Waffen SS during WWII

[harmonica]

Whatever.

Americans like to believe that mass murdering thousands of innocent civilians of a nation defeated, defenseless, and desperately trying to surrender, was justified.

Proving government propaganda works.

Japan was neither defeated nor defenseless. How many casualties did they inflict on the Marines at Iwo? If they were desperately trying to surrender why did they refuse to surrender unconditionally?

WRONG, but you won't accept the truth. You can't

Iwo was early in 1945 and does not apply to our discussion, Secondly, Iwo was nothing but a terrible waste of young American lives, for nothing but more stars for the commanders. Iwo was not used after it was taken, for aerial bombing of a defenseless nation. Do you know from what base the a-bombs were delivered? It wasn't Iwo.

As a typical duped American, (I was there once), you fail to understand Japan and the murderous consequences of FDR's bloodthirsty "unconditional surrender" requirement.

Iwo was needed as an air base for the invasion of Japan. Okinawa was much later and the "defenseless" Japanese inflicted 50,000 casualties. They mostly fought to the death so I don't know they considered themselves defeated.

I'm willing to accept any truth, you just haven't shown me much. I'm not much of a conspiracy guy.

WRONG. Iwo was NEVER used for an air base by the US. Please look it up.

what????!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[harmonica]

The valiant Wehrmacht army using the new blitzkrieg invasion technique was unstoppable at the beginning of the war.

Unfortunately, poor long term logistical planning by those in charge left the army short on food rations, petrol, ammunition, and winter weather gear. ...

you sound like you wanted the Nazi's to win???

the Germans were very good
...they beat not 1 but two nations' armies --''quickly''...France had one of the largest armies
...there's nothing wrong with admiring ANY countries' soldiers/etc and opining good vs bad
...the Germans were beaten by MANY armies--whose countries where much bigger/more populated/etc

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

 

[progressive hunter]

The valiant Wehrmacht army using the new blitzkrieg invasion technique was unstoppable at the beginning of the war.

Unfortunately, poor long term logistical planning by those in charge left the army short on food rations, petrol, ammunition, and winter weather gear. ...

you sound like you wanted the Nazi's to win???

the Germans were very good
...they beat not 1 but two nations' armies --''quickly''...France had one of the largest armies
...there's nothing wrong with admiring ANY countries' soldiers/etc and opining good vs bad
...the Germans were beaten by MANY armies--whose countries where much bigger/more populated/etc

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

 

[harmonica]

The valiant Wehrmacht army using the new blitzkrieg invasion technique was unstoppable at the beginning of the war.

Unfortunately, poor long term logistical planning by those in charge left the army short on food rations, petrol, ammunition, and winter weather gear. ...

you sound like you wanted the Nazi's to win???

the Germans were very good
...they beat not 1 but two nations' armies --''quickly''...France had one of the largest armies
...there's nothing wrong with admiring ANY countries' soldiers/etc and opining good vs bad
...the Germans were beaten by MANY armies--whose countries where much bigger/more populated/etc

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

 

[progressive hunter]

you sound like you wanted the Nazi's to win???

the Germans were very good
...they beat not 1 but two nations' armies --''quickly''...France had one of the largest armies
...there's nothing wrong with admiring ANY countries' soldiers/etc and opining good vs bad
...the Germans were beaten by MANY armies--whose countries where much bigger/more populated/etc

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

 

[harmonica]

The valiant Wehrmacht army using the new blitzkrieg invasion technique was unstoppable at the beginning of the war.

Unfortunately, poor long term logistical planning by those in charge left the army short on food rations, petrol, ammunition, and winter weather gear. ...

you sound like you wanted the Nazi's to win???

the Germans were very good
...they beat not 1 but two nations' armies --''quickly''...France had one of the largest armies
...there's nothing wrong with admiring ANY countries' soldiers/etc and opining good vs bad
...the Germans were beaten by MANY armies--whose countries where much bigger/more populated/etc

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

the Germans by themselves beat France and Britain
the Brits, US, Russia by themselves did not beat Germany

 

[harmonica]

the Germans were very good
...they beat not 1 but two nations' armies --''quickly''...France had one of the largest armies
...there's nothing wrong with admiring ANY countries' soldiers/etc and opining good vs bad
...the Germans were beaten by MANY armies--whose countries where much bigger/more populated/etc

