Quality takes time, and i must say i really enjoyed the video, the examples were brilliant and its fantastic how you answered not only my question to some extent anticipated my follow up questions, great work, great channel
@@rangergxi Performance was definitely weak. I don't know anything about their discipline, but the banzai charges were an outdated doctrine. That determination was probably of great use in the Russo-Japanese war, but they didn't find a way to translate it to more modern warfare. Charging at semi-auto rifles was simply not a good time.
No unit kept the same effectiviness all along the war. The Leibstandarte, per example, started as a poor performing regiment in Poland. Got much better in France as a Brigade, even better in Greece and kept elite quality up to Kursk. Reformed after heavy losses in 1943 with quite some pressed Luftwaffe ground personel got decimated in late/early 1943/44 in the Ukraine. At Normandy they were far from what they had been in 1941/42. No unit, on either side was some monolithic elite/crap unit as time and replacements went.
Yea i agree with this, many divisions/units had a evolution in performance throughout WW2. Many Commanders and men passed through these Division's. For example 3. SS Totenkopf originally a regiment was full of thugs (Concentration Camp Guards) and acted as such in Poland and France even early stages in Barbarossa. It evolved mainly due to its pretty much destruction in demyansk 1941-42. The whole unit had too be rebuilt and had swathes of better trained personnel in the division than before. Many officers of the division had trial by fire and built there view of war on that principal. Only the few ex-heer officers encouraged proper training within the units. Later at Kharkov-Kursk-Mius-Kharkov (again) it performed insanely aggressively but out performed many other units somehow even Grossdeutschland in kursk as they struggled on the left flank. The three Waffen SS divisions 1. , 2. , 3. SS were at there prime early 1943 but would only be ground down too Kampfgruppen strength later and suffer poor replacements from Volksdeutsche too luftwaffe personal filling the ranks. These Division's became Fire Brigades in 1944 and were a shadow of there former selves. This is only my opinion on the many books i have read with them in the battles so i would be glad too hear others thoughts. Sources used- Blood, Steel and Myth by George Nipe Last Victory in Russia by George Nipe Decesion in the Ukraine by George Nipe Bit biased i know but this was a author i read alot from early when i started reading on WW2. Im slowly more Glantz now haha.
@@Invicta556 Could not agree more. Evolution is key here for better or worse. Most "amateur" SS units still in France went to battle with second hand Czech and WWI vintage equipment due to the distrust of the Heer handing out materiel. They quite earned their better treatment due to their undoubful succeses based in slowly increased professionalism and, key in my opinion, agressiviness when given a task in offense or defense. Their different approach as to the relation between officers and troops also bonded the units at the small level more than their more distance keeping Heer counterparts. Yet, as you well point out, the heavy attrition these units suffered would eventually lower their overall quality over time no matter the better equipment given. By mid 44 I would hardly say they were "better" than their Heer counterparts similarly reformed and rebuilt again and again from scratch.
@@aasphaltmueller5178 There is this known event when Dietrich (at the time still LSSAHs commander) received the 4000 Luftwaffe transferees near Kharkov before Kursk. He lined these "Herman Göring Spende" (HG donation) as they were derrided to ask them to volunteer to the different branches of the Division, specially to the Pz.Gren. Regiments. Most chose the Artillery Regiment or logistics. Dietrich was so furious he refused to welcome any more of the LW shippments still on its way. When the division was rebuilding, yet again, on the spring on 44 many conscripts came from the Kriegsmarine. One could argue that some of the most motivated men they got at that time came ironically from its offspring Division Hitlerjugend when most of the Training and replacement battalion of said unit got assigned to fill the huge gaps before the Normandy landings.
@@gregorgerzson1767 you dont understand how unprepared Yugoslavia is then Yugoslavia is far less prepared compared to USSR at Barbarossa. Units are scattered and not equipped. The small size of the country does not help Those 6 men has thr advantage of a goverment collapsing on itself. Ironically, such advantage cant be used on the partisans and chetniks. Making them a more formidable opponent Go away bootlicker
NKVD wasn't "secret police". NKVD was commissariat of internal affairs, that is ministry. It included things like border guards, firefighters, convoy troops, police units and yes it also included "secret police". But that was just one of the many parts of the NKVD. Therefore when one talks about NKVD "unit", he needs to look what kind of NKVD unit it was. Was is a border guard unit or was it police unit or something else. Consequently their performance in combat varied. However unlike Wafen SS units, these were not units meant for combat originally and where used in combat usually out of emergency. Generally they were more disciplined and motivated, but had inferior equipment to standard army units, especially considering heavy and support weapons. The best of NKVD units were usually border guards, which were by design expected to be able to give a fight, and were equipped and trained accordingly. But they were meant only to fight smaller, delaying battles, therefore they still had relatively light equipment and were not equivalent of standard army units.
The same argument can be made for SS. SS is much more than secret police. NVKD is a government ministry of the Soviet Union, albeit a very power one. SS is “a state within the State” with a much boarder mandate and political power base than NKVD ever was.
@@aps125 NKVD wasn't really any more 'powerful' than any other Commissariat. It was the Interior Ministry. Some of its workers had weapons, most did not.
@@aps125 Which is why I said "Wafen SS" units. The difference is that Wafen SS were units specifically designed for combat while NKVD units were emergency measure out of desperation. Also because as you said SS as a organisation was parallel to the government, Wafen SS had separate line of supply and reinforcement. At last initially. NKVD was part of the government. The point I am making is that "NKVD" units were not some sort of fanatical "party" elite units people think they were. They were basically militia units formed from people with semi-"military" background like police. Most of them were later reformed in to standard units.
The NKVD also had military units. For example, the Dzerzhinsky motorized rifle division, which was part of the Moscow garrison and guarded the capital. During the defense of Moscow, the division actively participated in battles against the Germans. Similar units, but smaller were in other large cities.
@@jangrosek4334 Not sure which division you mean. There was 8th Rifle Division "Dzerzhinsky", but that was standard army unit subordinated to Red Army. Then there was Special Purpose Division "F.E. Dzherzinsky" that indeed during period of WWII belonged to the NKVD. And while before war it was reformed as full rifle division with the same TOE as army units, it was basically security unit tasked with protecting the capital, institutions of the state and party apparatus. While parts of this division took part in military operations during WWII, particularly battle of Moscow, division as a whole newer fought.
Good question, soviet Naval infantry, and paratrooper are also consider "elite troops" and perform well for example during the siege of Sevastopol and battle for Moscow.
You mean Soviet sailors? Because Russia 🇷🇺 was 1 of 15 republics in the Soviet Union. I always find people from the USA, UK and Canada strange because they just think anything that’s Soviet is automatically Russian ?
29 Motorised (Falcon) Division holding the corridor at Stalingrad was I believe, mentioned 3 times in dispatches. Quite a daunting mission to hold Soviet Armies on both sides apart.
