New answers tagged

0

First of all the book is called The diary of Anne Frank. She grew up (until her hiding time) on a nice square (Merwedeplein), where in front of the house where she lived is put a copper plate with her name and the names of the members of her family who died in the deathcamps, and in in he middle of the square, on a big piece af grass, you can see a black ...


0

I would have to say no, the Soviets did not excel in any single weapon. They did have some very good weapons, and a few were superior to their enemies equivalents in any given period of time (eg T34 in 1941) but over the course of the war, only one weapon truly excelled and that was the atom bomb. The Soviets excelled not because of their weapons (no country ...


0

US Cruisers used their Torpedos in many actions. Because they fought closer in ship to ship actions. Usually battleships were stationed for bombardment of beaches during landing operations.In a recent naval paper In fact, the US. Marine service as stated that unless the Navy comes up with a ship able to shell beaches the marines may not ever try another ...


9

The Katyusha. Hands down. Stalin's Organ. The T-34 and Soviet tanks were produced in tremendous numbers -- and destroyed in tremendous numbers. The same can be said about most Soviet weapon systems. The skill and dedication of their operators was heroic and legendary, but generally their heroism was short-lived as they went up against superior equipment. ...


0

When evaluating a tank you have to consider a few factors besides firepower and armor to get the real performance. For instance: ergonomy. T34's was awful. That means reduced rate of fire and crew underperforming due to exhaustion. Ability to see the enemy. If you don't see an enemy tou can't hit it. T-34 slits didn't allow to see much. Optics. and ...


3

Although it's not really about "weaponry", yet I should add something that others seem to forget completely: the sniping. Although the Red Army lacked good sniper rifles, yet it had an absolutely superior sniping school. One may easily find dozens names of German aces of Panzerwaffe and Luftwaffe, but in the snipers list the whole top is occupied by Soviet ...


15

Caveat Wars (especially in 20th century!) are won by nations/armies, not weapons. A weapon can be excellent (e.g., Me-262) but it will make no difference because it was introduced too late and/or was used incorrectly tactically. Another example is Tiger - seemingly an excellent tank, but very complex and expensive, so fewer than 2,000 of them were built ...


3

Schwerm is correct when he stated that the T-34 produced an international revolution in tank design when it appeared in combat in '41 during the initial months of operation Barbarossa. But I disagree with his assertion that the T-34 and KV-1 were the "best" tanks then in existence. Yes, the best tank designs; but operationally, due to poor Soviet ...


2

When you say "in WWII" you miss the point that WWII lasted 5.5 years. And all these 6 years there was intensive arms competition on both sides. Soviet tanks T-34 and KV where by far the best tanks in 1941. No other country had anything comparable. (See the Schwern answer for details). But in 1944 this was already not the best tank: Germans tanks were ...


66

I can think of a list of things which either excelled at the time or were feats not matched in the whole war. The T-34 and IS tank lines. Not just the tanks themselves, but also focusing on two hulls. The Yak-1 series fighter aircraft. The Il-2 ground attack aircraft. The PPSh-41 and PPS submachine guns. Tremendous use of artillery. The production ...


4

The T-34 tank was the outstanding armament produced by the Soviets during the war. It came as great surprise to the Germans and significantly outclassed the German tanks. The T-34 was an important factor in blunting the drive on Moscow during the Autumn of 1941. Although the T-34 had first appeared on the battlefield as early as July 1941, it was in too few ...


0

A. By what ages where men/women allowed to voluntarily join the Finnish army (upper and lower bounds if there was any, differences between men and women)? I have scoured my few Finnish sources and can't find a definitive answer to what ages men were allowed to join the Finnish army. I will note that Mannerheim, born in 1867, was 72 in 1939 when the ...


4

That's actually a more complicated question than it may seem. During WWII the Nazi government instituted price controls on things like bread, and the occupying UN powers didn't lift those controls until 1948. So bread's official price and its real ("black-market") price would have been very different things [pdf]. From 1936 through 1944, money (measured ...


4

That time frame, from Sept. 8 to October 28 1944, corresponds to the time period in which Nazi forces were driven out of Bulgaria by the Red Army during the Jassy-Kishinev Offensive following the Destruction of Army Group Center in Operation Bagration. The consequent replacement of a pro-Nazi government by a pro-Soviet one would seem quite sufficient ...


3

One Reichsmark is worth exactly zero Euros today as the Reichsmark is not legal tender. You can go to eBay to find out what the asking price is for collectors, banknotes seem to be going for about US$2 regardless of denomination while silver coins are going for about US$4-5 to the Reichsmark. If you were in an alternate universe where the Reichsmark and ...


0

Chamberlain didn't want to start a massive European war, like the one World War One was. Chamberlain wished to appease Hitler to prevent it. Ultimately he failed in cancelling a long-term war, but in the short-term, (around 1938) he delayed the war for a whole year, allowing one more year for Britain and France to rebuild against the Germans. However, if ...


0

The United States already had crippled Japan with an embargo, however, they knew from other invasions in the Pacific that they wouldn't surrender, so the only options were to invade, or use the new nuclear technology, which did the trick.


0

The story was common that they did hide in houses, but not many of them likely had as good of a hiding place as a business office.


2

Anne Frank's story was "uncommon." It's true that she died like many others, but in other ways her story was exceptional. 1) She lived in the Netherlands, a country where urban Jews were not rounded up in ghettoes (as they were in Poland). She also came from a relatively wealthy family who could pay for their hiding, and lived in a country that was less ...


1

You may also enjoy a book called "A Chance To Live" by Pieter Kohnstam. During the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands, when he was six he lived with his parents in the apartment below the Franks in Amsterdam, and they became good friends. Anne would babysit and play with Pieter often. The Franks even offered to have the Kohnstam family to come hide with them ...


1

Recitals of the Rescript in education were abolished in 1946 with the enactment of the Fundamental Law of Education. Officially, resolutions to repeal the Rescript were passed by both houses on 19 June 1948. I used the Japanese Wikipedia as a quick source, which is reasonably accurate on such basic facts (though notorious for its lack of citations). More ...


15

There is of course no such thing as a typical holocaust story. There are six million stories and each one is different. The Anne Frank story is special because it was warm and personal enough to have been palatable to the general public in the 1950's, while still being sufficiently tragic and moving to illustrate the enormous evil that was the holocaust. ...


17

For survivors who went undercover the whole time, her story is not all that untypical. The German term for such people was "illegals" or "U-Boote". They needed helpers, they needed hiding places, they needed money for bribes. Wikipedia quotes estimates that several thousand survived that way in Germany. For a Jew who lived in Germany or German-occupied ...


51

No, Anne Frank's story is completely exceptional - both in circumstances and the fact that she hid for so long (and her father survived). This is a typical case of Survivorship bias. Most Holocaust victims left no memoirs (and no surviving relatives either), and did not even have their names recorded as they were murdered. This is why just about everyone ...


0

They were really, really, really significant for the United States. They were able to raise over 150 billion dollars for the treasury by bonds. This helped fuel the U.S. war effort and supply troops with weapons, tanks, guns, etc. Without these bonds, the war could've lasted longer, or been harder to win. The bonds helped the U.S. win the war and were very ...


0

The atomic bombings likely sped up the surrender of the Japanese forces, but it wasn't the only cause. It was a larger one, but not the only one. The Soviet invasion of Manchuria also helped speed up the surrender, as Japan was struggling. Without the bombings, America likely would've had to invade Japan, possibly with help from the Soviets. The question ...


0

Sorry to drag up this post from 2014 but I am looking to reinvigorate it based on a Research Paper that I am in the middle of writing. I have no desire to theorise on what could have happened but rather on understanding whether the Strategic Mistake question could be looked at from two different levels - Strategic with respect to the War and Grand Strategic ...


1

In 1941, future President Harry Truman reportedly advocated a "bait and bleed" strategy that, "If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible." General George Patton suggested re-arming 26 German divisions and working with them to kick back the ...


1

My father served on the Eastern Front from 1943-45, as a non-commissioned officer for one of the Axis minor allies. He had at least heard rumors of a plan to surrender to the Western Allies, who would then unite with Germany to drive the Red Army out of Europe. It is a fact that the Western Allies were not going to go for such a plan, but it is indicative ...


1

I mean, apart from the fact the British and Americans met, planned, collaborated, shared intelligence etc separately from the Russians, which, yes, was a problem for the Soviet Union Stalin in his letter to Roosevelt on 7th April 1945 cited yet another reason to doubt the loyalty of USA: It is hard to agree that the absence of German resistance on ...


5

During wars, such as World War II, banking goes on as usual with a few differences: Enemy assets and bank accounts are seized; meaning if the address on the account is located in an enemy country, then the government takes the money in the account Non-sovereign accounts are frozen; what this means is that if a foreign country has a sovereignty problem, ...



Top 50 recent answers are included