this was some real anime shit
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
this was some real anime shit
this was some real anime shit
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
how did they have color this far back.
It's fake
can't tell if trolling or not
They had technicolor
they didn't in germany moron
"black and white" isn't black and white as in a binary image of only 2 extreme shades. It's an almost infinite range on the greyscale, the level of contrast can be converted into the color spectrum with software to give a pretty good conversion of what it probably looked like in color.
That's true. There are sources that show there's a swimming pool on top of it. Who would build a giant cannon with a swimming pool on top of it? It's obviously fake and probably only a holiday resort for Hitler. Long pipe at the front was a telescope, by the way.
Top lel
The Schwerer Gustav was a German 80 cm railway gun. It was developed in the late 1930s by Krupp as siege artillery for the explicit purpose of destroying the main forts of the French Magnoit Line, the strongest fortifications in existence at the time, though it was not ready when the Battle of France begun. The fully assembled gun weighed nearly 1,350 tonnes and could fire shells weighing seven tonnes to a range of 47 kilometres
The Gustav was later sent in the Soviet Union during the Battle of Sevastopol where it destroyed a munitions depot called White Cliff located roughly 30 meters underground.
They must have been swimming in resources if they were happy to shit them away on passion projects such as these.
That gun is insane....
>They must have been swimming in resources
They weren't. That's the problem. The Nazis were nutorious for blowing resources banking on wonder weapons that never ended up happening.
On the contrary, "wunderwaffen" mentality is exactly what you adopt when you refuse to face material reality. The west is currently going through this thinking that advanced technology can do everything and manpower shortages won't make a difference.
>The west is currently going through this thinking that advanced technology can do everything and manpower shortages won't make a difference.
You're looking too deeply for an equivalence that isn't there.
Pushing the narrative that army size(both manpower and equipment, since the west's industrial base is also degraded) doesn't matter as long as it has the latest fancy tech is not wunderwaffen mentality? Because that's what's happening
No, the lack of manpower is a concern, but its not being solved with the B-21 Raider or F-35 and I don't think anyone at the DoD is pretending that it is. The problem is that the US is not in any active wars at the moment so there's no mandatory draft
The problem is the culture war that's it. America has no real viable hard power opposition, diversity is its greatest and only weakness.
>so there's no mandatory draft
The moment America institutes another draft is the moment America is done for. Zoomers are gonna be cutting their fingers off to avoid it.
No narrative needed, it's an objective fact.
You are coping very hard because the West is getting pissed at thirdies again at a time where the global world order is disintegrating (so free for all soon) and even the outdated soviet equipment is now used up in Ukraine leaving you defensesless with hordes of low IQ mouths to feed.
You can thank the Iraqi air-defense system being overly centralized and so easily overwhelmed even with the equipment intact. They made it far too simple for the Americans to take control of the skies
Every time I bring up the terrifying truth about manpower shortages in Western militaries due to Zoomers not signing up I am always met with some moron saying that the military just needs like thirty guys with drones to win any war.
Nukes won the war in the end.
Only thirdie shitskin hordes think technology doesn't matter.
Nukes were used after Germany was already occupied, and when Japan's defeat was a foregone conclusion. What won the war was American industrial capacity and Soviet manpower. The allies could replace their losses endlessly, the Axis could not. That's what won the war, not Oppenheimer or Turing or some other clever nerds.
>desert storm
You are literally giving an example where American military might was at its absolute peak. They had a massive army and an enormous industrial base. Were they outnumbered? Yes. Did the technology help offset that? Yes! Technology most certainly helps armies become more efficient, but only to an extent where it helps an already existing manpower and equipment fulfiill their job. If your army is degraded on these aspects, your technology is worthless.
akshully germany lost because their allies sucked
see italians in africa
see italians in crimea
see romanians in battle of stalingrad
You are delving into the tactical details rather than the strategic ones. Germany had no chance of wrapping up the eastern front before American mobilization was complete.
if the eastern front didn't turn bad for them they wouldn't have needed to send as many divisions to the eastern front and the allies would have postponed the invasion. by the time they would be ready stalin would have ACKed himself after losing moscow and kiev
How and why did it turn out bad for them? By all means Barbarossa managed to destroy the expected red army mass along its advance route. They genuinely didn't expect that the red army would be able to keep going after the losses Barbarossa would inflict on it.
“Had I known they had as many tanks as that, I'd have thought twice before invading.”
if they had gotten to moscow faster before the soviets prepared counter attacks for one thing. if it had rained less or frozen faster they would have been many times faster in the last 150 miles
and stalingrad as i said the line broke because the romanians were ineffective and basically gave up and the 6th got encircled. losing 10% of your forces from a purely tactical error is a pretty big setback isn't it?
