8 Epic Stories from the Axis Side 

First reply

Bro pls lower the prices. It is like triple the price of a normal t shirt

and the discoard plz im on mobil

Why is the story of Simo in a video of Axis stories? The Finns weren’t a part of the axis when Simo fought in the winter war…

This was a great work you did. Now please make a video on the USS Laffey and it's fight against the 50 Kamikazes during the Battle of Okinawa.

The German pilot was a idiot and a traitor. Those bombers where there to kill civilians, women and children. Imagine a police man catching a group of terrorists who just killed a bunch of civilians and he thinks he is being knightly and honorable by letting them go because their car got shot up by other policemen and it wouldn't be sportive to finish them. What would you say about that police man? Would he be a hero and a great guy? The civilians killed by those bombers won't be talking to anyone anymore. How wholesome is that?

Great book, it was an excellent read

@@TrangleC Someone clearly doesn’t understand the concept of war. The soldiers, pilots, and soldiers don’t have a choice in who they attack where as terrorists very much do. Those pilots had to fight and bomb, the terrorists do not have to kill innocent civilians.

Very few people would have blamed Stigler for shooting the bomber down however there was no reason to. He saw 8 men who would be doomed if he shot them down over the English channel. In Europe, many pilots had qualms about shooting enemies or being shot down over open water as it basically meant a very painful very slow, very cold death of drowning with your plane. Warriors impart death. That doesn't mean they always want to be cruel about it.

@@n8zog584 Exactly.

​@@TrangleC nuh-uh

​@@n8zog584 These 8 man just killed 800 man women & children. They all are part of war. Stigel's act wasn't brave it was just kind.

I agree with you as well war sucks 😢but it’s how animals are as animals even humans fight for beliefs and resorces to this day 😐my grandparents from my dads side were normal citizens in ww2 some of them are still alive 🙂but I can’t forgive nazis 😑but I can forgive Germans like franz 🙂as not even they want war but I do have to agree what franz was saying as it was about dudy and survival 😐but I feel yea man 😑we are different but the respect for Germans killing us is the same is we killed them 😐

@@jettmthebluedragon blud uses the whole ass emoji tab for a comment

​@@ConfuzelddYT❤😂🎉😢😮😅😊

@@ConfuzelddYT and so who cares ?😑all your doing is campaigning on something you don’t understand 😑if you ask me WHY I use emojis is 1 thing 😐but you say emojis are bad when you don’t have real proof 😑what your saying is more of an a opinion rather then truth 😑

@@jettmthebluedragon who tf said tht emojis are bad??

The book a Higher call is about the story

@jomeugene8492. You're easily impressed.

i agree

He was a Nazi. It's not good to glorify Nazis.

@@freigeist2814 This is the Japanese were talking about, so you have no room to talk saying their enemy are evil. Ever heard of Nanking?

@@JamesWWagner-my8zm Americans were deliberately attacking civilians in Germany. I think that is pretty evil.

@@freigeist2814 And what were the Germans up to at the time?

@@82dorrin You mean the school kids that were being shot at?

@@JamesWWagner-my8zm just because one side was evil, doenst excuse the other from doing evil things as well, besides Saburo wasnt at Nanking, he didnt kill anyone there, why would you assume he was evil too because the county he fought for did evil things? Are you also saying the millions of japane Civillians were evil too? How would you argue against all the evil things the us did? Does that make all of us citizens evil too?

shit is amazing! not even worth saying its not realistic. its fucking amazing animation

Also, for once the Finns actually speak proper and correct Finnish. And the narrator does a darn fine job in pronunciation or Finnish names!

FLY, FIGHTING FAIR!!!!

@@skyvic09gaming21 it’s the code of the AIR!

@@114Riggs Brothers, heroes, foes!

​@@skyvic09gaming21KILLING MACHINE HONOR IN THE SKIES

B17! Flying Home!@@bongo4522

Right. Soviet Union was closer to the Axis. During the first Soviet-Finish war, Finland received fighter airplanes from The United States.

@@FlorinSutu fascists, communists... who cares they are all socialists.

Finland pay FULLPRICE those planes!!! Planes what nobody else wanted, planes who mainly comes too late. Same time Sovjets bombing Finland citicens by using USA flying petrol. Thanks for world biggest kommunist Roosevelt.