While the Waffen SS started out with hare-brained training, they later made up for this with fanatical zeal. One factor in this change was a Waffen SS "medical" innovation. As elite troops, the thinking went, the SS deserved to have the top priority in medical care, too. To this end, each of them had his blood-type tattooed under his left arm, for ease of treatment, if he was unconscious. In contrast, surrendering Red Army commissars were executed on the spot. As with most atrocities, this policy backfired. Word of this "take no prisoners" practice quickly leaked to the Soviets. Commissars became much less likely to surrender. Worse still, Red Army troops began to routinely strip surrendering Germans of their shirts. Any prisoner discovered to have an SS blood tattoo -- or an injury where one might have been -- was put to death. Certain that they could expect only death from the Reds, the Waffen SS now had every reason to fight "'to the last cartridge." They had become -- quite literally -- marked men.
@john connor Lmao the Soviets hated jews too, just not in a genocidal perspective. The arrests after the reveal of the Doctors Plot targeted Jews. Even Stalin stopped his daughter from meeting her lover, because he was a jew.
NKVD aren't secret police; it is the police. NKVD comes from public commissariat of internal affairs, and internal affairs as ministry includes: public police service, secret police service, traffic police, fire departments, border police as well as administration for issuing IDs, and other papers. In war, everybody is soldier, and that include every policemen as well.
Good point. it is a Western Habit to label organizations according to how they would be if were part of a Western Country. The things the NKVD supposedly did would not be accepted openly by a Western Power. If a military group did such things the Government would have to lie about their existence or mission. They would be Covert or Secret.
@@joeschmoe9154 The NKVD was exceptional not because of its harshness or brutality, but because it engaged in extensive foreign operations, which kinda contradicts the "VD" part of their name. No Western country, or any non-Soviet country for that matter, would have foreign espionage under a Ministry of the "Interior". It would either be its own ministry, like the later NKGB and MGB, or part of the war/defense ministry.
Excepting of course that in war not everyone is a soldier. You can call them soldiers but it doesn't make it so. It's like pressing NFL players onto ice and calling them a hockey team.
Nijmegen is a pretty questionable example of the SS "under-performing". -First off, the 10th SS division wasn't fully present and was merely remnants formed into 3 roughly 500 men strong, ragtag combat groups (Kampfgruppes) alongside literal fallschirmjager training units, to defend against a vastly larger, better equipped and mostly experienced attacking force. - Despite this they inflicted heavy casualties and successfully delayed the allies a few vital days despite repeated infantry pushes supported by significant amounts of tanks, heavy artillery and even some limited airsupport which ground the city too rubble. By the last day of the battle British tanks and artillery were running notably low on munitions such was the intensity. -At a period and place during the war when large scale surrender by German units was increasingly common, and almost always vastly outnumbered actual combat losses for units, Kampfgruppe Euling fought down too 300 dead out of 500 men with only 60 surrendering in their fight south of the bridge. -Kampfgruppe Henke was in defense of the railway bridge itself, I cant find much about this unit but I gather it was mixed with trainee Fallschmjager and SS soldiers (and led by a Fallschmjager commander) which might further explain the "flight" across the bridge, which is also worth mentioning only happened after the unit in question knocked out several tanks and was on the verge of being surrounded by a far larger force of tanks and paratroopers. All in all I dont think focusing on a company sized unit out of a division (and quite possibly not all organic to said division anyway) being mowed down trying to break out of a chokepoint, while also being plowed through with tanks from the other end (which also happened on the bridge, 4 shermans literally drove over the bridge from the south side guns ablazing with German infantry still on the bridge), with total ignorance given to the prior 3 days of exceptional performance by the standards of German units of the time leads to a seriously misleading conclusion.
Entirely my point to TIK, this was not a representative performance by top SS units and ignores the 20:26 exceptional fighting spirit and skill they usually displayed.
NKVD was a very large organisation. In WW2 it consisted of Militia(Police), Border Guards, Firemen, Prison Guards, GUGB(equivalent of KGB), and even Civil Registry service. So an NKVD division could be a Border Guard/KGB division or a Firemen/Civil Registry "division"...Obviously the combat and fanaticism value had a very wide spread. Border Guards proved to be some of the best units in the beginning of the war.
While reading the book "Tigers in the Mud" the one instance where the main character fought alongside an SS unit he said he was extremely impressed with there organization, coordination, fighting ability and planning. Also mentioned how well they were equipped compared to the regular units on the front. Another interesting part of the book was when they were relieved by an inexperienced Luftwaffe field division equipped with brand new MG42's, AT guns and vehicles (cant remember specifics). But once they were attacked they immediately retreated and left behind the new equipment and the following day the main characters unit was attacked by the Russians using the left behind equipment said they were all furious how they gave brand new equipment to rookies instead of the veteran units. Thoroughly enjoyed the book would reccomend it.
I don’t know what was Judith Stein’s primary source, but I am certainly not going to take this lying down. Obviously, people with disabilities were already segregated in the Wehrmacht etc, from which volunteers were admitted to the SS basic training. In addition, it's questionable to claim, for example, paratroopers as poor quality due to heavy losses.
I read the book and Carius does eventually wrap his head around it upon his service on the Western front seeing the way troops just surrender in the west, great book
A WW2 veteran told me ..... Do you know why they give medals after a battle? It’s because the big mouths before the battle rarely are the real fighters in a battle. Wise man.
Very true. I saw that so often in my life, the folk who say 'We must advance' normally mean 'you advance, I will stay here and make sure the office is tidy'.
I read in a book that a Waffen-SS veteran wrote, that when he was coming out of NCO training he was hoping for a lower numbered divisions. So while the higher number divisions often weren’t crack troops but the lower numbered divisions tended to have higher quality. It’s why in the Ardennes offensive you saw so many SS divisions involved.
Yes, that's generally true for Waffen-SS formations. The higher the number, the worse the men and equipment. It also depended on the use of the unit. Of course a mechanized SS unit on the Eastern front was more important than a mounted anti-partisan SS unit in the Balkans. On the other hand, an army tank division would receive reinforcements easier than a fortified army division in Norway ... It's still a myth, that SS divisions were preferred over the Wehrmacht when it came to reinforcement and supply. None of the SS divisions in the Ardennes was fully equipped, while at least some army divisions were. After the Ardennes, that really shifted. But then again, it was kind of "the guard fights to the end" thinking. With no resources left for both, they kept the SS fighting.
@@lucas82 I would say that Wiking (5th), and 9th and 10th were also good...while e.g. 4th was crap but you can't blame the men for it as their average age was relatively high (as in being old)
@joanne chon The thing is that when Brits could carry around guns casually with no license to carry, let alone own, the cops were still baton wielders. So guns being easy to get isn't the reason American cops have lots of military equipment. It's attitude.
Ken Shearson sounds to me like you’re projecting your own abysmal life onto mine. The police are too busy instigating riots and brutalising protestors to stop looters
One of the comparative advantages of studying the Germans vis a vis the Soviets is how many individual formation histories exist. It's not just true of the SS divisions, all the major German formations varied in quality significantly. Hell, Grossdeutschland began Barbarossa as little more than an overstrength regiment, far from the elite mechanized division that it would be in 1943-1944, and that wasn't an SS formation. Some SS divisions had well trained, high morale front fighters with excellent equipment. Some had volksdeutsche conscripts from the eastern territories, poorly trained, forced into service, and often using second rate captured equipment. The elite, motorized divisions performed as well as a comparable Wehrmacht tank division, the second rate infantry formations were, well... second rate infantry.
