[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: stg44.jpg (527 KB, 1400x950)
527 KB
527 KB JPG
Why does there seem to a coordinated effort to discredit the combat effectiveness of the Wehrmacht lately? For example I often hear that the Garand was the best rifle of the war but honestly? No. Not taking any machine guns into account that would be the Stg44. Barely any army uses a battle rifle as their standard issue anymore and if they do it's closer to a Stg44 than a Garand (G3, FAL).
A battle rifle would be used as a marksman rifle these days, but there was not even a scope for the Garand, the G43 had one available though (so had the Stg44 btw).
Another talking point I hear a lot is that their logistics where extremely bad. I mean yes, it's true that they relied on horses a lot but that is because the little oil they had would be needed for tanks instead. In light of the fact that a lot of the infrastructure AND factories were bombed out, that oil is short in Europe and the countries that had rich oil reserves didn't trade with them it was quite acceptable if you'd ask me ...
It is just like the myth of the 'Nazi gun grabbers' that had been spread around gun enthusiast circles some time ago. If you still believe that btw read this: https://nationalvanguard.org/2019/09/the-myth-of-gun-control-under-hitler/
>>
Nerd
>>
>>49209007
Kids still talk about WW2? I thought that sort of interest died out with the actual veterans.
>>
>>49209007
>nationalvanguard
It's like you went out of your way to make anyone making a similar argument to you untenable. Fuck off IDF.
>>
>>49209007
If the Axis were all indeed garbage at war then that means 60 million people died because retards got uppity. Not a good look IMO.

also
>Haven't been to /k/ in years
>Still full of larping fags and poors
this place hasn't change at all.
>>
File: idf women.png (2.12 MB, 1280x960)
2.12 MB
2.12 MB PNG
>>49209071
*JIDF
Fuck
>>
>>49209071
The author cites the actual 1928 law of the Weimar Republic which restricted gun rights and the 1938 of the Third Reich that relaxed them again.
You are not going to find that information on the website of the ADL for some reason ...
>>
>>49209007
The Garand is given that distinction because it was the best rifle of the war that was used by the majority of an army. I'll give you this, the STG-44, individually, is a better weapon, but it was only fielded by select troops. In regards to the Garand, American exceptionalism doesn't do you any favors, either.
>that their logistics where extremely bad. I mean yes, it's true
>it was quite acceptable if you'd ask me
No, if you're going to war, you need to have your shit together beforehand. You can't just wave away stupidity on the part of the German government for allowing their logistics to be such shit.
>>
>>49209007
>coordinated effort
Dude it's not some kind of conspiracy to point out that the germans had next to no chance of winning the war, especially after they lost the battle of Britain. It's more "lost cause" wankery where people ignore enormous amounts of evidence and hyperfocus on things that would have had almost no effect on the outcome like small arms. No, your wunderwaffe shit would not have bridged the absolutely insurmountable gap in industrial production or made any meaningful difference in outcomes when you picked a fight with the two largest armies on earth at the same time.
>>
>>49209007
>lately
Reverse wehraboos have been a thing forever
>>
>>49209115
Look, what I meant is that:
Of course the US for example had the oil to not have to rely on horses and could produce enough ammo to make liberal use of their artillery.
If you compare the logistics of the Wehrmacht to that without taking the circumstances into account then of course it is considered bad.
However if you do take the circumstances into account that can't be said anymore.
>shit together beforehand
I don't think they ever thought that they'd have to fight 3/4 of the world eventually.
Afaik they hoped to make peace with the UK and the US.
The UK had in fact peace movements going on but Churchill would have none of it.
In the US there were highly influential people like Ford who viewed the Third Reich in a positive light, he even published a translated 'Mein Kampf' but Roosevelt would have none of it.
I would argue that it all spiraled out of control from the view of the Axis. Whether or not you could already see the outcome from 1939 with hindsight that is another question entirely ...
>>
>>49209007
Leftists have been flooding /k/ since the panic buys began since they fancy themselves gun owners and thus experts now.
That's also why the average IQ here has dropped sharply.
>>
File deleted.
>>49209007
>For example I often hear that the Garand was the best rifle of the war but honestly? No. Not taking any machine guns into account that would be the Stg44.

The StG 44 was far more innovative of a design but was expensive, made from often shoddy materials, had a rather short service life (100,000 rounds), and was unsuited for mass production (less than 500,000 produced). The M1 Garand on the other hand had excellent build quality and was cheap enough to be produced in the millions. So it was in practice, the better service rifle. But the StG 44 was the way of the future and virtually every service rifle designed since 1945 is doctrinally based on it.

>Another talking point I hear a lot is that their logistics where extremely bad. I mean yes, it's true that they relied on horses a lot but that is because the little oil they had would be needed for tanks instead. In light of the fact that a lot of the infrastructure AND factories were bombed out, that oil is short in Europe and the countries that had rich oil reserves didn't trade with them it was quite acceptable if you'd ask me ...

It represented shockingly poor judgement on the German leadership's part that they thought they would able to wage a mechanized war with so little oil at their disposal. They got away with it for the first two years because of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and the Western Front collapsing so rapidly during Fall Gelb. But then Hitler got greedy and decided to attack the Soviet Union to seize its resources for himself and it all started to fall apart.

>It is just like the myth of the 'Nazi gun grabbers' that had been spread around gun enthusiast circles some time ago. If you still believe that btw read this: https://nationalvanguard.org/2019/09/the-myth-of-gun-control-under-hitler/

Ask the Jews, Romani, Poles, Ukrainians, Russians, French, Dutch, Belgians, and political dissenters that the Third Reich murdered by the millions if their right to bear arms was respected.
>>
>>49209137
>Dude it's not some kind of conspiracy to point out that the germans had next to no chance of winning the war
True, it just reflects poorly on the average education here. The war was pretty close to ending in their favour several times. Barbarossa was WAY closer than most people know since Stalin thought it was a good idea to take peasant food for his army with local revolts breaking out that nearly led to a counter revolution.
>>
File: m1d-5.jpg (152 KB, 1500x940)
152 KB
152 KB JPG
>>49209007
>A battle rifle would be used as a marksman rifle these days, but there was not even a scope for the Garand, the G43 had one available though (so had the Stg44 btw).
>>
>>49209432
Not OP but you seem confused about several things. Well, actually I know you're a jewish shill since you're the pedophile avatarfag, but let's clear up your misunderstandings anyway
>was unsuited for mass production
Wrong, the numbers that were produced are actually pretty good for the time and situation it was made in and the mostly stamped parts made mass production really much easier than most designs, the Stg45 would've been even better.
>The M1 Garand on the other hand had excellent build quality and was cheap enough to be produced in the millions.
Stamping out Stg44s is cheaper than building Garands and American soldiers literally swapped out their magazines once a week (more often if the chance arose) because they were shoddy pieces of shit
>It represented shockingly poor judgement [blablabla]
All of this is wrong and retarded, your assumptions about their assumptions are based on memes and Hitler attacked the Soviet Union because it was gearing up to attack Germany and was already making demands about the Balkan.
>"Although Suvorov's suggestion that the Red Army was preparing for war against Germany in July 1941 is certainly untenable, given the evidence available, in 1941 the Red Army was undoubtedly mobilizing for war against Germany, just not a war in 1941. We can only speculate that in May 1941, when plans for a preventative strike against German forces massing on the border were considered, that Stalin deemed - in many ways correctly - that the Red Army was simply not ready for such an operation." (Hill, Alexander. The Red Army and the Second World war. Pp. 197-198.)
>Ask the Jews, Romani, Poles, Ukrainians, Russians, French, Dutch, Belgians, and political dissenters that the Third Reich murdered by the millions if their right to bear arms was respected.
Lmao kike

Pic related (You), I watched that thread unfold back then.
>>
>>49209082
Rolling for Jew puss
>>
>>49209504
Just read the entire pic. So you're telling me that every time I see the "pregnant anne frank next to a confederate" pic in almost every thread in /k/, it was a pedo jew posting that every single time? Wow. That explains everything honestly... Its like those chinkoid bugmen posting black'd porn on /pol/.
>>
>>49209007
If they were effective, they wouldn't have lost.
>>
>>49209565
He has an entire folder with pictures and pornography of her and probably other little girls as well, it's really fucked. The bright side is that avatarfagging is still against the rules so he catches a ban from time to time when people bother to report him.
>>49209571
>the vietnamese had better equipment thanAmerica because they won
lmao
>>
File: can't gas me now goyim.png (249 KB, 686x526)
249 KB
249 KB PNG
>>49209504
>Wrong, the numbers that were produced are actually pretty good for the time and situation it was made in and the mostly stamped parts made mass production really much easier than most designs, the Stg45 would've been even better.

Hitler initially opposed its adoption specifically BECAUSE it could not be produced in large enough numbers to reequip the entire German Army.

>American soldiers literally swapped out their magazines once a week (more often if the chance arose) because they were shoddy pieces of shit

They were swapping out their M1s for StGs because they offered a massive improvement in firepower, the same reason Germans could be regularly seen running around with captured SVT-40s and PPSh-41s during Operation Barbarossa. Doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of German soldiers never got to use an StG because it was never going to be produced in sufficient numbers to equip them.

>All of this is wrong and retarded, your assumptions about their assumptions are based on memes and Hitler attacked the Soviet Union because it was gearing up to attack Germany and was already making demands about the Balkan.

>Soviet Union
>gearing up to attack Germany
>after they had just been punched in the face multiple times by autistic Finns and Stalin hadn't yet finished purging the Red Army

>Lmao kike
>everyoneidisagreewithisjewish.jpg

>Pic related (You), I watched that thread unfold back then.

You don't scare me boy
>>
File: stg44 scope.jpg (76 KB, 800x608)
76 KB
76 KB JPG
>>49209432
Not gonna repeat what the other anon said but since when is there a claimed mass murder of the French, Dutch and Belgian people?
As for the Ukrainians, they actually got killed by the millions in the Holodomor and apparently many Russians didn't fare well under the communist regime either, otherwise I don't think people such as the Cossacks would've fought on the side of the Axis.
As for the Poles? Strangely enough, after having been killed by the millions, enough of them were left to repopulate Eastern Germany where the native population had been raped, murdered and expelled.
>right to bear arms was respected
Oh you mean like the US who confiscated all the guns of the German people they could get their hands on or the USSR who executed people for having as much as a single bullet?
>>49209496
Was that handed out in WW2? If so then my statement was incorrect and I take it back.
>>49209626
>filename
You are aware that Anne Frank died in Bergen-Belsen (after being transfered there from Auschwitz) and therefore couldn't have been gassed and isn't even claimed to? I know, I know, US soldiers spoke of operational gas chambers in Buchenwald, Dachau and possibly Bergen-Belsen too but these camps are officially known to have been labor camps only now.
All the death camps were in the areas liberated by the USSR.
Speaking of the USSR, they actually blamed the Katyn massacre on the Germans but now we know that they did it themselves, isn't that weird for a regime that is known to have been extremely honest otherwise?
>>
>>49209626
>Hitler initially opposed its adoption specifically BECAUSE it could not be produced in large enough numbers to reequip the entire German Army.
No, he opposed it because of the cartridge.
>They were swapping out their M1s for StGs because they offered a massive improvement in firepower,
I wrote magazines (of their garands), not guns, schizo.
>he same reason Germans could be regularly seen running around with captured SVT-40s and PPSh-41s during Operation Barbarossa.
Irrelevant
>Doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of German soldiers never got to use an StG because it was never going to be produced in sufficient numbers to equip them.
irrelevant
>after they had just been punched in the face multiple times by autistic Finns and Stalin hadn't yet finished purging the Red Army
Correct.
>>everyoneidisagreewithisjewish.jpg
You are. A pedophile too, avatarfag.
>>
>>49209504
>American soldiers literally swapped out their magazines once a week (more often if the chance arose) because they were shoddy pieces of shit
the enbloc was a disposable part, retard
you "swapped it out" in the same way you swapped out empty brass for rounds
>>
>>49209958
>the enbloc was a disposable part, retard
Really? How many were soldiers supposed to carry according to army regulations, retard?
>you "swapped it out" in the same way you swapped out empty brass for rounds
They were forced to, because it sucked, but that was never the actual plan.
>>
>>49209623
Lmao, thanks for the heads up. Next time if I see any of those pics, I'll report immediately.
>>
>>49209970
nigger you what, the manual of arms tells you to discard the empty clip by means of letting the gun fling it away with the ping
I genuinely have no clue where you got this idea that the garand used a replaceable, reusable magazine
>>
File: 3627_Explaining.gif (507 KB, 238x238)
507 KB
507 KB GIF
>>49209007
>wordswordswordswordswordswordswordswordswordswords
>wordswordswordswordswordswordswordswordswordswords
>wordswordswordswordswordswordswordswords
>>
File: Car_in_Oradour-sur-Glane4.jpg (1.5 MB, 2288x1712)
1.5 MB
1.5 MB JPG
>>49209855
>Not gonna repeat what the other anon said but since when is there a claimed mass murder of the French, Dutch and Belgian people?