@@jakkeledin4645 - - Why it would be the need for "Sovjets bombing Finland citicens by using USA flying petrol", considering that Soviet Union had so much petroleum and gasoline, that it was exporting massive quantities to Nazi Germany in 1940 ...early 1941?

@@jakkeledin4645 Yes, Finnland was a victim of Soviet expansionism; yes, USA business interests wanted to keep USA 'neutral' for financial reasons; yes, Roosevelt did some illegal things (against USA law), and, yes, Roosevelt implemented many programs that were economically 'socialistic', BUT, A. We already had SOME 'socialistic' features in our society; B. He was NOT trying to fully convert the government to Socialism; C. He was not trying to convert the country to Communism; D. He certainly did not believe in Communism: he certainly could not have been the world 'biggest' Communist!! Sorry that the Finns got screwed over by Stalin in WW2; but I think we can all* agree that the Poles got screwed over much worse * (except for the 6 million Poles that got killed! They can't really agree!!) Sorry that the Finns are on Putin's list today, but hopefully, thanks to the price Ukrainians are paying (and being helped with), the objectives on that list are not going to be attempted. But Roosevelt was absolutely NOT a Communist, so, you just make yourself appear less credible by saying so.

He's definitely a hero in my opinion. He was fighting for hos country that got invaded by the Russians. Seems like the Russians love to invade and attack their neighbors.

Undeniably, a hero, serving his country

True. He was a hero defending his own country against Soviet Invasion. He never fought in other country territory. Only defending his people inside Finland.

He fought against the Russians that's good enough for me to make him a hero

And he wasn't using a scope as well as to not get detected put snow in his mouth . After the war he was asked : " - what did you feel when you shot a Russian? - The recoil " Fucking legendary

Except that their animator sucks... The Japanese sailors never wore the German Stahlhelm

Agreed 🥲in fact my family was in ww2 in Europe they are part Slovenian in fact my grandpa was actually born in ww2 in Europe in 1943 the same year franz spared Charlie 🙂no joke 😐this year he is 80 years old and this year would mark the 80th anniversary of no bullets fly 🙂

I will upload a 80th anniversary of no bullets fly this December 20th 🙂

What you saying, you were ugly crying too.

He didn't kill a bunch of children and he did attack in violation of a ceasefire, killing a man. I guess I'm not as moved.

​@k-27 locomotive on hitler*

​@@stomper5432bruh Germany isn't mr adolf 💀💀

@@stomper5432 you do realise that he wasn't always in charge, right?

@@KLUCZESIA you do realize that idgaf right

Bozo dunno how to argue then put iDgAf shit lmao

Are there any momentous in the restaurant?

@@big566bunny There used to be a picture of him in one of the rooms, but that was years ago. No idea if it's still there.

Axis stories include the people with the biggest balls

​@@overused6632doesnt exist

@overused6632 that’s a terrible thing to say considering 95% of people on the Axis side aren’t bad people at all the Allies have done a lot of fucked up shit too.

@@NathanielNerquaye-Tetteh-uz2nf leave the moralist be .. his inept way of thinking cannons understand the "logic" of war and the people that fight it. he thinks the allies were the "good guys" .. yet he has no freakin clue about the countless war crimes they did during the war. ignoramus at his finest :)

And the worst.

Ah yes and now you have democracy and you are very free ,as are we in Ireland. Ah yes paradise indeed.

@@FelixMendelson No , it’s worse than ever , even free speech died with Covid and we are all Nazis in case we don’t share the opinion of the ruling party 🤢.

Not at all , even my first reply got deleted. Freedom exists only for the rich.

Everyone knows that the smell of burning oil doesn't penetrate a closed window. Rubbish.

I am freshly shaved, lubricated and willing..

A great story that must be told !

These Storys are getting told not often enough

Scopes also weren’t the same in the 1930’s/1940’s

@@Deltathegoldenretriever, I was specifically commenting on the scopes from his era. The other 8 Billion people on the planet understood it.

“The other 8 billion people on the planet understood it” a- not at all your comment gave no reason to believe you were talking about old scopes nor would the average person know how different today’s scopes are. Not mention probably only a couple thousand people max even saw your comment, with him being the only reply. Get off your high horse smart ass.

