The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
The Tank Quotient
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In the absence of serious wars between serious countries since 1945, it’s difficult to approximate the “combat efficiency” of the various national militaries. All that’s available, it seems, are reference to history, national IQ, and anecdotal observations.

Nonetheless, I think there’s a couple of events that could be considered “international standardized tests” for this.

Strong Europe Tank Challenge

Crews from NATO and non-NATO partners compete in defensive/offensive mounted and dismounted operations. Platoons rotate throughout 12 events with 1,500 possible points in total.

Results:

Команда 2016 2017 2018
Germany 1 2 1
Austria 1 3
Sweden 2
Denmark 2
Poland 3 6 5
United States 5, 6 3 7
France 4 4
Italy 4
United Kingdom 6
Ukraine 5 8
Slovenia 7

The Germanics, and Scandinavians, uniformly do much better better than the rest – and it’s not necessarily due to them using Leopards either, which the Poles also use.

Now I am aware the modern German military is something of a meme, with Anglo MSM stories such as them using brooms instead of guns for training and whatnot. But apart from many of them probably being exaggerated, there’s also the factor of:

  • Not many problems with SJWs/woke commissars, which I am informed have crippled British military capabilities in the past half decade. If anything, they have more of a problem with overly testosterone-fueled race war enthusiasts in the ranks.
  • Their strong and highly consistent military record, registering ~25% superiority in combat efficiency over the Americans, British, and French in both the world wars.

Trevor Dupuy in A Genius for War suggests that this tradition of excellence was not destroyed in 1945:

Experience to date of the West German armed forces — happily never tested in battle — suggests that the strong efforts to ensure a measure of civilization and democratization within the Army, as well as the continuation of strong civilian controls, have not resulted in an inefficient, ineffective Army. Superficial evidence suggests that the units of that Army are functioning within the NATO framework with efficiency at least comparable to that of the two other major military NATO partners, the United States and Great Britain. … American officers who have seen West German training and maneuvers have commented with respect and admiration on the efficiency of German performance, and the capability of German troops to react quickly, flexibly, and effectively to unforeseen maneuver circumstances. West German General Staff officers have demonstrated outstanding capabilities on the various NATO staffs.

My guess is that the Germans could still put up a very good showing against Anglos or Poles if it came to it, and they had the requisite morale.

***

Biathlon World Championship

The tank biathlon is a mechanised military sport event promoted by the Russian military with some similarities to the winter sport of biathlon. It utilizes the complex training of tank crews including their rough terrain passing skills combined with the ability to provide accurate and rapid fire while performing maneuvers.

Results:

The table shows the teams’ places in each of the world championships. For 2nd division teams, the first number is the place within the division, and the second number is the absolute place. The teams are ranked according to their average (absolute) place.

Clear correlation with national IQ, as well as stereotype-based assessments of military proficiency.

Slavs and Chinese at the top. India not far behind – while the average is unimpressive, it has a billion people to draw from, including some very high IQ groups as well as “martial races”. The Africans are at the bottom – Chad Chad aside, they usually make Arabs look competent in military matters.

Unfortunately, no country that participates in the “Eurasian” tank biathlons also participates in the “Atlanticist” NATO games, so it’s not clear how to establish a common basis of comparison.

Russia, followed by China (Belorussians/Kazakhs being ~Russians), are consistently at the top. However, it is Russia’s event, and it probably puts the most effort into it, so I wouldn’t necessarily automatically put it above China. My guess is that Russia and China would be Poland-Anglo/French tier in a common ranking?

***

UPDATE: Canadian Army Trophy

h/t @whyvert in comments.

The Canadian Army Trophy (CAT) was a tank gunnery competition established to foster excellence, camaraderie and competition among the armoured forces of the NATO countries in Western Europe.

Germans again dominate:

Year Team/Squadron/Company Nation Tank Best Platoon or Section Nation Tank
1963 4e Lanciers BEL M-47 Patton
1964 4e Lanciers BEL M-47 Patton
1965 Royal Scots Greys UK Centurion Mk.5
1966 13th/18th Royal Hussars (QMO) UK Centurion
1967 B Squadron, Lord Strathcona’s Horse (RC) CAN Centurion
1968 1er Lanciers BEL M-47 Patton
1970 16th/5th The Queen’s Royal Lancers UK Chieftain Mk.3 16th/5th The Queen’s Royal Lancers UK Chieftain Mk.3
1973 3. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 83 FRG Leopard 1 Queen’s Royal Irish Hussars UK Chieftain
1975 3. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 84 FRG Leopard 1 A1 3. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 84 FRG Leopard 1 A1
1977 Royal Canadian Dragoons CAN Leopard 1 A2 B Squadron, 11 Tankbataljon NLD Leopard 1
1979 2. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 284 FRG Leopard 1 A4 2. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 284 FRG Leopard 1 A4
1981 4. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 294 FRG Leopard 1 A4 4. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 294 FRG Leopard 1 A4
1983 CENTAG (West Germany) FRG Leopard 1 A4 1. Zug, 2. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 293 FRG Leopard 1 A4
1985 NORTHAG (Netherlands) NLD Leopard 2 2. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 244 FRG Leopard 2 A1
1987 CENTAG (United States) USA M1 Abrams IP 1 Platoon, D Company, 4/8th Cavalry USA M1 Abrams IP
1989 NORTHAG (Netherlands) NLD Leopard 2 A4 4 Platoon, A Eskadron, 41 Tankbataljon NLD Leopard 2 A4
1991 NORTHAG (Germany) GER Leopard 2 A4 3. Zug, 4. Kompanie, Panzerbataillon 84 GER Leopard 2 A4

***

Military World Games

This is just an Olympics for people who happen to be soldiers, so doesn’t mean much. Volleyball proficiency isn’t going to do you much good on a battlefield.

***

Annual Warrior Competition

Combat-oriented competition for the world’s special forces running since 2009. But I can’t find any convenient set of statistics for all years and I’m not sure it’s worthwhile expending the effort, as it doesn’t seem to be something that’s taken very seriously by the major countries (e.g. Brunei special forces took #1 and #3 place in 2019).

***

Over all, too little data/not standardized enough to be of much worth as an input into attempts to quantify national military power. But might be of use as a plausibility check.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Army, Germany, Military, Tanks 
Hide 82 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    I'd say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I'm talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they're known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    Replies: @UK, @Morton's toes, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @Pontius, @Znzn, @Fuerchtegott

    , @LondonBob
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    The people who went to Sandhurst and then in to the military at school were the dumb but sociable types, good at sports. Prince Harry is a good example, dumb but a nice guy who likes to keep active. The Army has always held a low position and historically relied on the recruitment of idiot sons of the gentry and lowly scum of the earth. The RN, the senior service, and RAF have had less difficulties.

    I assume with the Prussian background in Getmany the Army would be more prestigious.

    Replies: @Amerimutt Golems

    , @Amerimutt Golems
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

     

    The U.S. military is overrated.

    Despite prior experience in the British Army, Washington needed a Prussian to train troops. The U.S. did badly at the Battle of Bladensburg (pre-diversity) and in WWII troops were 'terrorized' by the German MG42 machine gun.

    Replies: @Thorfinnsson

    , @Belarusian Dude
    @Boswald Bollocksworth


    The Germans are just really good at almost everything
     
    Not at winning wars.

    Replies: @Vaterland

  3. isn´t conventional military strength in end pointless since the invention of the nuclear bombs?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Erik Sieven

    You can destroy a country with nukes. You cannot conquer it.

    Replies: @Erik Sieven

  4. @Boswald Bollocksworth
    The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

    Replies: @Europe Europa, @LondonBob, @Amerimutt Golems, @Belarusian Dude

    I’d say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I’m talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they’re known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    • Troll: LondonBob
    • Replies: @UK
    @Europe Europa

    Absurdly clichéd self-critical English attitude that completely misses how ridiculously far above our weight the UK punches in almost every human endeavour.

    Replies: @Philip Owen, @Bert

    , @Morton's toes
    @Europe Europa

    Englishmen are great at consuming liquor.

    , @Athletic and Whitesplosive
    @Europe Europa

    The police of their major cities have twitter accounts that produce memes at a rate greater than perhaps any other country's.

    , @Pontius
    @Europe Europa

    Formula 1.

    , @Znzn
    @Europe Europa

    Duke of Wellington? Waterloo? Wars between Great Britain and France?

    , @Fuerchtegott
    @Europe Europa

    Dogging porn.

  5. UK says:

    These are some really hokey measurements!

    Making judgements from the Military World Games and the Tank Biathlon are like understanding football (soccer) from the Olympics. They are likely to let you know quality only as an inverse of their results. No serious military and no serious soldier would want to attend except as an excuse to have an all expenses paid holiday.

    OTOH, Germany has high quality officers – similar to Brits, well above French, and the Danes are all round awesome.

  6. @Europe Europa
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    I'd say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I'm talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they're known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    Replies: @UK, @Morton's toes, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @Pontius, @Znzn, @Fuerchtegott

    Absurdly clichéd self-critical English attitude that completely misses how ridiculously far above our weight the UK punches in almost every human endeavour.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    @UK

    Like controlling SARS-CoV-2? Making motor cars? Fishing? Fruit picking?

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

    , @Bert
    @UK

    Right. Britain holds the record by losing two empires.

    At the beginning of the period when Great Britain was the most powerful nation in the world, it lost most of, and the best part of, North America. It did so through political arrogance and military incompetence. Imagine the stupidity of Cornwallis trying to conquer interior South Carolina with a few thousand infantry when the Ulster-derived Patriot militia were mounted riflemen. Imagine Cornwallis turning over a portion of that attempt to Banastre Tarleton, whose only tactic was a headlong charge before even assessing his opponent's strength and disposition.

    The best people left Britain for America, and the best of those were people who had resisted the English from time immemorial, the Scots and their Scots-Irish descendents.

    Replies: @Agathoklis, @the grand wazoo

  7. Russia is certainly somewhere between Ukraine and the rich countries.

  8. As a German reserve soldier, here is the deal:

    Generally speaking, Germany faces 2 possible exintction level threats.
    1: Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.
    2: USA getting really really really stupid, voluntolding us into doing stupid stuff in the east, resulting in Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.

    Essentially, Germany is stuck between the doomsday scenarios of US stupidity and Russian anger managment issues, which is not neccessarily the best place to be in. A stronk German Army would be good against Russian anger managment issues, but may also incourage moar US stupidty. A weak German army may increase Russian anger managment issues (but this is debatable) but probably decrease US adventureism and stupidty. It is also much cheaper. Guess which option Germany took?

    Scenario one is pretty unlikely, given that Russia is a pretty reasonable great power, which has far too much to loose to nuke countries it does much business with for no fucking reason.
    Scenario 2 is pretty likely, given that the current leadership of the USA has a rather random degree of detachment to reality. (Russias attachment to reality is opportunistic Russians will tell the truth if it is in their interest, with the USAs is just random). As such, the key thing for German soldiers is to avoid being voluntold by the USA do to stupid dumb deadly shit regarding the Russians.
    As a bonus, this may result in German soldiers also not being voluntold to do stupid things regarding various Muslims.
    How does one prevent getting voluntold to die for Hunter Bidens Burisma Board position? Easy, publically project to the Americans that the Bundeswehr is a meme. Americans being as reality averse and meme affine as they are are probably going to buy it. If the Americans wont even ask for german troops in Ukraine, there is much less of a chance of things going nasty with the Russians.
    If we have to pretend to be clowns, then so be it.
    Regarding Russia, we have one buffer zone (poland). Now, it would be kind of cute if our buffer zone (Poland) got its own buffer zone (Ukraine), but that is strictly a luxury item. In the meantime, we will use our totally not feigned indignancy over Russias oh so super duper terribly aggresive action to maybe get cheaper oil from Russia.