Do I really need to spell this shit out for you?

>As for the Ukrainians, they actually got killed by the millions in the Holodomor

Well no shit, they were caught in a war of extermination between two totalitarian dictatorships and made to suffer the most abject misery at the hands of both.

>As for the Poles? Strangely enough, after having been killed by the millions, enough of them were left to repopulate Eastern Germany where the native population had been raped, murdered and expelled.
>18-20% of all Poles die during WWII and it only regains its pre-war population numbers in the 1970s
>>
File: lololololol.jpg (281 KB, 1600x1200)
281 KB
281 KB JPG
>>49209007
>nationalvanguard.org
>>
>>49209007
>Why does there seem to a coordinated effort to discredit the combat effectiveness of the Wehrmacht lately?
Because you're a paranoid schizo. Germany is credited with excellent use of combined arms, the first military to use tanks as more than just infantry support, and the creation of the MG42.
>>
>>49210058
are you seriously trying to tell me that you think soldiers fucking disassembled their garands to replace the receiver? do you even know how the garand is built??
>>
>>49210058
Fucking fudd
>>
File: MG_3437-1024x683.jpg (27 KB, 1024x683)
27 KB
27 KB JPG
>>49210058
wait hold on
you don't think this is an M1 Garand, do you?
>>
>>49209089
>relaxed them again
And yet the 1938 law was the basis for the 1968 gun control act in the US.
>>
>>49209007
The M1 Garand was without a doubt the best standard issue rifle of the war. Not that it matters because small arms dont win wars.

The argument of Nazi gun rights is also not as cut and dry as either side makes it out to be. Basically they relaxes the restrictions for those in the states protected classes and put further restrictions in place for those the state was opposed to. All in all this is closer to the message that Nazis instituted further gun control - but it's not a crystal clear distinction.
>>
File: Rugergang.jpg (3.04 MB, 3024x4032)
3.04 MB
3.04 MB JPG
>>49210118

No, this is obviously an M1
>>
>>49209200
>Afaik they hoped to make peace with the UK and the US.
Pants on head retarded idea. You're in that stage of history learning where you've realized the mainstream narrative is lacking so you latch onto the first alternative you see which is equally lacking.
>>
>>49210076
>are you seriously trying to tell me that you think soldiers fucking disassembled their garands to replace the receiver?
No. You first went to clips and now receivers. Wanna talk about the bolt next since we're still on the topic of shit I never mentioned but you somehow imagined because you forgot to take your meds today?
>>49210118
Are you retarded, anon?
>>
>>49210046
>Do I really need to spell this shit out for you?
I'm afraid you need to because that is the first time I hea about a genocide that the Germans committed against the French, Dutch and Belgian people.
>Ukrainians
I just checked and it turns out there are quite a lot of Ukrainians who identify as Cossacks.
Somebody should've told them that the Germans wanted to exterminate them.
>Poles
Wow we really need to hand a lot of respect to the Polish people! Even though 1/5 of them died they were able to resettle an area half the size of Poland at the time with their own.
>>
File: maxresdefault.jpg (103 KB, 1280x720)
103 KB
103 KB JPG
>>49210173
how do you suggest you "swap out the magazine" on an M1 garand without replacing half the reciever, anon?
>>
>>49209200
>The UK had in fact peace movements going on but Churchill would have none of it.
Germany's tactic was to feign peace or neutrality, arm up, and then invade. The world watched this happen on repeat. Why would the UK believe Germany?
>>
File: Mr.ATF_Man.jpg (17 KB, 342x445)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>>49210076
>everything is a receiver
I wonder who is behind this post
>>49210148
It should've been.
>>
>>49210187
you seriously don't know about sur-glane? you've either never done the most cursory search of information on WW2 or you're lying through your nazi teeth
your next post will be "poland was massacring ethnic germans so bombing hospitals was okay", despite the fact that all the massacres happened after the german invasion
>>
>>49210193
>Germany's tactic was to feign peace or neutrality
>feign
Hitler never wanted a war with Britain, anon.
>neutrality
Fucking when lmao
>arm up
*rearm
>and then invade
Remind me, did Germany declare war on France and Britain or was it the other way around?
>>
>>49210173
The M1 has an internal magazine grafted to the receiver. You cannot change the magazine without replacing a significant portion of the gun. Weekly magazine swaps would not have been possible. There is zero evidence that Americans had to swap out their magazines weekly.

If you meant "clip" instead of "magazine", then you're still wrong. Ammo was distributed with the clip already attached. Soldiers would have no reason to hold onto expended clips.

What are you talking about?
>>
>>49210257
>Hitler never wanted a war with Britain
why did he attack a country that britain was sworn to defend, then?
>Remind me, did Germany declare war on France and Britain or was it the other way around?
remind me, did hitler invade poland?
>>
>>49210195
>It should've been.

Imagine how much more ass US Army and Marine Corps infantry could've kicked in WWII if every enlisted man had been issued a Mini-14 with 30 round mags, let alone an AC-556.
>>
>>49210272
>What are you talking about?
Pretty sure I was thinking of another gun, but I've enjoyed myself to much to stop bullying the other anon now.
>>
>>49210303
>why did he attack a country that britain was sworn to defend, then?
Because Britain didn't care and they were mistreating the Germans there.
Britain did not declare war because of Poland, anon. If that would've been the case it would've declared war on the SU since it conquered half of Poland together with Hitler.
>remind me, did hitler invade poland?
See above. If Britain was "sworn to defend" Poland, why did it ignore the eastern half of it?
>>
>>49210311
oh my god, you actually thought the m14 was the m1 and that it was from WW2
you can't make this kind of comedy up
>>
>>49210129
Who says this? Why should the US in 1968 choose to base their gun control acts on a law passed in the Third Reich in 1938 when Germany never, not even before WW1, had a gun culture even closely as liberal as that in the US?
>>49210132
>protected classes
The 'nazis' actually got rid off class distinctions altogether. That's why the aristocrats, who didn't like that some Generals in WW2 had been Corporals in WW1, sabotaged the war effort, like Ernst Jünger or very famously von Stauffenberg.
Nobody but ethnic Germans were permitted citizenship and that was not a secret, it was in the program of the NSDAP all along.
So of course people who are not citizens have their rights restricted. So no, that absolutely does not support the message that the 'Nazis' pushed for further gun control.
>>
File: 1619465033867.png (229 KB, 500x518)
229 KB
229 KB PNG
>>49210311
It's okay, Anon. We all make mistakes. You don't have to pretend to troll.
>>
>>49210333
>oh my god
feminine hands typed this post
>>
>>49209504
I've always wondered how this works. Obviously an anon constantly posting offensive pictures of Anne Frank is not surprising in the slightest. What I don't get is why everyone seems certain it's one guy. The autists here always repeat the worst memes they see. The open duck beaks, sexualized rats, and Dugan Ashley's mouth next to a furry picture are clearly posted by many different anons. How is Anne Frank guy known to be different? Does he explicitly identify himself? Armatard is the same. He's not a tripfag and there are many, many, MANY ironic and unironic vatniks. Is there a reason we know they're individuals?
>>
>>49210326
>they were mistreating the Germans there
could you post proof of them being mistreated >>BEFORE<< the german invasion, and also show me germany taking actions other than invasion to stop this?
>If Britain was "sworn to defend" Poland, why did it ignore the eastern half of it?
see picrel
>>
>>49210337
>when Germany never, not even before WW1, had a gun culture even closely as liberal as that in the US?
???
You were expected to go out armed in Germany for a very long time, even required by law if you were a free man in some regions. That died down a bit later, but the long tradition of countless small arms manufacturers all over Germany didn't come out of nowhere, anon. And most of them never even tried producing anything for the army.
>>
>>49210337
>So no, that absolutely does not support the message that the 'Nazis' pushed for further gun control.
you could not legally arm yourself if you were untermensch in nazi germany
where in your mind do you manage to square "you cannot have guns" with "they weren't limiting gun ownership"
>>
>>49210348
I'm not trolling, I just genuinely find the guy's responses entertaining.
>>
>>49210326
>See above. If Britain was "sworn to defend" Poland, why did it ignore the eastern half of it?

British and French aircraft were literally getting ready for a bombing campaign against the Caucasus oilfields before Fall Gelb forced them to cancel it. It was probably a blessing in disguise since it would have mean that the Soviet Union would have joined the war as an Axis Power and with American help still being cockblocked by Isolationism, the British position would have been truly hopeless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pike
>>
>>49210222
>sur glane
Even if we say that such a massacre took place what is the official death toll? ~1000? That does not qualify as a genocide.
The US committed massacres in Vietnam with similar death tolls, doesn't mean that the wanted to genocide the Vietnamese people.
>bombing hospitals
When did Germany bomb hospitals in Poland?
You are probably getting that mixed up with Dresden, which was a refuge and hospital city at the time it was firebomb in early 1945.
>Poland totally didn't use violence against the Germans in the Danzig corridor which was populated overwhelmingly by Germans
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=1960
>>
>>49210333
He means the M1 carbine, which had conventional removable mags. Some people say they sucked and didn't last long. He confused it with the M1 garand because he's not 18 yet and probably a noguns.
>>
>>49209007
As the name implies, the STG-44 didn't come out until 1944, retard. The US was using Garands in Europe from the day it entered.
>>
>>49210352
Some of the Anne Frank pictures, like the pregnant confederate one, are posted by others as well, but he's the only one who consistently posts those pictures and does so with every post while also being in every thread even slightly related to Germany to spread misinformation.
>>49210361
>could you post proof
Why would I bother? You can find it pretty easily yourself. The big massacres happened after the invasion, but that doesn't mean there was no mistreatment before that.
>show me germany taking actions
Literally over a decade of negotiations, even before Hitler came to power. If you want to know why that didn't work out, look up Beck, the foreign minister of Poland at the time.
He tried to make Poland a regional power leading a coalition of eastern European states, but none of the eastern European states wanted anything to do with Poland since they had acted like warmongering cunts a lot, which in the end just led Poland to be completely isolated with no major power protecting them.
>Poland was almost certainly the most disliked and her Foreign Minister the most distrusted. Poland's pursuit of an independent line left her bereft of any close friends by the end of 1938.... The Western powers saw Poland as a greedy revisionist power, illiberal, anti-Semitic, pro-German; Beck was a 'menace', arrogant and treacherous.[2]
>His efforts failed for several reasons:[14]
>Both Italy and Hungary preferred to align themselves with Germany, rather than Poland;
>The dispute between Romania and Hungary over Transylvania doomed efforts
>The desire of both Italy and Hungary to partition Yugoslavia blocked any effort to include Rome, Budapest and Belgrade in an alliance.
>None of the other four states that was meant to form the "Third Europe" with Poland was interested in accepting Polish leadership.
>see picrel
TLDNR, there is no possible excuse for what they did if you what you claimed is true, therefore it isn't. It was never about Poland, brainlet-kun.
>>
>>49210281
There is no way in hell any armorer would be replacing hundreds of parts every other day as patrols came back, holy shit you are retarded
>>
>>49210383
>you could not legally arm yourself if you were untermensch in nazi germany
Untermensch wasn't a racial designation, even the most extreme hardliners like Himmler (who tend to be cited as proof but did not direct racial policy) thought that subhumans existed in every people. Slavs were eastern Aryans according to propaganda in schools, universities and encyclopaediae.
>where in your mind do you manage to square "you cannot have guns" with "they weren't limiting gun ownership"
Where in your mind do you decide to make dumb shit up?
>>
File: 1619465101238.png (257 KB, 462x544)
257 KB
257 KB PNG
>>49210393
When you lie to yourself, you're only hurting yourself.
>>
>>49210403
>Some scholars do not take the British plans of attack seriously and regard them as mere contingency plans.[8]
Nigger every nation had a plan of invasion for literally every other nation.
>British and French aircraft were literally getting ready for a bombing campaign
I think you severely overestimate the meaning of plans being prepared, Operation Sealion was never really taken seriously either.
>>
>>49210415
>Even if we say that such a massacre took place
you're trying to deny sur-glane?????? are you fucking braindead?
you're the only one who used the word genocide, too
>When did Germany bomb hospitals in Poland?
https://web.archive.org/web/20090105195335/http://www.historia.wielunia.webpark.pl/1wrzesnia2.html
>You are probably getting that mixed up with Dresden, which was a refuge and hospital city at the time it was firebomb in early 1945.
dresden was an industrial and rail hub
>>
File: Honest_Bear.jpg (74 KB, 806x687)
74 KB
74 KB JPG
>>49210459
>mad
>>49210488
>smug
Resistance is futile, I have won.
>>
>Anne frank pedophile stopped avatarfagging but keeps posting in the thread immediately when you bring up his childporn collection and past postings
Funny.