My father fought in the US Army 442nd RCT which was composed of Japanese American soldiers and fought against numerous German and Austrian soldiers in Italy and in France. He said that they fought against some Waffen SS Units and regular German Army Units. He said that the Germans were good soldiers and were tough opponents. He saw German soldiers attack through their own artillery barrage and tried to overrun his rifle company. He also witnessed German units fighting to the last man and his company during a series of battles was reduced to ten soldiers from a company that had 250 soldiers. His rifle company normally had 200 soldiers which is double the number of a regular US Army rifle company because Japanese Americans were only in one regiment. These soldiers were citizens of Japan and the US because their parents registered their names in Japan and these families expected their sons fight hard for the US and do not bring dishonor to the family. I like watching your videos and would like to ask questions about WWII but, most of the veterans have passed away and very few remain.
You make a very ood point, that for the SS divisions, each has to be examined on a case by case basis. However, I would suggest that such a separation into different cases should probably also include the various divisions for the particular battles/campaigns - for example, the 1st SS-Panzerdivison did (tactically) pretty well at Prochorovka, alright (or even good) in Normandy (for the most part), pretty bad in the ardennes, and absolutely disastrous in Hungary in 1945... the simle reason is that the division had been nearly destroyed several times druing the war, and after 1943, the reestablished division was worse than before...
Yes, and we must also remember that there were transfers between divisions, and replacements etc. So really (if we lived in an idealistic world), we should be looking at each individual soldier, not the units. But that might be too much to ask
That was the case with most German divisions that were resurrected after being destroyed. It’s why the German army of 1943 was not as combat effective as it was in 41
Actually, considering what they were asked to do in the Ardennes, with the terrain and supply situation as it was, they did not do too bad there either. I would say the two places the Leibstandarte did bad was in Poland 39 and Crimea 42. The latter their officers threw them away in frontal Great War style attacks.
@@PalleRasmussen They did fairly poor in the ardennes, and what they did achieve was in a part due to them pushing their sister division aside, blocking their advance in the process. Granted, the objectives were ambitious and the odds stacked heavily against them, but odds can be overcome - the division in its state when it went into barbarossa, into kharkov or kursk would have stood a far better chance. And if their officers don't know better than throwing away their men in frontal assaults, than this is a factor for assessing the combat efectiveness of a division as well... @Admiral Kolchak: In the grand scheme of things, you're right. However, to a certain point, this can even increase a division's combat effectiveness, when the ratio of veterans and replacements gets better. But the regular german army was never that completely hyped as being "elite", there was always already the understanding that some divisions are good, some excellent, and some downright bad...
Bias confirmed! (But no, I think the Italians did well in that encounter - and the British did poorly. It's just difficult to sum it up in a handful of words)
italian infantry had back up from artillery and antitanks and airplane cover, and had good supplies..yeah no wonder they performed well. ISNT THAT ALWAYS THE BLOODY CASE ?? Good performers were ALWAYS backed by good support and cohesion with neighbouring units. "duh"
ODDBALL SOK surprisingly, no. Not with Italian units atleast. In the early North Africa campaign (first British and Italian offensives) the Italians has all of the above, Aircraft, Tank, Anti-tank, Well supplied infantry (Horse, Foot and Artillery in you will). Plus the immediate advantage of defensive warfare, and still they got overrun and scattered. So I believe in the case of Italian victory’s (strategic and tactical) they must not be understated (ofc with regard to the tactical and strategic impact on sed operation) as there are so few. (Not meant as a roast, Scusi)
@@henrykissinger3151 i wouldn't call early all italian units well supplied, some were, but not all, most weren't. and while they had tanks and anti-tank guns, both of these were in short supply in the early period (compared to italian units by operation crusader, which is arguably in short supply compared to what they needed). as a result of this, their defensive advantage was actually a disadvantage, as the british were able to defeat italian units piecemeal. look at the individual combats during compass; other than pure manpower, the Italians had fewer trucks, anti-tank guns, artillery and tanks compaired to their british opponents (edit: atleast in the majority of cases), and they often didn't even have a manpower advantage.
Well, there is also a factor that NKVD and the Army weren't as separated as Waffen SS and Wehrmacht. A lot of NKVD troops were incorporated into army units. Border guards were mostly transferred to the army, a lot of NKVD units that fought in 1941 were reformed into the army and navy units, and also NKVD was one of the main sources of command staff for new army divisions formed in 1941 (mostly, for rifle divisions). New units needed people with at least some military (or paramilitary) experience and education, and NKVD had them. Do not forget - NKVD wasn't only secret police. It also included "normal" police, border guards, coast guard, internal security, and so on. For example, a significant portion of "advisors" in Spain and China was comprised of NKVD personnel.
Technically speaking, the same applies to the SS. While Tik, most other people, simply use the term the SS to refer to the Waffen (armed) SS, the SS consisted of much more than just the Waffen SS. The concentration guards, Gestapo, the SD, and I believer other police units, all fell under the SS, so, in that sense, they were like the NKVD except that their armed branch is often thought of as the only branch of the entire organization.
@@Riceball01 You miss the point. SS from a start was a paramilitary organization under NSDAP. Be a member SS was a sign to be politically affiliated with NSDAP and shared their objectives. On other hand NKVD was just an analog of a ministry of home affairs. Although it included a political security body (a complicate subject due to constant reorganizations), for different times it was OGPU (The Joint State Political Directorate), GUGB (The Main Directorate of State Security), and eventually it was transformed to KGB, be a member NKVD does not necessary mean you are politically affiliated. Waffen-SS was a parallel army intended to replace the wehrmacht eventually. The NKVD divisions were just intended to perform some kind of police functions (a coast guard, a border guard, a railways safeguard, a military police).
Alex K SS is a political entity or “a state within the state”. The non-military branch of the SS or Allgemeine-SS eventually expanded into 12 main offices (hauptamt), each being roughly the equivalent of a Reich ministry. The regular police (Orpo) and secret police (Sipo, made of Gestapo, Kripo, plus Nazi Party Intelligence aka SD) were just two of them. We are talking about an organization with much boarder power and mandate than NKVD of the Soviet Union. The other point I want to make, Waffen-SS was never intended as Wehrmacht replacement. Himmler’ grand design for the SS as an elite political order of the Nazi regime. After winning the war in the east, SS would have become the vanguard of vast conquered territory, putting in charge of “germanization” but there was no plan to supersede Wehrmacht as Reich’s official armed forces.
@@Hunt-nu1pq I think it was a conscript division. Along with it's sister division the GvB division. The term volunteer (Freiwillingen) was usually applied to foreign or ethnic German units.
DeltaEchoGolf The 10th ss was made with more than half of it’s effectif coming from of the RAD (Reich labour service) while the rest was veterans from various w-ss divisions,I would not agree with the "Fact" that GVB was a conscript unit,a large portion of it’s strength when it was formed was mainly by young men who had previously volunteered in 1942/1943 the rest being veterans (the majority of them were from SS-Rgt "Deutschland" & "Der Führer")or even foreign volunteer (Italians/French’s),it is also important to mention that the members of this unit fought with great tenacity against the Americans & at some points it even succeed at counter-attacking American forces at Coutance,when it was reformed in November 44 it absorbed the experienced men from the ss brigades 49-51 which greatly contributes to bolster the figthings capacity of the division.
