|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2017 9:05:58 GMT
Option 1: Invading a country in weather conditions that make it more difficult to navigate or supply troops. Ex: Napoleon's invasion of Russia.
Option 2: Making a frontal assault through an open plain toward a bunker. Ex: Battle of Gettysburg
Option 3: This thread
Option 5: Not listening to your wife's bad dream that could maybe be about the future. Ex: Julius Caesar.
Not to say any of these are actually stupid, but you can answer anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Feb 4, 2017 12:53:04 GMT
Invading Russia in 1941 as Germany. Worst thing ever.
Conrad von Hötzendorf being an army chief, even horrible than invading Russia as Germany.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Feb 4, 2017 13:19:28 GMT
Mountbatten not being Prime Minister. Stupid decision Britain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2017 17:09:49 GMT
Invading Russia in 1941 as Germany. Worst thing ever. Conrad von Hötzendorf being an army chief, even horrible than invading Russia as Germany. I believe that's option 1, not option 4 |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Feb 4, 2017 17:44:30 GMT
Invading Russia in 1941 as Germany. Worst thing ever. Conrad von Hötzendorf being an army chief, even horrible than invading Russia as Germany. I believe that's option 1, not option 4 but I voted for @coolguy14  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2017 17:51:15 GMT
I believe that's option 1, not option 4 but I voted for @coolguy14 Well I can't say that I didn't vote for that one... You can select two answers by the way. |
|
|
|
Post by Thrawn on Mar 4, 2017 4:41:20 GMT
Invading a country with a extreme weather and environment without proper planning and supply is really not a good move. Really it is not. Even if your ambition is high but still dont...or maybe yes but...still no.
|
|
|
|
Post by Der Kaiserreich on Mar 4, 2017 6:01:51 GMT
I like how most people voted @coolguy14.  XD |
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Mar 4, 2017 10:41:59 GMT
Odd chouce for a necropost
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Mar 4, 2017 11:12:01 GMT
Is the ancient poll yes!
|
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Mar 4, 2017 14:38:50 GMT
Invading Russia in 1941 as Germany. Worst thing ever. Conrad von Hötzendorf being an army chief, even horrible than invading Russia as Germany. I disagree with that. The concept was sound, but Hilter should have allowed Stalingrad to fall to Russians then bombard the city with the Russians trapped in there. Fall back, let the gullible Russians ordered by Stalin to retake the city, repeat the mass killings. It would have worked a couple of times which could inflict massive setbacks suffice to allow the Germans to proceed with their steamrolling into the rest of Ukraine. Both Stalin and Hilter allowed their egos to take them over during that battle. If Ukraine fell into German hands completely, it wouldn't matter if Leningrad or Moscow wasn't captured yet. Especially when the Axis powers suddenly gain free entry into the oil fields and not to mention denying the Russians the harvests from Ukrainian farms (which were more fertile than most of Russia). |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Mar 4, 2017 14:51:33 GMT
Invading Russia in 1941 as Germany. Worst thing ever. Conrad von Hötzendorf being an army chief, even horrible than invading Russia as Germany. I disagree with that. The concept was sound, but Hilter should have allowed Stalingrad to fall to Russians then bombard the city with the Russians trapped in there. Fall back, let the gullible Russians ordered by Stalin to retake the city, repeat the mass killings. It would have worked a couple of times which could inflict massive setbacks suffice to allow the Germans to proceed with their steamrolling into the rest of Ukraine. Both Stalin and Hilter allowed their egos to take them over during that battle. If Ukraine fell into German hands completely, it wouldn't matter if Leningrad or Moscow wasn't captured yet. Especially when the Axis powers suddenly gain free entry into the oil fields and not to mention denying the Russians the harvests from Ukrainian farms (which were more fertile than most of Russia). that's all fine, but why keep repeating the whole "bomb, empty your magazine, run out of the city, run back to the city after a few days" when you can get your allies to do something. Whoops, just realized Germany's allies sucked. No but seriously, I don't think this method would've been feasible. Both the sides called the city as "living hell" which you would enter on your feet, but come out on someone else's. The Germans were completely overextending themselves by then while the Russians were literally making tanks a few miles from the front line only to send them to the front within minutes. The German reinforcements would have to cross a huge tract of land, only to get to the front line to find out that the Russians had taken over that area. Also, one of the few things why the Germans invaded in the first place was because they were incredibly short on iron and oil. So I don't think spending whatever was left in such a way would've been beneficial. No to mention that the Russians could've just sent their entire country just to defend one city. |
|
|
|
Post by Der Kaiserreich on Mar 4, 2017 14:53:04 GMT
Invading Russia in 1941 as Germany. Worst thing ever. Conrad von Hötzendorf being an army chief, even horrible than invading Russia as Germany. I disagree with that. The concept was sound, but Hilter should have allowed Stalingrad to fall to Russians then bombard the city with the Russians trapped in there. Fall back, let the gullible Russians ordered by Stalin to retake the city, repeat the mass killings. It would have worked a couple of times which could inflict massive setbacks suffice to allow the Germans to proceed with their steamrolling into the rest of Ukraine. Both Stalin and Hilter allowed their egos to take them over during that battle. If Ukraine fell into German hands completely, it wouldn't matter if Leningrad or Moscow wasn't captured yet. Especially when the Axis powers suddenly gain free entry into the oil fields and not to mention denying the Russians the harvests from Ukrainian farms (which were more fertile than most of Russia). Just goes to show something about dictators and people with mustaches. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Mar 4, 2017 14:56:29 GMT
I disagree with that. The concept was sound, but Hilter should have allowed Stalingrad to fall to Russians then bombard the city with the Russians trapped in there. Fall back, let the gullible Russians ordered by Stalin to retake the city, repeat the mass killings. It would have worked a couple of times which could inflict massive setbacks suffice to allow the Germans to proceed with their steamrolling into the rest of Ukraine. Both Stalin and Hilter allowed their egos to take them over during that battle. If Ukraine fell into German hands completely, it wouldn't matter if Leningrad or Moscow wasn't captured yet. Especially when the Axis powers suddenly gain free entry into the oil fields and not to mention denying the Russians the harvests from Ukrainian farms (which were more fertile than most of Russia). Just goes to show something about dictators and people with mustaches. we will defend Stalingrad at any cost! Why? It has the name of Stalin privyet! (Stalingrad summarized) |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Mar 4, 2017 17:16:07 GMT
Just goes to show something about dictators and people with mustaches. we will defend Stalingrad at any cost! Why? It has the name of Stalin privyet! (Stalingrad summarized) , This is WHY over 800,000 soldiers were fighting in the battle of Stalingrad. It's the equivalent of fighting for Hiltersberg or something like that. Don't underestimate the egos of Stalin and Hilter. They both knew Stalingrad would serve as a huge morale blow to the loser, so they poured into it an endless supply of soldiers. So knowing the ego of Stalin, the generals of Germany could have handled it better than Hilter's "no retreat whatsoever!". It would have gone differently if the Germans used it to their full advantage. And as for the industrial capacity of Russia, it was pretty terrible in producing heavy equipment that could be relied on in middle of a battlefield. The hastly made tanks that entered the war was much subpar in comparison to the prewar tanks, BUT the designs was improving. Pros and cons. Edit: was meant for Napoleon Bonaparte |
|
XD