>>49210502
>dresden was an industrial and rail hub
Then why did they target civilians instead of just trainstations and industry, anon?
>>
>>49210456
>TLDNR, there is no possible excuse for what they did if you what you claimed is true, therefore it isn't.
Who is "they"? What did they do? Do you mean britain not going to war with the USSR?
>It was never about Poland, brainlet-kun.
You're right there, britain only took the step of signing a defence agreement with poland after germany had already invaded the czechs and kept going, despite the view of the rest of europe that it would be okay if germany just stopped there
>>
>>49210337
>the Nazis eliminated classes
>goes on to explain Nazi Germany had rights restricted for classes of people
Come back when you're 18 and own guns.
>>
>>49210379
>You were expected to go out armed in Germany for a very long time, even required by law if you were a free man in some regions.
That might be but while a citizen in the US could buy a M1919 a citizen in most other countries, not even just Germany, could ever buy such a weapon.
That was not the fault of leadership in the Third Reich. Again, it was in the Weimar Republic, where the 'nazis' had no say over guns legislations, passed the very restrictive law of 1928.
>small arms manufacturers never tried producing anything for the army
And you could buy shotguns, bolt-actions and pistols from them in the Third Reich from them and if anything their business opportunities improved when in 1938 a lot of restrictions put forth by a different government were dropped so I don't see your problem.
>>49210383
>untermensch
Let's say that these existed just as the politically correct view tells us. Then what? These wouldn't have been Germans and only Germans would have been citizens so I don't see your argument here honestly.
Can you even take full advantage of the 2A as a non-citizen in the US? There is no way a non-citizen from Afghanistan can walk into a walmart and buy a 50cal ...
>>
>>49210542
strategic bombing is not the same as dive-bombing, and bomber air command did not have the capacity to attack a target smaller than "this city" without doing low-level bombing ie suicide
>>
>>49210552
>Who is "they"? What did they do? Do you mean britain not going to war with the USSR?
Yup, if protecting Poland was the point of the war declaration (which it wasn't) then they would have.
But they didn't, because it wasn't.
>after germany had already invaded the czechs and kept going, despite the view of the rest of europe that it would be okay if germany just stopped there
>invaded the czechs
Czech lands broke apart and had a civil war going on with the soviets about to place a satellite state there. Nobody at the time, not even the czechs, was really bothered when Hitler moved in and restored order before the soviets managed to take over.
>>
>>49210480
you're trying to tell me that nazi germany didn't persecute people based on race and religion? what the fuck are you smoking?
>>49210562
>Let's say that these existed just as the politically correct view tells us.
you're denying that nazi germany considered people subhuman?
>>49210562
>These wouldn't have been Germans and only Germans would have been citizens so I don't see your argument here honestly.
oh that's okay then, they just revoked german citizenship of people who lived in germany for generations so they don't count
>>
>>49210554
Not him, but you seem to be confused about the meaning of "classes" in an economic and monarchic context.
>>49210562
>That might be but while a citizen in the US could buy a M1919 a citizen in most other countries, not even just Germany, could ever buy such a weapon.
>That was not the fault of leadership in the Third Reich. Again, it was in the Weimar Republic, where the 'nazis' had no say over guns legislations, passed the very restrictive law of 1928.
I was just responding to the point that Germany never had a very liberal gun culture, since that just flat-out wasn't true even if the Weimar Republic fucked it up later.
> so I don't see your problem.
See above, anon claimed that:
>>49210337
>Germany never, not even before WW1, had a gun culture even closely as liberal as that in the US?
>>
>>49210595
>Czech lands broke apart and had a civil war going on with the soviets about to place a satellite state there. Nobody at the time, not even the czechs, was really bothered when Hitler moved in and restored order before the soviets managed to take over.
>Nah bro, Crimea *wants* to be annexed, so it's okay. :) - Valdimir Rasputin
>>
>>49210571
>strategic bombing is not the same as dive-bombing, and bomber air command did not have the capacity to attack a target smaller than "this city" without doing low-level bombing ie suicide
Large cities were and still are miles big and you could actually target specific parts of it, like an industrial region, back then with strategic bombing already. They not just didn't, they also specifically chose to go after civilian targets as well.
>>49210600
>you're trying to tell me that nazi germany didn't persecute people based on race and religion? what the fuck are you smoking?
I told you that you are wrong about the terminology you're using because you are, I don't think I made any other claim except
>Where in your mind do you decide to make dumb shit up?
Based on what I wrote above.
>>
jesus christ. How is this still ongoing?
Were the Wehrmacht effective?
Did Germany win world war 2?
No. Guess they weren't very effective.
>>
>>49210595
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The agreement was to defend poland against german aggression, and that's what britain did
how does that flow into "there is no possible excuse for what they did if you what you claimed is true, therefore it isn't." Are you saying there needs to be an excuse for britain to only follow the agreement, and not just declare war on a country they have no legal obligation to?

