kk 🙂

@Dr Badass PhD did the t34 serve in every single climate possible for world war II, no it didn't however the M4 sherman variance served in every single theater on almost every single front except for and was overall one of the most produced tanks in the world.

Guess Mauler doesn't agree with truth over facts

I asked him about it... he basically said the T34 was a better tank, but the M4 was more successful because there were more of them....

And I said that the M4 was more successful than the t34 that was it so my point proven lol

Relax. I'm trolling.

😛

<:troll_face:726878856585281557>

I have zero clue.... I just know bad things happened in WWII.... I am more interested in the leaders biographies from WWII.....

I read Stalin's auto-biography, and I also read the book Hitler wrote... crazy stuff btw

plus I read Patton and Nimitz books 🙂 both were great reads

I should take a look at more biographies

i read one from a uboat crew member

it was a good read

I read the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin and America has really fallen off...

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/explosion-rocks-southern-lebanon-report-643140

IDF really doing works.

It amazes me what destruction and disruption the IDF can do with how relatively small it is and remain like a ghost when things like this happens

Them israelis are a bunch of technological wizards man

Cause they get the top tech from the usa....

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/399817941576712192/729730944969343066/apartheid_israel.webm

Sent to me by a friend

made me rethink some things

lmao

I already have that video

whoever was talking about shermans and t-34s, the sherman was of more quality, but the T-34 had better armor design

the americans had tanks that could match the 4th gen german tanks like the tiger and panther but due to the atlantic

That convo was forever ago xD

lol

oof

lol

I saw Sherman vs T-34 Debate

Ima necro that conversation again and pull a kanye

"T-34, I'm gonna let you finish, but Sherman is the best"

Ultimately though the argument is silly because they're tanks that were built with objectively different purposes and goals in mind.

IE the Sherman was *definitively* the best Tank in WW2 *for the United States* because it was designed around tight tolerances in production, factoring in certain interchangeability with spare parts from the M3 Lee as well as making sure there would be a reliable supply of spare parts, ease of repair because these vehicles would be operating overseas, reliable performance, and overall versatility.

The Chieftain, Potential History, and Spookston have all made phenomenal cases in defense of the Sherman

And that's not saying the T-34 was a bad tank either. the Soviet Union had a completely different design doctrine and intention, making the T-34 with similar ideas in mind to the Garbage Rod - make so many of them that when one breaks down, the crew hops into a new one and keeps going.

And, previous point includes that the T-34 did have to contend with the Third Reich's best when it came to armor, so naturally they were upgunned and up armored to be able to push through the Tigers, Panthers, Tiger 2's, and Panzer 4's that were massed up on the Eastern front.

So on one hand you have a tank that was designed with the intent of being replaced as fast as it was destroyed, if not faster, while also being able to slug its way through as many obstacles as possible, and then you have a tank that needed to be mass produced for operation across *both* Major oceans, that saw fighting in every theatre of WW2... Two completely different tanks that really would only face off eachother when both were already obsolete, the Korean War.

I guess I'll just leave this here...