Thank you for listening to the suggestions in the comments. I am an academic (my Ph. D.is in a different field), and I have given and attended many scholarly talks over the years. Remember that we should always be able to see the speaker’s face - so yes the camera should be to our right/speaker’s left in this case. We can see the visuals better that way as well (or just insert them in the video for short periods of time post facto). And I also agree that the speaker really needed to use notes. Of all the talks I’ve given and attended I can count on one hand the SUCCESSFUL talks that have been given by a person not using notes (and the images don’t count as notes). It’s nearly impossible to do this well as scholarly talks are dense, and since there is so much information that *can* be shared, the speaker quickly loses herself/himself in random details. This is very confusing for an audience - even scholarly audiences - as the point is lost.
seems good enough but some of the stuff he said about Hitler is amazingly incorrect. People seem to take late 44-45 Hitler and talk like that's how he was his entire reign.
He is simplifying everything 😂 I know one hour only but he is rumbling about unrelated things like sudetenland thag has nothing to with the fall of Berlin lol
What? Stalin didn't listen to his generals until halfway through the war, he literally sent communist party commissars to all the army command post in the field to make sure that the army was doing what the communist party wanted the army to do. His professional generals and officers couldn't do anything unless the political party commissars agreed and this stayed policy until middle 1941. The war didn't start going in the Soviets' favor until Stalin related some of his control and started trusting his generals. Stalin cared more about staying in power than he cared about his people. In the beginning Hitler did trust his generals, but when did not nazi army started having setbacks that caused Hitler to lose trust in his generals. The more trust he lost the more he interfered and the more they had made her setbacks and losses.
I don't want to sound critical because clearly the speaker knows his material, but his pauses were frequent and long. If this talk were edited to fix that, it would have been better. However, I enjoyed the talk.
The JS-2 had a 122mm main gun and the T-34 had a 76mm main gun in to versions, the 1941 and 1943. The T-34 was up gunned to an 85mm and given a different designation, T-34-85.
Great lecture but so many of these videos I watch about WW2 the presenters say "Uhhh" every other word. It would be nice to get speakers that don't use "Uhh" as a conjunction every 5-10 seconds.
Take a shot every time he says "uh" boy will you ever get loaded.....dor someone who has a "few other" one of thwm is certianly NOT public speaking. And the camera work is awful, too
I found it more engaging due to the somewhat conversational style. I don’t like an overly dense lecture as I’m literate and could just read it instead.
Some is good. Some is blatantly wrong. The Germans had about 56 divisions in the West. 160 in the east. Almost the entire Luftwaffe was in the east. Stalin was involved, a lot, and often wrong. It is a miracle the USSR did not collapse before he got it together (Encirclement of 750,000 men at Kiev alone). And if his generals were not great, it is because Stalin had all the good ones purged two years before the invasion.
In 44/45 Hitler sent troops and tanks west. He actually did say the East will need to fend for themselves - as the lecturer said. Hitler thought any troop still fighting in the East must have been a coward, as all the good troops had already balliantly died. Its insane logic all around. Its like he wanted all the German women assaulted.
Thank you sir was very useful for my master degree in history university of keleniya Sri Lanka. Roshant Weerasinghe son of Herbert Weerasinghe former inspector general of Sri Lanka Police.
A hard no for me. Glantz is much, much better. The scant overview of Zhukov, no mention of Operation Bagration and the Stalin quote on cowardice with no lead up and almost thrown in as a filler, just made me turn this one off. And "cleared" the Baltic States. (Sorry, but the Courland Pocket held out until the cessation of hostilities)
He has no idea what he is talking about 😂 poland did not belong to russian empire only. It was partitioned by Prussia, Austria and Russia... si.plifying history is not good. Especially when a "historian" does it.
Guards, shock and penal. REALLY? How about thinking just for a sec instead of repeating cold-war propaganda: Do you really think that human waves and clearing minefields with soldiers is how you defeat the best army at the time?