@Empor ! banzai charges where the Japanese 100% had more ammo. You're thinking of a different kind of banzai, I forgot the name, which is ordered by the Emperor himself. That charge is meant to take as many enemies down as possible before the defenders are wiped out. Hacksaw ridge has a good banzai charge scene that clearly shows the Japanese shooting at the Americans. But the one you're thinking of has Japanese soldiers charging with sharpened bamboo, swords, bayonets, and with whatever ammunition the Japanese can use.
My grandpa was in the Wehrmacht on the Eastern front from day one. He said that the more fanatical new recruits were, the faster they fell. He gave them on average two weeks. If you imagine that the SS was composed entirely of these people, it’s no surprise to see high casualties. But you also have to take into account that the further the war progressed, the more new recruits were shoved into the Waffen SS, often very young with little training. There even was an entire Waffen SS Division composed of only Hitler Youth. This would also account for a massive drop in performance as the war progressed. So in a lot of ways, many later German Waffen SS divisions were militia forces no different to the foreign divisions. However, unlike the Italian black shirts, the SS did have funding. So at least the equipment wasn’t any worse than that of the Wehrmacht, though as we know, towards the later years all German fighting units had massive problems when it came to supplies.
Default Aggressive is perhaps a better definition. No matter how you manipulate the numbers, they still lost 50% less than the Red Army. A Normandy landing would be too fanatical for me.
hard to say for every division... the core-divisions like 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 9th, 10th and so on were pretty successful. in the first years of the war the SS had no proper officer training for their leaders since they wanted to seperate from the heer. so the early ss-divisions had huge losses in poland and france. ("this is the objective, you go this way, i go this way and we`ll see how it turns out" :D) later on they got some expertise by the army and their understanding in tactics increased. another factor is that they got prioritized for better equiptment since himmler had his own industry-department inside the SS and could direct material straight to his guys. but i agree that other divisions (like the foreign-divisions) were poor front troops and often used against partisans at the balkan or behind the frontlines in russia. himmler wanted to expand his waffen-ss empire and therefore pursued recruiting foreign units more excessive than the wehrmacht, resulting in a huge quality loss.
@@Abensberg not all forgein units was utter trash Handschar for example (if I am correct the first ss divison to be named " waffen der ss" instead of the name for german units with just "ss" The mutiny many like to throw around was done by communist infiltraters and they forced other members to join them (or else they would be killed, you can find one such forced soldier telling his experiences in the book written by volksdeutsch veteran of the division Zvonimir bernwald The mutiny itself was extinguished by the Imam of the battalion who was awarded the iron cross for it The division did very well in combat even on the eastern front and the division earned 5 knights cross of the iron cross now about the desertions the bosnians who joined mostly did so to protect Bosnia and when they were moved out of Bosnia during their service they deserted and others joined the partisans most likely not of treachery but when to them there was no other choice For example in Zvonimir bernwald's book he mentions one such veteran who said (paraphrasing) "what was I supposed to do joining the partisans was the only way I would be safe from the Chetniks" in the end despite all this for every german there was a Bosnian in the unit. labelling all forgein (or even some german) units as worthless milita is not correct and frankly disrespectful.
As I was understandig it, you are "like 90% German", when you also belong to the nordic race, from a nazi viewpoint. So I think Volksdeutsch is just a descriptions for Germans that lived outside of Germany.
It wasn't that clear-cut, though. The Volksliste had 4 categories in terms of how 'German' you allegedly were. These was decided not only on the basis of ethnicity/race, but on political activism (or the lack thereof) as well. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksliste
@@bondziu so were the Volksdeutsche from a nazi view not "as good" as germans with citizenship? Or were Volksdeutsche on the Volksliste just because they are the benchmark? I think option 2, but am happy to hear your arguments.
@@marcofromel2377 I guess you could argue that those who fell into the DVL category I (Volksdeutsche in a strict sense) were considered to be as good as Reichsdeutsche (consider the resettlement campaign "Heim ins Reich"). Categories II-IV (Deutschstämmige, Eingedeutschte, Rückgedeutschte) were somewhat inferior, as their either lacked the political background (II), or were not really ethnically/politically 'clean' (III and IV). Millions of people in occupied Poland who did not belong to the actual German minority (but spoke a regional dialect and were somewhat distinct, i.e. Silesians) were put into cat. III and IV only to be later drafted into the Wehrmacht as cannon fodder. Many others had themselves put on the list following a verification process, seeking short-term personal and political gains. The latter were considered outright traitors, and many of the former did as well, even though they did not apply for that and any protest could lead to a one-way trip to a concentration camp. My best guess is: cat. I was in high regard, the lower categories were just a source of free cannon fodder from the occupied territories.
Volksdeutsche were simply ethnic Germans that were citizens of other countries before the war, there were millions of them living all over Eeastern Europe. Since SS couldn't fill their ranks with national conscripts, They recruited heavily amongs Volksdeutche, often conscripting them against their will.
I read an Osprey book about the formation and training of the SS before Poland and France. Apparently they were recruited from mostly rural areas as opposed to the regular army which got most of its Manpower pool from big cities obviously. Some of these newly-formed divisions were apparently trained much more extensively in close combat and aggressive maneuvering. similar to the Stormtroopers of ww1. ( The Osprey book stated that interestingly, they were the first soldiers to train with live rounds which was criticized at the time by the Wermacht.) They also had drilled into time and time again that the more decisive and quickly you end a Combat Action the more of your comrades you will end up saving by making the fighting shorter, this could help explain why sometimes their casualty rates are much higher.
On a case by case basis the SS consistently underperformed. Due to the recruitment practice once you joined you couldn't leave which put a lot of young officers off. This problem effected the SS throughout the war giving them lackluster leadership. The other problem they suffered from in late war especially was being too big. With all the extra toys they had been given they struggled to supply them within the division structure, the Ardennes is a classic example.
NKVD was actually relativly small. 366 000 in 1937, policing, fire fighting, guarding borders, inspecting buildings, machinery and harvests, guarding borders, camps and railway in country of 163 million.
As an ex NATO officer, I was pretty sure of that. Being a fanatic in most cases doesn't make you a good soldier, but only a good murderer and/or torturer to people who can not defend themselves. I've seen it with my own eyes in Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq.
I think it's true to say that any allied units/divisions who faced an SS unit/division unit in combat, knew full well the battle would be fierce & heavy going. It's known that facing the SS had a great effect on allied morale. It was often a No Quarter situation.
Depends on the engagement. SS Verfungstruppen took heavy losses in Holland because they had to capture several bridges on open ground, since there was a lack of armor, you kind of have to fight World War One style. Totenkopf was routed at Arras, but kicked in the teeth of a Moroccan Division a couple days earlier near the French-Belgian border.
@@jamesmackenzie1536 Yes - and all the more striking since the Dutch army was so weak and unprepared. But what was really telling was the defeat of German troops (including fallschirmjager) in the Hague, precisely because they had no artillery to speak of, no armor, and little air support. They had to take on the Dutch on equal terms in small unit actions...and lost....