>if they had gotten to moscow faster before the soviets prepared counter attacks for one thing
They explicitly assumed that the Soviets would not be able to do so. They assessed that the red army would be able to mobilize 50 reserve divisions - in reality they could mobilize 15 times that amount. Germany's failure was baked into Barbarossa's planning. And how the hell do you except the Romanians to fight Soviet tanks without anti-tank weapons? This was just another reality check on the Axis' material limits.
>in reality they could mobilize 15 times that amount.
that was more than a year after their advance was halted
The advance didn't halt because of unlucky weather. It halted because of unexpected Soviet resistance which pushed the wehrmacht to its limit. They could see the Kremlin spires from a distance? Good for them, they were all exhausted and stretched thin anyway.
which is because they got there slowly and they expected snow instead of mud so they had all the wrong equipment for the weather
what's hard to get about that. I'm not saying they would ultimately beat the soviets i'm talking about securing moscow and kiev. Personally i think stalin would have blown his brains out
Once again, they arrived slowly because of unexpected resistance. They expected the red army to be defeated before they even reached Smolensk, yet here they were having to fight counterattack after counterattack, suffering casaulties, getting bogged down. That was the failure of Barbarossa.
>That was the failure of Barbarossa
The failure of Barbarossa was knocking out the Western Red army which was its primary objective?
>counter attack after counter attack
Which ultimately gained them nothing.
Moscow would have been symbolic but everything of value was behind the Urals at this time, would have better to retreat and re-arm rather than send hundreds of thousands to their death.
>The failure of Barbarossa was knocking out the Western Red army which was its primary objective?
Precisely, the failure was baked into the plans. They assessed the red army would be permanently crippled by these losses, they didn't believe the Soviets could keep going.
>Which ultimately gained them nothing
Slowed, exhausted and bloodied the German advance to Moscow.
>would have better to retreat and re-arm rather than send hundreds of thousands to their death.
Losing the stragetic initiative, and since Pearl Harbor happens right around that time your time table is tighter than ever, having to finish off the Soviets before America completes mobilization.
>Did the technology help offset that? Yes!
Thanks, all I needed.
The technology advantage of NATO is bigger than ever now btw. Even the old shitty tanks stripped of all digital sytems absolutely wreck all the shit anyone else can produce.
So you're saying that wunderwaffe like long range strategic bombers and attack helicopters negate any numerical advantage an army has if they lack tech to counter it?
Wunderwaffen is not about tech making an army more efficient, it's about thinking it can compensate for degraded manpower and industry.
>The technology advantage of NATO is bigger than ever now btw
The most advanced missile defense system is the Russian S-400. Both China and Russia have already ventured into hypersonic weaponry. Meanwhile the much-hyped entrance of the invincible Abrams tank to the Ukrainian battlefield has resulted in videos of it in flames within less than a day
>The most advanced missile defense system is the Russian S-400.
Is it? Or are you just saying it is because you're not here in good faith?
>Wunderwaffen is not about tech making an army more efficient,
It is though? Most wunderwaffen were just improvements on standard equipment. The Panther V was condsidered a wunderwaffe. Another common example is the SG 44 which basically every modern assault rifle is patterned after. So were stealth subs, jet planes, helicopters, cruise missiles etc. All standard stuff today was super futuristic to a period that started with traditional rifle squads and prop planes. Even battle rifles were future tech early in the war.
A lot of it saw mass deployment and was very effective, trying to dismiss the ones that weren't deployed yet because the war ended is a strange argument to say the least. Even the most ambitious wunderwaffe are standard issue today proving that the tech was very useful.
>it's about thinking it can compensate for degraded manpower and industry.
According to who? You? Wunderwaffe as a term was used to refer to a lot of systems which eventually saw practical deployment to great effect. Just at that point it started to quickly become normalised, as all the other weapons would've been, and did, after the war.
I think you have a specific meaning for the term in mind that is very different from how the Germans actually used the term.
>The most advanced missile defense system is the Russian S-400.
This is a huge cope. I've seen this claim repeated many times without any actual facts to back it up. The S-400 is unproven since it was never demonstrated at any international conference, it probably cannot even track stealth bombers for all we know. In comparison Aegis and Patriot are both proven systems that are actually superior. Patriot systems can track up to 100 targets simultaneously, while S400 can only track 6. The Aegis/Patriot systems can shoot down ballistic missiles while the S400 is not designed to do that and can only hit slower moving projectiles or aircraft. It still relies on proximity detonation like old flak tech.
>hypersonic weaponry.
And what does "hypersonic" mean? Keep in mind pretty much every ballistic missile in the tactical range is travelling at hypersonic speeds.
This claim, taken up by midwits and IMC grifters surrounds guided hypersonic glidebombs. These have never been demonstrated to international observers. Meanwhile crappy old missiles like Kz routinely get shot down by Patriots.
