Basically Britain was first nation to realize the true potential of this recent invention.
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
fuser wrote:Can you differentiate between immediate blockade effect and continued blockade effect. Do you know that during the drive to Moscow Germany also happen to catch Ukranian farms and we are discussing a scenario where there is no Barbarossa. or are you saying that my sources are wrong? If that so please provide how so?
Easier than Africa? yes but can they support large number of troops there when simultaneously maintaining similar numbers in Africa? a big no.
Fascists are so cute. When can't defend their hero who was brought up in the argument by them only, they will post completely nonsensical and irrelevant things about their nightmare i.e. Stalin either about his dick or whatever. But good to see that they still can't defend their hero and are just pissed about it.
Are you lacking reading comprehension tonight only or is it a common thing for you. Check back the numbers for "crusader"
Axis : 119000 Allies : 118000, advantage in number Axis for this particular battle even though it was a very small advantage but completley demolishes your argument regarding superior numbers.
So yeah don't expect to make insane comments like "Britain sucked ass against Germany in land battles" and hope that it won't be thrashed.
Preston Cole wrote:Riiiiight, Britain by itself with its blockade would doom Germany which has agreements with not only the USSR but entire Europe as well.
It doesn't matter whether Germany controlled Western Russia or had trade with it, one point remains unshakable: Britain will not defeat Germany.
I don't know if they could support two fronts.
No, Rommel proved on the ground that Germany could kick Britain's ass in North Africa and I don't see any other non-fascists claiming otherwise, much less that he was an incompetent fool.
Yeah, whatever, I meant they were poorly supported and Hitler completely forgot about the importance of the North African front.
Travesety wrote:People.... Hitler wanted an armistice with the UK.
You have serious reading comprehension issues, when did I said that fascists claimed that he was a fool?
And after all your blabbering you still are completely unable to defend your "hero".
I don't think I'm the one with reading comprehension issues here, man...
Why would I need to defend him from a delusional commie?
There are legitimate doubts for how serious Hitler was for peace with Britain beside Britain wasn't going to accept any peace offer from Germany until she rolls back all her gains made from this war.
Travesty wrote:The German nuclear programme went back to the 30's.
Fuser already wrote:Of course you have as demonstrated twice in this very thread only.
1. Didn't payed attention to the numbers posted on operation crusader and made an ignorant comment about numbers after that post.
2. You attributed to me something that I never wrote.
i.e. serious reading comprehension problems.
Preston Cole wrote:This is getting weird. It's like you have an obsession to prove the big bad fascist wrong (but since you said that "I hate Hitler, really hate him man" thing some time ago, it's to be expected).
Oh God I'm getting so hot thinking about all of th[…]
I'm having trouble to see how the First Amendment […]
Fascism is right-wing nationalism.
Which assistance programs are you talking about e[…]