Yes i do, i'm polish myself. The battle of Wizna was the thermopylae of poland. It was around 700+ men holding off the german invasion force of around 40,000 for more than 3 days... we did amazing.. i just wish the british would of kept their friggin word and helped out.
Incorrect on the French point. The French and British armor (tanks in particular) were superior to the Germans, and they had more of them. The tactics hadn't kept up with the times, however. Even Erwin Rommel acknowledged that had the tanks been deployed en masse however the invasion of France could've been stopped.
@slitor almost. but actually, rifling dates back to the 16th century, it wasn't "invented" during the Crimean War. regiments like the British "Green Jackets" were using rifled muskets in the early 19th century, and rifles were part of the weaponry used in the War of 1812. the Minie ball came into play in the 1840s, after which rifling became much more common for infantrymen.
@@heritagehound7565 I have actually misquoted Rommel on this one. The actual quote goes "If I had to take hell, I would use the Australians to take it and the New Zealanders to hold it". However, there is a good chance that this quote is apocryphal. Which I didn't know when I made this comment 9 years ago.
You do understand this is set during World War One. The Lewis Gun at the time during World War One wasn't old. Were you expecting them to use an M60 Machine Gun in this TeleMovie?
Yeah I read this in a book I found at my schools library. France however didn't have the best gear a lot of it was old and dated as far back as 1918 so that might help explain why they formed in a big line, maybe waiting for new modern gear. The german troops however were equipped with modern gear which gave them an edge I guess.
@AlexDeLarge90 usmctanks1 was correct. I am a former US Army officer and I hold a degree in history. All you need to do is look at Vicksburg and Petersburg, to see the genesis of trench warfare. The repeating rifle, railway guns, and machine guns (in the form of Dr Gatling's invention) were all introduced during the US Civil War.
+Dunnlrs - Hey you are right about this, being WW1, Germans fighting Australians and not the Polish. However, the uniform is Australian Army issued and made, in those days and for the metal helmets are English or standard Allies issued item.
A technical note: the French did in fact possess superior tank forces at the beginning of the war, both in quality and quantity deployed on the Western Front. The Germans used only light and medium tanks, while the French possessed such heavies as the Char B. However, the French tanks were deployed mainly as defensive buttresses for infantry forces. As such, despite a few impressive local engagements, French armour did not play anything like the role of the concentrated German spearheads.
The patch on the sergeant is from the 8th or 7th Victoria regiment of the Australian Expeditionary Force (Infrantry Battalion). later to be combined due to heavy losses in the Australian and New Zealand forces. (ANZAC's) He is not polish as you say.
In 1939 Germans had to few modern warfare. Poles were using anti-tank rifle and anti tank gun(37 Boffors) and it worked. Huge problem was Luftwaffe with BF 109. France had chance in 3rd week of war. In Early 1940 German generals didn't repeat the same mistakes. They had proper supplying more AMV. More over France had Enigma code and working machine from Polish Inteligence and they did not used it.
This is mere silliness. These countries clung to their neutrality in the face of Allied negotiations to at least permit coordinated defensive preparations. Moreover, the suggestion that these countries with relatively tiny forces would up and invade Germany had Britain simply asked is like saying Slovenia would fly to the moon if Spain just phrased the request politely.
It is true that the tactics didn't keep up. And yes they had more tanks, but they were somewhat slow. The French also relied on large bunker complexes. However these complexes, as strong they might be relied on static front lines, and they weren't static anymore. Another thing to keep in mind was that Germany had absolute air supremacy, rendering many fortifications obsolete. The last thing: Many in Europe were in doubt of who they should support. The German economy was great. There's weren't
You are right. But Poles were fighting in France ("Blue Army") in French uniforms, and in Austria-Hungary in Polish uniforms against Russia., and In Russia against Germans. They refused fighting for Kaiser and commanders were imprisoned by Germans. Many Poles, (as Italians and Irish men) were fighting in American Units (without Polish signs on the uniforms).
Makes me wanna go throw on the "ANZACS" miniseries and watch it.. awesome.. It's an awesome piece of Australian film making, with the likes of " The Light Horsemen" That's what I'm gonna do right now, throw on me DVD of the ANZACS....