​@@gregedwards1087This dude thinks everyone on earth saw his comment lmao what a dumb dumb

@@gregedwards1087 Mitch334 is right... the scopes during the 30s and 40s were of low caliber compared to today's scopes. The low quality often meant that you normally couldn't achieve better than 1.5 to 2 X magnification. Today's scopes can get you up to 30 X magnification. So with all the problems you stated, the scopes magnification was useless if you couldn't see through it. Today's sniper scopes also come with a special cover/filter that eliminates reflective glare, so your position isn't given away due to sunlight.

@@overused6632 cringe statement

@@overused6632 there are no good guys in war

​@@graustreifbrombeerkralle1078 true statement.

@@christoperwallace6197 It's weird to act as if there was a good and a bad side in that war. I get the overall idea, but marking the Axis as the bad and the Allies as the good side would make the Soviets good guys as well, and I'm pretty sure all of Eastern Europe would strongly disagree there.

@@graustreifbrombeerkralle1078yea at this point if you think the axis weren't that bad compared to the allies, your living in a world devoid of facts.

​@FlitzerFlash nonsense, we rotated a lot of experienced pilots back to the states for a year to pass on their expertise to the new pilots, then they rotated back into the fight. The Axis just let their pilots fight until they got killed or captured without having passed on their experience to new pilots. That and we started to have way better equipment from 43 on.

What a nonsense. Tell me more about the Poles. Allies uses their pilots as a reserve and instructors while nazis had to fight until death so already in a Battle of Britain they use a lot of freshers. That also a Germans who ruthlessly attacked civilians and hospitals. Allies were trying to make rotation for front units, German while they rebuilted their units. Also for bomber pilots were allowed to back home after certain number of missions like in "Catch 22" novel.

@FlitzerFlash the japanese literally ate people and shot down pilots in parachutes.

@FlitzerFlashplease tell me you’re joking?! The average Allied pilot by even late ‘43 usually had quadruple the flight hours before combat that a new Japanese or German pilot did. Just because a small subset of Axis aces had extremely high kill totals by late war just shows how they were used constantly, while Allies maintained their training and rotation systems through the end of the war. And you actually think the Allies were the ones doing the civilian slaughtering?! I guess we found our Nazi sympathizer.

i too would enjoy this

@@hilmarheathkliff9511 Have you heard of this story before?

@@AppleHistoryGuy i have not. But i want to.

Good story.

@@rdallas81 Thanks.

I remember reading about Ében-Émael many years ago, not only the operation was like taken from a good movie script, but the epic, Tolkien-esque name of the fort made it impossible to forget for me 🙂.

Yes, HOWEVER they were considered Axis later on in the war. So yes they were part of the Axis.

Thank you

That's a good idea. I also mentioned 4 different other things, 3 comments above yours.

Admiral Cunningham if i remember correctly actually gave the leader of that raid a medal. From Jingles, the italian navy captains where mostly political postings but apparently the further from high command you got the more discipled the men where and the allies considered the italian frogmen as a real and serious threat due to their successes.

Yep … what about the Alpini that broke out from the Seige of Stalingrad … when the Soviets refer to them as White Devils … you know they were tough!

It would be great if he made them fr

Jeet singh sekhon's stand, Battle of Rezang la

America saved the world. Only to become the worlds largest terrorist organization ever.

Yes. But you see... Stiegler's 109 G-6 is also animated as 109 E-3. Which would even include different armament setup, too.

Triggered same way so scrolled down to find who finds it . Just a small mistake of great video series

amateurish

@@adambane1719 That's not the definition of being part of the Axis as even Germany had a non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union at the time. Finland joined the Axis as a co-belligerent on the Continuation War some years later.

Hiroyoshi Nischizawa

@@Abhishek_I99 yeah i know, even like the IJN Haguro last stand or Commander Nishi but its unlikely to be featured in Yarnhub

Don't forget the captain of the IJN Ikazuchi who rescued 442 Allied sailors including a future British diplomat

Like the Japanese pilot who deliberately rammed a torpedo in the water to protect his carrier.

No matter right or wrong I can appreciate these men's courage.