as for the czechs, unilaterally invading is not acceptable no matter the circumstances of the nation being taken over. you're taking the answer you want, ie nazi germany did everything from a sense of honour and a genuine desire to help the people in the nations it invaded, and ignoring things like mass murder, attempted genocide, etc
>>
>>49210518
I am a 91F you absolute mongoloid. You have far important shit to do in that position let alone the supply line issues that needing so many replacement parts would cause. Everything made for the army at the time was made with reliability foremost so we wouldn't have to ship thousands of tons of supplies across on top of the normal shit.
>>
>>49210631
>>Nah bro, Crimea *wants* to be annexed, so it's okay. :) - Valdimir Rasputin
Not an argument.
Used to have a czech girlfriend and talked with her great-grand parents about the occupation. Aside from that there are plenty of historical sources describing the time if you ever bother to actually look up how and why the czechs got into civil war territory.
Which you obviously haven't done yet, despite your arrogant posting about it.
>>
>>49210502
>deny
I don't deny anything. To avoid anyone trying to deny anything here I said "let's just say this is true" because I can just take the arguments as you make them and show that they make no sense. You on the other hand have to resort to calling me a 'denier' and a 'nazi'.
>genocide
You literally said they killed them by the millions which would be a genocide.
>>49210502
>some Polish website
Gee no conflict of interest here I mean it's not like they murdered, raped and expelled millions of Germans to occupy their rightful territory until today right?
>Dresden was and industrial and rail hub
These are old propaganda lies by Bomber Harris (may he rot in hell covered in molten asphalt with eyes burst from the heat just what the innocent civilians in Dresden had to endure). Of course if the goal was only to destroy industry and infrastructure you would not drop firebombs on civilians but bomb the factories and railway stations with 'ordinary' bombs.
>>
>>49210494
>Some scholars do not take the British plans of attack seriously and regard them as mere contingency plans.
A plan devised during, and to achieve a required aim in the war you are fighting is not a contingency plan. Contingencies also do not involve actual reconnaissance of the bombing sites, actual force transfers, and munition allocations to carry out the bombing
>Operation Sealion was never really taken seriously either
>https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/GERMAN%20PLANS%20FOR%20INVASION%20OF%20ENGLAND%2C%201940_0001.pdf
>Pg 71: The preliminary order of the 2nd July was soon followed by a second Supreme Command Directive dated 16th July, stating that the Fuhrer had decided on "preparations and eventual execution" of the landing,which was to take place over a wide area, "approximately between Ramsgate and west of the Isle of Wight."Because of the advanced time of year, it was stipulated that the preparations must be completed by the middle of August (10).
>>
>>49210658
>the 60 to one killrate of the Army in vietnam means the soldiers weren't effective because America lost the vietnam war
???
>>
>>49210655
>Large cities were and still are miles big and you could actually target specific parts of it, like an industrial region, back then with strategic bombing already
britain couldn't, because their bomb sights were far behind that of the US and the US were reticent to share their nordens
>>49210655
>I don't think I made any other claim except
Is this not you?
>So of course people who are not citizens have their rights restricted. So no, that absolutely does not support the message that the 'Nazis' pushed for further gun control.
if it isn't, apologies, if it is, just because you suddenly declare part of your population not part of your population doesn't mean whatever you do to them doesn't cunt
>>
>>49209007
Most of conventional Western sources on WW2 are still relics of old retarded Allied war propaganda, which they desperately cling to, given the nature of most regimes in developed Western country stems from allied "victory", so a lot of claims about Germany and Axis in Western Academia is little more then constantly self-contradicting war-time propaganda mythology with 0 bearing to objective reality.
For a country size of Texas fighting basically whole world, Germans did AMAZINGLY well.
No, I'm not a NatSoc, my grandpa fought against them, but I'm just being rational and realistic.
>>
>>49210658
who would win? one nation freshly destroyed by a world war vs everyone
>>
>>49210680
>Of course if the goal was only to destroy industry and infrastructure you would not drop firebombs on civilians but bomb the factories and railway stations with 'ordinary' bombs.
So we can kill civilians in factories but when they go home they are untouchable?
>>
>>49210660
>The agreement was to defend poland against german aggression, and that's what britain did
First of all, lmao no Britain didn't and could not have.
Second of all, if it's about a line on a paper then it is not about "protecting Poland"
>how does that flow into "there is no possible excuse for what they did if you what you claimed is true, therefore it isn't."
See above.
> Are you saying there needs to be an excuse for britain to only follow the agreement, and not just declare war on a country they have no legal obligation to?
I'm saying that the point was never to protect Poland since they did not bother protecting Poland. The point was to get a casus belli against Germany.
>as for the czechs, unilaterally invading is not acceptable no matter the circumstances of the nation being taken over.
Then France and Britain should not have done that with Germany when Germany did not attack them.
>you're taking the answer you want, ie nazi germany did everything from a sense of honour and a genuine desire to help the people in the nations it invaded
I have never even implied that, schizo. Are you retarded?
>and ignoring things like mass murder, attempted genocide, etc
Keep kvetching, kike.
>>
>>49210674
>I am a 91F you absolute mongoloid
Post tits, granny
>>
>>49210337
>Why should the US in 1968 choose to base their gun control acts on a law passed in the Third Reich in 1938
Because Sen. Thomas J. Dodd, the go to man of gun control legislation and the architect behind the '68 GCA , who had worked as an assistant in the prosecution of the Nuremberg trials, got a hold of the German law and kept a personal copy he provided to the library of congress as evidenced by a letter sent to him by the law librarian?
>>
>>49210680
>I don't deny anything.
>Even if we say
"even if we say" is very clearly you saying you don't believe it happened. Don't try and play coy about this, anon.
>You literally said they killed them by the millions which would be a genocide.
considering there were more than a few million frenchmen, no, it wouldn't be a genocide.
>>49210680
>Gee no conflict of interest here I mean it's not like they murdered, raped and expelled millions of Germans to occupy their rightful territory until today right?
and axishistory is an unbiased forum that honestly discusses german actions during the war, yes
let's not go this route and just accept that you don't believe any pole and I don't believe any neo-nazi
>These are old propaganda lies by Bomber Harris (may he rot in hell covered in molten asphalt with eyes burst from the heat just what the innocent civilians in Dresden had to endure). Of course if the goal was only to destroy industry and infrastructure you would not drop firebombs on civilians but bomb the factories and railway stations with 'ordinary' bombs.
are you trying to tell me that dresden was not an important rail station, and that it had no industry? I've already told you about the lack of accuracy, and firebombing is significantly more effective against industry than conventional bombs just as it's more effective against housing
>>
>>49210691
>A plan devised during, and to achieve a required aim in the war you are fighting is not a contingency plan
Literally irrelevant. Plenty of plans are made during a war and the soviet invasion was not necessary, hence why it did not happen.
>ontingencies also do not involve actual reconnaissance of the bombing sites, actual force transfers, and munition allocations to carry out the bombing
Plenty of times they do.
>>Pg 71: The preliminary order of the 2nd July
Look up how seriously that was pursued.
Hint: Not very.
>>
>>49209007
who cares anymore and because modern world anything old german/nazi = evil and no good
>>
>>49210696
>britain couldn't, because their bomb sights were far behind that of the US and the US were reticent to share their nordens
If that were true strategic bombing would've been impossible against literally any target that isn't just some city. It's also obviously not true because brits didn't target civilians plenty of other times.
>Is this not you?
It ain't me, I am no senator's son.
> just because you suddenly declare part of your population not part of your population doesn't mean whatever you do to them doesn't cunt
Nobody, least of all jews, ever really saw them as part of any European population, anon.
>>
>>49210337
>Ernst Junger
>Aristocrat
What the flying fuck are you on about you dogshit for brains bastard?
>>
>>49210725
>Second of all, if it's about a line on a paper then it is not about "protecting Poland"
>literally "a mere scrap of paper"
>The point was to get a casus belli against Germany.
they already had casus belli against germany with her invasions prior, they were trying to get hitler to stop his expansion past pre-versailles territories and keep europe at peace through appeasement
>Then France and Britain should not have done that with Germany when Germany did not attack them.
they didn't, they stayed behind their borders in the hope that germany would take the message and reel itself in, take a more peaceful stance, and instead they invaded neutral belgium
>Keep kvetching, kike.
I'd like to double check here, this is you denying the holocaust happened, right?
>>
>>49210709
I'm pretty sure that by international law it was indeed legal to bomb arms factories with the civilian casualties that would result from that not being a crime since it was directly related to the war effort.
Deliberately targeting civilians was illegal though, yes.
As you might know the Germans have been prosecuted relentlessly for their crimes against civilians, but the UK, US and USSR haven't.
>>49210625
I'm confused here. It is widely known that the US has the laxest gun laws in the world.
The Third Reich relaxed the guns laws that the previous government passed and while you couldn't by an MG34 you could buy bolt action rifles, shotguns and pistols and then I said that Germany never had much laxer gun laws but now someone meant to make the argument that the US based their gun control on a law from 1938 (which relaxed them) ... ?
That logic is too complicated for me, you evidently need superior jewish intellect to understand that.
>>
>>49210785
>If that were true strategic bombing would've been impossible against literally any target that isn't just some city. It's also obviously not true because brits didn't target civilians plenty of other times.
they had atrocious hit rates, even worse than when bombing cities. british strategic bombing was, by most metrics, a failure
>Nobody, least of all jews, ever really saw them as part of any European population, anon.
feel free to tell that to the jews who earned the iron cross during the great war
Germany, pre-nazi, was in fact one of the more welcoming states in europe to jewry, and the patriotism of german jews in the great war was noted
>>
>>49210676
>Aside from that there are plenty of historical sources describing the time if you ever bother to actually look up how and why the czechs got into civil war territory.
Did you forget that the coup was orchestrated by Germany? Germans made fake reports about ethnic cleansing before invading just like they did with Poland.
>>
File: El_Goblino(You).jpg (387 KB, 1029x1297)
387 KB
387 KB JPG
>>49210809
>>literally "a mere scrap of paper"
It's true. Britain did not care about protecting Poland, you said before that is the reason and now you're moving the goalpost.
>they already had casus belli against germany with her invasions prior,
Good luck trying to tell parliament or your citizens that, they barely managed with Poland with a lot of preparation.
>they were trying to get hitler to stop his expansion past pre-versailles territories and keep europe at peace through appeasement
Nope.
If they would've wanted peace Britain would've stopped the balance of power bullshit and just allowed a continental hegemon, either France or Germany, they wanted neither and to keep a perpetual state of "balance" which just led to wars for literal centuries.
If they would've wanted peace France wouldn't have occupied part of Germany and mistreated the citizens there until Hitler threw them out.
IF they would've wanted peace they wouldn't have support Poland in its ridiculous attempts at not siding with one of the major expansionist dictatorships it was surrounded by.
>they didn't, they stayed behind their borders in the hope that germany would take the message and reel itself in, take a more peaceful stance, and instead they invaded neutral belgium
What the fuck?
They literally invaded western Germany and pulled out again, why are you so fucking retarded?
Learn some basic history, French soldiers invaded German soil before it ever happened the other way around in WWII
>I'd like to double check here, this is you denying the holocaust happened, right?
I'd like to double check here, are you still denying that your jewish and your people killed Christ?
>>
>>49210794
I didn't mean to say that Ernst Jünger was an aristocrat, only that he sabotaged the war effort, which is true. He himself was not an aritocrat, that is correct, I worded it incorrectly. He was a conservative who didn't like the Weimar Republic but he didn't like the 'nazis' either, he wanted to have the old ways restored, that is the rule of aristocrats.
>>
>>49210838
>I'm confused here. It is widely known that the US has the laxest gun laws in the world.
>>Germany never, not even before WW1
>never
That word stretches back into the past, anon.
>>
>>49210841
>they had atrocious hit rates, even worse than when bombing cities. british strategic bombing was, by most metrics, a failure
Doesn't mean you couldn't target places smaller than several miles in circumference which is what you're implying and absolute bullshit.
>feel free to tell that to the jews who earned the iron cross during the great war
Irrelevant emotional appeal, try to be better than that.
>Germany, pre-nazi, was in fact one of the more welcoming states in europe to jewry, and the patriotism of german jews in the great war was noted
Stop talking about a country you don't understand. Germany was very different depending on where you were in it and antisemitism was very widely spread long before the 20th century.
>>
>>49210761
>soviet invasion was not necessary, hence why it did not happen.
Is it a contingency plan then, or a planned bombing that was only stopped due to a change in circumstances. These are two different things?
>Plenty of times they do.
Not in a shooting war when you need material in places that matter. Show these "contingencies" then
>Look up how seriously that was pursued.
>Directive No. 16 On preparations for a landing operation against England
> I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England and, if necessary, to carry it out.
>On the 1st September extensive preparations for SEALION began, with the movement of shipping from the German North Sea ports to embarkation ports.
>On the 4th September the shipping section of the Naval Staff was able to report that 163 transports(70)4,58 G.R.T.), 1910 barges, 419 tugs, including trawlers,and 1600 motor boats had been requisitioned
>For the tactical minefields planned by the Naval Staff to protect the flanks of the crossing area,a total of 6,800 mines, including 800 dummy mines, and the necessary anti-sweeping equipment had been ;*(D-t,'"ready by the 4th September. The transfer of this gear to the operational harbors was in process, and would be definitely completed by the 19th September.
>The setting up of coastal artillery along the channel coast, as ordered by the Fuhrer, was completed by the middle of September, and the following were then ready for use:
>In addition, according to a notation in the wa diary. of the Naval Staff, there were thirty-five heavy and medium batteries of the .Lrmy, as well as seven batteries of captured guns
>>49210838
>As you might know the Germans have been prosecuted relentlessly for their crimes against civilians, but the UK, US and USSR haven't.
And yet find me a German or Jap prosecuted for strategic bombing
>>
>>49210600
You fucking idiot I don't deny anything I say "Let's just agree on this thing" so that nobody feels the need to deny them in the first place so we can just focus on the arguments you make and you can't come at me with "hurr denier" which I'm not but you try to portray me as such anyway.
>>49210600
>they just revoked citizenship
It was in the program of the NSDAP and they were democratically voted. Pick your fight with democracy itself if you don't like that not with me.
>>
>>49210857
>Did you forget that the coup was orchestrated by Germany?
So? Shit was about to break down anyway, making it do so on your terms is preferable.
>Germans made fake reports about ethnic cleansing before invading just like they did with Poland.
>fake
There was mistreatment and it was true as alleged, though it's not like Poland has much of a moral highground there since they used that excuse to steal land from czechoslovakia.
>>
File: modern aryan warrior.jpg (1.42 MB, 3000x2000)
1.42 MB
1.42 MB JPG
>>49210892
>El_Goblino(You).jpg

Like you Aryan Super Saiyans are any better
>>
>>49210909
I only used 'before WW1' because then there are 2 governments before the 'nazis' that didn't have laxer, but in the case of the Weimar Republic, even stricter laws yet you people mean to tell me that the 'nazis' pushed for gun control and the US took that as a model for some reason ... ?
>>
>>49210950
>Is it a contingency plan then, or a planned bombing that was only stopped due to a change in circumstances. These are two different things?
I claimed the former, you the latter, why would I agree with you now?
>Not in a shooting war when you need material in places that matter. Show these "contingencies" then
Making plans is nearly free, anon. Moving some supplies that aren't bound up anywhere isn't critical either.
And that greentext is tldnr
>>
>>49210954
>NSDAP and they were democratically voted
oh fuck me, you're even more retarded than I thought
what percentage of the vote did the NSDAP get, remind me?
>>
>>49210950
>And yet find me a German or Jap prosecuted for strategic bombing
Germany didn't even have the capability of proper strategic bombing and only started bombing british civilians after Britain did so.
Any other bombing before that or the threat of it like in Denmark or the Netherlands was a political tool used with lots of warning to avoid bloodshed and it did. People often accept that logic with Hiroshima and Nagasaki but ignore it for the Netherlands and Denmark to excuse what Britain did when they bombed German civilians for no reason and with no gain.
>>
>>49210957
> oh no there are some fat guys that have similar ideas
> better give up my guns and pay taxes now!
Do shills literally think this shit works?
Because of government-contractor astroturfers and bots shitting up this site, I'm literally more to the right, then I was in 2019.
>>
File: 1317714174078.png (7 KB, 323x303)
7 KB
7 KB PNG
>>49210955
>>Did you forget that the coup was orchestrated by Germany?
>So?
>>
>>49210986
I don't think they ever got the absolute majority, no, however the ways they used to install themselves as the only legal party were legal and no country considered them illegitimate so again, pick your fight with democracy not with me if you don't like that.
>>
>>49210658
> country size of Texas has whole world declare war against it, because it left the kike banking system.
> well they weren't effective enough
KYS
>>
>>49209007
Probably just over correction for them being overpowered in peoples minds. Suddenly everybody realized they had pros and cons just like everybody else.
>>
>>49211000
you literally posted an image saying "this is you lol" and now you're saying that someone else is stupid for doing it
>>
>>49210955
>So?
If Germany instigated the civil war, then they're just invaders.
>>
>>49209007
Wehrmacht relied mostly on horses during the entire war, not just during the latter parts when fuel became a problem.
>>
>>49211009
Its not that they were overpowered, I think its the nature of how state worked that made them effective.
30s Germany had barely any corruption and distributist economic model did really work and average German worker's living standards were higher then those of Americans and Brits, let alone living hell that Russian workers had to live in under Stalin.
Hence why anglos had to sick poles on Germany to justify war declaration, since they NEEDED to shut it down, otherwise their own population would figure out that their main problem are banks and kick them to the curb.
>>
>>49210980
>Moving some supplies that aren't bound up anywhere isn't critical either
> 24 Farman F.222 heavy bombers
>four squadrons comprising 48 Bristol Blenheim Mk IV bombers
> 65 Martin Maryland bombers
>1,000 short tons (910 t) of bombs were allocated
>100+ bombers and 1,000 tons of bombs are not a sizeable amount

>And that greentext is tldnr
>I'm not reading things which disagree with me
Explains it all really