I know that some of the SS divisions were well trained, supplied, and fought well. I've researched the 6th SS Mtn Division's fight in Finland, and in Operation Nordwind. They did well, and seem less inclined to commit the standard atrocities typically associated with SS units.
Have a video about the "forgotten soldiers" and the "forest brothers" that fight against the Germans then the Soviets well into the 50s in Poland and the baltic states. poignantly tragic story.
Great question. I'd also assumed that Waffen SS were the 'elite' (some divisions at least), or that's what Hollywood and Co. would love you to believe (apart from that silly scene in Fury where the SS charged a single Sherman with panzerfaust).
Himmler styled them as "elite" the SS officers and troops thought of themselves (were indoctrinated) as "elite". The rest of the Wehrmacht thought they were pikers. No they really did stuff like that. The reason why they had such high casualties is because the really did believe the "Ubermensch" BS they had been fed. So when they were told to charge that machine gun! They charged that machine gun and died in droves doing it. And they kept at it all the way to the bitter end.
@@jamestheotherone742 Well later on in the war, the premiere Waffen-SS divisions such as the LSSAH, Das Reich, and Totenkopf gained a solid reputation for preventing Soviet breakthroughs and spearheading every major offensive, but this was required a very painful learning process where they essentially had to abandon the ideological aspect and began to restructure themselves as a formal military organization in all but name.
@@jamestheotherone742 a good example of that is how they had 3 guys charge left right and middle with bundle grenades. They only expected 1 or 2 to survive out of 3.
Soldiers did not make them elite, industry did. They, at least those considered "elite" got priority in weapons and manpower, supply and transport. It is easy to be "elite" when you get things others do not so you fair better than them. It would be like you starting at 50m mark and racing to 100m against a trained athlete, with bare feet while you got the best running shoes. You win and call yourself elite athlete because you were better than the other one. That's essentially what "elite" status was in that war when divisions were concerned. When you get the first pick of everything and have priority over other units, it is hard not to perform well.
I will assume NKVD units, made from the local police force would be a somewhat uniform mix of ages from 20-55+, versus a regular army unit with officers of a mix of ages, but enlisted men between 20-22 (Soviets did not have career enlisted). The fact is older men do not stand up well to prolonged fighting on the front line, especially married men with children who have a reason to live, or not, versus 20+ year olds who still have a sense of invulnerability
I have to point that NKVD units were already considered as "second rate troops" by the own Soviet forces, as the NKVD was the Soviet equivalent to a Ministry of the Interior, thus the NKVD units on pre-war USSR were mostly police units. They did have some relatively good units when it came to counterespionage and snipers, but in general they were just police units, thus not a first rate unit when compared to a regular rifle division, and that not talking about mechanised units. In the Great Patriotic War, the NKVD units were a mixture between the pre-war police and militias drawn from local populations loyal to the Soviets, which were called "Opolcheniye". They often served in auxiliary roles, but also took part in combat whenever needed, like in the siege of Leningrad or in some stages of the battle of Stalingrad. Also, the NKVD wasn't a unit of the Party, in the USSR (unlike in Nazi Germany) the Communist Party had no recruitment capabilities (most of the civilian and military leaders of the USSR were members of the party, though). It was a ministry within the government. They weren't the "secret" police, by the way, or better said, weren't just the "secret" police as the normal police was also the NKVD.
132-nd detached battalion of convoy (yes, prison convoy) troops of the NKVD was one of the key units defenders of the Brest Fortress - one of the main symbols (in the Soviet Union and modern Russia) of the heroic defense of the outbreak of war (in september, 1941, Hitler and Mussolini personally examined the walls of the Brest Fortress, there are real footage and eyewitness accounts). This battalion died at the very beginning in full force. Famous lettering on the wall “I am dying, but do not surrender! Farewell, my Motherland!” was made namely in the barracks of this unit. It became a symbol of resistance in post-war Soviet historiography and is still mentioned in the school curriculum in Russia and Belarus.
TIK, there are some flaws: Neither SS nor NKVD were considered to be fighting troops from where they began. Reckless attacks without caring for flanks was German (armored) doctrine. 10th SS at Nijmegen was on like 30% strength with less than 30 armored vehicles. 30% strength means all combat troops are dead and the cooks and secretaries are fighting (9th SS at Arnhem wasn't off much better.) On the other hand: why could the Allies not succeed ? XXX Corps, 1st Para, 82nd and 101st Airborne were not only considered "elite" but were on full strength ... 3rd SS at Arras routed. True. By that early point in the war, it wasn't a division but a motorized regiment only. No armored vehicles. Still no "excuse", though. "LSSAH, Totenkopf and Das Reich" were notorious for their high losses, not for achieving stunning successes. 5th SS Division "Wiking" (Dutch, Belgian and Skandinavian volunteers) performed quite well during Barbarossa and was considered a crack unit by Wehrmacht officials. The unit never had to be fully pulled out of service due to unstandable casualties, as happened several times with the above mentioned. 12th SS "HJ" , being a very green unit, put up some fight at Caen in 1944, literally defending to the last man. Problems with SS units: a) they were glorified by propaganda for being a fighting elite right from the start, without having earned any merits before. You are not a fighting elite just because you are told so and fanatism doesn't make up for leadership and tactics. b) generally bad leadership. Just being given the uniform and rank does not make you an officer. There were only a handful of SS officers who initially had received a military education (General Staff education that is), e.g. Steiner (5th SS) and Bittrich (9th SS). As mentioned above, 5th SS performed quite well ... Wehrmacht Generals despised most of their SS counterparts for lack of military education, leadership qualities and accordingly the high casualties they often caused unnecessarily. As a general summary: the SS divisions were not very combat effective in the first half of the war, many units being way less "skillful" than Wehrmacht units. Exceptions being made. In the second half of the war, replacements for SS units were no longer 100% volunteers. Most replacements came from parts of the Wehrmacht that had already seen the decline of their branches, like Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine. But by that point, the SS had at least better trained NCOs and officers due to combat experience and "interchanges" with Wehrmacht branches. Both, Wehrmacht and SS were scraping the barrel for men, so one can consider them as equal in combat effectiveness.
@@darklysm8345 Kursk = SECOND half of the war. As I said, they performed as well as Army units in the SECOND half. Btw, 1st SS took almost 3,000 casualties (KIA and WIA) during Kursk. Fighting men, meaning this is nearly half of its infantry combat strength. That's a significant number in my book.
@Dwarov 1 they break trough the 3rd line at prohovarovka lol. Many historians say if they pushed foward and Hitler didnt stop them, the russians most likely lose the entire southern front Also the russians prepared for months and set up millions of mines. And the germans almost made it. You cant just say the german divisions were bad because they cant slice trough a million man fort lol Casulaties show how the soviets actually lost Waaay more men while DEFENDING
I'm delighted to have been guided to your channel - I thought this was a very well researched and produced video. I was very impressed. Delighted to be a new sub!