The Russia/Iran/Chinese bloc's "supercarrier killer missiles" also turned out to be bullshit, the missiles the Iranians gave to Yemen were shot down by American CAGs last year.
It was all a cope.
>much-hyped entrance of the invincible Abrams tank
Abrams is a 40 year old tank, as for "hype" from midwit defense industry enthusiasts such as yourself, America literaly sold more Abrams tanks to Algeria last year than it ever gave to Ukraine, which was just a few surplus tanks stripped of all its modern weapons systems. No one with more than two braincels expected much of less than a hundred half century old tanks (did you?).
One thing this war HAS shown us is though is what a pathetic paper tiger the Russian military turned out to be. Ukraine pushed Russia back and dismantled its best armoured brigades and special forces long before the West gave it so much as a food donation. Rather than "dismantling the Ukranian military in 3 days", Ukrainian peasants dismantled Russia's paper tiger in 3 days.
And I guess this is the projection that your post is really about: that Russian and Chinese "wunderwaffen" turned out to not exist. That their tech is shit and the recent war proved that nothing better is coming.
The objective proof of that is in the third world arms procurement market. Since the embarrasment in Ukraine the Russian arms contracts have zeroed (even India cringed then abandoned Russia, only Iran is left becsuse they have no cjoice). In the same period NATO sales to non-NATO countries more than doubled.
>The most advanced missile defense system is the Russian S-400
Funny that there is an ongoing thread on /k now: "russian AD is one of the biggest scams in history"
They are right. Russian air defence is shit, although it isn't just about equipment itself.
/k/ has unironic nafotards
As opposed to unironic Russian Internet Research Agents like yourself?
They are right about Russian AD being shit though.
Even BRICS stopped buying Russian (is BRICS even gonna be a thing in 5 years?) because it turns out Russian tech is so much shitter than everyone thought.
I don't think you quite understand how bad this war was for Russia which relies on its arms exports, it would've been bad already even if they had won after week 3. The current shitshow is irrecoverable.
Depends on the circumstances.
A Tech Advantage didn't help in fighting the unconventional wars (Western Powers as in America) fought since the 60s. The problem was that, unlike WW2, we weren't able to taper off logistics of the guerillas as they were either funded by foreign backers or the drug trade. And unless you were prepared to fight their backers (eh) or win the drug war (huh?). You're out of luck. With that said there was still some success. To defeat the guerilla you had to deprieve them of base and equipments. Something the brits were generally able to do like Kenya and Malaya.
The tech advantage still helps in fighting conventional wars. The initial Iraq War phase was what the US Army is built for and Baghdad was conquered in a week. It is the reason why China still thinks twice before acting upon their desire to take Taiwan.
That said, defene proliferation still gets shit wrong more often than not. Like what is a LCS?
Even Iraq was hardly a "conventional war" in the historical sense. It was a modern European style of war attempting to minimize civilian casualties. Imagine a broken down world order with civilizational survival on the line where WMDs are a free for all and tell me that tech doesn't matter.
And to get back to
>manpower shortages won't make a difference.
NATO actually has a much bigger standing army than say China and India combined despite a smaller population of just under 1B combined people vs. 3.8 billion in India+China. The reason for that is obvious, better tech also translate to stronger economies which is what actually allows you to keep people in the field. Having a large mass of people who are a net negative to your economy (like most of Africa) is a detriment to your ability to keep soldiers in the field. The size of Nigeria's army is only 200k despite the country being a similar size to the US for that reason.
You can fantasise about hordes of stick wielding untrained orcs charging through nuclear fire towards a tank brigade, let's take bets on that.
But realistically tech is everything and traditional manpower is worth about as much as a 60 dollar FPV drone on the modern battlefield.
moron
they made two of them. if someone told them they wouldn't need it to defeat france it never have would have been built
time to jump in your time machine general hindsight
It's just steel on railway and it was quite useful.
Wait until you hear about the V2 program. Probably the most wasteful project of the entire war. Literally killed more friendlies than enemies and ate up a huge % of German overall munition production.
And cost more than the Manhattan Project.
>Probably the most wasteful project of the entire war. Literally killed more friendlies than enemies and ate up a huge % of German overall munition production.
That's "literally" a post-war narrative put out by some hack draft dodging British espionage group to justify the fact that the impotent cowards hid in the British countryside for the entire war. They also spread the myth that they tricked German engineers into "aiming" over their targets by leaking false hit reports (because they were so fricking clueless they didn't even know that the V2 was guided, not pure ballistic). The only successful intelligence operation that group ran was to fool the British public into thinking they had achieved something. Sadly pop historians swallowed their myths whole too.
In reality the V2s were in fact quite effective and that's why it was such big priority to shut it down and to get the tech during Paperclip. It was literally on top of the list.