FUNNY HISTORIAN WITH DOCTORATE... POLAND WAS NOT PART OF RUSSIA BEFORE 1914, BUT WAS DIVIDED IN THREE PARTITIONS BETWEEN 1772 AND 1795 BETWEEN PRUSSIA, AUSTRIA AND RUSSIA... SO GDAŃSK WAS IN POLAND AND POZNAŃ (BY THE WAY WAS THE FIRST CAPITAL OF POLAND)... BY THE WAY... BETWEEN 1775-1806 EVEN WARSAW WAS IN PRUSSIA... BUT IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH GERMANS...THOUSE WERE ETHNIC POLISH LANDS, PRUSSIAN ANNEXATIONS FOR SOME 124 YEARS... UOT OF THOUSAND YEARS HISTORY OF POLAND
Tom York in the search bar of youtube you can tipe "TIK" (its the name of the channell. It should aappear on top of the list. If you are not sure is a british guy). As for doctor Citino you can type his name on the search bar. I would reccomend "death of the wehrmacht" (i think is that one). Hope i was helpful and that you would enjoy those lectures.
@@craigjones8518 oh jeez that was a 2 years old comment. Now, I don't remember the specifics because it was so long ago. However, you there as I said to Tom York above, you can check "TIK" channel, which does extensive research on the whys and hows of WW2. David Glantz and Robert Citino are also two other historians that focus on this matter. If you want to go into the really specific and technical you should check out "military history not visualised". Let me know if this was helpful. Thanks!
The last film of Hitler wasn't taken on his birthday. It was filmed on March 20th, 1945. How could it have been filmed on his birthday if it was shown on episode 755 the final Die Deutsche Wochenschau released?
I figured out why it can be frustrating listening to this. He takes a 1-2 second pause every 15-25 words. His voice itself is sexy, honestly. The pauses though
"soviet formations were guards, shock and penal and penal were sent to clear minefields" WTF ?! Stopped watching after this bs. The biggest bulk of formations were regulars ones. Guards were with experienced command and officers. The ratio of penal companies/battalions at its highest in 42-th were 2.5% of the entire army. They were not sent to clear minefields by their bodies. There were combat eng. like in any other army to do that. Shock armies were artillery and breakthrough equipment heavy formations and they didn't use human waves.
i would like to say thanks to this guy because there are not so many people in western world who can name Stalin smart,thanks to ideology such conclusions are not widely common in western media
In the end my country of origin ended up Capitalist again . Unfortunely Stalin and his romanian traitors plus romanian jewish killed all the upper middle class starting 1946 peoplethat were educated enough to keep up a good work for its nation . Back that time we were hiring belgium workers and specialists to work for the romanian industry . Romanian coin was stronger than us dollar . Now after 29 years of so called democracy we are the poorest country in the E.U and up to 4 million romanians relocated to the west that's including me !
+Danel Irimescu in any case i lived in USSR and knew exactly that any country of Eastern communist block lived better then we lived while we lived not bad in 70-80,I would like to ask you was dependence from USSR for Romania stronger than today dependence from US and EU?
Dude I do not want to elaborate on this issue cause it will take too long but all i can say market economy makes competition strong and competition means progress . I am not a ass licker but I love the western civilized world . I feel home in the west but you have to be organized .Before Romania joined NATO there were already british paratroopers in the mountains . Me I live in CANADA on the western coast and I love both Romani and Canada . Social welfare and disabillity programs are very well organized in british columbia . They are very human not what you guys think . Democracy and the rule of law.
I have never heard a scholar of note in this field describe Stalin as an easy-going and open-minded intelligent man (?). Quite the contrary. He misjudged Socialism taking over the world (it didn’t), his dumbass economics triggered a famine that almost wiped out the Ukranians period end-of-story, and he tolerated zero dissent and criticism. The list goes on and on
He desperately needs some notes to keep him on track. He should never had attempted to present this complex subject speaking extemporaneously. He is constantly drifting of the topic.