There has been an explanation to why the SS Nord division faired poorly in Finland. And that is that the battles were fought in wilderness, where finnish troops were "crack" and germans were inexperienced. Soviets too, but they were sitting in their trenches and bunkers so it doesn't matter. Some food for thought
The examples you choose of the SS failing are awfully nit picky, all “elite” (crack) divisions that see extensive service in this war on both sides have their rough moments, like the 101st Ab at Nuenen or Guards Armored vs 12th SS
But, by the point of "Market-Garden" operations there was not a lot Germans left in "Frundsberg", because most of the divisions vehicles and manpower were destroyed in Fallais Pocket.
You'd be hard pressed to find any unit that performed perfectly throughout the entire war. You could choose any unit and highlight their failures, as see as they may be, and paint that unit in an unflattering light using just those instances. But if you compare those rare moments of defeat to the countless instances of almost superhuman performance against impossible odds, you can see that these units were indeed elite.
In fact Nord was put under Finnish control and Tutelage and became very effective especially against the Americans later in the war. The 10th SS was composed of conscripts. You could have used 1st LAH 2nd DR or Wiking... It was more down to training. The first 3 divisions were the only true SS volunteer units who were trained in stormtrooper tactics by WW1 veterans.
7th SS Prinz Eugen was Volksdeutscher and 8th SS Florian Geyer same. 22nd SS Maria Theresa same...13 SS Handzar raised in Bosnia from local moslems and 21 SS Skender beg from Albanians. Also there were SS Kosaken kavalliere division under command of SS general Pannwitz. Various SS independent units not to mention, like 500 SS parachute batallion or SS Alpenvorland regiment. Etc, etc...
Not true the majority of the personels in the 8th ss kavalry division werer in majority germans only the 17th cavalry RGT were mainly composed of volksdeutsch from Hungary,this latter regiment was then transfered to form the nucleus of the 22nd ss cavalry div,the 13th waffen-gebirgs div were made up of Bosnian-Muslim not Volksdeutsch,it's also intresting to point out the 7th ss "Prinz Eugen" was in the begining suppose to be an all german div but due to the low ammount of volunteers (only 5,000) it was decide that the main man power would be the volksdeutsch from romania,Croatia & hungary.
@@doriancanarelli8997 right . So what was not true about 13SS Handzar??? Full Prinz Eugen was raised from Volksdeutscher from Banat germans, due to loses it was filled up with Volksdeutscher from Romania mainly. Some Croats were also presemt in their units. For Hungarian germans mainly in Florian Geyer.
@@palmanbracht9125 The reason why the 13th ss was not made of volksdeutsch is because they had no german ancestry like i said they were Bosnian -Muslims, originally the 5,000 german volunteers were the nucleus for the "Prinz Eugen" division but since it has a shortage of german volunteers it tried to recruit volunteers from the Banat,it did work in some instance but were not enougth to brougth the divsion at full strength wich is why they later forced the enlistement into the unit.The 8th ss Kav division was majoritarly german only it's 17th regiment was made up of volksdeutsch,the 22nd ss kav div however was truly a volksdeutsch unit with more than half of it's strength being composed of etnhic german from hungary.
Seems like you are cherry picking on the SS divisions. Your picked the lackluster "Nord" little more than volkish legion and the late bloomer "Frundsberg" not formed until 1943. You did not analyze Leibstandarte, Das Reich, Totenkopf, Wiking or the tough as nails Flandern/Nederlander Legions. Hmmmm...
at 2:11 the division "giovani fascisti (young fascists)" was an italian army division, not blackshirts. the only unit of the italian army 100% volunteers, they were a bunch of fascist teenagers beetween 16 /19 years old,the british nicknamed them "mussolini's boys"- this was an unusual unit with an unusual history
If the SS-Division Nord consisted mainly of "Volksdeutsche", they for sure weren't fanatical party soldiers. Usually, "Volksdeutsche" simply were conscripted to SS-Units because there weren't enough volunteers. Conscription on german soil was Wehrmacht territory, so the Waffen-SS found that kind of legal loophole to recruit "Volksdeutsche" - german minorities living in foreign territories, especially in eastern and south-eastern Europe - into their ranks. Sometimes even against their will.
LtBrown1956 True, but you seem to be missing the point. The point is, you‘re probably not a fanatical party soldier if you had to be pressed into service and/or into certain units.
@@blackfyre15 no ....I got your point ....however, I should have indicated (and I failed to do so) that MY point was the last sentence in your post ..."Sometimes against their will." My apologies ....you made several points in your post that I agree with but only commented on the last which, from your view point, did not make sense ....sorry Kay
In all political parties you have fanatics, and on each fanatic you have at least 2 or more opportunists who joined party to gain something from the party membership. When you make a military unit out of party members, you get a lot of opportunists in situation where they can gain nothing and lose life. Hence the poor performance and cowardice.
Why would a police division have 5 regiments? To garrison a wider area. More command infrastructure allows a unit to cover more ground. This isn't a maneuver formation- it's a garrison/internal security formation. With more regiments it can spread out over a wider area and still be under control. I can see a single division commander being able to manage more sub units because of the slower operational tempo that garrison unit would have to deal with. However tossing them into combat would be... interesting. That's a lot of colonels asking for the general's attention plus I see no organic fires except for mortars and some cannons. That's probably sufficient for dealing with the local populace and mopping up stragglers and evaders, but not suitable for dealing with a proper combat formation. A regular German or US infantry division would steal this unit's milk money, eat its lunch, give it an atomic wedgie, and then toss it into a rubbish bin.
I'm veteran of the British army, originally from Botswana. Can you do a project on Tswana-Sotho regiments in world 1 and 2. My ancestors served in Both.
Only 1st and 2nd SS divisions can be considered "elite". Even then, consider their performance compared to Wehrmacht during the Battle of the Bulge where the former clearly sucked. Perhaps the "genius" of Sepp Dietrich also contributed to that though...
Incredible, these days I was watching your documentary series again, Crusader, Battleaxe, Market Garden, Even Emael and Compass, I would like you to do a short one about Crete and Tunisia. Thank you, now from Italy.
I plan to do Crete at some point. And also, I'll get to Tunisia as part of my North African Campaign series... whenever I get time to continue that (probably after Stalingrad)
It is weird that many will watch a video on UTube and take the person who made it at his or her word many times instead of reading about the event from a book or books.Reading is amazing and we need more readers and less Cell,I pad,Computer Zombies. It's mostly the schooling they receive today or the lack thereof that is responsible but not the only thing . The School system has gotten progressively worse in the last 30 years in many if not most European and North American countries. They don't even teach American history or the US system of Government or the constitution anymore in the US, They haven't tough meaningful subjects or spent enough time on them in many years, instead they are teaching our kids about India and the History of China and the very important Gender pronouns and other SJW nonsense. This is all a subversive Communist/socialist plot to weaken and ultimately destroy the greatest Country in the history of the world and the Great Countries of Europe.
NKVD were never an elite force. They were more like the military police nowdays, so it is no wonder they performed worse. However there are numerous examples when they did well, say for instance "the Komissars house" in Stalingrad. The guards units were considered better than ordinary, so perhaps one day mr TIK will compare those.
Fanaticalness isn't a word. The word you're after is fanaticism. I do the same sometimes. If I can't think of the word I make one uip lol. Fanaticism is a real one though.