Realistically is quite a controversial statement… Wittman has been proven to be a massive liar about almost 90% of his war story’s… most Germans exacerbated a lot of the kills they got like ALOT

Not really. They've made about 3 or 4 times as many videos on the allies, compared to the axis.

@@user-xu2pi6vx7o What I meant was in terms of respecting both sides and equally making funny moments for each as not to show a one sided picture nor demonizing one faction.

@@blitzsturm5614 I wish seeing USA being the antagonists

​@@overused6632 well there were many heroic acts of the Italians during the second world war

@@overused6632 why shouldn't? afterall its a military story channel, not a propaganda channel.. right?

​@@hauptmannnnThe only Who talks about propaganda is you. Italians had many heroic acts. The last cavalry attack and victory of WW2 was made by the Savoy ( Savoia) platoon against the russians and their T34 on the Don river. Or the torpedos manned attack on the Alexandra harbour with the sinking of the 2 Battle ships Valiant and Queen Elizabeth. Or the Fighter pilots Who defended the sky from the B17 with a ratio of 500 Vs 30 on average ( Macchi and Fiat G55). Or the Folgore parachuters in North Africa at El Alamein... That's history not propaganda

@@piersp38 i guess it comes from the post war sentiments that the italians weren't really good soldiers having to be constantly be saved by Germany until they finally changed sides. Yet Admiral Cunningham as i said before held their frogmen in the highest regard.

@@gregorturner9421 I am afraid that despite the attempt to explain some event you made the facts more foggy and untrue. Legends and saxon propaganda said germans saved us and we swapt side. The reality Is they helped US with the Africa korps but have you ever seen that if they came to Africa It was thanks to the italian Royal Navy and not to their kriegsmarine? We gave them our fleet and ensured tons of ammo till late 42' bringing fame to Rommel thanks to our soldiers and marines, moreover we saved them in Tunisia and Sicily allowing them to retreat at our own cost [ you never heard about right?] . In Russia, to the Don river, to protect their back we faced the soviets operations Saturn and Little Saturn loosing 80k Alpine troops to protect their escape and their total strategy failure in the Donbass and Stalingrad [ saving romanians and hungarians too ] . About switching side, OMG that's funny .... It was a civil war , the king and some of his loyal troops declared war on Germany, the other half remained loyal to Benito and Adolf not only till last day of 1945 but also till 1953 where finally we signed the peace with Jugoslavia.... Where have you study history? To the pub ?

That's what I'm saying

Haha never mind. 🤦🏻‍♂️

I would only disagree to the extent that nothing could compare to the shore bombardment capabilities of the 14" and 16" guns of the Battleships. However, it would certainly have been possible to design and build something much less expensive and labor intensive to basically act as a giant gun truck.

@@christineshotton824 Shore bombardment failed to justify battleship construction in WWII for a few reasons: - battleships were big enough investments that they only make sense at the strategic level if you can use them as capital ships (as in, the heavy hitters of your fleet to sink the enemy heavy hitters so your navy is free to carry out its operations without worrying about enemy heavy hitters). Once they were forced out of that role due to lack of offensive capability in a setting where airpower had increased battle ranges massively (far beyond the ranges at which any battleship was able to fire on any enemy ship), the sheer cost and expenditure that went into battleship construction outweighed whatever benefits battleships could still provide in secondary roles, especially since cheaper alternatives had those roles covered (see below). - for most shore bombardment applications cruisers and destroyers were sufficient, because while their guns are much smaller than those of battleships that still puts them well above most land artillery in terms of firepower; destroyers in particular proved invaluable in fire support (such as on D-Day), because they were seen as being more expendable (so people were much more willing to risk them against enemy shore or underwater defences), and because their smaller size meant they could get much closer to shore and fire more accurately onto enemy positions. The only cases where you really need battleships for shore bombardment is if the targets are far enough inland that you can’t hit them with cruiser or destroyer guns, but that’s where the next caveat comes in: - pretty much everyone going into WWII already had plenty of old battleships that could be used for shore bombardment, so even if you absolutely needed battleships to do shore bombardment, there was no reason to build any new battleships. Indeed, it was these old battleships that did far more shore bombardment than the WWII-generation battleships across all WWII navies. - lastly, some navies (the Royal Navy most prominently) had monitors, which packed the firepower of a battleship on a far smaller and cheaper platform for shore bombardment, being the exact sort of cheap but potent gun platform you were arguing in favour of and further reducing the importance of battleships.