@@alitlweird As far as I am aware, your placement of the word 'never' and mine are both acceptable. I teach English, but it is impossible to know everything regarding the language. Please could you point me to a definitive reference that shows that one can not put the adverb 'never' in between the auxiliary and principle verb? Thank you.
He is saying that Germany occupied Poland and other countries "practically from the XVI century". Wrong!!! In the 16th century Poland was a local European empire. It was a big mistake of the Polish rulers not to cancel the Prussia which was the relic of the Teutonic state and totally dependant of Poland. Doing that ( destroying the Prussia) Poland would stay safe, big and prosperous, guard of the peace in Europe. No WW1, and WW2. Just to remind Poland was a democratic monarchy when in France, and England was absolutism.
He says “uhhhh” so frequently it’s as if he’s trying to burp-very annoying. Otherwise enjoyable lecture, but he needs to work on cutting down the “uhhhhhs.”
The historians who lecture often have the best presentations. He just needs practice . As far as TIK goes ....can anyone understand him? . Every presenter I’m finding has his opinion that eventually comes through...
@@GrubHuncher unless he’s deleted the video, his political analysis explaining how they nazis were in fact communists/socialists therefore nazism = socialism strongly suggests he has at the very least far right (bordering on fascist?) views. The way in which he tries to distance the Nazis, obviously evil, from the right and conflate the evil of the Nazis with the left (socialism/communism) suggests he has certain leanings, along with many of his other comments contained within said video.
@@ALimbOfGreatTree Well he's not wrong, the "Nazis" were national socialists, and they never considered themselves to be anything else or called themselves anything else. The racialism and nationalism were the main areas of disagreement between them and conventional socialists, beyond that it was mostly aesthetic differences between the two. Look at what happened to the Ukrainians. Look at what happened to the Kulaks. Look at Lavrentiy Beria. The gulags, the brainwashing... Then gaze over the fence at the German side -- the genocide, the slavery, the secretive disdain for lower classes, the brainwashing, the death camps, Goebbels acting like Harvey Weinstein... What is the actual difference between these people? Giving power to a party of socialists results in atrocities and madness every single time. TIK is absolutely correct to point out the obvious similarities between the forms of socialists and to condemn them all equally. And I'll agree that he's probably right-wing, but to call him a "Nazi" is blatant slander. He's never condoned or supported anything the Nazis did, he just said they shared a lot of their political ideas, aspirations and doctrine with far-left communist types, which is true.
29 minutes into the lecture and as many as 3 false facts 1) Soviets just passed Soviet POWs through a filter to check who changed the side voluntarily and collaborated with the enemy, the absolute majority went after that; 2) The notorious Soviet rapes myth; 3) Stalin had an awesome sense of humour.
Listen to a presentation on the downfall of Germany by Rob Citino - plenty out there. Captivating, energetic, insightful and fast flowing. Bit different from this one.
Correct. Also i disagree that the bombers just dropped their bombs anywhere over Berlin in order to get away. Crews could be punished for this behaviour and there were ways of checking they released the bombs over the specified target. Crews generally were also highly personally motivated to do their job as best they could. The collateral damage was due to bombs being very inaccurate.
Very interesting. Obviously ... But gee ... Terrible 'ah, um' delivery ... "Like .. er .. you know" ... You would think he had never 'presented' a lecture before ... Just sayin' ...
44:25 yes, correct. General Rokossowski a Pole actually or Russian of Polish descent, his Army captured Danzig end March 1945 and Pomeranian region that German called Danzig Westpreussen. Nowadays it is city of Gdańsk region.
the british bombed by night. on the flak towers were 12.8 cm guns not 88s. these are just two among many ather errors. does this guy have a history doctrine?
You should educate yourself about soviet prisoners of war - majority of them were sent to filtration camps, and after interrogation 98% of them were set free or rejoined the army.
You can't be more wrong about Stalin having no humor, it shows you didn't really research much about him. He had very smart dark humor. There are whole books written with his jokes
If you had more than a child's concentration level you'd have heard him say he did have a humour, but being called uncle Joe wasn't something he found funny, learn to listen fully in future, you're an adult afterall.