Hi, definitely not an ss fan boy, but please check the sources. Sydnor "Soldiers of Destruction" depicts SSTK or 3d SS division performance at Arras in completely opposite colour - it was Rommel's 7th panzer infantry, who panicked. Rommel, however, knowing general jealousy from army to SS was quick to blame SSTK for cowardice under fire to cover weak performance of his troops. But it was SS infantry, who counter-attacked advancing British tanks on foot. Almost in all cases when 3d SS suffered heavy losses it was reasonably explainable by specific circumstances (Dunkirk, where they faced high concentration of British artillery, which not only enjoyed numerical superiority, but was ordered to fire-out all remaining shells because there were no way to evacuate war materiel back to England). SSTK first line combat troops with extensive pre-war training were almost completely annihilated in Demyansk pocket where again they were instrumental in not only holding back Russian offensive, but also in breaking-out towards advancing jaegers. Please note, that before WW2 1-2-3 SS divisions were vigorously trained, their officers attended Wehrmacht officer schools. Small unit tactics were generally up to date. However qualified senior officers with field experience (like Hausser) were available for SS only in small No. and that remained to be a problem throughout entire war.
Correct. 3 SS introduced the world to cammo uniforms. Eike stole Romanian 149mm field guns from the Skoda Works, so it had serious fire power. The guns had been prepaid and were loaded for shipment when they were stolen.
Disillusioned, but there have been hints to it throughout the history I've been exposed to. Must have been nine years old when my sister showed me, 'Medal of honor' for ps1, and they made mention of SS troops being poorly trained. Something like 'World at war' (1973) which I'd been exposed to before painted more of the stereotypical, 'elite troops' type of picture.
I wouldn't say that the NKVD people were necessarily fanatical, or even political. NKVD was a huge organization, basically the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and had all kinds of functions. Ideological policing and political terror was just one aspect, that only a small minority of NKVD employees were involved in. It's likely that most of the people in the NKVD divisions were just regular police, border guards, firefighters or park rangers in civilian life.
The way I do see things , a good soldier is an objective person which can keep his head cool under pressure (danger ) first and foremost . Mixing ideology and fanaticism with realities of a battle field is not a wise thing .An ideological motivated person will most probably attack and stand when he should not and will disregard the lives of his comrades .SS and NKVD were a minority on western front and they did little to nothing on the big picture . However the equipment and tactics were very different and can't be compared . SS was like a party replica of Wehrmacht while NKVD were more like a police unit meant to supervise and motivate the army troops .
I think it's safe to assume that ideology-based paramilitary organizations in general are invariably doomed to perform far more poorly than professional militaries from simple fact that the organization's worldview is tied to their ideology and its commanders and fighting men are simply less able to see the situation from the objective lens that military schools at least try to teach their men how to see. This leads them to do things such as holding their ground when a professional or conscript force would have had the good sense to withdraw or attacking when the latter would have had the good sense not to. The lone examples I think of where this trend was reversed were the Iraqi Republican Guard in the latter stages of the Iran-Iraq War (and to a lesser extent, the Persian Gulf War) and that was only after a long and painful baptism by fire that forced them to begin reorganizing themselves along more professional lines; and Serb paramilitary groups in the early stages of the Yugoslav Wars, specifically the Battle of Vukovar, and in that case, the multi-ethnic JNA was literally in the process of disintegrating and even its Serb regiments were often outright mutinous, with one regiment holding an anti-war protest where they sang John Lennon songs and another literally throwing away their weapons and walking back to Serbia.
Nah, I agree with TIK. It is HIGHLY variable and depends on circumstances. In essence war is not sanitized or possible to sanitize from politics, indeed it is politics by other means and nothing else. It depends on variable of public support vs elite effort. In Germany, the government was actually QUITE popular and had widespread support, as did in many other major WWII factions. It was a war the widest part of population was fully behind. In those cases having "more" support is worth little. In cases like Yugoslav wars where only 26% of Serbian mobilization call responded (in mainland Serbia) that means that those *who do* respond are going to be the exceptions and pretty ideological. Serbian ideology is one of equating south slavs with Serb label based on imprecise and vague ancient documents and saying these people have to acknowledge they are Serb and so we will govern them from Belgrade. It is same as Slovakia (basically means Slavland) saying: you all Slavs (Slov=Slav) are us and we will govern you from Bratislava as we see fit because you got confused so we have to show you the way. It is a patronizing and silly ideology so wide support is lacking due to common sense. In those situations only fanatics will be reliable for the war effort. ww1.habsburger.net/en/chapters/serbs-all-and-everywhere-serb-national-programme Same goes for feudal or dynastic wars. You can't expect same performance from a Christian Bulgarian or Armenian levy fighting next to their feudal liege of Ottoman Turkey and their unit of Sunni Ghazis who came all the way from east Anadolia in a fight that is essentialy about spreading Islam. When Normans took England the crack troops of William were basically his wider family clan and relatives and both Picard and Bretons there were his cousins. It was one wider family fighting to increase the private property their genetic kin posses. Even if they die their cousin will benefit. A random mercenary or a peasant levy that comes from Galic/Celtic populace will NOT be as motivated or care for the outcome.
@@utvara1 There are obvious exceptions to the rule, but in general, ideology-based paramilitary groups are amateurish at best. When they do perform well, it's either because of sheer luck or they've begun to graduate from paramilitary to regular military, shedding the emphasis on ideology in the process. While you are right that wars are waged at the behest and benefit of politicians, the generals charged with planning and waging the war are usually expected to be at least nominally independent and objective. So that they have the ability to draw a line with civilian leaders when they have unrealistic expectations and can't simply be fired for not disagreeing with them.
@@360Nomad again it all depends... the narrative that having military unit with strong convictions that support war is going to result in any negative effect whatsoever is silly and irrational. It is a different issue completely that war is often joined by unprepared volunteers like Hitl3r in WWI because he dodged Austrian military training. Of course that type of person is likely to underperform for obvious reasons. In Croatia in Yugoslav wars the crack troops were Kažnjenička bojna that was basically released convicts, Croat nationalist terrorists and foreign neonazis... they performed better then our regular units and basically were the first line of defence in many situations because they were willing to take risks that would usually cause mutinies etc in other, they would also do 'reckless' or just high risk high reward things that the enemy would not expect. They would also be 'creative' by doing irregular damage that spreads enemy attention to protecting things that have no military value and abandon strategic positions. Thus they would creep up and slowly push enemy out. However the political party wing HOS that was purely unprepared but nationalist teens suffered massive casualties. It also didn't help that their uniforms were black. The key difference was that while the convict batallion was on average age about 40 and full of veterans of french legion, old experienced veterans and professional killers, thede were basically highschoolers who were led into a war by their political leaders who were often intellectuals, playwriters, attorneys and small businessowners. The thing is... if there is a new regime or ideology, then their fanatics are not the establishment. For example if there were a war with Iran now, you can be quite sure their fundamentalist and fanatical Islamic Revolutionary Guard would outperform the regular army because they had some 50 or so years and this is the second generation that has both ideology and professional long term training. Naži$ came to power in 33 and were in war by 39... of course their fanatics are not yet established within the military anywhere near well enough compared to ideological supporters of Kaiser (aristocracy) in Wehrmacht.
i was at vukovar. serbian white eagles. main difference us and german ss is that we all served regular army first. in the war, paramilitary's were incorporated into the regular army on large scale, but kept separate units with lower leaders pretending to be officers. we didn't stick to the orders always. also, we were much more brutal to the enemy. we really hated croats and muslims, while regular army units had all kinds of people. funniest moments are these: we had regular army uniforms, but had nationalist amblems. often, in the beginning, we would have higher officer still wearing a red star, while we had eagles. we fought each other in ww2. not in this war, but still i hated them a lot. they didn't like to be around us if there are no other people around. during kosovo war, serbian president milosevic didn't allow volunteer units since we did what we wanted. he used a lot of police who were trained as the army. ordinary people loved us, if they were not communists.
There is also the small matter with the Continuation War that, apparently, London & Washington warned Helsinki about pushing their aspirations towards "Great Finland."
NKVD had a fine record of machine gunning down their own soldiers that retreated and as for their record on the front line performance it doesn't exist because they never served on the front line. Ja-whoos rarely do
So you didn't even watch TIK's video about those barrier units??? The number of people shot dead by those units is way way lower than the number stopped then discipline then send back to their own unit. So your view is BS!!!
Thanks TIK ad another great piece of research! I think your Market-Garden work, as well as Crusader, are masterpieces. Have you ever thought of writing a book? Matt from Chicago
I have considered writing a book, but not sure what on. I feel that in order to write a history book, you have to spend a long time in the archives, which I don't have time to do whilst working on this channel
@@TheImperatorKnight Thanks for the reply! Maybe something short like the Russian War 42-43 as that seems to be the body of most your work. If you're looking for a change of pace - There seems to be very little modern work done on Operation Husky (Sicily). Podcast might be a good idea as well. I'd tune in! Just me. Keep up the outstanding work!
Don't stay locked up for too long. Get some sunlight at the very least, since Vitamin D is essential ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Oza9kjcXCRY.html
I'm not saying in this case but there were countless cases of special Russian units gunning down their own troops who tried to retreat. This was implemented by Stalin mostly after the battle of Stalingrad and was a standing order to the end of the war. This is a fact not rumor.
First time watching your clips. Actually thought, when the Patreaon list started to roll, the names were germans killed in action laying dead behind that railroad.... Think I need to see a shrink
Just because some SS divisions or parts of them performed poor on occasion doesn't mean they weren't elite, these instances you listed are hardly representative, TIK. IMHO you simply do not like the idea of political soldiers very much. Yet especially those early SS divisions were simply great despite some trouble in the Low Countries & France, which led to some doubt about their combat effectiveness - and the Russians peed their pants every time they had to confront Wiking, a "late stage" SS division. The late stage regular German army was always happy to see Waffen SS soldiers show up because by then they had gained a solid reputation in battle. As for the quality of the Waffen SS training; It's methods are still copied today, by the U.S. marines for instance - and their training was as realistic as possible at the time - enough said. On the whole Waffen SS fought better than the average division in the regular army, why dispute something historians have confirmed time and again? This video is at the very least misleading and tendentious.
The NKVD were not meant as frontline troops, although they could be used in that role at times, particularly at very bad times. The NKVD were internal troops, security troops. The best example of NKVD troops fighting on the frontline was at Stalingrad.
NKVD were indeed internal troops (hence the VD in the name). They were mostly the border patrol troops in the june of 1941, so they cannot be compared to SS. They can be seen as national guard, military police and border patrol troops simultaneously. As for party loyalists in USSR there were comsomol organisation and party members, but there never were separate elite fanatic troops like SS, instead there were guard divisions, that usually had more communists (official term for the party members) or people from comsomol and usually less people from non-slavic republics (since they had hard time with Russian language in general), but it was just a statistical shift, not an organized bias. So NKVD divisions were not fanatic troops, but rather divisions that were separate from the army due to its origin and role, but there were troops where communists were bigger in number than in the average divisions - the guard divisions.
@Kevin Davies Fortunately, Peek oil philosopher is less self-centered, based in Kerala ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JZBv-WCnNnY.html
It could be the case that the soldiers joined these units, not to serve their countries and fight, but to enjoy social prestige and privileges, I don't know much about the NKVD, probably had their big slice of privileges within soviet society, but I'm pretty sure the SS was seen as a social elite and enjoyed all the best that Germany could offer.
NKVD was a huge organization including the firefighters department and regular police. The NKVD divisions in no way were "ideological" or "elite", they are just organized police force to be used in battle in a situation of manpower lack.
@@yulusleonard985 "they got obliterated" and? that doesn't mean they weren't elite or are you saying the sacred band of Thebes or the 300 Spartans were not elite since they both got obliterated?
@@lewistaylor2858 SS are literally Militia unit. They are far from Elite. They dont get army pension. Sacred band of Thebes and Sparta royal guard are their standing army.
@@yulusleonard985 >They dont get army pension. LMAO , seems standing army tards get upset with malitias replacing them, even in early america malitias were suppose to be the thing a stading army was suppose to be illegal. and here comes nazi germany to prove that the malitia model works and kicks ass, funny coming from a bunch of big government fanatics to use decentralization for processes across the board
@@bubblegumgun3292 SS is never a militia. The other guy misinterpreted what they truly are, and you better not use his stupidity to validate your argument Proper militias formation while have the light arms like rifles, SMGs, LMGs and HMGs. Lacked the bigger guns from mortar and up. A proper militia unit of Germany is the volksturm. While there is a VK batallion that held pretty well due to them being filled with WW1 vets. They suffered huge casualties, more than 50%
Hello , my Great uncle was a German plane mechanic in ww2 .he told Me in an Interview ( which i recorded ) he was stationed on the nearest airfield to stalingrad but didnt tell me the name ... do you know the name by any chance ? He sadly passed Away at the Age of 96 only a few weeks After the Interview.
Hi Tik, I’m under the impression that the Waffen SS where better equipped and supplied than regular army, receiving the newest equipment and had their own supply trains. I’m also under the impression that a Waffen SS division was larger in both men and equipment, specifically #Of tanks. Is this true? I’ve read that during the winter of 1941 and the push to Moscow that Waffen SS troupes had proper winter gear, their command leadership anticipated the need to prepare for winter months ahead of the regular army. well equipped and well fed troops tend to preform better.
Most everything the Germans did on the eastern front was wreckless, standard doctrine says on the attack you should have a 3-1 numerical advantage. 5-1 in urban terrain. The Germans are attacking all the time with even numbers or even out numbered.
You should have a numerical superiority in a relatively small portions of the front where breakthrough is to be achieved, and this is done by massing your forces up within these sectors to accomplish certain operational goal. You don't nessecerly have to have an overall superiority in numbers.
@@BeelzebulKlendathu Sure, but look at the numbers at Kursk just for one example of many. Germans were outnumbered in men, tanks, planes, artillery etc. You don't attack when you're on your back foot.
As I recall, after Operation Nordwind (near Strasbourg) and Operation Spring Awakening (Battle of Lake Balaton), even Hitler realized that the SS troops were not living up to expectations, and was perhaps even thinking of disbanding them. If nothing else, Hitler was severely disappointed in their performance.