And yet she is bigger and more ambitious and expensive than all the rest, yet what does she do in the war? Nothing whatsoever of any importance, neither shore bombardment nor engaging any other larger warship, with her only real surface engagement being against Taffy Three. Being too "valuable" to sortie, too expensive to fuel she and her sister was held in reserve until Japan had already effectively lost and of course as a result could do absolutely nothing. And secondly you just keep spamming every damn WW2 video that mentions the navy I see with the same message as if builders and politicians at the time knew this ahead of time. What exactly are you hoping to achieve other than annoy people? If you are so obsessed with the superiority of the carrier and wish to preach it all day long go invent yourself a damn timemachine and go back and try to convince the people of the time then.. seriously get some fucking hobbies, you're no better than a spambot

@@Arthion Yamato actually wasn’t the most expensive WWII-gen battleship in spite of being the largest: the Iowas were more expensive individually. If you go by *relative* expense (what the ship cost compared to what her nation could afford), the Bismarcks were probably the most expensive, given that the Kriegsmarine was on a shoestring budget and had far less naval infrastructure to work with compared to the IJN (for the obvious reason that Germany was a land power and Japan was a naval power). If you think Allied battleships were more useful because they did shore bombardment, you’re forgetting that a) most shore bombardment from battleships in WWII wasn’t from the fast battleships but pre-existing older battleships, b) cruisers and destroyers were enough for most fire support missions, and c) building a capital ship to do shore bombardment is also a massive waste in itself. The Yamatos actually sortied significantly more often than often assumed (not as often as Allied fast battleships, the Littorios or the Kongos, but much more often than the Nagatos, Fusos or Ises, or the German capital ships). More importantly, *sortieing does not make a ship useful unless the ship can actually do her job by sortieing.* Yes, Allies fast battleships were present in a lot of engagements-but in spite of that most of them never actually played any significant role during said engagements (either being relegated to the role of overgrown destroyers or even just being there without doing anything), meaning that they might as well not have sortied at all. In fact, you can legitimately argue that a pointless and useless battleship that doesn’t sortie is better than one that does, because at least it’s not using up as much fuel that way and it isn’t as if the battleship that does sortie is justifying her existence by sortieing. You do realize you’re being hypocritical by being an apologist for Allied WWII-era battleships and making excuses for them by saying the Allies didn’t know any better? Note that I never said Yamato was actually useful or in any way strategically sensible; I said that she was a pointless waste of resources because she never justified the investment put into building her. All I did was to apply this same standard to every WWII-gen battleship to point out that nearly all contemporary Allied battleships (and all German and Italian battleships) should also be criticized for the same sin of being pointless wastes of resources. The fact nobody knew these ships would be a net strategic negative to the navies that built them doesn’t mean they were not net strategic negatives at the end of the day; saying that these battleships were justifiable because the people who ordered their construction thought they were is like saying Vasa was a well-designed ship because the people who built her didn’t know that she was a horribly unstable and unseaworthy vessel.

@@Arthion Just don't watch the channel if it bothers you that much.

Finland was not an Axis member at all. Finland became the "bad guy" only because Germany altered it's plans, and attacked their ally Soviet Union, thus making Finland fighting the same enemy as Germany did. For different reasons of course. Germany to invade Soviet Union, Finland to remain independent an unoccupied nation trying to get the land back they lost one year ago (When Germany and Soviets were allies)

Simo actually tried to join the Finnish army for the 1941-44 war but the army refused to let him. His shot up jaw and mouth would have made communication with other soldiers too much of a hassle.

No, but at one point, his country was aligned with Germany and the axis powers, so good enough.

​@@maverickmissile801 like USSR in 1939 during Poland invasion?

@@unowen9027 kinda

@@maverickmissile801 And the reason was the illegitime war started by the Soviet Union in 1939. Anyone supporting the Soviet Union during WWII supported the enslaving of a free nation. Great Britain had the good taste to apologize for that after the war. Many countries did not.