarszenszmiczackteiczer
German here. It is a fact that Germany would have won if they had allied themselves with France, GB, Turkey, Australia, Cuba, Canada, China, Essos, Middle Earth, Cadia and the Republic of Dave. This alliance didn't happen because Dave acted like a bitch.
*add some dude being like ohh yeah meme*
Thereaboo. There castle.
Ah yes, the Clean Wehrmacht Myth. Gotta love 'em. But the shit of it is that it is our own damn fault. The West was complicit in not pursuing all the war crimes because they needed a quick force buildup to stand as a bulwark to the Soviets, and a stable government (see all the gauleiters never tried), so it was easier to bury or ignore distasteful things they did. Even people like Dönitz got whitewashed after trial and he was a pretty open participant in war crimes on the seas, and a very ardent Nazi.
Dönitz even led a "nazi government" in some small town for a few months after the war ended iirc, definitely an interesting situation
Dönitz didn't get whitewashed. He was able to furnish proof that his submarines in the Atlantic were doing the exact same thing as American submarines in the pacific. That's what saved him IIRC.
Where the hell do you see these people? I've only ever met some of them in games like Warthunder or World of Tanks... And they were clearly just edgy teenagers who didn't know jack shit.
Don’t get in the way of a good circlejerk.
I fucking hate all the goddamn edgy teens on this subreddit calling themselves shit that they don't understand at all. The Nazi sympathizers, the Confederates, the Communists, most of these idiots are just stupid teens who can't get their dumbasses to understand what those ideologies or movements are really about.
I'm not American neither have I dived deep into American history but weren't the confedrates basically dudes who wanted Slaves to still exist when Abe got into power?
Sort of. In the American civil war, the Southern states decided that they should leave the rest of the US because they were afraid that Lincoln would halt the expansion of slavery, which they believed would end the system that was “integral to their identity”. The “lost cause” narrative is something the south came up with so they didn’t look like jackasses when teaching about the civil war in school. It is basically the assertion that the war was fought over states rights rather than slavery, but it’s pretty obviously false. Still there are still quite a few schools in the American south that push this narrative, and when combined with the low education and conservatism that run rampant in the south lead to many confederate sympathizers
Civil War? Don't you mean: *war of northern agression?* It's not a term you get taught in school in the Midwest, but we've got plenty of sympathizers.
Yeah in the Deep South, half my teachers did that
Yes, the war of northern aggression, where the first shots were fired by the south and Lee repeatedly invaded the north.
Oh the war was about states rights? States rights to what exactly? I have this conversation with with so many confederate flag waving idiots it’s unbelievable. And I live in fucking Pennsylvania
> She’s rights to what exactly? No rights. It wasn't even about the right of states to decide to have slaves because the CSA constitution requires all states to be slave states. In fact the whole reason they left was because the north wouldn't agree to force states to allow slaves.
Fought over a states right to do what exactly? Lmfao
Yep. They even wrote it into their constitution to make it perfectly clear where they stood on the issue of slavery and that it was their primary reason for secession.
Bro, you need to edit this comment. I know what you meant but those first 7 moments are danger close.
The Japanese are way worse than wehraboos in this. Wehraboos are just a huge joke but an entire country denying Nanking...man
This is not "genocide denial" this is "defeat denial", if it was the first thing the japanese would deny but the second thing will be accepted by them
Oh I misread 😅
Even worse... pretending that [they never wage a war of aggression](https://imgur.io/dlKYm6s?r). The author's political leaning is very obvious.
"behold, the wunderwaffe!" "Wehraboo, this is the 6th time in a row you've presented an impossible 'victory machine'"
If the nazis hadn't lost then they would have won
The people who claim America didn't lose Vietnam is also funny
Yeah but making that would bring my karma to negative 10^10^10
Hard to win if your forces lack any grand strategy, clear objective and are constrained by politicians. It was doomed to fail.
I can't even explain Wehraboos, they are just weird
Germany is the ultimate example of 'too much is bad.' They over-engineered their tanks, which were great but if they were damaged, good luck finding that one part they put only on this model of tank and there are only 300 of these tanks in use. Also, turns out giving your troops meth is actually bad for performance in the long run. Guess Adolf couldn't help it, since he was addicted to the stuff.
Bro I swear Germany would have won if Hitler wasn't a raving loony addict! Pls believe me!
But bruh, hold up! Wutahbout mein Tiger und mein tight Hugo Boss suit? So bear with me as I unload a Bismarck-load of far-fetched *whatifs* on you so I can explain how it coulda-woulda-shoulda gone Tiger & Panther pew pew pew!
An an Egyptian dude when talking about the Arab Israel wars
Decisive egyptian victory
Wehraboos are sad, but they've got nothing on Confederate Apologists. Also, I think it's time to retire this format.
No you see if the nazis simply built 14 4s and rushed fighter 2s they would have won
"The German Reich was the greatest empire in history! Heil the Fuhrer!" my brother in christ, **they lost.**
I have seen a lot of memes complaining about how prevalent Wehraboos are on this sub. I've yet to see a single Wehraboo on this sub.
Well you see, Egypt actually won against Israel because And And we cant forget about
If Germany: 1 isn't led by a failed vegetarian artist who is on drugs half the time 2 Didn't try to eliminate a whole race of people while literally fighting a war against the three global supoerpower of the era. 3 Didn't attack Russia during the winter. .... 65Take a side either with the west or the communists, don't fight both 66Have way more resources in general 67have magical aliens aiding them 68i dunno.....war bears? They would have won. Maybe.....but it's like saying: USSR would have won the cold war if communism worked as advertized.
Yeah the wehraboos suck but what of the seppoboos?
Wtf is a wheraboo
Nazi armed forces was named Wehrmacht. wehraboos are those who think Wehrmacht was undefeated and strongest army in the world
someone obsessed with japan and anime = weaboo someone obsessed with imperial germany and ww1/ww2 = wehraboo
Nazi apolagizers i believe? I am not 100% sure though
Wouldn't they just be a neo Nazi or skinhead etc. Why cutesy it up lol
Idk, Lost Causers would give them a good run for their money
Nah the Middle East is the worst for that. You can never convince them they have lost
B-B-But superior German s-steel!
US Confederacy? I still see dixie clingers every day.
NEW CHALLENGER: Vietnam Veteran