@Tomenable You're right but at the same time it can't be said it was actually better. They had different strengths and weaknesses. The Mauser was the more accurate weapon and could bring fire to bear over a longer range. The .303 through quicker bolt action and a 10 round capacity was capable of much more rapid fire. I'd say that in the 14,18 conflict the strengths of .303 would make it the better rifler to have.
Its not a Polish flag, its a regimental patch used by the ANZAC'S (Australian and New Zealand Army Corps) this regiment is Australian and the Colonel is with the (Lancashire Fusiliers) a British Army regiment, no Polish in this even though the patch looks like the Polish flag it is just a tactical badge. The 2 regiments also fought at Gallipoli together against the Ottoman Turks.
The difference between the US Marine Corp and the Anzacs is very minimal. I'm not talking about equipment wise, i'm saying that both were used as shock troops and were taught and told to conserve resources. In terms of battle spirit and efficiency on the battlefield, the Anzacs is on par with the US Marine Corp. For some battles which proved the combat readiness of the Anzacs Search up Battle of Hamel - WWI Battle of Torbruk - WWII Battle of Long Tan - Vietnam
To everyone writing that this is polish army action, quite frankly you are all fools. The read and white is a Unit insignia of the 8th Battalion of the AIF during world war 1, For those who don't know the AIF was Australian that fought from the beginning thought to the end of the war. This scene was from a 1985 series that appeared on Australian tv, it was known as ANZACS.
These are Anzacs, Australia and New Zealand Army Corps, and they are the loyalist and bravest fuckers you would ever wish to go into battle with. From a Pom ex squaddie.
Except the Napoleonic wars, he made every countrys military look like a disgrace, but in the end he was beat by Sir Arthur Wellington and Gebhard Blucher.
You will find its the Colour Patch of the 8th Battalion 1st AIF Above the Colour Patch on the eppulette is the Dressing The word AUSTRALIA which signified they were Australian Soldiers Colour Patches do not signify Nationality but what unit they are battalion or division. No doubt the Poles during WW2 fought with extreme courage but the above video was a TV Adaption of one Battalion during World War One and the ANZAC Corps that fought on the Western Front. Remember this video was a TV Series
Sorry correct you here - though you are not easy to insult. :P The Germans didn't lose many troops in Poland. They took Poland by storm (Blietz krieg). Poland lost their military. Germany only lost a couple of tanks. This is due to the lagging military of Poland. Hence they still had lancers who tried to charge the german troops. Shows how outdated they were. France were at somewhat the same situation. Their military was hopelessly outdated. Poland weren't afraid of GB who promised to defend em
@LambdaZetaTeke spot-on...one of the reasons for the American Civil War's high casualties and brutal nature was the juxtaposition of outdated "Napoleonic" warfare with modern "amenities" like automatic weapons, repeating rifles, and the high number of troops armed with rifled instead of smooth-bore muskets... i always tell people: WW1 was born on Civil War battlefields. the parallels are frighteningly accurate. it was a sad, bloody mess =/
i agree but us brits took a lot of causalties in the war. on july1 1916 lost 57,000 men wounded or dead in 1 morning also in 1917 britain lost more men than they had in the first 3 years of fighting
@RobsonRockMachine What I posted 2 days ago was an observation that Poland seems to be on peoples "first to conqour" list in Europe alot, but then added that they are fierce fighters that stand up for themselves. see WW1 and 2. I dont know why your attcking what I said. oh and BTW Australia hasnt been a colony since 1901.
No problem. It isn't easy to insult me. Germans were prepared for shorter campaign in Poland. They had to few supplies for longer fights. It was main lessen for German Generals. They lost hundreads tanks and planes in Poland. France had real chance to won this war in easy way. The only problem was will to fight. Poland was afraid about GB and France consent to the annexation of a territory - like in Czech Republic. That's why they deployed forces in long battle line.
@LambdaZetaTeke was it not so that in the 18th century during a siege (maybe before), the opposing armies would dig trenches to put forward their mortars in range of the fort and then bomb it. But indeed, it was in the american civil war that they would form a sort of frontline.