>>49211006
>Country the size of Texas is so bad at diplomacy and strategy, that it ends up fighting the entire world.
>can't even finish it's first set of opponents before declaring war on the next
>>
>>49209007
>but there was not even a scope for the Garand
Dumbass, look up the Garand-D
>>
>>49211018
That wasn't me, you retard.
>>
>>49210980
>Moving some supplies that aren't bound up anywhere isn't critical either.
>Yeah they were mobilizing for war, building bombs, and placing them nearby, but that doesn't mean anything. That's just easy light stuff.
The immense cope.
>>
>>49209432
StG-44s was cheaper to produce then Kar 98Ks were since they were mostly stamped infact.
>>
>>49209889
>I wrote magazines (of their garands), not guns, schizo.
how exactly does one swap a garand magazine, mister opinions
>>
>>49211028
They literally rationed coffee from day one of the war so I think they were very conservative with their oil as well.
>>
>>49211041
>German worker's living standards were higher then those of Americans and Brits
>Domestic consumption in food staples reach 1928 levels in 1937
>>
>>49209082
roll
>>
>>49211041
>average German worker's living standards
You can thank Weimar era Siemen's for hooking up apartments with electricity.
>>
>>49209007
They lost bigly
/thread
>>
>>49210311
you were think of the M1 carbine because you're a noguns retard
>>
>>49209200
>I don't think they ever thought that they'd have to fight 3/4 of the world eventually.
>invade all your neighbors
>wtf why are they fighting back?
>>
File: brainlet annoys Feder.png (409 KB, 989x620)
409 KB
409 KB PNG
>>49211074
https://archive.org/details/HitlersRevolutionVonRichardTedor
For anyone who wants to read about the economy from an unbiased point of view.
>>
>>49211100
tldnr
>>
>>49211047
It was other way around, anon.
Germany only declared war on Poland, as it had every legitimate reason to do so.
It is pretty obvious, given how Poles weren't discriminated in Germany (plenty reached brass ranks in both Wehrmacht and even SS), while ethnic Germans in Poland were treated like second-class citizens.
Poles were also very expansionist, and they also annexed parts of other countries in Munich agreement, where precedent for redrawing retarded Versaille treaty bordergore was already approved by Anglos themselves.
In reality, Polish were just used by anglos to cook up a justification to declare war on Germany at all costs. Hitler himself actively resisted the notion of another European war, and reading history of diplomatic relations between Germany and banker-cartel-controlled countries like UK and USA proves that.
>>
>>49211066
Coffe was quite a different thing. Even Sweden rationed coffe until 1952 and they never even entered the war.

That said, yes the fuel situation wasnt as great as for example Russia and the US, their use of horses was mainly due to the fact that their army expanded massivly in the late 30s/early 40s and they simply could not produce enough trucks for all of it. Horses on the other hand they had all they wanted.
>>
>>49209007
This is a classic wehraboo thread. A staple of /k/ since I've been coming here back in 2010. This might even be a copypasta because you hash out the exact points every other wehraboo thread for the past 11 years has. Nice
>>
>>49211074
> I'm an economist, so trust me spouting random non-sourced bullshit on an internet forum
LOL
>>
>>49211099
>Czechoslovakia
not invaded, became a protectorate with the treaty being signed by the president of of CS himself
>Austria
Voted to become part of Germany
>Poland
Committed acts of violence against Germans with the Polish government having no interest in democratic solutions.
>France
Declared war first.
>Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway (not really a neighbor)
Preventive occupation to avoid GB landing there.
>Switzerland
Even shot down Wehrmacht planes but Germany didn't invade.
>GB (not a neighbor)
Never invaded.
>>
>>49210968
I feel like you genuinely dont understand the concept of never.
>>
>>49210129
Look at the text of the law and point out exactly in which way they are similar.
Mind you that, unlike the US's NFA, the NS government made no restrictions on automatic weapons or barrel lenghts.
>>
>>49210986
>what percentage of the vote did the NSDAP get, remind me?
>american thinks absolute majorities are normal or necessary in most countries
Retard
>>
File: 1618340110085.png (2.05 MB, 1480x1080)
2.05 MB
2.05 MB PNG
>>49211145
>Preventive occupation
>>
>>49211128
> anyone that doesn't believe war-time Allied propaganda at face-value is wehraboo
Oh you silly schizo.
>>
>>49211124
Yeah sure oil and coffee are a very different thing but it just shows that they indeed were forward thinking so I think it's no stretch of imagination that they conserved their oil too just in case ...
>>
>>49211121
>Polish were just used by anglos to cook up a justification to declare war on Germany at all costs
Brittan's appeasement policy is the quintessential example of appeasement. Chamberlain did everything possible to prevent war.
>>
>>49211133
>30s Germany had barely any corruption and distributist economic model did really work and average German worker's living standards were higher then those of Americans and Brits
LOL
>>
>>49211001
>civil war about to happen
>move your own guys in position first and preempt it
>"woooooow so evil"
Retard.
>>49211025
The civil war would've happened anyway, anon.
>>
>>49211150
>the NS government made no restrictions on automatic weapons or barrel lenghts
What was the SBR and machine gun ownership rate in nazi Germany?
>>
>>49211166
If it was just shameless 'land grabiing' why did they not invade Switzerland which even shot down their planes?
>>
>>49211145
>Preventive occupation
>>
>>49211166
Yeah like Allied invasion and occupation of Iran?
>>
>>49209007
This thread is one of the dumbest I've fucking seen in a long goddamn time, even on /k/.
OP is either the dumbest gorilla nigger or a fuckin fantastic troll, take your pick. Stol feeding the shit. Sage in all fields.
>>
>>49211176
It was liekly a combination of many things, but not even the Panzer divisions that was expected to advance rapidly had half trucks as they should have had according to their organization tables in many cases.
>>
>>49211177
LOL no. "Appeasement" was a post-war myth designed to create an impression that it was Germany that wanted war. In reality anglos literally did everything to block Germany's attempts to resolve things diplomatically. The only reason Munich agreement was even okay'd by Anglos is because of Czechs's themselves.
>>
>>49210311
fucking dumbass
>>
>>49211182
Anon above posted links to well-sourced excellent work by Richard Tedor. >>49211100
It pretty much confirms everything that I said.
Your "source" is screenshot of someone's wall of text with no sources.
>>
>>49211193
They had nothing worth to capture

>>49211197
>whataboutism
The invasion of Iran should not be considered justified either, when did anyone ITT say it was?
>>
>>49211232
you fucking what? You want to explain why britain didn't just declare war on germany for her breaches of versailles and international law the first four times she invaded her neighbors, if they were so intent on war and not appeasement?
>>
>>49211252
> muh whataboutsim
> literally comparing Allies to Axis
Retard.
>>
>>49211252
But the Netherlands did? Like what?
Aren't they known first and foremost for camper vans? Pretty sure there are better things to capture, anon ...
>>
>>49211265
>Someone did something criminal therefore I should also be allowed to be a criminal
nigger mentality
>>
>>49211274
>to avoid GB landing there
>>
>>49211255
Not him but which neighbors would that be?
CS became a protectorate with the treat being signed by the president himself and Austria voted to become part of Germany.
That makes 2, what are the other 2 before Poland?
Military aid in Spain, which is not a neighbor or what?
Furthermore do you forget that GB sacrificed their Empire to defeat Germany? I think they just wanted to drag as many countries into the conflict as possible.
>>
>>49211232
>appeasement was a post-war myth
In reality Chamberlain wanted peace.
>How horrible, fantastic, incredible, it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing.
>However much we may sympathize with a small nation confronted by a big and powerful neighbor, we cannot in all circumstances undertake to involve the whole British Empire in a war simply on her account. If we have to fight it must be on larger issues than that.
>I believe it is peace in our time.
>I am speaking to you from the Cabinet Room at 10 Downing Street. This morning the British Ambassador in Berlin handed the German Government an official note stating that unless we heard from them by eleven o'clock, that they were prepared at once to withdraw their troops from Poland, a state of war would exist between us. I have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received, and consequently this county is at war with Germany.
Germans simultaneously feel the most persecuted and most successful group in existence. No wonder they're obsessed with Jews.
>>
>>49211288
Yeah but your implied argument was that they had something valuable to grab instead.
>>
>>49211320
Strategic territory is valuable. Also
>your argument
>>
>>49211255
> muh 4 invasions
LMAO, this was already covered in this post: >>49211145
There were no "invasions" since in every case they were sanctioned by both sides. Austria voted to join Germany, CS president signed Munich Agreement.
In reality, it were anglos that were warmongering madmen.
>>
>>49211194
Britain literally wanted to do that in scandinavia.
>>
>>49211318
You are right, England is what caused WW2. If Brits just let Germans annex Danzig, major war could have been avoided.
Until Stalin did something, but who knows.
>>
>>49211331
Yes. Yes they did.
>>
>>49211324
I mean since the declared goal of the Third Reich was to unify all German territories into a whole and Switzerland has a majority of German ethnicity it would have been valuable to them, wouldn't it? I mean the leading NSDAP politician in Switzerland was murdered in 1936 if I remember correctly yet they didn't invade.
>>
>>49211252
>The invasion of Iran should not be considered justified either,
What kind of retarded rules of warfare exist in your bird brain?
>>
>>49211281
> you pointed out holes in my argument, its not fair!
Are you trying to turn me into a NatSoc or something? Almost everyone who argues for blue-pilled version of WW2 is doing such a shit job of it.
>>
germany lost, get over it.
>>
>be America
>only one to have a semi auto rifle as your standard issue
>8 rounds instead of 5, only ones with better capacity than you are the bri'ish
>Retards online 70 years later compare a specialist weapon used by comparatively few
to your mass fielded battle rifle used by the majority of your infantry
>>
>>49211166
Belgium and the Netherlands were violating their neutrality by having secret negotiations with GB and France to use their territory to invade Germany. This is not even contended, they admitted as much at the time. Same with Norway, incidentally.
>>
>>49211318
>In reality Chamberlain wanted peace.
>>How horrible, fantastic, incredible, it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing.
>no THIS politician means what he says
Actual retard.
>>
>>49211378
Germany intended for the Stg 44 to become standard issue, just like the USSR intended the SVT 40 to become standard issue. Neither of them could do it tho, or more liekly didnt think it was worth it since they didnt have the industry of the US.
>>
>>49211367
They crucified prophet of Christianity and then some century later they ruled half the civilized world.
I can see the potential in Hitler becoming a somewhat of a prophet-like figure, especially now that more and more people are disillusioned with liberal democracy.
>>
File: maxresdefault (2).jpg (47 KB, 1280x720)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
No germany didn't restrict gun rights for Germans and actually relaxed them a bit compared to Weimer

>B-b-b-but what about the so called untermenchen barred from them???

Don't care
>>
>>49211352
So obviously they felt the wartime benefit of invading the Netherlands was more valuable than using resources to invade Switzerland. It's not a difficult logic
>I mean the leading NSDAP politician in Switzerland was murdered in 1936 if I remember correctly yet they didn't invade.
Are you saying Germany would be right to invade another country because a supporting politician was murdered?
>>
>>49210957
That's just an amerikwan anon
>>
>>49211406
>>no THIS politician means what he says
Giga-retard

>>49211318
>The German cries out as he strikes you
>>
>>49211431
>t. stormfaggot
>>
>>49211472
Reminder that this is still the jewish pedophile from the beginning of the thread.
>>
>>49210957
>Like you Aryan Super Saiyans are any better
We are.
>>
File: autistichitler.webm (2.12 MB, 500x375)
2.12 MB
2.12 MB WEBM
>wants to liberate a 35km corridor of Poland
>Invades Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Greece, Yugoslavia, Albania, and North Africa
>Can't beat UK
>invades USSR
>troops fleeing Moscow in defeat
>declares war on US
>"what could possibly go wrong?"
what did xe mean by this?
>>
>>49211472
Unlike Chamberlain, Hitler's actions and words were in harmony.
>>
>>49211514
Yeah bro just spam retarded shit after all the discussion we just had
>>
>>49209855
>As for the Ukrainians, they actually got killed by the millions in the Holodomor
never happened. Where are the bodies?
>>
>>49211530
Just report and move on, anon.
>>
>>49209007
>For example I often hear that the Garand was the best rifle of the war but honestly? No. Not taking any machine guns into account that would be the Stg44.
not really. having shot both the StG-44 in original condition and a Garand, even with the extra firepower the StG kinda flounders in comparison to the American M1 and carbine. the main problem the StG 44 had was that the mag well and magazine was very sensitive, even just touching it wrong ran the risk of jamming it up. not to mention that an unloaded StG was still about half a pound heavier than a loaded M1. StG was definitely still effective for its time, but not much more than American weapons.

the M1 Garand and M1 Carbines were able to match the firepower of the StG-44 and most German fire groups, and the Germans often recognized this. the M1 Carbine specifically was so popular with Germans that they'd ditch their guns for them if they ever captured enough supplies. but in general, the individual riflemen of the United States virtually always had the advantage with firepower. even if a Wehrmacht soldier had an StG (unlikely considering K98k's would've outnumbered them in production by about 30:1), he'd always be hurting for more ammo and even worse for spare mags.
>Barely any army uses a battle rifle as their standard issue anymore and if they do it's closer to a Stg44 than a Garand (G3, FAL).
no, just no. the G3 and FAL have virtually no feature in common with the StG-44, maybe save for the G3 having a similar way of taking the stock off and the FAL having the main spring in the stock. anyways, the M1 Garand's bolt system have been used in loads of different modern firearms (i.e. the Kalashnikov family, QBZ-95, and Type 81) and there's virtually no firearm that uses the bolt system of the StG.

also major militaries like Turkey, Iran, Brazil, and Argentina regularly use battle rifles as standard issue.
>but there was not even a scope for the Garand
yes there was. M1C and M1D.
>>
File: 2626677.png (143 KB, 975x470)
143 KB
143 KB PNG
>The mighty Wehrmacht only scored a 1:1.5 kill ratio against a peasant army of starving conscripts despite sucker punching them
oh no no no no
>>
>>49211548
>having shot both the StG-44 in original condition
You shot an stg44 in 1944?
>>
File: pol master race.jpg (116 KB, 640x853)
116 KB
116 KB JPG
>>49211000
>getting this angry when people make fun of you
>>
>>49210809
If belgium was neutral, then why did they accept british and french troops moving through their territory to invade germany?
>>
File: master race jabba.jpg (66 KB, 796x1025)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
>>49211508
lol
>>
>>49211539
>JANNY, JANNY, HELP MEEEEE!
>>
>>49211566
>>49211579
Getting out the good old spam folder?
>>
File: muhnaziutopia.png (76 KB, 740x581)
76 KB
76 KB PNG
>>49211041
basic foodstuffs were more scarce in nazi germany than pre-nazi even before they rationed
>>
>>49211539
nothing he said is wrong tho
>>
File: nazis at war.jpg (121 KB, 460x600)
121 KB
121 KB JPG
>11 Million Germans surrender in WW2
>2/3 of Wehrmacht/SS
>More than every other European combatant COMBINED
>So many that it overloads Allied supply lines and a few starve due to their cowardice
>No resistance against Allied occupation when even Ethiopia and Albania managed to resist their occupations
>All the high-ranking nazis rat each other out or cooperate with Allies. Famed SS commando Otto Skorzeny becomes a Mossad agent
Were the Nazis cowards?!?!?!
>>
>>49211616
Wouldn't know, I don't read obvious shitposts.
>>
>>49211632
>burying your head in the sand at triggering comments
rofl
>>
>>49211603
>what was the great crash
>>
>>49211573
they didn't, that was one of the reasons the germans could break though so easily
>>
>>49211622
>Spamming the good old tabloid tier lame war rumours

As much as you can simply deny, you are very easy to spot as the same guy posting through out this thread and others like clockwork.
Not that it rustles my jimmies but it's funny just to see you around trying to wage this war on a polish mine stomping forum
>>
>>49211646
At least post tits if you need my attention that much
>>
>>49211514
Even better is that Germany ended up backstabbing and invading every one of their "allies" (Finland, Hungary, Romania, Croatia, Slovakia, Italy) except Bulgaria, who managed to outmaneuver them diplomatically to avoid being backstabbed
>>
>>49211659
do you have any evidence these studies are wrong?
>>
>>49211673
Arguably, Finland outmaneuvered them instead of being invaded.

>>49211622
Why focus on gay trannie shit when it's easier and more pertinent to criticize nazi foreign policy?
>>
>>49211678
>studies
>>
>>49211678
>War rumor tabloid articles are studies
Don't make me laugh, it's like the recycled ww1 meme about Germans playing clay pigeon with belgian babies
>>
>>49210968
Do you legitimately not understand the words you are typing?
>>
>>49211696
>>49211698
So I'll take that as a no then
>>
>>49211727
Gottem
>>
>>49211693
Krauts tried to invade Finland but got btfo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapland_War
>>
>>49211719
Fascists don't care. To them, religion is just a tool of the state. They're godless.
>>
>>49209007
The Garand was the best of the war not only due to it's function but how effectively it was issued. When everyone else (including the Germans) is still using bolt actions for standard issue the nation with a quick to reload semi-automatic that also has a higher capacity than most of those bolt actions is going to have a serious advantage from it. If the StG-44 had been widely issued and not just part of Germany's dying gasps it would easily have taken the top spot. It needed to be produced and issued earlier in the war. In the garander scheme almost nobody had an StG-44 while if you saw just about any GI he was very likely carrying a Garand.

Their logi was bad and circumstances doesn't suddenly make it not bad. An army mostly relying on horses for logistics against completely motorized forces is generally fucked. If you don't have your ducks in a row before starting a war with basically everyone worth a shit that's on you.

Why do I get the distinct feeling that site you linked is stormfag shit? I guarantee Hitler didn't allow people like Jews or Gypsies to have weapons. The main takeaway regardless of how you want to spin it is that as most dictators that want to slaughter a specific group of people disarm those people.
>>
>>49211719
>here's what X wanted
Who cares? Tldnr
I can't believe you're pathetic enough t have that shit saved.
>>
>>49211406
> well AKCHUALLI anglo politician said he liked peace and didn't like war, check-mate!
Retard.
>>
>>49211603
Weimar hit economic rock bottom in 1929, especially when you factor in the fact that Weimar had literal famines, where people died from starvation.
>>
>jewish pedophile and Frank poster got banned and his shitposts deleted
Based mods?
>>49211802
Hitler said so too, just like Stalin, Mao, Bush, Obama and Churchill.
I don't think we should trust stuff like that blindly.
>>
>>49211719
Haha good, only right-wing ethnocentric versions of Christianity are cool, like Katakombniki in Russia, the rest are trash.
>>
>>49211771
Grand is cool for going to a range with your buddies.
Its a shitty gun for war though.
Not very reliable, no range and shit sight. I'd rather be armed with a Lee-Enfield then Garand.
>>
>>49211879
That's my point. I'm just talking about the fact that in general, it were Brits that pushed for war, because they felt threatened by rising popularity of Third Position ideas, that rejected economic principles, on which British banking system relied to survive.
>>
>>49211630
>>49211579
>>49211566
>>49211557
>>49211514
here is a (you) for you hard work
>>
>>49211630
There actually is a funny scientific term in psychology that's commonly associated with them called "authoritarian submissiveness". Basically it's a characteristic where the "the strong will rule the weak" chest-thumpers are also complete betas right beneath the surface, losing their wind and instinctively submitting to anyone who outmatches them.
Makes a lot of fucking sense, with all the so-called "alpha males" falling to copsucking and hiding behind their semiotic-of-the-week and delegating responsibility to whichever authority figure they're crutching themselves on at the moment or whatever.
>>
>>49211962
I think you may have just replied to the wrong person initially then, since I was replying to the guy who thought that just because CHamberlain said he didn't want war that means anything
>>
>>49212037
Imagine putting so much work just to have an excuse for not working out.
It's alright bro, not everybody can be a chad.
>>
>>49209007
The reich didn't even last as long as ISIS friend. They tried, they failed, they died. Move on.
>>
>>49212084
ISIS hasn't been there for 11 years, has it?
Am I getting old?
>>
>>49211452
>so obviously they felt like the Netherlands were more important
Exactly my point. They couldn't have invaded simply to grab more land since then Switzerland would have been more beneficial but did so to avoid GB landing there.
>would they be right
No but it would fall in line with them being opportunistic land grabbers with the logic being: "Hey you killed our leading politician a while back otherwise you would be part of us now so we are just going to invade you instead" but they didn't do that ...
>>49211514
That's PTSD. He fought for 4 years in WW1 as a basic soldier. Making fun of that is pretty low to say the least.
>>
>>49211557
Is that wikipedia? If it is wikipedia are you aware that they have admitted to being a left wing political organization? If you are aware of that do you understand that they would have an interest in making the army of a country considered very right wing look much worse and an army of a country that is considered very left wing look much better than they actually were?
>>49211536
In undeclared mass graves ... ?
>>49211717
Explain it to me then how a law from 1938 which relaxed gun laws could have served as a model to restrict gun laws in 1968 in a country that had a completely different attitude towards guns in the first place.
>>
>>49209007
Herbs.
>>
>>49211630
>pic
Are these US forces? That's a 1911, isn't it?
Wasn't the army segregated? That one soldiers looks like he is black, but wouldn't that have been impossible then ... ?
>>
File: gondola shiggy.jpg (87 KB, 1024x730)
87 KB
87 KB JPG
>>49211145
>Preventive occupation
>>
>>49209007
Take your meds, nobody fucking cares about Wehraboos.
>>
>>49211539
Report him for what, disagreeing with you? This isn't reddit.
>>
>>49210303
>We wuz defendin' poland 'n shieeeeeet
>Literaly hands it over to Stalin two fucking weeks later for the next fifty years
Yes anon, the genocidal total war declared on Germany was totaly justified if that helps you sleep at night.
>>
>>49212839
The Nazi shrieks and sobs as he strikes you.
>>
File: brainlet.jpg (19 KB, 600x660)
19 KB
19 KB JPG
>>49210447
Fuck off. The Mkb-42, as the name implies, came out in 1942 and is the predecessor of the Stg-44, you literal brainlet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maschinenkarabiner_42(H)
The US, brilliant as they are, after having been exposed to the concept of the 'assault rifle', chose to make the M-14 their standard issue after the war.
20 years after WW2 they actually made the M-16, which classifies as an assault rifle, their standard issue.
>>
>>49210562
>There is no way a non-citizen from Afghanistan can walk into a walmart and buy a 50cal ...
Walmart doesn’t sell .50 calls but if they did, yes.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/may-aliens-legally-united-states-purchase-firearms
>>
>>49209007
>if you ignore the bad logistics
>the outdated equipment
>the lack of adaptation to changing battlefields
>the poor and highly political command structure
>the impossible material supply constraints
>the lack of sustainable infrastructure
>the insufficient manpower
>the inadequate production capacity
>and all matters related to war
>then why are they being discredited?!?
Ya, and what have the Romans done for us lately?
>>
>>49213106
>such as possession of a valid hunting license or permit
>>
>>49213111
>>if you ignore the bad logistics
>>the outdated equipment
>>the lack of adaptation to changing battlefields
>>the poor and highly political command structure
>>the impossible material supply constraints
>>the lack of sustainable infrastructure
>>the insufficient manpower
>>the inadequate production capacity
>>and all matters related to war
He asked about Germans, not 1940 Allies.
>>
You're right. Being anti wehrmacht is the cringiest contrarian bs of all time.
>>
>49213111 (you don't even get a (you) for that)
>bad logistics
For the fact that they had oil shortages, bombed out infrastructure and factories it was quite good actually.
>outdated equipment
Thanks for letting us all know that you are smoking different kinds of research drugs. The MG42 and Stg44 to name only 2 pieces of equipment were groundbreaking.
>lack of adaptation to changing battlefields
Source?
>command structure
Literally everyone admits that the command structure of the Wehrmacht contributed in large parts to their successes.
>material supply constraints, infrastructure, production capacity
Not the Wehrmacht's fault but rather the result of huge bombing campaigns.
>insufficient manpower
That would actually only speak in their favor as the stuff above.
>>
>>49212695
>GB wants to invade scandinavia to choke Germany out again like in WWI
>Hitler does it first
>retards cry about it a century later
What exactly was he supposed to do in your mind, anon?
>>
>>49213024
Not him, but
automatic rifles had existed for decades, there's a difference between having one and having a good one you can put into use for an army you brainlet.
I really hope you didn't think what you wrote was smart there, that was fucking embarrassing to read.
>>
>>49213205
>automatic rifles had existed for decades
Yet no assault rifles.
Give me one (1) automatic rifle before which used an intermediate cartridge.
>>
>>49212037
> well smart psychology man said being strong is stupid, hehehe.
"The cynicism that regards all hero worship as comical is always shadowed by a sense of physical inferiority."
On one hand you have thousands of years of human history, full of wars, battles and victories won by brain and brawn, and on another you have a bunch of sheltered nerds in so-called "academia"(that existed in its current for for barely a few centuries) that try to classify things they could never understand or experience.
>>
>>49209082
I want a nice Jewish girl to settle down with
>>
>>49211548
>Stg44 is bad because magazine
Isn't the Garand notorious for really fucking bad thumb injuries due to the badly thought out way you load this thing?
The Stg was revolutionary in the sense that now it was possible that you could advance will suppressing the enemy effectively from much longer ranges than an SMG could.
The Garand can not match this.
>M1 Carbine
This is generally known as a pea shooter, anon. I don't think they would've traded their well made K98 for that. (unless of course, as you admit yourself, when they ran out of ammo)
You are also completely forgetting about the MG34/42. While Americans had the BAR, a WW1 era automatic rifle that held 20 rounds, an MG42 has a 150 round belt and shoots at 1200 rpm.
>G3 and FAL virtually no features in common with the Stg
The G3 is a German design and just by looking at it you can see that it's very close to the Stg.
The thing is because of NATO bullshitery they had to use a full power rifle round instead of an intermediate round.
FAL, while not a German design, is very close to the G3 and denying this is just laughable.
It's not just about the internals, mind you, but the ergonomics, the length, the fact that it uses a magazine, fully automatic ...
>rather poor countries use cold war era battle rifles
Yes and?
>garand had a scope
Yeah ok I'm ready to say that I made a wrong statement there.
>>
>>49213132
>unless the alien is admitted into the U.S. under a nonimmigrant visa
Did you just pick out what you liked the most or are you criticizing the very concept of permits and hunting licenses? The text states that a holder of a non-immigrant visa may purchase a firearm if they have a valid hunting license or other ( state ) permit. A legal alien in the US with an immigrant visa does not have such a stipulation attached, and may ( federally ) purchase a firearm just as any other non prohibited person is able to.

If it’s the latter and you’re just bullshit about permits and licenses existing at all then I agree. “Shall not be infringed” is crystal clear.
>>
>>49213503
The argument was that certain people who were not citizens didn't have the same rights as others and that this is a bad thing.
Now first of all I don't know if someone from Afghanistan could actually in practice receive a visa in the first place but let's say such a person comes to the US without one and doesn't have a hunting license or permit. Then that person couldn't buy a gun.
>"Shall not be infringed" is crystal clear
So can you, as an ordinary citizen, buy an M249, yes or no?
>>
>>49213223
Entirely irrelevant to the original point the anon made and even more so than your last post, how often are you going to move that goalpost?
>>
>>49213406
>FAL, while not a German design
Weren't they just Germans in another country?
>>
>>49213657
I didn't move the goalpost once.
The Stg-44 (or the Mkb-42) for that matter were revolutionary. Not primarily for having been fully automatic but for having fused an MG with an SMG.
>>
>>49213721
>I didn't move the goalpost once.
>The Stg-44 (or the Mkb-42) for that matter were revolutionary
>Not primarily for having been fully automatic but for having fused an MG with an SMG.
How does any of that justify this post
>>49213024
After this post
>>49210447

I mean, the guy's point is retarded, but your post has no real connection to its content
>>
>>49213779
>>49213721
(It lacks any real connection to my point that the Stg44 was special due to it actually being feasible as a mass produced rifle more than just an experiment as well by the way)
>>
>>49213590
I’m not going to get into a big long shit flinging fest with you like the rest of the people in this thread but I will answer these immediate questions/statements. Assuming you’re the OP, or whichever anon was doing most of the arguing here.

I don’t care what the “argument” is or was. I am simply posting what the law is in the subject. If a person legally enters the US ( in this example from Afghanistan ) with a non-immigrant visa then they may only purchase a firearm if they also obtained a valid hunting permit, or other license from a state. If they entered the US with an immigrant visa then they need to meet no additional requirements from the federal government’s standpoint. Whether or not a person from Afghanistan is likely to receive either of these types of visas is not what the initial question was. If they did obtain either one of them then this is how the law will apply to them.

>So can you, as an ordinary citizen, buy an M249, yes or no?
No. But my statement about disagreeing with permits and licenses was an expression of my own opinion on how the law should be interpreted, and not how it is applied in fact.
>>
>>49213779
An assault rifle has to be intermediate, otherwise it would be considered a battle rifle at best like the FAL and G3.
The M-14 is not an assault rifle, but the M-16 is.
Where is there a contradiction here?
>>
>>49209432
>M I L L I O N S

no don't ask about the ACTUAL million German soliders murdered in Satanist-communist REAL death camps
>>
>>49213406
Not the person to whom you're responding, but the whole "Garand thumb" issue tends to be heavily exaggerated, IMO. It derives from the fact that with the bolt locked back, once something, such as a loaded en-bloc clip, pushes the follower down far enough, the bolt will be released. However, with a loaded clip in the magazine, the tension of the clip's pseudo feed lips on the top round causes the bolt to immediately stop at the back of the round and the bolt won't close until you deliberately push the charging handle forward, unless the clip is extremely worn out from tons and tons of reuse (and even then I'm not so sure). Usually, you'll only get "Garand thumb" by pressing down on the follower directly with your thumb when the magazine is empty without holding the charging handle back, which is kind of a dumb thing to do.
>>
>>49211065
You don't because that anon doesn't know what he's talking about. It has an internal magazine, fed with disposable enbloc clips. You could have kept the clips if you wanted to probably, but since garand ammo was issued with ammo in the enbloc clips they were as disposable as the spent cartridges.
>>
>>49213703
Well wikipedia states that the designer was someone with a French name.
There are people who consider at least the German-speaking population of Belgium to be ethnic Germans, maybe the same goes for the French speaking part, I don't know.
>>
>>49209007
can we all appreciate the fact that this guy has an STG, a pistol holster and pouches for 7.92x57?
>>
>>49213827
Ok you know what?
Let's just agree that in the US even non-citizen can obtain firearms. Still they disarmed the German people after WW2 so it's not like they believe in the right of every person to be armed no matter what.
>>
>>49209007
>Another talking point I hear a lot is that their logistics where extremely bad. I mean yes, it's true that they relied on horses a lot but that is because the little oil they had would be needed for tanks instead. In light of the fact that a lot of the infrastructure AND factories were bombed out, that oil is short in Europe and the countries that had rich oil reserves didn't trade with them it was quite acceptable if you'd ask me ...


its not just the lack of horses that made them bad
their entire supply structure was archaic and streamlined
requesting a spare part in the US army was simple as requesting it from a depot, and if they didnt have a part they would send the request up and so on until they found it, which would then be sent back down the chain
the system was so efficient, Russians were getting spare parts for lend lease shermans faster than spare parts for their T-34s

germans, by contrast, couldnt get a request past the depot
if they didnt have a part, you were out of luck unless you sat next to the train as it arrived and literally fought other tank commanders for the parts

yes, the total shortages meant you didn't have too many spare parts in the first place
but they only had a rudimentary system of replacements that compounded the problem

and lets not get into the fact they still hand built their tanks up until 1943
and they never got around to automatic welders or moving assembly lines
>>
>>49211563
nah, I shot an StG-44 that was repaired back to original issue standards with spare parts. original condition =/= original time period it was made, dumbass.
>>
>>49214010
Sure, you’ll get no objection from me there
>>
>>49213333
Quads checked
You will indeed find a nice Jewish girl to settle down with, anon.
>>
>>49213190
Can you help me find Nazi Germany on a map? None of the ones I've seen seem to have it.
>>
File: antarctica.png (264 KB, 600x494)
264 KB
264 KB PNG
>>49214144
>he doesn't know
>>
>>49213193
Exactly what he did, lose. Maybe he could have skipped the part where he handed half of Europe to commies though.
>>
>>49214014
>germans, by contrast, couldnt get a request past the depot
So what exactly stopped them from requesting the part at another depot instead?
>>
File: the_thing_1982.jpg (52 KB, 1200x680)
52 KB
52 KB JPG
>>49214168
Sorry, already claimed by the ayyyyys.
>>
>>49214178
Not him but you are aware that Stalin most likely prepared to attack all of Europe in 1941?
He showed overwhelming aggression towards the west, taking over the Baltic states, the western part of Poland, tried to take Finland ...
>>
>>49213894
Where is the connection to this post >>49210447 that made you sperg out so hard?
>>
>>49211938
>no range and shit sight. I'd rather be armed with a Lee-Enfield then Garand
Please tell me this is bait
>>
>>49213406
>Isn't the Garand notorious for really fucking bad thumb injuries due to the badly thought out way you load this thing?
only if you're retarded. the first bullet in the clip prevents the bolt from going forward, and if you're really scared you can just keep the edge of the palm in front of the charging handle.
>The Stg was revolutionary in the sense that now it was possible that you could advance will suppressing the enemy effectively from much longer ranges than an SMG could
and you could effectively do this with most LMGs, automatic rifles, and even something like the M1 Carbine.
>The Garand can not match this.
perhaps, but M1 Garands always outnumbered StGs on the battlefield, and there was always enough supplies and ammo to keep the M1s in the fight. that just wasn't true of the StG.
>M1 Carbine
>pea shooter
compared to a full size rifle? yes. but it could still drop a man easy. it had problems (needed a lot of lube, couldn't handle debris well, mediocre magazines) but within 200m it could kill easy
>I don't think they would've traded their well made K98 for that
except they did? watch this video at 7:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF0qH_zvfdU
>MG34/42
probably the one serious small arms advantage the Nazis had. the BAR was more of an auto-rifle meant to give better firepower to riflemen; the actual MGs the US used were the M1917 and M1919. these worked very well for emplaced firing, but weren't as adaptable as the MG34/42. granted, the US focused on solid riflemen, while Germans used fire groups based on the MG.
>FAL and G3 StG comparison
literally there is nothing in common with design, other than aesthetics. yes, they originally wanted to use an intermediate cartridge, but that idea was around before the StG and Nazis.
>rather poor countries use cold war era battle rifles
Turkey and Iran are the premier MENA military powers, and the former is using a new 7.62 NATO rifle (MPT-76) as its standard issue. Nordic countries also still use G3s.
>>
>>49213190
Damn, and they STILL lost? Wow, the Germans must have been incredibly fucking shitty.
>>
>>49214288
His post implies that the STG-44 was the first of its kind while that is actually the MKB-42.
>>
>>49214295
>probably the one serious small arms advantage the Nazis had. the BAR was more of an auto-rifle meant to give better firepower to riflemen; the actual MGs the US used were the M1917 and M1919. these worked very well for emplaced firing, but weren't as adaptable as the MG34/42. granted, the US focused on solid riflemen, while Germans used fire groups based on the MG.
the BAR problem is less of an issue when you consider that the real "basic" unit of the US army wasnt the infantry rifle platoon but the armored rifle platoon

the US believed armored infantry were the main unit of warfare, similair to the germans but they had the industry to make it a reality
and every armored infantry squad had a half-track with either an M2 or M1917A1 on it to provide fire
and they, by hook or by crook, had 1 or 2 BARs per squad like a normal infantry squad anyways despite it not being standard issue
and a bazooka per squad, just in case

you can still make the argument that a mounted MG isnt as good as an organic MG, but it does mean the average US squad wasnt nearly as outgunned as people think
>>
>>49209082
this be a real nigga moment
>>
>>49214295
>Nordic countries also still use G3s.
as secondary arms at best. Finland never took the 7.62 NATO pill, Norway went with the 416 and Sweden uses the FNC.
>>
>>49214295
>only if you are retarded
Guess there were a lot of retards then.
>and you could effectively do this with most LMGs, automatic rifles, and even something like the M1 Carbine.
So why has the US decided to use assault rifles themselves? Evidently they are just better at that than other rifles (nowadays a M249 might be better at that yes, but at the time the MGs were supposed to be used from a rested position, weren't they?).
>M1 Garands outnumbered Stgs
Sure but I'm pretty sure the Stgs were in their own squads so when they had presence on the battlefield they could fully utilize moving fire.
>American soldier telling stuff
American soldiers also told of gassings at Buchenwald and Dachau (these camps are officially no longer claimed to have been death camps). To be quite honest I don't think they are all that credible, but let's give this man the benefit of the doubt. Then what? Yes, I believe that since ammo was short they would've taken all the guns and ammo they were able to get their hands on, anything else would be quite stupid. Why the M1 Carbine? Well, maybe because you could carry more ammo than it was the case with a Garand. And unless I missed it he didn't say that they left their K98 for them, did he?
>literally nothing common with the design
Stg-44: Automatic rifle with a detachable magazine with a length typical for an assault rifle, pistol grip, shoots intermediate ammo.
G3/FAL: Automatic rifle with a detachable magazine with a length typical for an assault rifle, pistol grip, shoots rile ammo.
Garand: Semi auto rifle with length and grip more reminiscent of bolt-action rifles, loads with clips, shoots rifle ammo.
(At the very least these are closer to the Stg-44 than the Garand)

It's the same argument as with the Stg-44 and AK dispute. Because the internals are different the AK has nothing to do with the Stg-44, right ...
There is no way you can convince me that these rifles were not at least inspired by the Stg-44.
>>
File: Ribeyrolle1918.jpg (31 KB, 1022x287)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>49213223
Some people would probably mention the Fedorov, though personally I don't really consider the 6.5 Arisaka a proper intermediate cartridge. It definitely had intermediate-tier ballistics out of the Fedorov's relatively short barrel, but it's much bigger and heavier than most modern, true intermediate rounds, including the 7.92mm Kurz.

The only pre-WWII select-fire rifle with what could be considered a real intermediate round that I can think of is probably the Ribeyrolles automatic carbine, which used a cartridge that was essentially a .351 WSL case necked down to use an 8mm spitzer bullet. I don't know its exact ballistics, but I would assume it had comparable performance to the 7.92 Kurz.
>>
>>49214385
interesting, thank you for sharing.
>>
>>49214186
>So what exactly stopped them from requesting the part at another depot instead?
the fact that there are way more battalions than supply dumps, so you literally couldnt visit another one
>>
>>49214508
>visit
But the Americans didn't visit other depots either, you said they put out a request to the next depot.
Why weren't the Germans able to do that?
>>
>>49214497
personally i find the whole 'but design X was an earlier assault rifle' a bit pointless. Academically interesting, yes, but nothing more.
Even if we consider the ballistics of 6.5 out of a Fedorovs barrel to be 'intermediate', or the Ribeyrolle, or even a DIY select fire winchester self loader:
The STG remains the first fielded magazine fed, intermediate cartridge firing, select fire rifle to enter the stage in any number one can deem significant, even if its numbers are dwarfed by the numbers of MP38/40s and K98s and roughly equalled by G43's.
Its only doctrinal BS in US and Soviet top brass that prevented the assault rifle concept to be properly fielded (by a power that wasnt on its last legs) prior to the late 50's
Even the AK, as long lasting as it has proven to be, was initially intended to be an SMG++ that was conveniently chambered in the same cartridge as the SKS (the intended standard arm)
>>
>>49210838
Britain has laxer gun laws than huge swathes of the US in 1900.
>>
>>49210148
This rifle confuses me. It looks like a 580 series but has the 181 series side mount?
>>
>>49214524
americans didnt need to visit other depots, your request would just keep getting passed up the chain until they found someone who does have it, then send it back down until it reaches the original depot
the whole system was centralized such that any request would eventually be filled

by contrast, if germans looking for a part didnt find it, the buck stopped there
either send the tank back to the factory and hope you get issued a replacement
or have a fist fight with other tank commanders over burned out wrecks to claim the parts inside
there was no centralized authority for distributing the parts they did have, just unload all the parts and let the crews sort it out
>>
>>49214695
>send the tank back to the factory
I'm not sober enough to start looking for the info, but i remember reading in Beevor's Arnhem that a major factor in german armor presence in the area had to do with very rapid redeployment of tanks that were in various states of repair in german/austrian factories to the Market Garden area of operations
or somehting like that
(and on a, not necessarily related, sidenote, the imo most overlooked details of western front warfare is the constant underestimation of SHAEF of the capability of Germany to re-evaluate its priorities and rapidly switch to respond to allied movements)
>>
>>49214345
It is the first of its kind that is actually practical enough to be mass produced, which is kind of a big deal.
>>
>>49210750
>even if we say
Doesn't imply that I personally don't believe in it only that there are quite a lot of people who would dispute it, which I don't do and by saying 'even if we say' I hope to be able to focus on the arguments instead of causing a discussion of a different kind. I think I explained this before.
>millions
There were also more than a few million Poles yet their killing is considered a genocide too.
(And killing millions of people of an ethnicity is rightfully considered a genocide in my eyes).
>axishistory is biased
The OP of that thread lists all of his sources. Apart from that it's not like you won't find people there who stick to the politically correct view, but they also don't censor politically incorrect views. Why exactly are you so opposed to that, anon?
>important rail station
Taking a look at the large number of refugees that were in the city when it was bombed it must have been.
>no industry
I know for certain it had a cigarette factory.
>lack of accuracy
Ah yes, the whole city is bombed to ruins and it's 'lack of accuracy'. That's gonna be it, I'm sure.
>>
>>49214773
>actually practical enough
i'd say it was more readily accepted to be fielded than easily produced
sure it was mostly stamped, but the internals look like a nightmare
>>
>>49209040
Americas especially do. They idealize it because they desperately want to believe modern America is just like America back then. A coping mechanism for then they see faggots, women and niggers posing with faggot flags by overpriced faggot-35 jets of which their hard earned tax dollars went towards.
>>
>>49209082
Rollin
>>
>>49209082
Why not?
>>
>>49213940
At this point, you're just baiting and badly at that
>>
>>49215354
Not him but are you denying the fact that barely any of the soldiers that were taken as POWs to the USSR came beack?
>>
File: 17.jpg (202 KB, 571x542)
202 KB
202 KB JPG
>>49209007
>noo don't counter the propaganda about the German military
>yo check out this actual Nazi propaganda website
>>
>>49215448
First of all that's not propaganda but the superiority of the Wehrmacht has been accepted as fact by most military historians ever since.
Secondly sure you might say that's a 'Nazi propaganda website' but at the same time remember that mainstream sources, such as wikipedia, tend to have a very strong left wing bias. On the other hand you can just take the 1928 and 1938 gun laws and compare them yourself, it's just that the author of the 'Nazi propaganda website' has already done that with the laws for you to see. I just thought that might be more convenient.
>>
>>49214186
>So what exactly stopped them from requesting the part at another depot instead?
If the warehouse near you doesn't have the part you need, the next nearest warehouse will be even farther away.
>>
>>49215535
The Nazi gun control thing is bullshit, but there are plenty of credible sources to prove that.
You linking to a Nazi blog leads me to be a little suspicious about your motives in "correcting" the narrative about the Wehrmacht

As for the Wehrmacht, it's a classic problem of pendulum overcorrection. Lots of falsehoods and misconceptions perpetuated ideas of super stronk superior German tech/troops. So people tried to tamper that down but it's resulted in the reverse of "lmao horses" which is as much of a oversimplification as "lmao Russia had more men". The Germans weren't that bad, or they would have never been so successful, but they also weren't that mythically good, or they wouldn't have lost.
>>
>>49215535
>First of all that's not propaganda but the superiority of the Wehrmacht has been accepted as fact by most military historians ever since.

even dupuy, the guy who made the rather dubious claim that it took more americans to match germans, has said the wehrmacht as a whole organization was inferior to their opponents on a strategic level

and even then, the claims of german superiority have dropped off in recent years for good reason
its not the cold war anymore and we have access to material other than autobiographies of west german generals

and even in his own day, dupuys claim has been challenged
either by people who rightfully claim tactical superiority never exists in a vacuum and vanishes once combined arms between artillery and armor are factored in
or that tactical advantage never existed in the first place or is heavily exaggerated
>>
File: nazi-party-flag-1.jpg (53 KB, 1200x628)
53 KB
53 KB JPG
>>49209007
>Why does there seem to a coordinated effort to discredit the combat effectiveness of the Wehrmacht lately?
Why do people like you seem to be historically illiterate our outright liars pimping stale and pathetic neonazi/jewposting/pokltard garbage past the point of stale and into the land of rotten where you are sitting there stinking of shit waving a zog flag and clutching a copy of the turner diaries (shit) and tmein kampf(really shit)? Is it because you are a tard OP? Are you a simpleton, a moron? The kind of man who's brain is shaped by infographics and peer pressure echo chambers? A man child with no personality or morals? Is that is case OP? Are you here from pol to pimp some retarded garbage about nazis because you are a spastic cunt? Here's your (you)
>>
>>49209007
The StG 44 is a revolutionary weapon, but it's effect on the war was rather limited. As their main rifle, it's the K98k which represents Germany, which alongside most of it's bolt-action counterparts is generally inferior to the M1 Garand.
>>
>>49215617
>credible sources that prove that
Sure I could link the law from 1928 and 1938 but who else even wrote about that?
>>49215632
>we have access to material other than autobiographies of west german generals
Such as?
>Dupuy
Pretty sure it's not just him.
>>49215673
My brain is shaped by infographics and peer pressure echo chambers yet I am here in this thread where I am just getting insulted for being a 'nazi'. Interesting claim.
>>
File: the-chosen.jpg (152 KB, 1080x1168)
152 KB
152 KB JPG
It's a political matter, the powers that be fear European identity more than anything else.
Therefore, the Germans must have been wrong in every field and every manner.

Hitler had one testicle, 11 gazillion in the holohoax, they were bad at combat blahblah
>>
>>49215831
>Pretty sure it's not just him.
even dupuys own students did not necessarily agree with him
christopher lawrence, a contemporary, claims the US were effectively equal, only 20% worse at most, and operationally superior as a whole fighting force, because individual infantry capability does not exist in a vacuum especially when artillery or tanks are involved

and both dupuy and lawrence admit that their data may be flawed, due to stricter german casualty recording that gives them a lower number of wounded on paper
>>
>>49209007
Germany shouldn't have broke the peace treaty with Russia. Germany should have waited for Russia to attack. If Finland can win a defensive war against Russia, then so could Germany.
>>
>>49209403
Shhh, be vewwy vewwy quiet. I'm hunting wacists.
>>
>>49210194
funny, every time someone talks about the british in the war it's "the nazis stood literally zero chance of a successful invasion" and yet they always bitch about the eternal germ threatening their sacred island when asked about motivation for the war
>>
>>49211331
they DID do that to iceland
>>
>>49209007
Is this one of those nazi threads where people idolize how the nazi conscripted the lowest people in society to rape, murder, burn, and loot white peoples towns? Just make a Dirlewanger thread and talk about how you're a CS major and got a gf to move to colorado after making 8,999 threads about no gf because nobody likes you because you're a prick and you're ideas don't work.
>>
>>49217116
*your
>>
>>49209075
I mean that's literally what happened in WW2 this is honestly a correction in the post war appraisal of the wehrmact. The German military was good. But it wasn't legendary, and stumbled the second it fought someone it's own size. France was the one impressive thing it accomplished.
>>
>>49209200
Germany wasn't on a war footing economically until 42. When barbarossa was launched the logistics corps said they couldn't support it. And German factories were empty, because again they weren't on a war footing so they weren't doing shit like Rosie the riveter, when all their enemies were. Like fuck they were retarded.
>>
>>49209447
KeK no it wasn't. Britain wasn't going to surrender, and their involvement, even ignoring Japan guaranteed eventual US involvement. You can't let grampa get his ass kicked. Just like Japan couldn't swallow China, Germany could not swallow Russia.
>>
>>49216728
Yes just leave them Europe they won't build a navy in the next decade or two.
>>
>>49216191
I mean Finland didn't win a defensive war against Russia, so not a strong point.
>>
>>49217434
the obvious move is to become their naval support so they spend less time on ships and thereby deter an invasion of the isles. also nuke italy.
why yes, i play hoi, how could you tell
>>
>>49217251
you're grannie mom can't unsuck that russian cock, commie
>>
File: 1610125387915.jpg (63 KB, 625x531)
63 KB
63 KB JPG
>>49212063
>>49213305
Cope. Must've hit a sensitive spot.
Facts don't care about your feelings.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.