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

 

[progressive hunter]

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

I never said they did

 

[harmonica]

if it was any other than the nazis I might agree with you,,,but not on this one,,,they were merciless and killed without reason any including children that stood in their way

and beating france is nothing to brag about

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

= Germans were good
France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

 

[progressive hunter]

not all murdered children etc!!!!!!............there were many Germans who were not nazis
....most were soldiers like any others
....the Germans beat one of the biggest armies AND the British army--quickly--this WAS a great accomplishment .....it was very inventive/imaginative/different/etc tactics-strategy........
..France had more/better tanks
why do you think they called it Blitzkrieg?
..the Germans were and are good

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

 

[harmonica]

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

no--it's proves my point

 

[harmonica]

well they didnt beat the british or the UK wouldnt exist today,,,and sorry if they were in the german army under hitler they were nazis


if fact since they lost the war they didnt beat any army

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

if the French and Brits were better, had better and MORE tanks/etc--how were they defeated?

 

[progressive hunter]

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

no--it's proves my point

having a big tank doesnt make it a great army,,,,in fact having a great tank and losing makes it a sub-standard army at best which was my point

 

[progressive hunter]

yes they beat the Brits and France
they lost to the US/Brits/Russia/etc---NOT the Brits

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

if the French and Brits were better, had better and MORE tanks/etc--how were they defeated?

well the brits were never defeated and the french like I said could be beat by a kid with a cap gun

 

[harmonica]

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

no--it's proves my point

having a big tank doesnt make it a great army,,,,in fact having a great tank and losing makes it a sub-standard army at best which was my point

hahahahhahahahahaha!!!!!! you just fked up!!
so Germany DID have a better army--you just said it

 

[harmonica]

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

if the French and Brits were better, had better and MORE tanks/etc--how were they defeated?

well the brits were never defeated and the french like I said could be beat by a kid with a cap gun

....if you know anything about military history, rarely does an invading country totally defeat another country --much less defeat TWO countries' armies--post 1900
...remember, the US provided the UK with logistics/supplies/weapons/etc--the UK was never going to defeat Germany

 

[harmonica]

I'd like to see the proof they made it onto UK soil,,,

and a kid with a cap gun could beat the french

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

if the French and Brits were better, had better and MORE tanks/etc--how were they defeated?

well the brits were never defeated and the french like I said could be beat by a kid with a cap gun

.....the Brits were kicked off the continent/beaten at the Battle of France/etc = the Germans were better

 

[progressive hunter]

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

if the French and Brits were better, had better and MORE tanks/etc--how were they defeated?

well the brits were never defeated and the french like I said could be beat by a kid with a cap gun

....if you know anything about military history, rarely does an invading country totally defeat another country --much less defeat TWO countries' armies--post 1900
...remember, the US provided the UK with logistics/supplies/weapons/etc--the UK was never going to defeat Germany

then why did you say germany defeated britan???
and I never said they were going to

 

[progressive hunter]

the UK did not defeat Germany

.

Testifying to the French advantage is the Somua S35, a plump, cute tank which was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940. Hundreds went into action in May 1940, but to little avail.

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

if the French and Brits were better, had better and MORE tanks/etc--how were they defeated?

well the brits were never defeated and the french like I said could be beat by a kid with a cap gun

.....the Brits were kicked off the continent/beaten at the Battle of France/etc = the Germans were better

I never said they werent, but they didnt defeat them

 

[harmonica]

France Had a Tank That Could Have Crushed Hitler's Best (But Was Wasted by Bad Generals)

proves my point

if the French and Brits were better, had better and MORE tanks/etc--how were they defeated?

well the brits were never defeated and the french like I said could be beat by a kid with a cap gun

....if you know anything about military history, rarely does an invading country totally defeat another country --much less defeat TWO countries' armies--post 1900
...remember, the US provided the UK with logistics/supplies/weapons/etc--the UK was never going to defeat Germany

then why did you say germany defeated britan???
and I never said they were going to

.......the Brits WERE defeated at the Battle of France--where France surrendered and the Brits kicked off the continent ---Germany in control----this is a MAJOR accomplishment/victory/etc---not some insignificant battle