>because they were so fricking clueless they didn't even know that the V2 was guided, not pure ballistic
"guided" is a bit of an overembellishment. It used gyroscopes for stability and a simple engine cutoff system that was dictated by its velocity. Its trajectory still had to be calulated beforehand to determine its azimuth that the gyroscopes then maintained provided nothing disturbed the rockets flight path
>"guided" is a bit of an overembellishment.
How?
>It used gyroscopes for stability and a simple engine cutoff system that was dictated by its velocity.
You just described a guided system.
You are also wrong as it was more sophisticated, it had 11 control loops, 4 for each rudder and 4 for the jet outlets, 2 cascaded controllers connected to the gyros and 1 final master controller for the actual trajectory set point tracking. Later systems were also radar guided.
> Its trajectory still had to be calulated beforehand to determine its azimuth that the gyroscopes then maintained provided nothing disturbed the rockets flight path
Yes of course, all rockets do. Do you think NASA rockets to the moon just launch into space and then compute their trajectories mid flight? The point is that these are geometric calculations and they relied on wind tunnel experiments to compute the friction and other fluid dynamics. The control loops absorbed disturbances from wind etc., this is how the system worked and how they still work today you pick a trajectory like an orbit and the control feedback loops compensate for disturbances. You don't aim it "more up or down" in the direction you want to fire, and there is absolutely no proof at all of the post-war myth that V2 engineering teams were even aware of misinformation espoinage campaigns (if they even existed). The idea that they incorporated "feedback" from misinformation into their designs is fundamentally not even possible, and if the spindoctors who first dreamt this up (mostly to placate the British public btw) knew anything about engineering at all they would've likely chosen a different story that holds up to scrutiny.
It was relatively cheap all things considered. The Germans had shortages of very specific resources, not of everything.
No, you are just low IQ.
The US runs on Wunderwaffen and has done so successfully.
The Wonder Weapons Germany was producing were in fact quite cheap, it was specific resources that were in short supply.
>manpower shortages
That is why tech is better.
If Germany had the resources to spare
>they didnt
They absolutely did, otherwise the raw materials would have just sat there, it was a handful of critical materials that were rare, Germany had more than enough steel and power so big gun projects put very little strain on the German resource demands.
V2 is what put men on the moon in the end.
This isnt untrue.
israel smashed a force 30x their size just by pure technological superiority.
Technology is an 'x' factor and Germany was right to adopt the mentality of quality over quantity.
It wasnt enough, but in principle this is the superior method.
Go plead your case to the Qing or Golden Horde or the Arab coalition, all of whom felt the burn of powder and the last the sting of lasers.
Also the US in Iraq took over the entire country with a combat front of less than a single division's worth of men and resources.
Good post. Germany mostly lacked oil and things like aluminium. It had a surplus of steel and coal which it used effectively.
>where it destroyed a munitions depot
wow slow clap
>what if gun....but le BIGGER
man these guys really were stuck in the 19th century. all it takes is temporary loss of air support and that thing becomes an easy target for bombers.
Leaked photo from my dick
Did that tank have a galley and barracks room?
Nazis made lots of stupid shit.
>Nazis made lots of stupid shit.
Pic unrelated
Marvel tier
>some real anime shit
>Marvel tier
What do you think inspired anime and superhero comics?
arent those guys a literal enemy in the first medal of honor game
hows the weather in tel aviv
I love that Kitsch aesthetic. People have mythologized the nazis so bad into those superhuman villains you kinda forget 90% of people back then were easily impressed yokel peasants in sleepy villages.
>90% of people back then were easily impressed yokel peasants in sleepy villages
you're so much better than them bro
Most of them enjoyed getting away from their shitty villages and their alcoholic fathers.
Those swords are so shitty. At least make them usable.
Don't be sad it's over, just be glad it happened.
Did that gun even fire once in combat?
48 times at sevastapol
KABLAM!
it wasn't particularly useful, the iron could have been put to better use
I fantasized so often to be one of these men.
A real man. Who believes in things and is willing to die for things and who fights stuff.
This is normal. Not anime shit. But certain ~~*people*~~ don't want things to be normal.
>'might makes right'
>loses
I think I'm okay not being one of them
The allies believed in might makes right and won with more force.
Why else would they go to war or use nukes? moron.
No actually they believed the truth was on their side and that's why they should win. Otherwise they'd surrender after the fall of France.
it looks like something from an anime. the gun.
>A real man. Who believes in things and is willing to die for things and who fights stuff.
This is very broad and applies to pretty much all men before the mid-20th century. It doesn't mean you have to latch on to a post-enlightenment state-totalizing vanguard to appreciate masculine vigor.
God, family, and country are what men fight for. Not for the state, not for an ideology. For their own spirit and blood.
>Not for the state, not for an ideology.
Speak for yourself. I would belong to the party elite and frick actresses like Goebbels and snort meth like the other guys.
They knew how to party bro.