You are right, they are Germans, but they are from World War 1. The Battle of Hazebrouck was fought in 1918. I know that in World War 2, the Free Polish Army fought very bravely alongside the British Army in North Africa, Italy, France, Belgium, Holland and into Germany.
Try the terms SAPs or SAPPERS Tunneling Mining Bridgeworks and other Military Terms. Most will find Battle Field Engineering goes back longer then they think. Its not NEW its just been re-advised and re-adapted
@woobinda65 This is from a made for TV series called Anzacs. It starred Paul Hogan of Crocodile Dundee fame. Some of the battle scenes did lack realism but in the context of a made for TV programme maybe that is slightly more understandable
Okay, didn't want to pull this card, but lets have a look at the casualty figures. Germany, like every other country involved (bar the US) had horrendous casualties. By the time that the German people and many commanders thought enough was enough, the German army on the western front had retreated, and if they hadn't surrendered then, an invasion of Germany would have commenced.
Considering the German role in WWI and WWII, I can understand how people in Russia and Europe are a bit more worried by Nazi activities in Germany than in France.
I'm English, but don't take that as a bias. The wikipedia article is easy to quote from, thats why I used it, but it is clear to see that after the battle of Amien, and the subsequent breakthrough of the Hindenburg line, there was no hope for German victory on the Western Front.
Statement born out of ignorance, the french did indeed have a large military force yes, but in 1939 when the war started the French military equipment wasn't to date hell some of it still dated back to ww1. They also lacked in air force, in heavy tanks, anti-air, artillery etc same goes for the Brits. the germans although outnumbered by the French and British had much better equipment, more heavy tanks, a larger air force, more artillery and the gear their military used was more modern.
are white and red colors on the soldiers arm an unit emblem? or are these polish troops? (which i doubt to be, because in WWI polish units where created in france witth french equipment and uniforms)
Thats the Russians being terrible not the Germans being great. If you smash glass with a rock it doesn't mean that that rock can now smash anything. German deaths on the Eastern Front were higher than Russians, but they took large amounts of prisoners. In answer to an earlier comment, there were no revolutions in Germany that ended the war, their army had starved and been crushed in the allied counter offensive of 1918.
Power of French forces was not important. After thee weeks Geramns had ammo only for next 12 days. Their supplays were almost used. It was important lesson for German General. They had planed 10 days fights in Poland. Poland was fight against Germany Slovakia nad Soviet Union for 5 weeks.
I've got a quote to back up my claim, 'In November 1918 the Allies had ample supplies of men and materiel to invade Germany. Yet at the time of the armistice, no Allied force had crossed the German frontier; the Western Front was still almost 900 mi (1,400 km) from Berlin; and the Kaiser's armies had retreated from the battlefield in good order.' This is taken from the wikipedia article on world war one. I think my claim has a little more depth than yours.
If you look at germany during both those world wars you might understand what military geniuses the germans war to fight a war on 2 fronts both times and still keep it going for so lon, hell, in the first world war the Entente didnt even step on german soil, if it wasnt for the revolts in germany i believe the war would keep on for longer and the allies would ultimately seek for a peace treaty.
I highly doubt that. The Japanese were more afraid of the Marines than they were of the Australians, they never showed it because of their religion at the time, but they wrote about it.
No, it is not a historical fact - it's just your opinion. Having said that, the ANZAC and Canadian troops were bloody good and deseerve every honour bestowed upon them together with the thanks of the British people. I hold them in the highest regard along with the many other Empire troops who fought so bravely for a country (and idea, The Empire) that was not even the country of their birth. I mention particularly troops from the Indian sub-continent who are so often overlooked in this context.
I love hearing Info about some actual history.. THANK YOU Whom Are native to these military forces because I am Always given info that I dont know.. No sarcasm I legitimately mean this.. I have learned so Much thanks to some educated youtubers.. THANKS!! K!!
Yes, because we could have done so much when you were being invaded by two super powers. Not that the Poles weren't brave, but seriously, wtf did you want us to do?
@LambdaZetaTeke I wonder how much attention was paid by Confederate and Union commanders to the Crimean War in the 1850s? A few comparisons come to mind. Trench warfare, the decline of cavalry on the battlefield in the direct assault role, mass use of rifled weapons and breach loading artillery. Not to mention battlefield medical care. (or the lack of it!)
Can't believe there are people on here who think this WW2 and Poles fighting Germans. This is Belgium in WW1 with Australians wearing Brit style uniforms. No poles.
Thanks for the info... By "fiction" often I mean "movie"... I know they are two different things. Anyway, a low level of absurdity is still present, no matter if "fiction" or "movie" is...
@thebigJM92 Only because they did'nt have the Lee-Enfield No1 Mk3 .303! Though i note for the record that at 2.06/2.07, the silly bastard seemed to jam the bolt. Just like the Sikh soldier in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.
@LiveJoyDivision I wasn't comparing them, I was trying to show you (But failed) how weapons that have killed more people aren't necessarily better weapons, read the comment properly and you'll realize I wasn't comparing them at all. Overall yes, the Mauser is probably a better design, it's much more refined than the Enfield, but for combat, the Enfield is more effective, it emerged on the winning side...twice, for a start. The Mauser action has been more successful than the Enfields however.
@jizzinmypants191919: I disagree. The Lee-Enfield may have been a bolt-action weapon, but in the hands of trained men it could seem like machine gun fire. Just ask the Germans at Mons in 1914.
@MrPearlJack Kar98k is less accurate past 400 yards, bolt takes long to manipulate and is more difficult under stress, Lee-Enfield has ten rounds, 98k has five, Enfield has better long range sights (No4 Micrometre sights). Lee-Enfield wins, I do love Mausers but for a combat situation the Enfield is more preferable.
Yes i do, i'm polish myself. The battle of Wizna was the thermopylae of poland. It was around 700+ men holding off the german invasion force of around 40,000 for more than 3 days... we did amazing.. i just wish the british would of kept their friggin word and helped out.
Yep "Anzacs", you may notice Paul "Crocodile Dundee" Hogan in there. It was a great series from what I remember.
who would have thought that tree ferns would provide such excellent cover from bullets.
They don’t you ducking autist. As evidenced in the show
Pulse rifle - best rifle ever made.
Incorrect on the French point. The French and British armor (tanks in particular) were superior to the Germans, and they had more of them. The tactics hadn't kept up with the times, however. Even Erwin Rommel acknowledged that had the tanks been deployed en masse however the invasion of France could've been stopped.
@slitor almost. but actually, rifling dates back to the 16th century, it wasn't "invented" during the Crimean War. regiments like the British "Green Jackets" were using rifled muskets in the early 19th century, and rifles were part of the weaponry used in the War of 1812. the Minie ball came into play in the 1840s, after which rifling became much more common for infantrymen.
It's the Australian 8th Battallion, 1st AIF. In WORLD WAR 1.
My unit had blue over purple colour patches. Every battallion has a different colour.
"Give me two Australia division and I will conquer the world" - Erwin Rommel
And a New Zealand division to hold it.
And it was Hell he would take not the world.
@@heritagehound7565 I have actually misquoted Rommel on this one. The actual quote goes "If I had to take hell, I would use the Australians to take it and the New Zealanders to hold it". However, there is a good chance that this quote is apocryphal. Which I didn't know when I made this comment 9 years ago.
You do understand this is set during World War One. The Lewis Gun at the time during World War One wasn't old. Were you expecting them to use an M60 Machine Gun in this TeleMovie?
Yeah I read this in a book I found at my schools library. France however didn't have the best gear a lot of it was old and dated as far back as 1918 so that might help explain why they formed in a big line, maybe waiting for new modern gear. The german troops however were equipped with modern gear which gave them an edge I guess.
@AlexDeLarge90
usmctanks1 was correct. I am a former US Army officer and I hold a degree in history. All you need to do is look at Vicksburg and Petersburg, to see the genesis of trench warfare.
The repeating rifle, railway guns, and machine guns (in the form of Dr Gatling's invention) were all introduced during the US Civil War.
+Dunnlrs - Hey you are right about this, being WW1, Germans fighting Australians and not the Polish. However, the uniform is Australian Army issued and made, in those days and for the metal helmets are English or standard Allies issued item.
A technical note: the French did in fact possess superior tank forces at the beginning of the war, both in quality and quantity deployed on the Western Front. The Germans used only light and medium tanks, while the French possessed such heavies as the Char B. However, the French tanks were deployed mainly as defensive buttresses for infantry forces. As such, despite a few impressive local engagements, French armour did not play anything like the role of the concentrated German spearheads.
You’re referring to WW2, this battle is in WW1.
That was in ww2 this is ww1. Re tanks.
The patch on the sergeant is from the 8th or 7th Victoria regiment of the Australian Expeditionary Force (Infrantry Battalion). later to be combined due to heavy losses in the Australian and New Zealand forces. (ANZAC's) He is not polish as you say.
In 1939 Germans had to few modern warfare. Poles were using anti-tank rifle and anti tank gun(37 Boffors) and it worked. Huge problem was Luftwaffe with BF 109. France had chance in 3rd week of war. In Early 1940 German generals didn't repeat the same mistakes. They had proper supplying more AMV. More over France had Enigma code and working machine from Polish Inteligence and they did not used it.
This was,nt Hazebrouck.... It was the Nieppe Forest.
This is mere silliness. These countries clung to their neutrality in the face of Allied negotiations to at least permit coordinated defensive preparations. Moreover, the suggestion that these countries with relatively tiny forces would up and invade Germany had Britain simply asked is like saying Slovenia would fly to the moon if Spain just phrased the request politely.
It is true that the tactics didn't keep up. And yes they had more tanks, but they were somewhat slow. The French also relied on large bunker complexes. However these complexes, as strong they might be relied on static front lines, and they weren't static anymore. Another thing to keep in mind was that Germany had absolute air supremacy, rendering many fortifications obsolete.
The last thing: Many in Europe were in doubt of who they should support. The German economy was great. There's weren't
You are right. But Poles were fighting in France ("Blue Army") in French uniforms, and in Austria-Hungary in Polish uniforms against Russia., and In Russia against Germans. They refused fighting for Kaiser and commanders were imprisoned by Germans. Many Poles, (as Italians and Irish men) were fighting in American Units (without Polish signs on the uniforms).
Even in a victorious battle, soldiers die. Just fewer of them than on the losing side.
Makes me wanna go throw on the "ANZACS" miniseries and watch it.. awesome..
It's an awesome piece of Australian film making, with the likes of " The Light Horsemen"
That's what I'm gonna do right now, throw on me DVD of the ANZACS....
@Tomenable You're right but at the same time it can't be said it was actually better. They had different strengths and weaknesses. The Mauser was the more accurate weapon and could bring fire to bear over a longer range. The .303 through quicker bolt action and a 10 round capacity was capable of much more rapid fire. I'd say that in the 14,18 conflict the strengths of .303 would make it the better rifler to have.
WOW..!!! In three minutes.....three time the same scene.... What a movie !!!!
It was a TV series not a movie.
gnarkillkicksass -- ........who cares, the concept does not change.
Smart move. Mauser 98 Karabiner 7.92 infantry rifle Vs. Lee Enfield IV 303 infantry rifle.
Pretty sure a German platoon would not advance to the front like they were going to a picnic. It would be a much shorter war if that was the case.
lee enfield and mauser, Both best Rifles. I love them Both.
Its not a Polish flag, its a regimental patch used by the ANZAC'S (Australian and New Zealand Army Corps) this regiment is Australian and the Colonel is with the (Lancashire Fusiliers) a British Army regiment, no Polish in this even though the patch looks like the Polish flag it is just a tactical badge. The 2 regiments also fought at Gallipoli together against the Ottoman Turks.
Fun fact - in ww2 Australian forces were the only ones present at the first land defeats of both Germany and Japan.
The difference between the US Marine Corp and the Anzacs is very minimal. I'm not talking about equipment wise, i'm saying that both were used as shock troops and were taught and told to conserve resources.
In terms of battle spirit and efficiency on the battlefield, the Anzacs is on par with the US Marine Corp.
For some battles which proved the combat readiness of the Anzacs
Search up
Battle of Hamel - WWI
Battle of Torbruk - WWII
Battle of Long Tan - Vietnam
bollocks
@LambdaZetaTeke I'd say that it still is Dr. Maxim's MG which really revolutionized and defined the modern MGs
To everyone writing that this is polish army action, quite frankly you are all fools. The read and white is a Unit insignia of the 8th Battalion of the AIF during world war 1, For those who don't know the AIF was Australian that fought from the beginning thought to the end of the war. This scene was from a 1985 series that appeared on Australian tv, it was known as ANZACS.
This is true. Most poison gas deaths were Russian because the Tsar would not give his army gas masks.
It's a colour patch, used to identify units. Each one has a different colour and there are different shapes and combinations. It's not a flag.
true, the germans hated fighting them, they would say that no matter what was done cdns, aus, kiwi would not give up, only fight harder.
These are Anzacs, Australia and New Zealand Army Corps, and they are the loyalist and bravest fuckers you would ever wish to go into battle with. From a Pom ex squaddie.
Mauser 98k - best rifle ever made.
Except the Napoleonic wars, he made every countrys military look like a disgrace, but in the end he was beat by Sir Arthur Wellington and Gebhard Blucher.
You will find its the Colour Patch of the 8th Battalion 1st AIF Above the Colour Patch on the eppulette is the Dressing The word AUSTRALIA which signified they were Australian Soldiers Colour Patches do not signify Nationality but what unit they are battalion or division. No doubt the Poles during WW2 fought with extreme courage but the above video was a TV Adaption of one Battalion during World War One and the ANZAC Corps that fought on the Western Front. Remember this video was a TV Series
Sorry correct you here - though you are not easy to insult. :P
The Germans didn't lose many troops in Poland. They took Poland by storm (Blietz krieg). Poland lost their military. Germany only lost a couple of tanks. This is due to the lagging military of Poland. Hence they still had lancers who tried to charge the german troops. Shows how outdated they were. France were at somewhat the same situation. Their military was hopelessly outdated. Poland weren't afraid of GB who promised to defend em
@LambdaZetaTeke spot-on...one of the reasons for the American Civil War's high casualties and brutal nature was the juxtaposition of outdated "Napoleonic" warfare with modern "amenities" like automatic weapons, repeating rifles, and the high number of troops armed with rifled instead of smooth-bore muskets...
i always tell people: WW1 was born on Civil War battlefields. the parallels are frighteningly accurate. it was a sad, bloody mess =/
i agree but us brits took a lot of causalties in the war.
on july1 1916 lost 57,000 men wounded or dead in 1 morning
also in 1917 britain lost more men than they had in the first 3 years of fighting
@RobsonRockMachine What I posted 2 days ago was an observation that Poland seems to be on peoples "first to conqour" list in Europe alot, but then added that they are fierce fighters that stand up for themselves. see WW1 and 2. I dont know why your attcking what I said. oh and BTW Australia hasnt been a colony since 1901.
No problem. It isn't easy to insult me. Germans were prepared for shorter campaign in Poland. They had to few supplies for longer fights. It was main lessen for German Generals. They lost hundreads tanks and planes in Poland. France had real chance to won this war in easy way. The only problem was will to fight. Poland was afraid about GB and France consent to the annexation of a territory - like in Czech Republic. That's why they deployed forces in long battle line.
Winchester 1917 - Best rifle ever made.
@LambdaZetaTeke
was it not so that in the 18th century during a siege (maybe before), the opposing armies would dig trenches to put forward their mortars in range of the fort and then bomb it. But indeed, it was in the american civil war that they would form a sort of frontline.
You are right, they are Germans, but they are from World War 1. The Battle of Hazebrouck was fought in 1918. I know that in World War 2, the Free Polish Army fought very bravely alongside the British Army in North Africa, Italy, France, Belgium, Holland and into Germany.
@HatersGonnaHate1000 Mauser is the designer - It can be referred to as Kar98k, K98K, Mauser K98, K98 Mauser - All the same thing.
Try the terms SAPs or SAPPERS Tunneling Mining Bridgeworks and other Military Terms. Most will find Battle Field Engineering goes back longer then they think. Its not NEW its just been re-advised and re-adapted
@woobinda65 This is from a made for TV series called Anzacs. It starred Paul Hogan of Crocodile Dundee fame. Some of the battle scenes did lack realism but in the context of a made for TV programme maybe that is slightly more understandable
Movies aren't history, they are just stories.
Lazer rifle, The best rifle ever made.
I was wondering why the Poles would be using Enfield SMLE's.
Okay, didn't want to pull this card, but lets have a look at the casualty figures. Germany, like every other country involved (bar the US) had horrendous casualties. By the time that the German people and many commanders thought enough was enough, the German army on the western front had retreated, and if they hadn't surrendered then, an invasion of Germany would have commenced.
Hey, HUGE war movie buff, but I don't recognize this. What's it from?
Interesting that the Pommy Lt Colonel had a jam on his rifle because the magazine was miss loaded: Rims on the wrong side of the round below!
Considering the German role in WWI and WWII, I can understand how people in Russia and Europe are a bit more worried by Nazi activities in Germany than in France.
@Kaaleb68 The K98K was only used in WWII.
I'm English, but don't take that as a bias. The wikipedia article is easy to quote from, thats why I used it, but it is clear to see that after the battle of Amien, and the subsequent breakthrough of the Hindenburg line, there was no hope for German victory on the Western Front.
@mobilechief Yeah, me too. What do you have? Mine is a 42 dated Savage, No4 MkI*
AK47 - best weapon ever made.
Statement born out of ignorance, the french did indeed have a large military force yes, but in 1939 when the war started the French military equipment wasn't to date hell some of it still dated back to ww1. They also lacked in air force, in heavy tanks, anti-air, artillery etc same goes for the Brits. the germans although outnumbered by the French and British had much better equipment, more heavy tanks, a larger air force, more artillery and the gear their military used was more modern.
are white and red colors on the soldiers arm an unit emblem? or are these polish troops? (which i doubt to be, because in WWI polish units where created in france witth french equipment and uniforms)
So thats why we won, we had crocodile dundee!
@robo1945 They're Australians mate. The battalion colour patch merely resembled the Polish flag. Google 8th Battalion AIF for clarity.
@danfra66 trench warfare dates back to the 17th century, and futher back depending on what you count as an trench.
Thats the Russians being terrible not the Germans being great. If you smash glass with a rock it doesn't mean that that rock can now smash anything. German deaths on the Eastern Front were higher than Russians, but they took large amounts of prisoners. In answer to an earlier comment, there were no revolutions in Germany that ended the war, their army had starved and been crushed in the allied counter offensive of 1918.
Power of French forces was not important. After thee weeks Geramns had ammo only for next 12 days. Their supplays were almost used. It was important lesson for German General. They had planed 10 days fights in Poland. Poland was fight against Germany Slovakia nad Soviet Union for 5 weeks.
What movie is this and when was it made?
Alright, suggest them and the U.S. Marines to Deadliest Warrior... we'll see who wins.
whoah a war movie where german soldiers actually use some kind of tactic
cant be!
@LambdaZetaTeke used yes, but not widely at all. the American civil war was still steeped in the tactics of the previous 150 years of warfare.
I've got a quote to back up my claim, 'In November 1918 the Allies had ample supplies of men and materiel to invade Germany. Yet at the time of the armistice, no Allied force had crossed the German frontier; the Western Front was still almost 900 mi (1,400 km) from Berlin; and the Kaiser's armies had retreated from the battlefield in good order.' This is taken from the wikipedia article on world war one. I think my claim has a little more depth than yours.
I wonder how much longer that would have lasted had the Armistice not been signed. I don't think the new German government wanted to find out.
If you look at germany during both those world wars you might understand what military geniuses the germans war to fight a war on 2 fronts both times and still keep it going for so lon, hell, in the first world war the Entente didnt even step on german soil, if it wasnt for the revolts in germany i believe the war would keep on for longer and the allies would ultimately seek for a peace treaty.
@GioZakc I'm reckoning that Ski82PL has mistaken the red/white battalion colour patches on the AUSTRALIAN uniforms for the Polish flag.
@bluenose4344
yes, true indeed, in the 16th century, wooden baskets filled with sand.
I love how the guy at 1:30 is just carrying a an MG al troo la loo ra loo ra like. Ubermensch your ass Hun
I highly doubt that. The Japanese were more afraid of the Marines than they were of the Australians, they never showed it because of their religion at the time, but they wrote about it.
Absolute rubbish the Australians learnt very early on how to deal with the Japanese
Heck, there's no doubt that Germany was a great military power, especially during the days of Prussia.
The americans invented barbed wire too
Bloody hell crocodile Dundee was in the Polish army before he went walkabout! 0:19
Wait ... Have you seen the difference in size between Belgium and Germany?
@LambdaZetaTeke
if Civil War drags on for several decades. steampunk technology is expected to appear :P
No, it is not a historical fact - it's just your opinion. Having said that, the ANZAC and Canadian troops were bloody good and deseerve every honour bestowed upon them together with the thanks of the British people. I hold them in the highest regard along with the many other Empire troops who fought so bravely for a country (and idea, The Empire) that was not even the country of their birth. I mention particularly troops from the Indian sub-continent who are so often overlooked in this context.
in ww2 the these troops where probably braver and more loyal then your average ww2 US marine.
Martini-Henry, best rifle ever made... for killing Zulus anyway...
I love hearing Info about some actual history.. THANK YOU Whom Are native to these military forces because I am Always given info that I dont know.. No sarcasm I legitimately mean this.. I have learned so Much thanks to some educated youtubers.. THANKS!! K!!
Yes, because we could have done so much when you were being invaded by two super powers. Not that the Poles weren't brave, but seriously, wtf did you want us to do?
@LambdaZetaTeke I wonder how much attention was paid by Confederate and Union commanders to the Crimean War in the 1850s? A few comparisons come to mind. Trench warfare, the decline of cavalry on the battlefield in the direct assault role, mass use of rifled weapons and breach loading artillery. Not to mention battlefield medical care. (or the lack of it!)
Can't believe there are people on here who think this WW2 and Poles fighting Germans. This is Belgium in WW1 with Australians wearing Brit style uniforms. No poles.
Thanks for the info...
By "fiction" often I mean "movie"...
I know they are two different things.
Anyway, a low level of absurdity is still present, no matter if "fiction" or "movie" is...
@cjeffe007 He was talking about the Springfield 1903.
STG-44 the best Assault gun by it´s time
when there is a f in front of an a, there is no an in front of the f
isn't that crocodile dundee?
AH YES HE IS MORE CLEVER THAN WE THOUGHT THIS DUNDEE
@thebigJM92 Only because they did'nt have the Lee-Enfield No1 Mk3 .303! Though i note for the record that at 2.06/2.07, the silly bastard seemed to jam the bolt. Just like the Sikh soldier in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.
@woobinda65 forget it i mixed something up. but i agree - in most US films germans are represented like that. just look soldier james ryan.
@LiveJoyDivision I wasn't comparing them, I was trying to show you (But failed) how weapons that have killed more people aren't necessarily better weapons, read the comment properly and you'll realize I wasn't comparing them at all. Overall yes, the Mauser is probably a better design, it's much more refined than the Enfield, but for combat, the Enfield is more effective, it emerged on the winning side...twice, for a start. The Mauser action has been more successful than the Enfields however.
@jizzinmypants191919: I disagree. The Lee-Enfield may have been a bolt-action weapon, but in the hands of trained men it could seem like machine gun fire. Just ask the Germans at Mons in 1914.
@MrPearlJack Kar98k is less accurate past 400 yards, bolt takes long to manipulate and is more difficult under stress, Lee-Enfield has ten rounds, 98k has five, Enfield has better long range sights (No4 Micrometre sights).
Lee-Enfield wins, I do love Mausers but for a combat situation the Enfield is more preferable.