    • Agree: Fuerchtegott
    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    @Mightypeon

    What real contradiction would there be between German and Russian interests without NATO and American domination?

    Replies: @Mightypeon

    , @Vaterland
    @Mightypeon

    That's a general idea, I also had it, but I don't really believe it. Germany's current political "elite" is the worst we have had since the end of WW 2, excluding Willy Brandt; yet he was a traitor, but not stupid and actually competent at what he wanted to achieve. The 4-D Chess posting about Merkel and her circles maneuvering are projecting a bit much of strategical long term thinking, I'm afraid. It's just a no brainer damage control not to get crushed between USA and China or Russia.

    Nukes are not a problem though. We could produce around 6,800 from our nuclear reactors in a relative short amount of time. Political implications are the bigger problem for that. But a post-nation that takes pride in its own defeat and is smug about its own self-hatred, that is populated by Nietzsche's last man, is beyond ambitions.
    Although you can also 4-D chess post here. For relatively inconsequential German guilt in terms of hard power and some reparations we get political control over Europe. If that were true that is. Cucks like Heiko Maas who "went into politics because of Auschwitz" just want to safe guard their left-liberal post WW 2 world order. Yet if a total omega male like this guy can tell the USA to f off with North Stream 2 it is rather shocking just how hollowed out the USA has become... And yet here we are, occupied and dominated by this old bitch. What does this say about us?

    The reality is a liberal European Union dominated by Anglo ideas, a nation that has left the EU, and culturally fully Americanized, defined by the victor propaganda of hostile nations who waged war, defeated and occupied Europe as its foundation myth, has zero political future. A chance for the right potentially; unfortunately they are atrociously incompetent and fought tooth and nail by the establishment.

    Replies: @silviosilver

    , @Anatoly Karlin
    @Mightypeon

    Very plausible theory, makes sense.

  9. What a joke of a post! Only 8 or so countries compete in the Strong Tank Challenge.

    Why don’t you post who is the best pilot of the NATO Tactical Leadership program?

    Of course, the data would not confirm a pre-existing world view.

    • Replies: @Rattus Norwegius
    @Agathoklis

    "Why don’t you post who is the best pilot of the NATO Tactical Leadership program?"
    Let me guess, a Greek?

    Replies: @Agathoklis

  10. @Mightypeon
    As a German reserve soldier, here is the deal:

    Generally speaking, Germany faces 2 possible exintction level threats.
    1: Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.
    2: USA getting really really really stupid, voluntolding us into doing stupid stuff in the east, resulting in Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.

    Essentially, Germany is stuck between the doomsday scenarios of US stupidity and Russian anger managment issues, which is not neccessarily the best place to be in. A stronk German Army would be good against Russian anger managment issues, but may also incourage moar US stupidty. A weak German army may increase Russian anger managment issues (but this is debatable) but probably decrease US adventureism and stupidty. It is also much cheaper. Guess which option Germany took?


    Scenario one is pretty unlikely, given that Russia is a pretty reasonable great power, which has far too much to loose to nuke countries it does much business with for no fucking reason.
    Scenario 2 is pretty likely, given that the current leadership of the USA has a rather random degree of detachment to reality. (Russias attachment to reality is opportunistic Russians will tell the truth if it is in their interest, with the USAs is just random). As such, the key thing for German soldiers is to avoid being voluntold by the USA do to stupid dumb deadly shit regarding the Russians.
    As a bonus, this may result in German soldiers also not being voluntold to do stupid things regarding various Muslims.
    How does one prevent getting voluntold to die for Hunter Bidens Burisma Board position? Easy, publically project to the Americans that the Bundeswehr is a meme. Americans being as reality averse and meme affine as they are are probably going to buy it. If the Americans wont even ask for german troops in Ukraine, there is much less of a chance of things going nasty with the Russians.
    If we have to pretend to be clowns, then so be it.
    Regarding Russia, we have one buffer zone (poland). Now, it would be kind of cute if our buffer zone (Poland) got its own buffer zone (Ukraine), but that is strictly a luxury item. In the meantime, we will use our totally not feigned indignancy over Russias oh so super duper terribly aggresive action to maybe get cheaper oil from Russia.

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Vaterland, @Anatoly Karlin

    What real contradiction would there be between German and Russian interests without NATO and American domination?

    • Replies: @Mightypeon
    @Kent Nationalist

    Russia wants a buffer zone, (Ukraine and Belarus) as a hard interest, and it would want their buffer zone to have a buffer (Poland) zone of its own as a soft nice to have interest.
    Germany wants a buffer zone (Poland) as a hard interest, and would want their buffer zone to have their own buffer zone (Ukraine and Belarus) as a soft interest.

    The second scenario being pretty unlikely, essentially the clash is between the soft german interest of having a second layer of buffer zones withe the hard Russian interest of having a buffer zone in the first place.
    Unsurprisngly, the Russians are thus a lot more motivated then the Germans regarding Ukraine.

    Now, Germany also aims to essentially control the EU and create a German led European Union. As Russia, with its similiarly sized economy (in real times) and its far stronger military potential would be a stronger competitor here then France and the UK, keeping the Russians out of the EUs political decisionmaking is a German interest. Meanwhile, Russia has a number of interests in avoiding/preventing any unification of Europe without it having a veto or ideally being in the drivers seat, and it can position itself as a very distant alternative boss (the more distant a boss the better. It isnt surprising that the Soviet allies who liked the USSR the most, Vietnam, Cuba and North Korea, were the ones furthes from Moscow geographically, likewise, the US was/is more popular amongst its European Satraps then it is in Central America) who does not tell you all the time to sacrifice grandmas health care to pay debts to Germany.

    Replies: @AP, @Almost Missouri

  11. @UK
    @Europe Europa

    Absurdly clichéd self-critical English attitude that completely misses how ridiculously far above our weight the UK punches in almost every human endeavour.

    Replies: @Philip Owen, @Bert

    Like controlling SARS-CoV-2? Making motor cars? Fishing? Fruit picking?

    • LOL: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    @Philip Owen

    God bless you Philip Owen.

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcRxzWGNF8gAFwGC32_J6iW8parcMPD67eSMFF0tglxiF-uSWOhu&usqp.jpg

  12. @Agathoklis
    What a joke of a post! Only 8 or so countries compete in the Strong Tank Challenge.

    Why don't you post who is the best pilot of the NATO Tactical Leadership program?

    Of course, the data would not confirm a pre-existing world view.

    Replies: @Rattus Norwegius

    “Why don’t you post who is the best pilot of the NATO Tactical Leadership program?”
    Let me guess, a Greek?

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
    @Rattus Norwegius

    But that is my whole point. You can almost find any bit of data the view to confirm a pre-existing worldview.

    By the way, tanks are not as useful in modern warfare as they once were.

    Replies: @Tusk, @Thorfinnsson

  13. @Philip Owen
    @UK

    Like controlling SARS-CoV-2? Making motor cars? Fishing? Fruit picking?

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

    God bless you Philip Owen.

    [MORE]

  14. @Europe Europa
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    I'd say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I'm talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they're known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    Replies: @UK, @Morton's toes, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @Pontius, @Znzn, @Fuerchtegott

    Englishmen are great at consuming liquor.

  15. South Slavs are excellent at asymmetric warfare. Our “microwave under cardboard cutout” tactic is how to make your enemy waste money and time 101.

    Not to mention there were some ludicrous against all odds tier shit

  16. Unfortunately, no country that participates in the “Eurasian” tank biathlons also participates in the “Atlanticist” NATO games, so it’s not clear how to establish a common basis of comparison.

    It’s all too clear how to establish a common basis of comparison, but I hope that this never happens.

  17. @UK
    @Europe Europa

    Absurdly clichéd self-critical English attitude that completely misses how ridiculously far above our weight the UK punches in almost every human endeavour.

    Replies: @Philip Owen, @Bert

    Right. Britain holds the record by losing two empires.

    At the beginning of the period when Great Britain was the most powerful nation in the world, it lost most of, and the best part of, North America. It did so through political arrogance and military incompetence. Imagine the stupidity of Cornwallis trying to conquer interior South Carolina with a few thousand infantry when the Ulster-derived Patriot militia were mounted riflemen. Imagine Cornwallis turning over a portion of that attempt to Banastre Tarleton, whose only tactic was a headlong charge before even assessing his opponent’s strength and disposition.

    The best people left Britain for America, and the best of those were people who had resisted the English from time immemorial, the Scots and their Scots-Irish descendents.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
    @Bert

    None of the former Great Powers has fallen as much as Britain. Today, they are slightly behind the French but the British fell from a much greater height.

    , @the grand wazoo
    @Bert

    "At the beginning of the period when Great Britain was the most powerful nation in the world, it lost most of, and the best part of, North America."
    Churchill finished the job and totally bankrupted what was left of Great Britain when he insisted on continuing the war with Germany after 1940. The fact that his reasoning for doing so was for personal aggrandizement place him on top of the list of Greatest UK Traitor. As David Irving points out in his historical work 'Hitler's War", Adolph Hitler is quoted as saying just that over serveral different times. FDR's delayed joing the war, because the US and FDR's Wall Street cronies in particular, were buying British assets worldwide at .10 cents on the dollar, as they were pledged to pay for war materials from the US.

  18. @Europe Europa
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    I'd say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I'm talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they're known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    Replies: @UK, @Morton's toes, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @Pontius, @Znzn, @Fuerchtegott

    The police of their major cities have twitter accounts that produce memes at a rate greater than perhaps any other country’s.

  19. Their strong and highly consistent military record, registering ~25% superiority in combat efficiency over the Americans, British, and French in both the world wars

    How did there efficiency compare to contemporary Russia? That’s not a dig, genuinely curious.

    Based on stories about the disinterested way their commanders sacrificed troops I have to believe they weren’t operating anywhere near their theoretical optimum, but I haven’t seriously looked into it.

    • Replies: @the grand wazoo
    @Athletic and Whitesplosive

    If you're asking about Germany's war on it's Eastern front, I think she did well against the Russians given the fact Germany was fighting on 3 fronts, counting Africa. If Britain would have agreed to peace in 1940 Hitler's army would have destroyed Russia in 12 months, maybe less.

  20. Anatoly, if you check Monocle magazine, they’ve covered some other international military competitions. I don’t remember the details, but one was set in the Italian alps.

    Another possible proxy that comes to mind is making big budget movies, as there are some parallels between movie making and war fighting in terms of use of technology, organizing large groups, etc. From the small sample size of movies I’ve seen, Russia and China are now capable of making Michael Bay-style movies domestically.

  21. @Rattus Norwegius
    @Agathoklis

    "Why don’t you post who is the best pilot of the NATO Tactical Leadership program?"
    Let me guess, a Greek?

    Replies: @Agathoklis

    But that is my whole point. You can almost find any bit of data the view to confirm a pre-existing worldview.

    By the way, tanks are not as useful in modern warfare as they once were.

    • Agree: Tusk
    • Disagree: Thorfinnsson
    • Replies: @Tusk
    @Agathoklis

    Tanks were useful when deploying forces on a local scale, but considering the likely nature of a global war in the future tanks are most likely only useful tactically, and perhaps a small part on the operational level. Considering most armoured units would be deployed in MOUT scenarios it is going to take a capable force to even utilise them correctly, and as per national IQs isn't likely for a lot of states. At the same time look at Operational Vigilant Resolve in Fallujah and you'll see tanks getting beaten by assymetrical infantry tactics by desert dwellers. I'm very bearish on tank capabilities in their current form.

    , @Thorfinnsson
    @Agathoklis

    People have been predicting the obsolescence of tanks since at least the Spanish Civil War. The lesson the French Army drew from the Spanish Civil War was that the tank had been mastered by the anti-tank gun, and therefore it was imprudent to concentrate armored formations.

    Whoops.

    A generation later the widespread deployment of (crudely) guided HEAT munitions led to the same claim being made, but tanks were shown yet again to be vital to land warfare in the Yom Kippur War. The lesson relearned was rather that tanks unsupported by infantry were vulnerable, something well-known to previous generations.

    We were then told that modern "smart" top-attack munitions or...whatever...now finally made tanks obsolete.

    What we saw instead in the Donets Basin was that modern reactive armor substantially reduced the efficacy of all anti-tank weapons other than the large caliber high velocity gun firing armor-piercing ammunition.

    Back to the Future, anyone?

    The obsolescence of tanks is a long running futuretech fake news meme on the same level as nuclear fusion. Real Soon Now...

  22. @Bert
    @UK

    Right. Britain holds the record by losing two empires.

    At the beginning of the period when Great Britain was the most powerful nation in the world, it lost most of, and the best part of, North America. It did so through political arrogance and military incompetence. Imagine the stupidity of Cornwallis trying to conquer interior South Carolina with a few thousand infantry when the Ulster-derived Patriot militia were mounted riflemen. Imagine Cornwallis turning over a portion of that attempt to Banastre Tarleton, whose only tactic was a headlong charge before even assessing his opponent's strength and disposition.

    The best people left Britain for America, and the best of those were people who had resisted the English from time immemorial, the Scots and their Scots-Irish descendents.

    Replies: @Agathoklis, @the grand wazoo

    None of the former Great Powers has fallen as much as Britain. Today, they are slightly behind the French but the British fell from a much greater height.

  23. @Europe Europa
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    I'd say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I'm talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they're known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    Replies: @UK, @Morton's toes, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @Pontius, @Znzn, @Fuerchtegott

    Formula 1.

  24. gT says:

    No-one seems interested in building tanks no more, except Russia. Both the US and Israel have discontinued production of their main battle tanks to the extent of even stripping the factories. Even the f22 production line has been stripped also.

    I’m assuming that this means either that neither the US nor Israel are expecting to do any large scale high intensity land warfare on a WW3 type scale, or they are confident that their nuke missiles will suffice, or they have something else up the sleeve.

    Also the Western tank contest features different kinds of tanks, and the British tanks really suck, its like Britain also decided that large scale high intensity land warfare is a thing of the past. The Russian contest usually features only one kind of tank, some t72 variant, not even a t90. But maybe that has changed recently. The main US tank is considered a bit of a joke in some quarters, its too heavy, and has gearing or torque issues to the extent that its not good at the bulldozer purposes tanks inevitably get used for. Russian tanks on the other hand even used to have some type of implement in the front fitted by default to dig themselves in nice and low to await an attack. So Russian tanks were made for dirty work while the American tanks needed pristine roadways. Even with the aircraft the Russian planes can make do with dirt runways while the America planes need formula 1 quality landing strips.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @gT


    No-one seems interested in building tanks no more, except Russia.
     
    Well, Russia has fielded an RPG that can cripple front-line Western MBTs since 1989:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29#History

    By comparison, the US has the FGM-148 Javelin, which is able to take out the T-55:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin#Combat_history

    Bear in mind that the T-55 is based on the T-54, which was first fielded in 1949.

    Another argument against tanks are episodes like the Battle of Aouzou, where the Chadian forces used French MILAN anti-tank missiles mounted on Toyota Hilux pickups to devastating effect against the Libyan T-55 tanks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Aouzou

    Replies: @gT

  25. @Bert
    @UK

    Right. Britain holds the record by losing two empires.

    At the beginning of the period when Great Britain was the most powerful nation in the world, it lost most of, and the best part of, North America. It did so through political arrogance and military incompetence. Imagine the stupidity of Cornwallis trying to conquer interior South Carolina with a few thousand infantry when the Ulster-derived Patriot militia were mounted riflemen. Imagine Cornwallis turning over a portion of that attempt to Banastre Tarleton, whose only tactic was a headlong charge before even assessing his opponent's strength and disposition.

    The best people left Britain for America, and the best of those were people who had resisted the English from time immemorial, the Scots and their Scots-Irish descendents.

    Replies: @Agathoklis, @the grand wazoo

    “At the beginning of the period when Great Britain was the most powerful nation in the world, it lost most of, and the best part of, North America.”
    Churchill finished the job and totally bankrupted what was left of Great Britain when he insisted on continuing the war with Germany after 1940. The fact that his reasoning for doing so was for personal aggrandizement place him on top of the list of Greatest UK Traitor. As David Irving points out in his historical work ‘Hitler’s War”, Adolph Hitler is quoted as saying just that over serveral different times. FDR’s delayed joing the war, because the US and FDR’s Wall Street cronies in particular, were buying British assets worldwide at .10 cents on the dollar, as they were pledged to pay for war materials from the US.

  26. @Athletic and Whitesplosive

    Their strong and highly consistent military record, registering ~25% superiority in combat efficiency over the Americans, British, and French in both the world wars
     
    How did there efficiency compare to contemporary Russia? That's not a dig, genuinely curious.

    Based on stories about the disinterested way their commanders sacrificed troops I have to believe they weren't operating anywhere near their theoretical optimum, but I haven't seriously looked into it.

    Replies: @the grand wazoo

    If you’re asking about Germany’s war on it’s Eastern front, I think she did well against the Russians given the fact Germany was fighting on 3 fronts, counting Africa. If Britain would have agreed to peace in 1940 Hitler’s army would have destroyed Russia in 12 months, maybe less.

  27. JSQ says:

    There is also the International Sniper Competition, held annually at Fort Benning. It’s noisy as the US typically has a huge number of different teams representing various military and law enforcement units and thus tends to dominate the final results, but still some interesting patterns emerge (e.g., Nordic countries tend to perform well).

  28. @Agathoklis
    @Rattus Norwegius

    But that is my whole point. You can almost find any bit of data the view to confirm a pre-existing worldview.

    By the way, tanks are not as useful in modern warfare as they once were.

    Replies: @Tusk, @Thorfinnsson

    Tanks were useful when deploying forces on a local scale, but considering the likely nature of a global war in the future tanks are most likely only useful tactically, and perhaps a small part on the operational level. Considering most armoured units would be deployed in MOUT scenarios it is going to take a capable force to even utilise them correctly, and as per national IQs isn’t likely for a lot of states. At the same time look at Operational Vigilant Resolve in Fallujah and you’ll see tanks getting beaten by assymetrical infantry tactics by desert dwellers. I’m very bearish on tank capabilities in their current form.

  29. Lin says:


    Not exactly off-topic: Many don’t understand why:
    –A tank can’t be too heavy
    –An insect can pull weights many times its size
    –A jesus lizard(or Jesus himself)can walk on water but the average humans can’t do so barefoot.
    …………
    The Russian space pioneer Tsiolkovsky had explained these in an article but I lost the link; can you show me where I could find it?

    • Replies: @Tusk
    @Lin

    When I search keywords from what you just wrote I get this, but it is a collection of science fiction stories by Tasiolkovsky.

    Replies: @Lin

  30. There was for several decades a tank gunnery competition among the armies stationed in West Germany
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Army_Trophy

    • Thanks: Anatoly Karlin
  31. @gT
    No-one seems interested in building tanks no more, except Russia. Both the US and Israel have discontinued production of their main battle tanks to the extent of even stripping the factories. Even the f22 production line has been stripped also.

    I'm assuming that this means either that neither the US nor Israel are expecting to do any large scale high intensity land warfare on a WW3 type scale, or they are confident that their nuke missiles will suffice, or they have something else up the sleeve.

    Also the Western tank contest features different kinds of tanks, and the British tanks really suck, its like Britain also decided that large scale high intensity land warfare is a thing of the past. The Russian contest usually features only one kind of tank, some t72 variant, not even a t90. But maybe that has changed recently. The main US tank is considered a bit of a joke in some quarters, its too heavy, and has gearing or torque issues to the extent that its not good at the bulldozer purposes tanks inevitably get used for. Russian tanks on the other hand even used to have some type of implement in the front fitted by default to dig themselves in nice and low to await an attack. So Russian tanks were made for dirty work while the American tanks needed pristine roadways. Even with the aircraft the Russian planes can make do with dirt runways while the America planes need formula 1 quality landing strips.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    No-one seems interested in building tanks no more, except Russia.

    Well, Russia has fielded an RPG that can cripple front-line Western MBTs since 1989:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29#History

    By comparison, the US has the FGM-148 Javelin, which is able to take out the T-55:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin#Combat_history

    Bear in mind that the T-55 is based on the T-54, which was first fielded in 1949.

    Another argument against tanks are episodes like the Battle of Aouzou, where the Chadian forces used French MILAN anti-tank missiles mounted on Toyota Hilux pickups to devastating effect against the Libyan T-55 tanks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Aouzou

    • Replies: @gT
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    Ah, you are a bit behind the times, the anti-tank missiles don't work against the Russian tanks anymore. Apparently their anti-missile radar and explosive counter-measures, not including the explosive reactive armour, can even handle incoming enemy tank rounds. So the rpg-29 type of rockets don't even reach the Russian tanks. Russia learnt from the Chechnya conflict. Israel has also been fitting its tanks with explosive reaction armour and similar missile counter-measures.

    And Russia's battle philosophy is based on lots of artillery bombardment against fortified positions first, followed by tank and infantry advancement. Plus the Russians now include a lot of the terminator style anti-personnel weapon systems on at least half the armoured divisions. Firing anti-tank missiles is a kind of stationery warfare, Russia concentrates on high mobility warfare, bypassing areas of resistance to attack the undefended logistics and infrastructure behind. Stationery targets just get artillery activated against them until they don’t exist no more. The West just does not want to get involved in large scale high intensity conflicts because it means high casualties, and that is precisely that kind of warfare which is Russia's bread and butter. The West is geared for anti-insurgency type of warfare against sub-standard opponents and not to the large scale high intensity variety against comparable peers.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

  32. @Lin
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Not exactly off-topic: Many don't understand why:
    --A tank can't be too heavy
    --An insect can pull weights many times its size
    --A jesus lizard(or Jesus himself)can walk on water but the average humans can't do so barefoot.
    …………
    The Russian space pioneer Tsiolkovsky had explained these in an article but I lost the link; can you show me where I could find it?

    Replies: @Tusk

    When I search keywords from what you just wrote I get this, but it is a collection of science fiction stories by Tasiolkovsky.

    • Replies: @Lin
    @Tusk

    Thank you but seems your link didn't work.
    Tsiolkovsky's rationale is simple geometry and mechanics:
    --muscular strength is proportional to cross-section area of muscle like that of the biceps, ie it increases with the square of dimension; while body weight increases with the cube of dimension. So the bigger the animal, the weaker (relative to weight) it's. For tanks, it has to do with ground pressure of the tank track; too much and the tank will sink on soft ground or can't move. It also explain why the heaviest flying bird is about 20-25 kg or so(to do with 'wing loading').
    It's a classic every school student should read.

  33. Lin says:
    @Tusk
    @Lin

    When I search keywords from what you just wrote I get this, but it is a collection of science fiction stories by Tasiolkovsky.

    Replies: @Lin

    Thank you but seems your link didn’t work.
    Tsiolkovsky’s rationale is simple geometry and mechanics:
    –muscular strength is proportional to cross-section area of muscle like that of the biceps, ie it increases with the square of dimension; while body weight increases with the cube of dimension. So the bigger the animal, the weaker (relative to weight) it’s. For tanks, it has to do with ground pressure of the tank track; too much and the tank will sink on soft ground or can’t move. It also explain why the heaviest flying bird is about 20-25 kg or so(to do with ‘wing loading’).
    It’s a classic every school student should read.

  34. Re the Stronk Europe competition, presumably participating nations send their best crews, not average crews. Therefore, large nations—or large armies—have an advantage as they have a bigger bell curve from which they can select the rightmost tail, whereas in real war, your performance will be determined by your average crews. Seen this way, the performance of, e.g., the Austrians and the Scandinavians is even more impressive than their ranking suggests. Perhaps the same could be said about everyone not Russian, Chinese or Indian in the Tank Biathlon as well.

    Anecdote: A Polish-American friend used to play PanzerBlitz/Panzer Leader wargames against his German-American neighbor, who was the descendant of some kind of Wehrmacht or SS armor Kommandant. He said he always lost. Yes, this made him very angry. FWIW.

    I never witnessed a match, but I imagine my Pole making headlong charges to recover national honor while the coolheaded Kraut’s subtle machinations, informed by family lore, flank and inevitably grind up the advances.

  35. P.S. What kind of tank are those polar bear feeders on? It’s not a T-34 or KV- or IS-. Maybe a captured Tiger?

    • Replies: @LH
    @Almost Missouri

    The tank is tracked truck GT-SM.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  36. The photo used to headline this thread is very cool. The brave soldier shows his humanity by finding some time to feed the hungry bears. We all need to find some time to interact with our neighbors.

  37. mal says:

    In my personal experience, when I used to play World of Tanks, players on the Russian server were highest rated by WN8 (performance score revolving around ability to do damage) and match win rate (ability to translate damage into the win for your team).

    BUT – Russians were also accused of padding/seal clubbing because it was the biggest server and top players got to play against lots of idiots. American and Asian top players didn’t get as many idiots to destroy. Still, based on my observations, Russians were quite competent at the top level.

  38. @Europe Europa
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    I'd say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I'm talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they're known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    Replies: @UK, @Morton's toes, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @Pontius, @Znzn, @Fuerchtegott

    Duke of Wellington? Waterloo? Wars between Great Britain and France?

  39. @Boswald Bollocksworth
    The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

    Replies: @Europe Europa, @LondonBob, @Amerimutt Golems, @Belarusian Dude

    The people who went to Sandhurst and then in to the military at school were the dumb but sociable types, good at sports. Prince Harry is a good example, dumb but a nice guy who likes to keep active. The Army has always held a low position and historically relied on the recruitment of idiot sons of the gentry and lowly scum of the earth. The RN, the senior service, and RAF have had less difficulties.

    I assume with the Prussian background in Getmany the Army would be more prestigious.

    • Replies: @Amerimutt Golems
    @LondonBob

    The people who went to Sandhurst and then in to the military at school were the dumb but sociable types, good at sports. Prince Harry is a good example, dumb but a nice guy who likes to keep active. The Army has always held a low position and historically relied on the recruitment of idiot sons of the gentry and lowly scum of the earth. The RN, the senior service, and RAF have had less difficulties.

     

    Harry is literally a cretin.

    In the On the Psychology of Military Incompetence Norman F. Dixon cites the class system as a factor in poor battlefield leadership. For example lack of empathy for troops in the second Anglo-Boer War resulted in more deaths from diseases, crocodile attacks and other causes than enemy fire.

  40. @Kent Nationalist
    @Mightypeon

    What real contradiction would there be between German and Russian interests without NATO and American domination?

    Replies: @Mightypeon

    Russia wants a buffer zone, (Ukraine and Belarus) as a hard interest, and it would want their buffer zone to have a buffer (Poland) zone of its own as a soft nice to have interest.
    Germany wants a buffer zone (Poland) as a hard interest, and would want their buffer zone to have their own buffer zone (Ukraine and Belarus) as a soft interest.

    The second scenario being pretty unlikely, essentially the clash is between the soft german interest of having a second layer of buffer zones withe the hard Russian interest of having a buffer zone in the first place.
    Unsurprisngly, the Russians are thus a lot more motivated then the Germans regarding Ukraine.

    Now, Germany also aims to essentially control the EU and create a German led European Union. As Russia, with its similiarly sized economy (in real times) and its far stronger military potential would be a stronger competitor here then France and the UK, keeping the Russians out of the EUs political decisionmaking is a German interest. Meanwhile, Russia has a number of interests in avoiding/preventing any unification of Europe without it having a veto or ideally being in the drivers seat, and it can position itself as a very distant alternative boss (the more distant a boss the better. It isnt surprising that the Soviet allies who liked the USSR the most, Vietnam, Cuba and North Korea, were the ones furthes from Moscow geographically, likewise, the US was/is more popular amongst its European Satraps then it is in Central America) who does not tell you all the time to sacrifice grandmas health care to pay debts to Germany.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Mightypeon

    This analysis ignores the fact that most Ukrainians prefer to be Europe’s buffer zone rather than Russia’s buffer zone. So unless the Russians will mount a full scale invasion and occupation this is the way it will be.

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Mightypeon


    Russia wants a buffer zone, (Ukraine and Belarus) as a hard interest
     
    Besides functioning as a buffer, Ukraine had all the best farmland of the former Soviet Union/Russian Empire. I'm not sure what the figures would look like today, but I'm told that the Ukraine was a big a part of the USSR's/Imperial Russia's ability to feed itself, most of the rest of the country being too far north, too far away or just plain tundra. Plus the Ukraine is an important transit corridor for mineral, coal, oil and gas to reach markets to the west, as well as having easy to mine coal of its own. Then there's the warm water ports at Sevastopol and Odessa. On the whole, the Ukraine seems pretty important for Russia, so Putin's hegemonism seems restrained relative to the stakes. Well, now Russia has recovered Crimea and part of the Donbass, so maybe that's sufficient? Still, if I were Putin, I would rather be having an argument over Transnistria than over Ukraine.

    I know there's bad blood between Russians and Ukrainians, on the other hand Ukrainians had no problem mixing into and rising in Russia in Soviet times, so the conflict and antipathy today seems unnecessary and even a little contrived, at least to an outsider like myself. It would be as if there were a bitter, simmering military conflict between Canada and the US, who are nearly indistinguishable to outsiders.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  41. Surprisingly Vietnam does not score very well.

    In the tank gunnery contest it could be that inherent competence aside the German tank guns are widely regarded as the best in the world.

    IIRC the US Abram tank also uses a license built Rhinemetall 120 mm gun as do a bunch of other Western tanks.

  42. ” The Africans are at the bottom – Chad Chad aside, they usually make Arabs look competent in military matters.”

    Black Africans can be very good soldiers if properly trained and led. General von Lettow Vorbeck proved this in WW I. And one of the best units of the South African Defense Force was the 32 Battalion, which had black soldiers with white officers.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
    @Jon Halpenny

    I guess it depends what you mean by "good soldier". If that means being highly aggressive, physically imposing and scary looking I imagine they make better soldiers than most whites.

    During WW1 the French used black African soldiers in the Rheinland to terrorise the native German population, because of their propensity to extreme aggression and rape. I suspect the US Army often use black grunts in a similar way overseas, to incite terror in the natives.

  43. gT says:
    @The Wild Geese Howard
    @gT


    No-one seems interested in building tanks no more, except Russia.
     
    Well, Russia has fielded an RPG that can cripple front-line Western MBTs since 1989:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29#History

    By comparison, the US has the FGM-148 Javelin, which is able to take out the T-55:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin#Combat_history

    Bear in mind that the T-55 is based on the T-54, which was first fielded in 1949.

    Another argument against tanks are episodes like the Battle of Aouzou, where the Chadian forces used French MILAN anti-tank missiles mounted on Toyota Hilux pickups to devastating effect against the Libyan T-55 tanks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Aouzou

    Replies: @gT

    Ah, you are a bit behind the times, the anti-tank missiles don’t work against the Russian tanks anymore. Apparently their anti-missile radar and explosive counter-measures, not including the explosive reactive armour, can even handle incoming enemy tank rounds. So the rpg-29 type of rockets don’t even reach the Russian tanks. Russia learnt from the Chechnya conflict. Israel has also been fitting its tanks with explosive reaction armour and similar missile counter-measures.

    And Russia’s battle philosophy is based on lots of artillery bombardment against fortified positions first, followed by tank and infantry advancement. Plus the Russians now include a lot of the terminator style anti-personnel weapon systems on at least half the armoured divisions. Firing anti-tank missiles is a kind of stationery warfare, Russia concentrates on high mobility warfare, bypassing areas of resistance to attack the undefended logistics and infrastructure behind. Stationery targets just get artillery activated against them until they don’t exist no more. The West just does not want to get involved in large scale high intensity conflicts because it means high casualties, and that is precisely that kind of warfare which is Russia’s bread and butter. The West is geared for anti-insurgency type of warfare against sub-standard opponents and not to the large scale high intensity variety against comparable peers.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @gT


    Ah, you are a bit behind the times, the anti-tank missiles don’t work against the Russian tanks anymore.
     
    Kek, you spent a lot of time and effort to support Anatoly's original point that I was also trying to support, perhaps a bit too subtly.

    The point is that the Russians hold the upper hand in terms of anti-tank missiles and MBTs, thus rendering every other country's MBTs irrelevant.

    Russia also has the world's premier integrated air defense system while the US has....the F-35 and Patriot.....excuse me while I LMFAO....

    Also bear in mind that I am a person who absolutely loved the original Red Dawn as well as Rambo 2, and 3.
  44. @Jon Halpenny
    " The Africans are at the bottom – Chad Chad aside, they usually make Arabs look competent in military matters."

    Black Africans can be very good soldiers if properly trained and led. General von Lettow Vorbeck proved this in WW I. And one of the best units of the South African Defense Force was the 32 Battalion, which had black soldiers with white officers.

    Replies: @Europe Europa

    I guess it depends what you mean by “good soldier”. If that means being highly aggressive, physically imposing and scary looking I imagine they make better soldiers than most whites.

    During WW1 the French used black African soldiers in the Rheinland to terrorise the native German population, because of their propensity to extreme aggression and rape. I suspect the US Army often use black grunts in a similar way overseas, to incite terror in the natives.

  45. America is a dying nation, although most white Americans are still in denial about it. Just look at the blacks destroying Minneapolis, this is not some shithole like Detroit or St. Louis, this is one of the US’s premier and most affluent cities. If Minneapolis is on fire then frankly any US city could be on fire.

    It’s a mystery to me why Brexiteers want to become closely tied with that dying, majority non-white nation. It’s also a mystery to me why Brexiteers think majority black and Hispanic US, in addition to most of the whites being non-Anglo would have any real interest in teaming up with Britain?

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    @Europe Europa

    While I don't disagree with your point in general, from the early 1960s through the early 1990s the blacks destroyed dozens if not hundreds of American cities.

    Detroit incidentally was sixty years ago the fourth largest city in the United States and the single most prosperous.

    St Louis had nearly three times its present population a century ago.

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

    , @Vaterland
    @Europe Europa

    Because Jews own and control US and UK media. Because Israeli Zionists hate the EU and diaspora Jews resent German influence. Because UK nationalism is built on resenting Germans, bulldog and spitfire nationalism. And because most Anglo-Sphere conservatives are not actual right-wingers - especially an American in 99% of cases doesn't even know what constitutes the right - , but liberals who want a tax cut and serve as buttgoys for Israel. The last days have made it more clear than ever before that Europe's primary delusions are fundamentally US exports with which we are "blessed" since Murica won the Cold War. Take any European white guilt, hell, even German guilt, give it a cycle of steroids, then mix in wokeness and degeneracy and you have Murica. "Rotherham" is American jogger bread and butter. "Islamic terrorism" is a busy US weekend in one large city. "Cultural Marxism" is US-American mainstream liberalism. Minneapolis has made it evidently clear that the USA has sunken to the status of Banana Republic. Not even meming. This makes the 1st May look like a nice weekend in the park. Planet of the Apes: Orc Boogaloo.

  46. @Almost Missouri
    P.S. What kind of tank are those polar bear feeders on? It's not a T-34 or KV- or IS-. Maybe a captured Tiger?

    Replies: @LH

    The tank is tracked truck GT-SM.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @LH

    Thanks. The photo filename, besides being wrong about it being a tank, must also be wrong about the date of 1950, since GT-SM appears to have entered service in 1967.

  47. @Europe Europa
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    I'd say the English are the most pathologically mediocre race, not terribly bad at anything but not terribly good at anything either.

    It was different in the past, but I'm talking about today and I say this as an Englishman. Most countries have something they're known for, but no one would use England as an example of any particular extreme or characteristic.

    Replies: @UK, @Morton's toes, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @Pontius, @Znzn, @Fuerchtegott

    Dogging porn.

  48. @LH
    @Almost Missouri

    The tank is tracked truck GT-SM.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Thanks. The photo filename, besides being wrong about it being a tank, must also be wrong about the date of 1950, since GT-SM appears to have entered service in 1967.

  49. @Mightypeon
    @Kent Nationalist

    Russia wants a buffer zone, (Ukraine and Belarus) as a hard interest, and it would want their buffer zone to have a buffer (Poland) zone of its own as a soft nice to have interest.
    Germany wants a buffer zone (Poland) as a hard interest, and would want their buffer zone to have their own buffer zone (Ukraine and Belarus) as a soft interest.

    The second scenario being pretty unlikely, essentially the clash is between the soft german interest of having a second layer of buffer zones withe the hard Russian interest of having a buffer zone in the first place.
    Unsurprisngly, the Russians are thus a lot more motivated then the Germans regarding Ukraine.

    Now, Germany also aims to essentially control the EU and create a German led European Union. As Russia, with its similiarly sized economy (in real times) and its far stronger military potential would be a stronger competitor here then France and the UK, keeping the Russians out of the EUs political decisionmaking is a German interest. Meanwhile, Russia has a number of interests in avoiding/preventing any unification of Europe without it having a veto or ideally being in the drivers seat, and it can position itself as a very distant alternative boss (the more distant a boss the better. It isnt surprising that the Soviet allies who liked the USSR the most, Vietnam, Cuba and North Korea, were the ones furthes from Moscow geographically, likewise, the US was/is more popular amongst its European Satraps then it is in Central America) who does not tell you all the time to sacrifice grandmas health care to pay debts to Germany.

    Replies: @AP, @Almost Missouri

    This analysis ignores the fact that most Ukrainians prefer to be Europe’s buffer zone rather than Russia’s buffer zone. So unless the Russians will mount a full scale invasion and occupation this is the way it will be.

  50. @Mightypeon
    @Kent Nationalist

    Russia wants a buffer zone, (Ukraine and Belarus) as a hard interest, and it would want their buffer zone to have a buffer (Poland) zone of its own as a soft nice to have interest.
    Germany wants a buffer zone (Poland) as a hard interest, and would want their buffer zone to have their own buffer zone (Ukraine and Belarus) as a soft interest.

    The second scenario being pretty unlikely, essentially the clash is between the soft german interest of having a second layer of buffer zones withe the hard Russian interest of having a buffer zone in the first place.
    Unsurprisngly, the Russians are thus a lot more motivated then the Germans regarding Ukraine.

    Now, Germany also aims to essentially control the EU and create a German led European Union. As Russia, with its similiarly sized economy (in real times) and its far stronger military potential would be a stronger competitor here then France and the UK, keeping the Russians out of the EUs political decisionmaking is a German interest. Meanwhile, Russia has a number of interests in avoiding/preventing any unification of Europe without it having a veto or ideally being in the drivers seat, and it can position itself as a very distant alternative boss (the more distant a boss the better. It isnt surprising that the Soviet allies who liked the USSR the most, Vietnam, Cuba and North Korea, were the ones furthes from Moscow geographically, likewise, the US was/is more popular amongst its European Satraps then it is in Central America) who does not tell you all the time to sacrifice grandmas health care to pay debts to Germany.

    Replies: @AP, @Almost Missouri

    Russia wants a buffer zone, (Ukraine and Belarus) as a hard interest

    Besides functioning as a buffer, Ukraine had all the best farmland of the former Soviet Union/Russian Empire. I’m not sure what the figures would look like today, but I’m told that the Ukraine was a big a part of the USSR’s/Imperial Russia’s ability to feed itself, most of the rest of the country being too far north, too far away or just plain tundra. Plus the Ukraine is an important transit corridor for mineral, coal, oil and gas to reach markets to the west, as well as having easy to mine coal of its own. Then there’s the warm water ports at Sevastopol and Odessa. On the whole, the Ukraine seems pretty important for Russia, so Putin’s hegemonism seems restrained relative to the stakes. Well, now Russia has recovered Crimea and part of the Donbass, so maybe that’s sufficient? Still, if I were Putin, I would rather be having an argument over Transnistria than over Ukraine.

    I know there’s bad blood between Russians and Ukrainians, on the other hand Ukrainians had no problem mixing into and rising in Russia in Soviet times, so the conflict and antipathy today seems unnecessary and even a little contrived, at least to an outsider like myself. It would be as if there were a bitter, simmering military conflict between Canada and the US, who are nearly indistinguishable to outsiders.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Almost Missouri

    If you really have an interest in the relations of Ukraine and Russia (and its other neighbors as well), I would suggest that you pick up a Ukrainian history book and read it to be able to see that there's a lot more going on than just "indistinguishable" differences going on, for a long, long time. Ukraine is a classic case of where a nation just never has felt comfortable existing under the thumb of one of its neighbors. Ethnicity - nationhood - statehood, it's al there if you just take a deeper look.

    Replies: @LH

  51. Quantity has a quality of its own.

    Russia has lots of tanks of all sorts.

  52. @Boswald Bollocksworth
    The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

    Replies: @Europe Europa, @LondonBob, @Amerimutt Golems, @Belarusian Dude

    The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

    The U.S. military is overrated.

    Despite prior experience in the British Army, Washington needed a Prussian to train troops. The U.S. did badly at the Battle of Bladensburg (pre-diversity) and in WWII troops were ‘terrorized’ by the German MG42 machine gun.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    @Amerimutt Golems

    Washington never served in the British Army (he served in the Virginia Militia), and he along with most other colonial Americans with an interest in military matters were keenly aware of the great superiority of professionally officered well-drilled soldiers on the battlefield.

    As such the arrival of the "Baron" Steuben in America was a Godsend which Washington was quick to take advantage of, immediately appointing him inspector general of the Continental Army.

    It is true that the performance of the US Army in WW2 was in many respects quite bad. The US Army was of course historically unimportant to American security and thus inferior to the US Navy, and unfortunate if understandable decisions made by Generals Marshall and McNair led to consistently poor morale and training throughout the war.

    On the other hand the Army Air Forces performed superbly in WW2, reaching a higher standard than any other air force in the war. The Navy, after initially getting badly mauled by the Japanese, developed great mastery of naval warfare and complex operations by the middle of 1943. The Marine Corps, while often unfortunately horrifically squandered in foolhardy operations (e.g. Iwo Jima), performed significantly better than the Army.

  53. @LondonBob
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    The people who went to Sandhurst and then in to the military at school were the dumb but sociable types, good at sports. Prince Harry is a good example, dumb but a nice guy who likes to keep active. The Army has always held a low position and historically relied on the recruitment of idiot sons of the gentry and lowly scum of the earth. The RN, the senior service, and RAF have had less difficulties.

    I assume with the Prussian background in Getmany the Army would be more prestigious.

    Replies: @Amerimutt Golems

    The people who went to Sandhurst and then in to the military at school were the dumb but sociable types, good at sports. Prince Harry is a good example, dumb but a nice guy who likes to keep active. The Army has always held a low position and historically relied on the recruitment of idiot sons of the gentry and lowly scum of the earth. The RN, the senior service, and RAF have had less difficulties.

    Harry is literally a cretin.

    In the On the Psychology of Military Incompetence Norman F. Dixon cites the class system as a factor in poor battlefield leadership. For example lack of empathy for troops in the second Anglo-Boer War resulted in more deaths from diseases, crocodile attacks and other causes than enemy fire.

  54. Lol wtf.

    How is Azerbaijan better at tank combat and tank tournaments than Serbia???

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    @TheTotallyAnonymous

    Azerbaijan Announces All-Time High Defense Budget For 2019.

    https://infogram.com/191025-military-expenditure-i-1hxr4zy5o8nq2yo

    Armenia-Azerbaijan: Who’s the big defense spender?
    Azerbaijan spends six times more in dollar terms. But rival Armenia’s spending is far more painful at home.

    Decades into an intractable conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, plentiful oil has allowed Azerbaijan to spend lavishly on upgrading its military. Armenia’s struggle to compete, by contrast, is bleeding its budget.

    Between 2009 and 2018 Azerbaijan’s military spending totaled almost $24 billion, according to updated data from the Stockholm International and Peace Research Institute. Armenia spent slightly more than $4 billion in the same period.

    Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous

  55. @TheTotallyAnonymous
    Lol wtf.

    How is Azerbaijan better at tank combat and tank tournaments than Serbia???

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

    Azerbaijan Announces All-Time High Defense Budget For 2019.

    [MORE]

    https://infogram.com/191025-military-expenditure-i-1hxr4zy5o8nq2yo

    Armenia-Azerbaijan: Who’s the big defense spender?
    Azerbaijan spends six times more in dollar terms. But rival Armenia’s spending is far more painful at home.

    Decades into an intractable conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, plentiful oil has allowed Azerbaijan to spend lavishly on upgrading its military. Armenia’s struggle to compete, by contrast, is bleeding its budget.

    Between 2009 and 2018 Azerbaijan’s military spending totaled almost $24 billion, according to updated data from the Stockholm International and Peace Research Institute. Armenia spent slightly more than $4 billion in the same period.

    • Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous
    @Blinky Bill

    Sure Azerbaijan has lots of military spending, but military spending isn't the sole determinant of tank combat or tank tournament results (I assume not) either (real combat and non-lethal tournaments are different things).

    Anyway, for all its military spending, Azerbaijan still can't retake Nagorno-Karabakh from Armenia and the Armenians still control that securely since 1994 (Despite being inbetween a double Turkic sandwich and serious sanctions for 30+ years now). The 2016 Four Day War was a failure and with Azerbaijan's economy crashing from these circumstances in 2020, they're not even going to try for that for a long time to come (if they ever do). Just more skirmishing/minor whatever status quo on that border in future (most probably).

    Anyway, Serbia's military (that has more recent and relatively more successful tank combat experience compared to Azerbiajan, from 1999 that was previously VJ - Army of Yugoslavia) has also undergone lots of reform/upgrading/recovery in many areas (not sure tank combat specifically), so I don't think that's the reason.

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

  56. @Blinky Bill
    @TheTotallyAnonymous

    Azerbaijan Announces All-Time High Defense Budget For 2019.

    https://infogram.com/191025-military-expenditure-i-1hxr4zy5o8nq2yo

    Armenia-Azerbaijan: Who’s the big defense spender?
    Azerbaijan spends six times more in dollar terms. But rival Armenia’s spending is far more painful at home.

    Decades into an intractable conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, plentiful oil has allowed Azerbaijan to spend lavishly on upgrading its military. Armenia’s struggle to compete, by contrast, is bleeding its budget.

    Between 2009 and 2018 Azerbaijan’s military spending totaled almost $24 billion, according to updated data from the Stockholm International and Peace Research Institute. Armenia spent slightly more than $4 billion in the same period.

    Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous

    Sure Azerbaijan has lots of military spending, but military spending isn’t the sole determinant of tank combat or tank tournament results (I assume not) either (real combat and non-lethal tournaments are different things).

    Anyway, for all its military spending, Azerbaijan still can’t retake Nagorno-Karabakh from Armenia and the Armenians still control that securely since 1994 (Despite being inbetween a double Turkic sandwich and serious sanctions for 30+ years now). The 2016 Four Day War was a failure and with Azerbaijan’s economy crashing from these circumstances in 2020, they’re not even going to try for that for a long time to come (if they ever do). Just more skirmishing/minor whatever status quo on that border in future (most probably).

    Anyway, Serbia’s military (that has more recent and relatively more successful tank combat experience compared to Azerbiajan, from 1999 that was previously VJ – Army of Yugoslavia) has also undergone lots of reform/upgrading/recovery in many areas (not sure tank combat specifically), so I don’t think that’s the reason.

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    @TheTotallyAnonymous

    I'm team Orthodox on this one. Serbia, Armenia, Russia all the way !!!

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Harbin_Sophia_Cathedral_2017_summer.jpg

    Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous

  57. @Almost Missouri
    @Mightypeon


    Russia wants a buffer zone, (Ukraine and Belarus) as a hard interest
     
    Besides functioning as a buffer, Ukraine had all the best farmland of the former Soviet Union/Russian Empire. I'm not sure what the figures would look like today, but I'm told that the Ukraine was a big a part of the USSR's/Imperial Russia's ability to feed itself, most of the rest of the country being too far north, too far away or just plain tundra. Plus the Ukraine is an important transit corridor for mineral, coal, oil and gas to reach markets to the west, as well as having easy to mine coal of its own. Then there's the warm water ports at Sevastopol and Odessa. On the whole, the Ukraine seems pretty important for Russia, so Putin's hegemonism seems restrained relative to the stakes. Well, now Russia has recovered Crimea and part of the Donbass, so maybe that's sufficient? Still, if I were Putin, I would rather be having an argument over Transnistria than over Ukraine.

    I know there's bad blood between Russians and Ukrainians, on the other hand Ukrainians had no problem mixing into and rising in Russia in Soviet times, so the conflict and antipathy today seems unnecessary and even a little contrived, at least to an outsider like myself. It would be as if there were a bitter, simmering military conflict between Canada and the US, who are nearly indistinguishable to outsiders.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    If you really have an interest in the relations of Ukraine and Russia (and its other neighbors as well), I would suggest that you pick up a Ukrainian history book and read it to be able to see that there’s a lot more going on than just “indistinguishable” differences going on, for a long, long time. Ukraine is a classic case of where a nation just never has felt comfortable existing under the thumb of one of its neighbors. Ethnicity – nationhood – statehood, it’s al there if you just take a deeper look.

    • Replies: @LH
    @Mr. Hack


    I would suggest that you pick up a Ukrainian history book and read it

     

    Can you recommend something readable and available in genesis library?

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  58. @TheTotallyAnonymous
    @Blinky Bill

    Sure Azerbaijan has lots of military spending, but military spending isn't the sole determinant of tank combat or tank tournament results (I assume not) either (real combat and non-lethal tournaments are different things).

    Anyway, for all its military spending, Azerbaijan still can't retake Nagorno-Karabakh from Armenia and the Armenians still control that securely since 1994 (Despite being inbetween a double Turkic sandwich and serious sanctions for 30+ years now). The 2016 Four Day War was a failure and with Azerbaijan's economy crashing from these circumstances in 2020, they're not even going to try for that for a long time to come (if they ever do). Just more skirmishing/minor whatever status quo on that border in future (most probably).

    Anyway, Serbia's military (that has more recent and relatively more successful tank combat experience compared to Azerbiajan, from 1999 that was previously VJ - Army of Yugoslavia) has also undergone lots of reform/upgrading/recovery in many areas (not sure tank combat specifically), so I don't think that's the reason.

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

    I’m team Orthodox on this one. Serbia, Armenia, Russia all the way !!!

    [MORE]

    • Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous
    @Blinky Bill

    Agree (you could add in Greece as well), although its important to note that Armenians are actually Coptic or Oriental Orthodox christian, so they're sort of their own thing (in strictly religious terms they have more in common with Ethiopians, than Serbs and Russians).

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

  59. @Boswald Bollocksworth
    The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

    Replies: @Europe Europa, @LondonBob, @Amerimutt Golems, @Belarusian Dude

    The Germans are just really good at almost everything

    Not at winning wars.

    • Replies: @Vaterland
    @Belarusian Dude

    Oh, I am sorry for almost winning a global war against the combined might of all global super powers of their time as a country the size of Texas with Italy as your "ally". (Japan is also overrated).

  60. @Agathoklis
    @Rattus Norwegius

    But that is my whole point. You can almost find any bit of data the view to confirm a pre-existing worldview.

    By the way, tanks are not as useful in modern warfare as they once were.

    Replies: @Tusk, @Thorfinnsson

    People have been predicting the obsolescence of tanks since at least the Spanish Civil War. The lesson the French Army drew from the Spanish Civil War was that the tank had been mastered by the anti-tank gun, and therefore it was imprudent to concentrate armored formations.

    Whoops.

    A generation later the widespread deployment of (crudely) guided HEAT munitions led to the same claim being made, but tanks were shown yet again to be vital to land warfare in the Yom Kippur War. The lesson relearned was rather that tanks unsupported by infantry were vulnerable, something well-known to previous generations.

    We were then told that modern “smart” top-attack munitions or…whatever…now finally made tanks obsolete.

    What we saw instead in the Donets Basin was that modern reactive armor substantially reduced the efficacy of all anti-tank weapons other than the large caliber high velocity gun firing armor-piercing ammunition.

    Back to the Future, anyone?

    The obsolescence of tanks is a long running futuretech fake news meme on the same level as nuclear fusion. Real Soon Now…

    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
  61. @Europe Europa
    America is a dying nation, although most white Americans are still in denial about it. Just look at the blacks destroying Minneapolis, this is not some shithole like Detroit or St. Louis, this is one of the US's premier and most affluent cities. If Minneapolis is on fire then frankly any US city could be on fire.

    It's a mystery to me why Brexiteers want to become closely tied with that dying, majority non-white nation. It's also a mystery to me why Brexiteers think majority black and Hispanic US, in addition to most of the whites being non-Anglo would have any real interest in teaming up with Britain?

    Replies: @Thorfinnsson, @Vaterland

    While I don’t disagree with your point in general, from the early 1960s through the early 1990s the blacks destroyed dozens if not hundreds of American cities.

    Detroit incidentally was sixty years ago the fourth largest city in the United States and the single most prosperous.

    St Louis had nearly three times its present population a century ago.

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    @Thorfinnsson


    St Louis had nearly three times its present population a century ago.
     
    Home of the infamous Pruitt–Igoe housing projects.
  62. @Amerimutt Golems
    @Boswald Bollocksworth

    The Germans are just really good at almost everything. Building things, driving things, playing football. They are the most balanced race. I want to say that Americans could put up a better showing if the army were more selective, but then maybe the guys sent to the NATO event are already cream of the crop. An acquaintance who commanded an M1 Abrams in the 2003 invasion of Eyerack said combat arms guys are dumb as a board in general.

     

    The U.S. military is overrated.

    Despite prior experience in the British Army, Washington needed a Prussian to train troops. The U.S. did badly at the Battle of Bladensburg (pre-diversity) and in WWII troops were 'terrorized' by the German MG42 machine gun.

    Replies: @Thorfinnsson

    Washington never served in the British Army (he served in the Virginia Militia), and he along with most other colonial Americans with an interest in military matters were keenly aware of the great superiority of professionally officered well-drilled soldiers on the battlefield.

    As such the arrival of the “Baron” Steuben in America was a Godsend which Washington was quick to take advantage of, immediately appointing him inspector general of the Continental Army.

    It is true that the performance of the US Army in WW2 was in many respects quite bad. The US Army was of course historically unimportant to American security and thus inferior to the US Navy, and unfortunate if understandable decisions made by Generals Marshall and McNair led to consistently poor morale and training throughout the war.

    On the other hand the Army Air Forces performed superbly in WW2, reaching a higher standard than any other air force in the war. The Navy, after initially getting badly mauled by the Japanese, developed great mastery of naval warfare and complex operations by the middle of 1943. The Marine Corps, while often unfortunately horrifically squandered in foolhardy operations (e.g. Iwo Jima), performed significantly better than the Army.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  63. @Thorfinnsson
    @Europe Europa

    While I don't disagree with your point in general, from the early 1960s through the early 1990s the blacks destroyed dozens if not hundreds of American cities.

    Detroit incidentally was sixty years ago the fourth largest city in the United States and the single most prosperous.

    St Louis had nearly three times its present population a century ago.

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

    St Louis had nearly three times its present population a century ago.

    Home of the infamous Pruitt–Igoe housing projects.

  64. The performance of countries in a war can vary considerably, since there are many factors that can influence it. Think of Belgium (fierce resistance in WW1, a joke in WW2) or Prussia (big victories during the 18th century, dismal performance against Napoleon, more victories after 1850).

    Even States with a similar level of IQ, organisation and institutional traditions can behave very differently during the struggle, like Norway and Finland during WW2; both were invaded by far superior powers, but one was defeated immediatly and the other was never occupied (only 3 capital cities were never conquered during WW2 in Europe, Helsinki was one of them).

  65. @Belarusian Dude
    @Boswald Bollocksworth


    The Germans are just really good at almost everything
     
    Not at winning wars.

    Replies: @Vaterland

    Oh, I am sorry for almost winning a global war against the combined might of all global super powers of their time as a country the size of Texas with Italy as your “ally”. (Japan is also overrated).

  66. @Mightypeon
    As a German reserve soldier, here is the deal:

    Generally speaking, Germany faces 2 possible exintction level threats.
    1: Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.
    2: USA getting really really really stupid, voluntolding us into doing stupid stuff in the east, resulting in Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.

    Essentially, Germany is stuck between the doomsday scenarios of US stupidity and Russian anger managment issues, which is not neccessarily the best place to be in. A stronk German Army would be good against Russian anger managment issues, but may also incourage moar US stupidty. A weak German army may increase Russian anger managment issues (but this is debatable) but probably decrease US adventureism and stupidty. It is also much cheaper. Guess which option Germany took?


    Scenario one is pretty unlikely, given that Russia is a pretty reasonable great power, which has far too much to loose to nuke countries it does much business with for no fucking reason.
    Scenario 2 is pretty likely, given that the current leadership of the USA has a rather random degree of detachment to reality. (Russias attachment to reality is opportunistic Russians will tell the truth if it is in their interest, with the USAs is just random). As such, the key thing for German soldiers is to avoid being voluntold by the USA do to stupid dumb deadly shit regarding the Russians.
    As a bonus, this may result in German soldiers also not being voluntold to do stupid things regarding various Muslims.
    How does one prevent getting voluntold to die for Hunter Bidens Burisma Board position? Easy, publically project to the Americans that the Bundeswehr is a meme. Americans being as reality averse and meme affine as they are are probably going to buy it. If the Americans wont even ask for german troops in Ukraine, there is much less of a chance of things going nasty with the Russians.
    If we have to pretend to be clowns, then so be it.
    Regarding Russia, we have one buffer zone (poland). Now, it would be kind of cute if our buffer zone (Poland) got its own buffer zone (Ukraine), but that is strictly a luxury item. In the meantime, we will use our totally not feigned indignancy over Russias oh so super duper terribly aggresive action to maybe get cheaper oil from Russia.

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Vaterland, @Anatoly Karlin

    That’s a general idea, I also had it, but I don’t really believe it. Germany’s current political “elite” is the worst we have had since the end of WW 2, excluding Willy Brandt; yet he was a traitor, but not stupid and actually competent at what he wanted to achieve. The 4-D Chess posting about Merkel and her circles maneuvering are projecting a bit much of strategical long term thinking, I’m afraid. It’s just a no brainer damage control not to get crushed between USA and China or Russia.

    Nukes are not a problem though. We could produce around 6,800 from our nuclear reactors in a relative short amount of time. Political implications are the bigger problem for that. But a post-nation that takes pride in its own defeat and is smug about its own self-hatred, that is populated by Nietzsche’s last man, is beyond ambitions.
    Although you can also 4-D chess post here. For relatively inconsequential German guilt in terms of hard power and some reparations we get political control over Europe. If that were true that is. Cucks like Heiko Maas who “went into politics because of Auschwitz” just want to safe guard their left-liberal post WW 2 world order. Yet if a total omega male like this guy can tell the USA to f off with North Stream 2 it is rather shocking just how hollowed out the USA has become… And yet here we are, occupied and dominated by this old bitch. What does this say about us?

    The reality is a liberal European Union dominated by Anglo ideas, a nation that has left the EU, and culturally fully Americanized, defined by the victor propaganda of hostile nations who waged war, defeated and occupied Europe as its foundation myth, has zero political future. A chance for the right potentially; unfortunately they are atrociously incompetent and fought tooth and nail by the establishment.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    @Vaterland


    Although you can also 4-D chess post here. For relatively inconsequential German guilt in terms of hard power and some reparations we get political control over Europe. If that were true that is.
     
    Not just guilt and reparations, but race-replacement too. So even if it were true, it would be undone by the very real prospect of irreversible demographic eclipse, for what does it profit a man to gain the whole world if he loses his own race?

    Replies: @Vaterland

  67. @Blinky Bill
    @TheTotallyAnonymous

    I'm team Orthodox on this one. Serbia, Armenia, Russia all the way !!!

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Harbin_Sophia_Cathedral_2017_summer.jpg

    Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous

    Agree (you could add in Greece as well), although its important to note that Armenians are actually Coptic or Oriental Orthodox christian, so they’re sort of their own thing (in strictly religious terms they have more in common with Ethiopians, than Serbs and Russians).

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    @TheTotallyAnonymous

    TheTotallyAnonymous thank you for sharing your knowledge. Unfortunately the last person in my family well versed in Eastern Orthodox theology and doctrine passed long ago (grandfather). I was raised in a secular\atheistic household with only minimal exposure to the Russian Orthodox faith. Would you say the following statement is largely accurate ?


    In the 5th century, Oriental Orthodoxy separated from Chalcedonian Christianity (and is therefore separate from both the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Church), well before the 11th century Great Schism. It should not be confused with Eastern Orthodoxy.
     

    Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous

  68. While I have no objective total image of potential German military power – beyond the stuff you can ready anywhere on the internet, I do have some anecdotes to contribute.

    When I was relatively fit and preparing for Marathon post secondary school I considered joining the military in a professional way, day dreaming of KSK. Around that time I also met a former school friend who served as a medic and met KSK soldiers. And the mythology has merit to it. These people are way beyond the average; as an anecdote he chose to mention that the good man had a resting pulse rate of 38. Some Deltas and Seals talk shit, but everyone knows how Americans, who entirely on their own won WW 2!, are. A few years later, when in catholic monastery, I also met a former Zeitsoldat and para trooper and was again confirmed in my bias that Germany can still produce fine soldiers. Although they would have to prove their metal, like a distant relative of mine who was part of the para troopers who busted Duce out of the mountain fortress/prison in WW 2.

    Generally speaking one has to consider that the West-German Army was the backbone of NATO in the Cold War and had to be built up as a serious army, from the beginning with veteran Wehrmacht Generals and war aces. Back in those days when German guilt was confined to the Hitler government and SS and the Holocaust Industry was not a thing yet. Relatively similar situation in East Germany, which also officially continued some Prussian #trad. Now that military institution as such did not disappear over night and even for an incompetent gynocentric, post-feminist matriarchy like the government of Merkel, Nales, von der Leyen and AKK it is hard to destroy over night. The same goes for our health care system and institutions like the Robert Koch Institute which Murksel now takes and gets the undeserved credit for.

    And unfortunately it is not true that we are free from literal political purges, as happened to the KSK years ago: whose leading General was fired and had to be replaced by another man who, according to then defense minister Struck (SPD), “could lead politically” and we all know what that means in the current year. The casus purgeus then was that the General in question had highlighted a non kosher WW 2 elite era trooper regiment as their role model and apparently held other right-wing views.

    And I also think that the RWDS enthusiasts are mostly a media and Merkel government fabrication to justify the political “purification” of the Bundeswehr in general which has occurred in the last 2-3 years.
    What is an obvious truism is that you will not ever have a beta male loving feminism, the gays, veganism and matriarchy post-nationalism serving in elite special forces, or simply an effective military in general. Not. Ever. Never. And I also know former professional soldiers who are not happy with current year Goymany, to put it mildly. But they don’t decide in “democracies”. The Jews do.

    So of course even today’s Germany, at rock bottom of its history, could produce a million or so good soldiers and at least 100,000 real elite soldiers. German industry is a world leader still today, all built up over more than half a century, and BASF, Siemens, Porsche, Bayer, BMW and many others could easily switch to a high-tech war economy. The NQ (nuke question) I already mentioned.

    But Merkel, EU, Drumpf and the staggering giant aside: the question would remain. For what a huge army? A nationalist army? Before the Ukraine thing I honestly believed that Germany and Russia were on a way like France and Germany and that it would become totally inconceivable that we could or would ever even think of any military conflict and instead build strong, mutually beneficial relationships. And maybe that was exactly why Uncle Shmuel made his moves. Naively I also had believed that the Russofication of Israel would contribute to its normalization both as a nation and in relation to Goymany. I have also grown skeptical in the last 2 years and also feel a bit betrayed by the Putin system. Chabad-Abramovich Putin is not the man I saw in him in all those years before.

    Either way I have never met a serious person who believed that even Germany alone could compete with China and that the future is anywhere but in a integrated Europe; then obviously with a European Army to replace NATO and secure European independence. But who would lead it? A Rothschild banker with a granny fetish? Merkel? And fight for what? #NeverAgain? This ties back to army morality and self understanding. There is a reason why the US army is now basically reduced to a mercenary force. The men and I do mean men you want, will not fight for this system, but despite of it.
    A cope would be to excuse the decadence by the fact it reduces inter-European destabilizing chauvinism and in a serious event the male and natural instinct would jump back into action. But 2015 was for many like an invasion event, felt and perceived as such. Did the military coupe? Although there were 2 or 3 cases of Etiam si omnes, ego non.

    Europe’s problems are political, ideological, cultural and mythological, all inter-linked with our “elite”. The army issue could be solved over night. And there is still plenty of good soldier material and industry capacity left.

    I really miss the Schröder-Putin and even these later years. Simpler times.

    • Replies: @Jon Halpenny
    @Vaterland

    Schroeder and Chirac refused to support the invasion of Iraq, and so they were replaced by new leaders who would support the agenda.

  69. @gT
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    Ah, you are a bit behind the times, the anti-tank missiles don't work against the Russian tanks anymore. Apparently their anti-missile radar and explosive counter-measures, not including the explosive reactive armour, can even handle incoming enemy tank rounds. So the rpg-29 type of rockets don't even reach the Russian tanks. Russia learnt from the Chechnya conflict. Israel has also been fitting its tanks with explosive reaction armour and similar missile counter-measures.

    And Russia's battle philosophy is based on lots of artillery bombardment against fortified positions first, followed by tank and infantry advancement. Plus the Russians now include a lot of the terminator style anti-personnel weapon systems on at least half the armoured divisions. Firing anti-tank missiles is a kind of stationery warfare, Russia concentrates on high mobility warfare, bypassing areas of resistance to attack the undefended logistics and infrastructure behind. Stationery targets just get artillery activated against them until they don’t exist no more. The West just does not want to get involved in large scale high intensity conflicts because it means high casualties, and that is precisely that kind of warfare which is Russia's bread and butter. The West is geared for anti-insurgency type of warfare against sub-standard opponents and not to the large scale high intensity variety against comparable peers.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    Ah, you are a bit behind the times, the anti-tank missiles don’t work against the Russian tanks anymore.

    Kek, you spent a lot of time and effort to support Anatoly’s original point that I was also trying to support, perhaps a bit too subtly.

    The point is that the Russians hold the upper hand in terms of anti-tank missiles and MBTs, thus rendering every other country’s MBTs irrelevant.

    Russia also has the world’s premier integrated air defense system while the US has….the F-35 and Patriot…..excuse me while I LMFAO….

    Also bear in mind that I am a person who absolutely loved the original Red Dawn as well as Rambo 2, and 3.

  70. @Europe Europa
    America is a dying nation, although most white Americans are still in denial about it. Just look at the blacks destroying Minneapolis, this is not some shithole like Detroit or St. Louis, this is one of the US's premier and most affluent cities. If Minneapolis is on fire then frankly any US city could be on fire.

    It's a mystery to me why Brexiteers want to become closely tied with that dying, majority non-white nation. It's also a mystery to me why Brexiteers think majority black and Hispanic US, in addition to most of the whites being non-Anglo would have any real interest in teaming up with Britain?

    Replies: @Thorfinnsson, @Vaterland

    Because Jews own and control US and UK media. Because Israeli Zionists hate the EU and diaspora Jews resent German influence. Because UK nationalism is built on resenting Germans, bulldog and spitfire nationalism. And because most Anglo-Sphere conservatives are not actual right-wingers – especially an American in 99% of cases doesn’t even know what constitutes the right – , but liberals who want a tax cut and serve as buttgoys for Israel. The last days have made it more clear than ever before that Europe’s primary delusions are fundamentally US exports with which we are “blessed” since Murica won the Cold War. Take any European white guilt, hell, even German guilt, give it a cycle of steroids, then mix in wokeness and degeneracy and you have Murica. “Rotherham” is American jogger bread and butter. “Islamic terrorism” is a busy US weekend in one large city. “Cultural Marxism” is US-American mainstream liberalism. Minneapolis has made it evidently clear that the USA has sunken to the status of Banana Republic. Not even meming. This makes the 1st May look like a nice weekend in the park. Planet of the Apes: Orc Boogaloo.

  71. It only took until 2020 for Karlin to recognize the Endian military.

    Also finally a based German, agree about the fight despite the system

    Fk democracy, fk feminism, fk inter-caste||

  72. @Vaterland
    While I have no objective total image of potential German military power - beyond the stuff you can ready anywhere on the internet, I do have some anecdotes to contribute.

    When I was relatively fit and preparing for Marathon post secondary school I considered joining the military in a professional way, day dreaming of KSK. Around that time I also met a former school friend who served as a medic and met KSK soldiers. And the mythology has merit to it. These people are way beyond the average; as an anecdote he chose to mention that the good man had a resting pulse rate of 38. Some Deltas and Seals talk shit, but everyone knows how Americans, who entirely on their own won WW 2!, are. A few years later, when in catholic monastery, I also met a former Zeitsoldat and para trooper and was again confirmed in my bias that Germany can still produce fine soldiers. Although they would have to prove their metal, like a distant relative of mine who was part of the para troopers who busted Duce out of the mountain fortress/prison in WW 2.

    Generally speaking one has to consider that the West-German Army was the backbone of NATO in the Cold War and had to be built up as a serious army, from the beginning with veteran Wehrmacht Generals and war aces. Back in those days when German guilt was confined to the Hitler government and SS and the Holocaust Industry was not a thing yet. Relatively similar situation in East Germany, which also officially continued some Prussian #trad. Now that military institution as such did not disappear over night and even for an incompetent gynocentric, post-feminist matriarchy like the government of Merkel, Nales, von der Leyen and AKK it is hard to destroy over night. The same goes for our health care system and institutions like the Robert Koch Institute which Murksel now takes and gets the undeserved credit for.

    And unfortunately it is not true that we are free from literal political purges, as happened to the KSK years ago: whose leading General was fired and had to be replaced by another man who, according to then defense minister Struck (SPD), "could lead politically" and we all know what that means in the current year. The casus purgeus then was that the General in question had highlighted a non kosher WW 2 elite era trooper regiment as their role model and apparently held other right-wing views.

    And I also think that the RWDS enthusiasts are mostly a media and Merkel government fabrication to justify the political "purification" of the Bundeswehr in general which has occurred in the last 2-3 years.
    What is an obvious truism is that you will not ever have a beta male loving feminism, the gays, veganism and matriarchy post-nationalism serving in elite special forces, or simply an effective military in general. Not. Ever. Never. And I also know former professional soldiers who are not happy with current year Goymany, to put it mildly. But they don't decide in "democracies". The Jews do.

    So of course even today's Germany, at rock bottom of its history, could produce a million or so good soldiers and at least 100,000 real elite soldiers. German industry is a world leader still today, all built up over more than half a century, and BASF, Siemens, Porsche, Bayer, BMW and many others could easily switch to a high-tech war economy. The NQ (nuke question) I already mentioned.

    But Merkel, EU, Drumpf and the staggering giant aside: the question would remain. For what a huge army? A nationalist army? Before the Ukraine thing I honestly believed that Germany and Russia were on a way like France and Germany and that it would become totally inconceivable that we could or would ever even think of any military conflict and instead build strong, mutually beneficial relationships. And maybe that was exactly why Uncle Shmuel made his moves. Naively I also had believed that the Russofication of Israel would contribute to its normalization both as a nation and in relation to Goymany. I have also grown skeptical in the last 2 years and also feel a bit betrayed by the Putin system. Chabad-Abramovich Putin is not the man I saw in him in all those years before.

    Either way I have never met a serious person who believed that even Germany alone could compete with China and that the future is anywhere but in a integrated Europe; then obviously with a European Army to replace NATO and secure European independence. But who would lead it? A Rothschild banker with a granny fetish? Merkel? And fight for what? #NeverAgain? This ties back to army morality and self understanding. There is a reason why the US army is now basically reduced to a mercenary force. The men and I do mean men you want, will not fight for this system, but despite of it.
    A cope would be to excuse the decadence by the fact it reduces inter-European destabilizing chauvinism and in a serious event the male and natural instinct would jump back into action. But 2015 was for many like an invasion event, felt and perceived as such. Did the military coupe? Although there were 2 or 3 cases of Etiam si omnes, ego non.

    Europe's problems are political, ideological, cultural and mythological, all inter-linked with our "elite". The army issue could be solved over night. And there is still plenty of good soldier material and industry capacity left.

    I really miss the Schröder-Putin and even these later years. Simpler times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0IYnRQJas0

    Replies: @Jon Halpenny

    Schroeder and Chirac refused to support the invasion of Iraq, and so they were replaced by new leaders who would support the agenda.

  73. @TheTotallyAnonymous
    @Blinky Bill

    Agree (you could add in Greece as well), although its important to note that Armenians are actually Coptic or Oriental Orthodox christian, so they're sort of their own thing (in strictly religious terms they have more in common with Ethiopians, than Serbs and Russians).

    Replies: @Blinky Bill

    TheTotallyAnonymous thank you for sharing your knowledge. Unfortunately the last person in my family well versed in Eastern Orthodox theology and doctrine passed long ago (grandfather). I was raised in a secular\atheistic household with only minimal exposure to the Russian Orthodox faith. Would you say the following statement is largely accurate ?

    In the 5th century, Oriental Orthodoxy separated from Chalcedonian Christianity (and is therefore separate from both the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Church), well before the 11th century Great Schism. It should not be confused with Eastern Orthodoxy.

    • Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous
    @Blinky Bill

    I would agree that the statement you gave is accurate, although I'm no expert on Christianity (despite diving into it more intensely recently and doing some occasional and casual reading here and there).

  74. @Mr. Hack
    @Almost Missouri

    If you really have an interest in the relations of Ukraine and Russia (and its other neighbors as well), I would suggest that you pick up a Ukrainian history book and read it to be able to see that there's a lot more going on than just "indistinguishable" differences going on, for a long, long time. Ukraine is a classic case of where a nation just never has felt comfortable existing under the thumb of one of its neighbors. Ethnicity - nationhood - statehood, it's al there if you just take a deeper look.

    Replies: @LH

    I would suggest that you pick up a Ukrainian history book and read it

    Can you recommend something readable and available in genesis library?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @LH

    I don't know about what "Genesis" has to offer, but if I were you, I'd look for English language books written by either Orest Subtelny or Paul Magocsi for starters. Good luck!

    Replies: @LH

  75. @Mightypeon
    As a German reserve soldier, here is the deal:

    Generally speaking, Germany faces 2 possible exintction level threats.
    1: Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.
    2: USA getting really really really stupid, voluntolding us into doing stupid stuff in the east, resulting in Russia getting really really really angry and deciding to repeat 1945 with nukes.

    Essentially, Germany is stuck between the doomsday scenarios of US stupidity and Russian anger managment issues, which is not neccessarily the best place to be in. A stronk German Army would be good against Russian anger managment issues, but may also incourage moar US stupidty. A weak German army may increase Russian anger managment issues (but this is debatable) but probably decrease US adventureism and stupidty. It is also much cheaper. Guess which option Germany took?


    Scenario one is pretty unlikely, given that Russia is a pretty reasonable great power, which has far too much to loose to nuke countries it does much business with for no fucking reason.
    Scenario 2 is pretty likely, given that the current leadership of the USA has a rather random degree of detachment to reality. (Russias attachment to reality is opportunistic Russians will tell the truth if it is in their interest, with the USAs is just random). As such, the key thing for German soldiers is to avoid being voluntold by the USA do to stupid dumb deadly shit regarding the Russians.
    As a bonus, this may result in German soldiers also not being voluntold to do stupid things regarding various Muslims.
    How does one prevent getting voluntold to die for Hunter Bidens Burisma Board position? Easy, publically project to the Americans that the Bundeswehr is a meme. Americans being as reality averse and meme affine as they are are probably going to buy it. If the Americans wont even ask for german troops in Ukraine, there is much less of a chance of things going nasty with the Russians.
    If we have to pretend to be clowns, then so be it.
    Regarding Russia, we have one buffer zone (poland). Now, it would be kind of cute if our buffer zone (Poland) got its own buffer zone (Ukraine), but that is strictly a luxury item. In the meantime, we will use our totally not feigned indignancy over Russias oh so super duper terribly aggresive action to maybe get cheaper oil from Russia.

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Vaterland, @Anatoly Karlin

    Very plausible theory, makes sense.

  76. @Vaterland
    @Mightypeon

    That's a general idea, I also had it, but I don't really believe it. Germany's current political "elite" is the worst we have had since the end of WW 2, excluding Willy Brandt; yet he was a traitor, but not stupid and actually competent at what he wanted to achieve. The 4-D Chess posting about Merkel and her circles maneuvering are projecting a bit much of strategical long term thinking, I'm afraid. It's just a no brainer damage control not to get crushed between USA and China or Russia.

    Nukes are not a problem though. We could produce around 6,800 from our nuclear reactors in a relative short amount of time. Political implications are the bigger problem for that. But a post-nation that takes pride in its own defeat and is smug about its own self-hatred, that is populated by Nietzsche's last man, is beyond ambitions.
    Although you can also 4-D chess post here. For relatively inconsequential German guilt in terms of hard power and some reparations we get political control over Europe. If that were true that is. Cucks like Heiko Maas who "went into politics because of Auschwitz" just want to safe guard their left-liberal post WW 2 world order. Yet if a total omega male like this guy can tell the USA to f off with North Stream 2 it is rather shocking just how hollowed out the USA has become... And yet here we are, occupied and dominated by this old bitch. What does this say about us?

    The reality is a liberal European Union dominated by Anglo ideas, a nation that has left the EU, and culturally fully Americanized, defined by the victor propaganda of hostile nations who waged war, defeated and occupied Europe as its foundation myth, has zero political future. A chance for the right potentially; unfortunately they are atrociously incompetent and fought tooth and nail by the establishment.

    Replies: @silviosilver

    Although you can also 4-D chess post here. For relatively inconsequential German guilt in terms of hard power and some reparations we get political control over Europe. If that were true that is.

    Not just guilt and reparations, but race-replacement too. So even if it were true, it would be undone by the very real prospect of irreversible demographic eclipse, for what does it profit a man to gain the whole world if he loses his own race?

    • Replies: @Vaterland
    @silviosilver

    Contrary to Breitbart memes, the demographic situation in both Germany and Sweden is not anywhere near the United States. Turks, the largest muslim group, have been stagnant at around 2.4 million for years, Africans are barely more than 500k and the vast majority of immigrants are other Europeans. Thank God based Brexit solved that for Britain! And they get Indians and Chinese now. Although I obviously oppose the demographic change, especially if done with malicious intent. Yet again it is an ideological import and also founded on the post WW 2 foundation myths and activities of the Jewish diaspora. And East Germany is basically a de facto ethno-state. At least one good side of gommunism xDDD

  77. @Blinky Bill
    @TheTotallyAnonymous

    TheTotallyAnonymous thank you for sharing your knowledge. Unfortunately the last person in my family well versed in Eastern Orthodox theology and doctrine passed long ago (grandfather). I was raised in a secular\atheistic household with only minimal exposure to the Russian Orthodox faith. Would you say the following statement is largely accurate ?


    In the 5th century, Oriental Orthodoxy separated from Chalcedonian Christianity (and is therefore separate from both the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Church), well before the 11th century Great Schism. It should not be confused with Eastern Orthodoxy.
     

    Replies: @TheTotallyAnonymous

    I would agree that the statement you gave is accurate, although I’m no expert on Christianity (despite diving into it more intensely recently and doing some occasional and casual reading here and there).

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
  78. @silviosilver
    @Vaterland


    Although you can also 4-D chess post here. For relatively inconsequential German guilt in terms of hard power and some reparations we get political control over Europe. If that were true that is.
     
    Not just guilt and reparations, but race-replacement too. So even if it were true, it would be undone by the very real prospect of irreversible demographic eclipse, for what does it profit a man to gain the whole world if he loses his own race?

    Replies: @Vaterland

    Contrary to Breitbart memes, the demographic situation in both Germany and Sweden is not anywhere near the United States. Turks, the largest muslim group, have been stagnant at around 2.4 million for years, Africans are barely more than 500k and the vast majority of immigrants are other Europeans. Thank God based Brexit solved that for Britain! And they get Indians and Chinese now. Although I obviously oppose the demographic change, especially if done with malicious intent. Yet again it is an ideological import and also founded on the post WW 2 foundation myths and activities of the Jewish diaspora. And East Germany is basically a de facto ethno-state. At least one good side of gommunism xDDD

  79. @LH
    @Mr. Hack


    I would suggest that you pick up a Ukrainian history book and read it

     

    Can you recommend something readable and available in genesis library?

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    I don’t know about what “Genesis” has to offer, but if I were you, I’d look for English language books written by either Orest Subtelny or Paul Magocsi for starters. Good luck!

    • Replies: @LH
    @Mr. Hack

    Thanks, found both.

  80. @Mr. Hack
    @LH

    I don't know about what "Genesis" has to offer, but if I were you, I'd look for English language books written by either Orest Subtelny or Paul Magocsi for starters. Good luck!

    Replies: @LH

    Thanks, found both.

  81. @Erik Sieven
    isn´t conventional military strength in end pointless since the invention of the nuclear bombs?

    Replies: @reiner Tor

    You can destroy a country with nukes. You cannot conquer it.

    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    @reiner Tor

    Good point. Technically there might be something like "conquering by blackmail". But rather unrealistic... Anyway there are countries in the world with a authentic military policy strictly restricted to defense. For those countries nukes would be enough.

  82. @reiner Tor
    @Erik Sieven

    You can destroy a country with nukes. You cannot conquer it.

    Replies: @Erik Sieven

    Good point. Technically there might be something like “conquering by blackmail”. But rather unrealistic… Anyway there are countries in the world with a authentic military policy strictly restricted to defense. For those countries nukes would be enough.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS