(False) Historical stereotypes

Discussion in 'Historical Events Coffee House' started by D3adtrap, Jul 5, 2012.

  1. Achtung Kommunisten! Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,962
    Likes Received:
    340
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Birmingham, United Kingdom, European Union
    Maybe they're not totally wrong, if they simultaneously believe that 'Korean War' actually means the period of deployment of US troops.
  2. TheKoreanPoet Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    122
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    True, but an armistice is when both sides agree to stop fighting for now. Kinda like pausing a video game to grab a snack. Unless there is a peace treaty, the war is still going on, it's just that no one is fighting it.
  3. thelistener Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    May 2, 2011
    Message Count:
    868
    Likes Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    finland
    What I meant was that they got out t-55 out of their garages even in 1973, bad phrasing. But anyway Israelis used the same shells in the Sherman as the allies did in ww2, they only altered the shell to use a smaller cartridge.

    Also I am pretty sure that tiger was made to counter the unexpectedly formidable Soviet armor- mainly t-34 and kv-1.....

    But anyhow I would never choose the panther as the best tank of ww2, it too broke most of the time before even getting to the battlefield, and as for the the forest-urban aspect I hardly would call that off by just those reasons, by the time the panther came up on the field, Germans damn well knew what it had against were it was going to be used, sounds like design flaw to me (simply but) I also want stress how unreliable the panther was, again, with the tiger. But the panzer iv did well and was good tank with working in construction with infantry, best German tank in the war.

    Exactly, panther wasn't cost-effective that's the point, if only 30% of tank casualties on all sides were inflicted by other tanks, what's the bloody point in building heavy tanks who can only slug on each other? But I am getting bit carried away, my original point was that Sherman wasn't a bad tank and is with the t-34 best medium tank of ww2. And because medium tanks were the tanks that mattered, it makes it better than the panther in contest of "best tank in the war". (now just so we are clear, I do think heavy tanks mattered but they had to work in conjunction with medium tanks etc Germans did that bit wrong in most cases, unlike russians with their IS and yanks with pershing)

    (sorry if I forgot something or spelled something wrong, I am tired and surely should have left this for the morning..)
    yuri2045 likes this.
  4. Augustus Magnas Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2012
    Message Count:
    203
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    13
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Myth: Hitler was an atheist
    Fact: While not an overly-devout man Hitler was infact a Christian. In private he talked about fond memories he had as a Church Choir boy, in Mein Kempf he talked about how it is God's wish that the Jews be exterminated since it was they who killed God's son. So yeah Hitler might well have been the Mel Gibson of his day. This myth has been used mostly by Fundamentalist Christians as a way to try and condemn Atheism, they usually throw in Stalin as well.
  5. crocve Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    682
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    78
    I donĀ“t agree with this. You should see in youtube the 1st and 2nd parts of "Was Hitler Christian? An Analysis of 60 Quotations" . It is true that Hitler was Catholic when he was younger, but when he entered politics, he began to embrace paganism. It is just like what happened with Roman emperor Constantine, who used Christianity to help his political objectives, but continued to be a pagan and only converted in his death bed.
  6. GeorgykZhukov Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    618
    Likes Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Metro Detroit, Michigan
    Because i have massive tentacles protruding from my face.
  7. yuri2045 A Marines Biologist

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,767
    Likes Received:
    328
    Trophy Points:
    148
    Location:
    Curitiba, Brasil
    If I recall correctly, Hitler ordered a tank design to be able to mount their powerfull 88mm, so they could beat the KV-1 and T-34, because the Panzer IV was not strong enough with even its upgraded 75mm. In turn the soviets designed a new heavy tank, the Iosif Stalin, because the KV wasn't powerfull enough to penetrate the Tiger's armor, neither the T-34. So initially the Tiger was pretty good but was soon outdated, as to the Panther, its main flaw was that later in the war, with lack of materials and etc, the welding and in turn, the armor, even if well slopped and thick, wasn't good enough to the Soviet and American materials, but it did have a good gun that outranged both the Sherman and T-34. Anyway, I have to agree with, but I still have to say the T-34 is in my vision, the best tank of WW2, I was arguing about the Panther because you made it look worse than a Sherman, which it wasn't (at least on paper).
    thelistener likes this.
  8. Lighthouse Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    3,459
    Likes Received:
    465
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    The nearest Strip Club!
    Appears the price of Gas have flunctuated between 4-5 dollars.
    General Mosh likes this.
  9. General Mosh Citystates Founder!

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    5,310
    Likes Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Scattered to the 4 corners of Earth
    The US must be making one hell of a snack....
  10. thelistener Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    May 2, 2011
    Message Count:
    868
    Likes Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    finland
    Omar Bradley was GI's general.
    Wrong. As Marshall noted:"The GI's were not impressed with him. They scarcely knew him. He's not a flamboyant figure and he didn't get out much to troops. And the idea that he was idolized by the average soldier is just rot."

Share This Page

Facebook: