Photos of Swedish Neo-Nazis Fighting Antifascists in the Woods(vice) - Polidicks

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43221348]the tiger was a worthless piece of shit[/QUOTE] The Tiger was arguably the strongest tank of the war, its only true problem was the fact that it was hard to mass-produce such a machine. Which is the the shanty little Sherman was so popular. I agree with you on the Panther, though.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43221268]The funniest thing to me was that they were really heavily funded by Henry Ford. The very man who constructed the majority of the machines of war that fought the Nazi's. [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] And he endorsed the creation of the Tiger tank. What a sexy machine. I'd buy a calender of babes soaking wet, giving a carwash to it. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-299-1805-16%2C_Nordfrankreich%2C_Panzer_VI_%28Tiger_I%29.2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Yeah, you are right about the tiger. Except it and similar megalomaniac projects led to some of the biggest combat liabilities of Germany. If they focused more on lighter and more versatile projects like Panther over Tiger, they would have done far better. Many Hitler's choices in regards of war technology and development were already heavily criticized by the people who Actually Knew Shit and history has proven that many of them, including the almighty Tiger, were, in the end, another nail into Nazi Germany's coffin. Hitler might have been a charismatic politician and whatnot but he was a shitty strategist and actively hindered German war development.

I'm not disagreeing with you and I personally believe that if Hitler died, the war could have gone the other way. I just want to fuck and snuggle the Tiger. srsly why did he declare war on America. The Japs didn't declare war on the USSR, he should have just said, your problem hirohito.

[QUOTE=Moustacheman;43221361]The Tiger was arguably the strongest tank of the war, its only true problem was the fact that it was hard to mass-produce such a machine. Which is the the shanty little Sherman was so popular. I agree with you on the Panther, though.[/QUOTE] how many tigers were even produced? like 500? they were super expensive and hard to produce. it doesn't matter how [i]good[/i] your tank is if you can't really make enough of them to be that useful.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;43221362]Yeah, you are right about the tiger. Except it and similar megalomaniac projects led to some of the biggest combat liabilities of Germany. If they focused more on lighter and more versatile projects like Panther over Tiger, they would have done far better. Many Hitler's choices in regards of war technology and development were already heavily criticized by the people who Actually Knew Shit and history has proven that many of them, including the almighty Tiger, were, in the end, another nail into Nazi Germany's coffin. Hitler might have been a charismatic politician and whatnot but he was a shitty strategist and actively hindered German war development.[/QUOTE] [I]"Hey lets invest in the Tiger!"[/I] "Ok Hit-" [I]"Start making a Tiger II"[/I] "But H-"[I] "We need to go bigger, build the Maus!"[/I] "Hitler pl-" [I]"Split up our army halfway into Russia's territory!"[/I] "..."

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43221375]I'm not disagreeing with you and I personally believe that if Hitler died, the war could have gone the other way. I just want to fuck and snuggle the Tiger. srsly why did he declare war on America. The Japs didn't declare war on the USSR, he should have just said, your problem hirohito.[/QUOTE] The turn on eastern front happened before Western front opened and many Armchair Generals agree that Germany would have been beaten by SSSR without American intervention. It's just that it would be even longer and bloodier on both sides. America's involvement hurried things up (And if America didn't join the fray, most of the entirety of Europe would likely either part or puppet nations of SSSR.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43221375]I'm not disagreeing with you and I personally believe that if Hitler died, the war could have gone the other way. I just want to fuck and snuggle the Tiger. srsly why did he declare war on America. The Japs didn't declare war on the USSR, he should have just said, your problem hirohito.[/QUOTE] the panther is soo much sexier [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/PanzerV_Ausf.G_1_sk.jpg[/img] so was the t-34 [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Tank_T-34.JPG[/img] the tiger looks like a tank some kid would build in minecraft out of wool blocks.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43221389]how many tigers were even produced? like 500? they were super expensive and hard to produce. it doesn't matter how [i]good[/i] your tank is if you can't really make enough of them to be that useful.[/QUOTE] You're thinking of the beastly King Tiger. There were about 1,347 Tiger I's by the beginning of the war. Production dropped later as they moved towards the even more expensive Tiger II. It was a damn good heavy tank. But the Panther was a much better choice.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43221268]The funniest thing to me was that they were really heavily funded by Henry Ford. The very man who constructed the majority of the machines of war that fought the Nazi's. [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] And he endorsed the creation of the Tiger tank. What a sexy machine. I'd buy a calender of babes soaking wet, giving a carwash to it. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-299-1805-16%2C_Nordfrankreich%2C_Panzer_VI_%28Tiger_I%29.2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I swear to fuck I'm one of the few people that really hate the look of the Tiger I It's literally a cube [QUOTE=Moustacheman;43221413]You're thinking of the beastly King Tiger. There were about 1,347 Tiger I's by the beginning of the war. Production dropped later as they moved towards the even more expensive Tiger II. It was a damn good heavy tank. But the Panther was a much better choice.[/QUOTE] Tiger 2's where pretty garbo aswell. Not so much in terms of combat performance but mechanically they were shite and were often made of shitty metal because of the end of the war and lack of resources [quote]Soviet wartime testing During August 1944, a number of Tiger II tanks were captured by the Soviets near Sandomierz and were soon moved to their testing grounds at Kubinka. The Soviet team gave the opinion that the tests revealed the tanks to be severely defective; the transmission and suspension broke down very often and the engine was prone to overheating and consequential failure. Additionally, the Soviet opinion was of deficiencies in the armor after firing many anti-tank rounds at the same target. Not only did they report that the metal was of shoddy quality (a problem not particular to the Tiger II—as the war progressed, the Germans found it harder and harder to obtain the alloying materials needed for high-quality steel), but the welding was also, despite "careful workmanship", extremely poor. As a result, even when shells did not penetrate the armor, there was often a large amount of spalling, and the armor plating could often crack at the welds when struck by multiple heavy shells, rendering the tank inoperable[/quote]

[QUOTE=Araknid;43221424]I swear to fuck I'm one of the few people that really hate the look of the Tiger I It's literally a cube[/QUOTE] "the tiger looks like a tank some kid would build in minecraft out of wool blocks. " you aren't alone, brother.

[QUOTE=Araknid;43221424]I swear to fuck I'm one of the few people that really hate the look of the Tiger I It's literally a cube[/QUOTE] [B]AHEM![/B] [IMG]http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks-heavy/maus-heavy-tank/maus-heavy-tank-05.png[/IMG] I'm betting the Ratte would have just been a literal cube on tracks.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43221389]how many tigers were even produced? like 500? they were super expensive and hard to produce. it doesn't matter how [i]good[/i] your tank is if you can't really make enough of them to be that useful.[/QUOTE] 1347 Tigers, 492 King Tigers, according to Wikipedia. Question is how many didn't make it to front line. And the production cost is only part of the problem. Thing is that people often only praise the very most "engaging" performance of vehicles exchanging fire. People forget that even outside of manufacture, heavy tank is a big fucking logistics problem. They had issues with bridges, they had massive fuel shortages (which literally broke their back later in the war). The tanks had issues with bad terrain (SSSR Har har har harrr). So for instance the Soviet T-34 could be considered better not just because it's cheap, but because it's far more versatile and mobile, easier to maintain, oftentimes more reliable. Sure, if I had to choose a tank to sit in as a crew member, I would go with Tiger, my chances of survival might be somewhat higher, but if I had to choose a brigade of T-34s or a brigade of Tigers as a General, I would go with T-34s, because I would be actually capable of deploying modern, dynamic tactics without having to build around the weakness of my most expensive unit.

[QUOTE=Araknid;43221424]I swear to fuck I'm one of the few people that really hate the look of the Tiger I It's literally a cube Tiger 2's where pretty garbo aswell. Not so much in terms of combat performance but mechanically they were shite and were often made of shitty metal because of the end of the war and lack of resources[/QUOTE] It's Chassis is designed like a fucking car since a car maker designed it. I love it. Fuck Caterpillar chassis, WE NEED RACE WHEELS.

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;43221007]Wait, I thought Sweden was one of the world's [I]least[/I] reactionary countries.[/QUOTE] That's [I]exactly[/I] what these kinds of people are upset about.

[QUOTE=Moustacheman;43221441][B]AHEM![/B] [IMG]http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks-heavy/maus-heavy-tank/maus-heavy-tank-05.png[/IMG] I'm betting the Ratte would have just been a literal cube on tracks.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.modernforces.com/img/new_site/tank_57.jpg[/img] What a joke. But in all seriousness, I have a love for the LEE in a way. Not as a main tank, but it's an excellent infantry support vehicle.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;43221443]1347 Tigers, 492 King Tigers, according to Wikipedia. Question is how many didn't make it to front line. And the production cost is only part of the problem. Thing is that people often only praise the very most "engaging" performance of vehicles exchanging fire. People forget that even outside of manufacture, heavy tank is a big fucking logistics problem. They had issues with bridges, they had massive fuel shortages (which literally broke their back later in the war). The tanks had issues with bad terrain (SSSR Har har har harrr). So for instance the Soviet T-34 could be considered better not just because it's cheap, but because it's far more versatile and mobile, easier to maintain, oftentimes more reliable. Sure, if I had to choose a tank to sit in as a crew member, I would go with Tiger, my chances of survival might be somewhat higher, but if I had to choose a brigade of T-34s or a brigade of Tigers as a General, I would go with T-34s, because I would be actually capable of deploying modern, dynamic tactics without having to build around the weakness of my most expensive unit.[/QUOTE] yea you gotta deploy the right forces for the environment and tactics used. the german strategy was supposed to be based around combined arms with a high focus on mobility so i have no idea why they made such monstrosities like the tiger and king tiger.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43221461][img]http://www.modernforces.com/img/new_site/tank_57.jpg[/img] What a joke. But in all seriousness, I have a love for the LEE in a way. Not as a main tank, but it's an excellent infantry support vehicle.[/QUOTE] If we're talking infantry tanks, I've got a bit of a soft-spot for the Churchill. I just love heavy tanks. [IMG]http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/4224161.jpg[/IMG]

I like how there's literally a film trope for tigers coming out of nowhere and ambushing people.

[QUOTE=Moustacheman;43221471]If we're talking infantry tanks, I've got a bit of a soft-spot for the Churchill. I just love heavy tanks. [IMG]http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/4224161.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] churchill looks sorta cool from the side, but it looks weird from the front. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/ChurchillTank.jpg[/img] we can all agree that the sherman looks like a piece of crap though, right?

[QUOTE=Moustacheman;43221471]If we're talking infantry tanks, I've got a bit of a soft-spot for the Churchill. I just love heavy tanks. [IMG]http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/4224161.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Yeah but the M3 wasn't an infantry tank. It was just like, QUICK WE NEED A TANK....uhhhhhh This'll do? It have a cannon? Yeah...big one...We'll take as many till those shermans are built The M3 is like a physically disabled man who just tries, and does his job, but gets shot half way through. It's basically Michael Ironside. [img]http://www.hotflick.net/flicks/1997_Starship_Troopers/big/fhd997SPT_Michael_Ironside_001.jpg[/img]

hey guys the sherman serves a dual purpose as a lawnmower too! [img]http://www.2iemeguerre.com/blindes/images/rhinoab9.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43221484]Yeah but the M3 wasn't an infantry tank. It was just like, QUICK WE NEED A TANK....uhhhhhh This'll do? It have a cannon? Yeah...big one...We'll take as many till those shermans are built The M3 is like a physically disabled man who just tries, and does his job, but gets shot half way through. It's basically Michael Ironside. [img]http://www.hotflick.net/flicks/1997_Starship_Troopers/big/fhd997SPT_Michael_Ironside_001.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] It's classified as a heavy infantry tank, because it was produced early on in the war under the belief that WWII would be fought under similar conditions to WWI. Plus I couldn't get a good photo of the MK IV. [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;43221482]churchill looks sorta cool from the side, but it looks weird from the front. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/ChurchillTank.jpg[/img] we can all agree that the sherman looks like a piece of crap though, right?[/QUOTE] Now here's a Churchill MK. IV. This is the lassy I was looking for. [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] Also there are two MK. V's in the back. Isn't that neat?

I loved when they chopped off the top of the Ram tank and put a bunch of guys in an open box. cute little guy. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/IWM-BU-2956-Ram-Kangaroo-Ochtrup-19450403.jpg[/img]

i like how my thread about nazis is now ww2 tank general discussion btw. facepunch is p. cool sometimes.

Cause we can appreciate different opinions. I joke and say the nazis were the greatest thing for the jews, since they finally have a fatherland. My grandfather was a jewish pole who lost his entire family and was one of the only people left; he survived five years in the camps. People for some reason get really uncomfortable when I bring up that I have auschwitz documents.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43221520]Cause we can appreciate different opinions. I joke and say the nazis were the greatest thing for the jews, since they finally have a fatherland. My grandfather was a jewish pole who lost his entire family and was one of the only people left; he survived five years in the camps. People for some reason get really uncomfortable when I bring up that I have auschwitz documents.[/QUOTE] holy shit my sister would probably love you. she is super interested in the holocaust, particularly auschwitz i think.

This thread is now about tanks.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43221526]holy shit my sister would probably love you. she is super interested in the holocaust, particularly auschwitz i think.[/QUOTE] I was the shit who answered all the questions in my Holocaust studies class. Some fuckers didn't know who Stalin was. [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;43221532]This thread is now about tanks.[/QUOTE] Since photos of swedish, swedish ww2 tanks. [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Stridsvagn_m40K.JPG[/t] [b]WE BUILT A WINDOW ON THE SIDE AND IT HAS TWO COAX MACHINE GUNS BECAUSE FUCK YOU[/b]

the extrme anti fascists are just as bad as the neo nazis. They both fight, vandalize and are a nuisance to society, but for different causes.

[i]later models lacked glass windows on the tank[/i] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/Strv_m_40.JPG[/t]