Tiger Is vs T34s at The Battle of Prokhorovka: Who Won The Greatest Tank Battle in History?

On July 12, 1943 on the southern front of Kursk bulge near Prokhorovka station, took place one of the largest battles in military history with participation of armoured units.
The Soviet 5th Guards Tank Army and the German 2nd SS Panzer Corps, clashed in a massive battle of armoured vehicles, reminiscent of medieval clashes between opposing armoured cavalry.
The Tiger tank was impressive in every way, and the Wehrmacht now possessed a tank to compete with the T-34s and the KV1s.
More than a thousand armoured vehicles and anti-tank guns from both sides converged on a large plain south of Kursk in the vicinity of Prokhorovka on the morning of July 12th, setting the stage for what would be the largest single tank battle in history - and perhaps the most decisive moment of the war.
Music Credits: All This Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
Copyright fair use notice
All media used in this video is used for the purpose of education under the terms of fair use.
All footage and images used belong to their copyright holders.
#ProkhorovkaBattle #TigerTank #TankBattleWW2

[@jasonmussett2129]

The debate about Prokhorovka continues. Good stuff. Thanks, guys.😀👍

[@jasonmussett2129]

@@frankfkling304 Rodmistrov had to explain his losses to Stalin. It's a miracle he never ended up in front if a firing squad for his pains.

[@phungquyen3511]

9:30 It was General Nikolai Vatutin who ordered the 5th Guards Tank Army to launch the suicidal attack at Prokhorovka. Pavel Rotmistrov didn't want to send his tankmen into battle when they were at such severe disadvantages. Still, a quite informative video.

[@user-do3wt9sk7t]

Some sources say Stalin who ordered this attack but i think you are right

[@desmondgriffith7855]

Actually he didn't, Katukov requested help and Vatutin obliged, he never suggested that they charged the 1st SS panzer division it was Rotmistrov who did

[@ArcticWolf00Alpha0]

You should tell the story of Franz Stautdegger. He was a Tiger Tank commander who took on 50 T-34s on his own and destroyed 22 of them.

[@RussianThunderrr]

wrote: "You should tell the story of Franz Stautdegger. He was a Tiger Tank commander who took on 50 T-34s on his own and destroyed 22 of them." -- Do we really need to glorify more Nazis? Especially SS troops?

[@ArcticWolf00Alpha0]

@@RussianThunderrr So telling the story of a person that actually existed and did what at the time was considered to be quite impressive is apparently glorifying them...rather than simply acknowledging them is apparently glorifying them...no... would talking about a KV-1 tank holding of an entire German battalion for a day make you feel better?

[@RussianThunderrr]

@@ArcticWolf00Alpha0 wrote: "So telling the story of a person that actually existed and did what at the time was considered to be quite impressive is apparently glorifying them...rather than simply acknowledging them is apparently glorifying them...no... would talking about a KV-1 tank holding of an entire German battalion for a day make you feel better?" -- That person that actually existed was trying to conquered, occupy and kill as many as he can, there is no glory into this no matter how you slice or dice it, and doing it from relative safety of the tank that was pretty much immune to just about any anti tank weapons for the time, not to mentioned been surrounded by friendly troops in close proximity. -- Now the KV-1 tank you mentioned were in a lot graver danger, because of rapid advances of enemy, and had to performed heroic acts of self scarifies to defend their land, so others might live in piece. -- So you kinda confused about "heroes" of that war.

[@ArcticWolf00Alpha0]

@@RussianThunderrr I never called him a Hero...If you think thats what i was trying to say, then you to read better, or maybe not be on the internet.

[@ArcticWolf00Alpha0]

@@RussianThunderrr also what you said doesn't hinder the fact that what the Tiger Tank commander did was still an impressive feat and its a part of history, if just seeing a historical account from the perspective of a different side makes you angry...thats a little pathetic...

[@jessicageerligs339]

Some historians think that Manstein had figured out the Soviet's defense and was about to crush it...when Hitler pulled 14 divisions out of the line to defend Italy.

[@gavinbarker6602]

Do you have a source for this?

[@jessicageerligs339]

@@gavinbarker6602 kzbin.info/www/bejne/aGPboYF4f6iGarc .......the 1hr 29 min 40 sec mark.

[@Vlad79500]

He withdrew only two divisions and without equipment, which went to Germany and only then to Italy. The Adolf Hitler division in Italy was engaged in the fight against partisans and protecting Mussolini - purely police functions. After receiving the new equipment, the renamed one was again sent to the eastern front in November.

[@julianmarsh1378]

Manstein had wanted the Kursk battle to commence as soon as the ground dried out enough for motorized units, say in early to mid May...Hitler postponed and postponed...giving the Soviets time to build up incredibly strong defenses...so in a sense the battle was lost for the Germans before a single shot was fired.

[@rodjarrow6575]

Hitler's war in Russia was lost even before the invasion of Russia, in 1940, during the winter war of the USSR and Finland, after which different conclusions were drawn: Hitler decided that the Red Army was was weak, however, Stalin decided that it was urgent to sew warm winter clothes for the soldiers of the Red Army, who many died in the Winter War from frostbite.

[@alexbowman7582]

By mid 43 the Russian factories east of the Urals were beginning to out produce German factories so even an earlier Kursk win would have resulted in an eventual Russian win. Hitler apparently said we have to attack in Russia, thinking of attacking makes me feel sick.

[@julianmarsh1378]

@@alexbowman7582 The point of attacking earlier was to strike BEFORE the Russians had time to fortify in such depth. Had the German attack succeeded as planned, something like 16% of Russia's army would have been wiped off the earth--enough of a loss to curtail meaningful Russian offenses such as happened immediately after Kursk. This in turn might have led to a stalemate and a peace treaty. Stalin had offered several times to talk to the Germans but was rebuffed. After Kursk he saw no reason to do so again.

[@arekofpoland8735]

No - The Weather wasn’t good till July - on the northern part of salient.

[@julianmarsh1378]

@@arekofpoland8735 We are talking about the ground being dry enough to support mechanized formations, not balmy summer days.

[@edmundcowan9131]

Germany destroyed 5 to 1 Russian tanks due to poor Russian tactics. An entire tank corps was destroyed but most many recovered since they won the battle

[@vladimirjokanovic6462]

Well, the one who can take more punches is usually the one who wins a fight. The Krauts were just too delicate and sensitive even back then, let alone today 🙃

[@craigclemens986]

The ratio of 5-1 was consistent throughout the war

[@kjragg1099]

@@vladimirjokanovic6462 Soviet tactics were pretty awful until operation bagration in 1944 where they began using Tukhachevsky’s deep battle theory (red army version of blitzkrieg). If the red army didn’t suffer such a brain drain because of Stalin purging all his best generals, they may not have kept getting bloody noses from the SS and Wehrmacht.

[@traxel14]

@@craigclemens986 Maybe for Tanks, but with the soldiers lost, it is a different story: The soviet man losses were 15 to 1 at the end of the war! And that is a well known fact.

[@craigclemens986]

@@traxel14 yup. Soviets lost about 55% of all deaths in World War Two

[@Ernawati-od3tr]

The most perfect Tanks in World War 2 is a Tiger Tank

[@rifekimler3309]

The Sixth Army did not suffer a crushing defeat at Stalingrad, it was anihilated.

[@craigclemens986]

Actually, they surrendered

[@HiTechOilCo]

@@craigclemens986 - Actually, they were annihilated. Many years after W.W.II ended, only a few thousand of over 100,000 German Sixth Army soldiers came back home to Germany. The rest were slaughtered in Soviet P..O.W. camps.

[@craigclemens986]

@@HiTechOilCo at least 40% became prisoners of war. So the Army was not annihilated.

[@HiTechOilCo]

@@craigclemens986 - Correct and like I said above, then those remaining soldiers were *slaughtered* in Soviet P.O.W. camps.

[@craigclemens986]

@@HiTechOilCo that’s not the same as an army being annihilated.

[@americanpatriot2422]

Great video!

[@thomasaquinas2600]

Historians are always surprised: after a lost battle...or war, the soldiers themselves often are puzzled why they lost; they saw nothing of defeat. Books on Kursk are replete with excuses. One blamed a squall which made the streams near Prokhorovka impassable. One thing that is always overlooked: the battle was basically fought by the Panzer IV's, the Tigers mighty but few, the Elefante and Panther long since abandoned as useless or on fire. The battle followed theory: you cannot defeat a fixed battleground with only equal forces.

[@garyks5757]

Nowhere near equal forces

[@lyndoncmp5751]

There were zero Elefants and Panthers at Prokhorovka. The Elefants were on the other side of the battlefield in the north, while all the Panthers were attached to the Grossdeutschland sector, elsewhere. The three SS divisions didn't have Panthers at the time.

[@Richard68434]

The soviets outnumbered the Germans 3:1, and suffered casualty rates 4:1, not equal strength. The result was due to be experience, coordination and well led officers, not by the model of tanks

[@desmondgriffith7855]

Don't forget that none of the german panzer divisions were at full strength

[@simonx.8655]

Imagine a Pilot on this time in this area of Kursk, as wide as your eyes can see, Death and Explosions over the horizons in each directions. Must like feel the world will end .... like Doomsday has started and noboy on the frontline on the ground will survive

[@utkarshtrivedi8870]

A tactical victory for Germans, but more importantly the Soviets stopped Germans at Prokhorovka hence it was an operational victory for Soviets resulting in winning the Battle of Kursk.

[@user-do3wt9sk7t]

Great video

[@michaelmichael5643]

Nice work however the battle of Brody during barbarossa might very well be bigger... Hitler took the descision to stop Operation Citadel already on the 10th of July... i would refer you to Valeriy Zamulin's the battle of Kurtz "contreversial and negletec aspects".... i have anyway enjoy the video one of the best one on youtube i have seen so far.

[@daviddoran3673]

Brody is often offered as the biggest tank battle....biggest possibly because it was piecemeal , ad hoc, disjointed, coincidental.....most of the tanks involved were "tankettes" including panzers 1 and 11's...can we compare them and their effectiveness with Ferdinands and Panthers used in panzer Schwerpunkts?

[@gabrielc.2177]

@@daviddoran3673 Agreed... Not sure if Brody had as much artillery, general porpouse vehicles, anti tank positions etc as Kursk

[@michaelmichael5643]

Those tankettes as you put it won the battle of France and most of Western Europe... A tank battle is a tank battle and Brody was bigger in scale and numbers....

[@thearsenalmisfit2414]

He said single day tank battle which is correct . Prokhorovka was was just one dat of Operation Citadel alsp known as Kursk. Brody was indeed a bigger over all battle but for a single day in 1 small area Prokhorovka was the largest.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

The Arsenal Misfit, Goodwood at Normandy July 18th 1944 was slightly larger.

[@nitinkanals5087]

I like your videos. 😁

[@shanevanorder2644]

Another battle that should have been avoided

[@BalloonInTheBalloon]

miniscule gripe... the German letter "W" is pronounced "V"... that is "Vaffen SS" - while "V" is most often pronounced "F"... the typical example being Volkswagen.. pronounced "Folksvagen".

[@alexcalin6747]

And some people still say that the tiger was a mediocre tank... Pathetic...

[@kingcorp]

Yup. It was even worse than mediocre.

[@alexcalin6747]

@@kingcorp yes sherman was better

[@Stratigoz]

@@alexcalin6747 Better for lighting the fields of France with their burning carcases.

[@HiTechOilCo]

The main reason that Nazi Germany was totally crushed in W.W.II was because of a lack of fuel. They were critically short of fuel all throughout that horrific war.

[@arekofpoland8735]

Not only fuel … you can manufacture whatever number truck you need but all are useless if you have no rubber for tires

[@toddbradford4700]

It wasn't just fuel. Germany was just too small of a nation to take on Russia, England and the United States. From the moment they were at war with all three they were doomed. The US industrial output alone dwarfed the total war production capacity of Germany. When added to England and Russia's output the disparity between the war production of Germany and the allies becomes laughable. Only a delusional lunatic could have believed a victory over all three was possible.Unfortunately Germany was being led by one. By 1945 the US had called up 16 million men and could have called up many more if needed. 15 Million men served in Russia's military and they could have called up even more as well. Toss in another 4 million men for England and you can see how ridiculously one sided things are getting. By the fall of Stalingrad German was already using poorly trained conscripts from countries under their control. By the end of the war they were pressing old men and 12 year old children into service.

[@salvadorvillegas3569]

​@@toddbradford4700 : Caes en la MENTIRA de creer que solo por la capacidad industrial ya la guerra estaba ganada por los aliados cuando la verdad estribaba en la VOLUNTAD DE LUCHAR Y SACRIFICAR VIDAS ... ¿Crees que los anglo-americanos se atreverían a sufrir las ingentes perdidas que sufrieron los soviéticos? ... ¿Por qué crées que el arma que más desarrollaron los aliados occidentales fue el arma aérea? ... ¿Por qué crees que era tan importante para los anglo-americanos la sangría soviética? ... La triste verdad es que los alemanes perdieron la iniciativa de la guerra cuando sus existencias y reservas de combustible eran ya escasas o nulas. ABRE LOS OJOS y abandona esos ENGAÑOS.

[@toddbradford4700]

@@salvadorvillegas3569 There is a very old saying that has been attributed to many great generals and it's very true. “Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics.” Of course men still have to fight a war that's a given. But if my men have bullets and your men have run out, well it doesn't really matter how brave your men are. You lose. If my men have tank support because I have 54,000 of them and most of your men don't because you only have 1100 scattered over thousands of miles. You are going to lose. Same goes for any of a dozen other logistical examples. Fuel, food, medical supplies, equipment, replacement parts for equipment, etc. etc. Another thing I didn't even mention was that Germany was dependent on 2.7 million horses to haul supplies to their men at the front lines. HORSES! This wasn't a huge problem for them when they were invading small neighboring countries like Denmark. But you can bet your ass it became a very serious problem by the time their supply lines were a 1000 miles into Russia. One of the things that doesn't get talked about enough is the number of supply trucks the US produced and provided for the allies in WW2. Over 2 million of them. It's not sexy or exciting to talk about but trucks are way better for hauling supplies than horses. In fact those trucks may have done more to win the war than any other one piece of equipment. The US alone also produced 297,000 aircraft of various types, 193,000 artillery pieces, 6000 supply ships, and 86,000 tanks.Tactics may win a battle but logistics win the war.

[@salvadorvillegas3569]

​@@toddbradford4700: Mira tus CONTRADICCIONES por creerte los cuentos profesionales de la milicia: -CITA DE USTED: "If my men have tank support because I have 54,000 of them and most of your men don't because you only have 1100 scattered over thousands of miles. You are going to lose." Parece que nunca supiste que esa clase de datos DESDE ANTES DE UNA GUERRA Y EN PLENA GUERRA son los primeros en ser ocultados, falseados o manipulados por la PROPAGANDA...JUSTAMENTE para hacer que tus combatientes CONFIADOS mantengan la moral de lucha... Otra más de tus perlas: -CITA DE USTED: "The US alone also produced 297,000 aircraft of various types, 193,000 artillery pieces, 6000 supply ships, and 86,000 tanks.Tactics may win a battle but logistics win the war." Y ¿Quién se encarga de lograr que la logística se cumpla? ¿Las mismas máquinas se transportan y disparan solas? ...y si tienes las armas y máquinas, pero tu moral de lucha ya se ha roto...con logística y todo ¿Quién las utilizará? ....¿Por qué crees que ocurrió Dunkerke, Dieppe, Stalingrado, etc.? ...¿Por qué crees que Churchill hizo su famoso discurso de la sangre sudor y lágrimas? ...¿Por qué Stalin llamó a una guerra patria? ... ¿Por qué solo tenían asegurada la logística? ...RESPONDE HONESTAMENTE ¡Ah! y otro punto clave que mencionas: -CITA DE USTED: "Another thing I didn't even mention was that Germany was dependent on 2.7 million horses to haul supplies to their men at the front lines. HORSES!..." PRUEBA CONCLUYENTE que hace caer el cuento de una deliberada y muy bien preparada guerra agresiva de dominio mundial de los alemanes. Y por si no te has dado cuenta, GRACIAS a ello resistieron el invierno y mantuvieron la lucha pese a las limitaciones de su logística ... -CITA DE USTED: "One of the things that doesn't get talked about enough is the number of supply trucks the US produced and provided for the allies in WW2." -CITA DE USTED: "Same goes for any of a dozen other logistical examples. Fuel, food, medical supplies, equipment, replacement parts for equipment, etc. etc." Y Por qué no mejor contestas directamente la pregunta : ¿Crees que el PUEBLO de EEUU soportaría las carnicerías en sus ejercitos como las que sufrieron los soviéticos ante los "malvados nazis"? ... ¿Crees que esa entrega masiva de Studebaker y otros ejemplos logísticos de los EEUU a los soviéticos, era por pura y simple generosidad? ...

[@cwalenta656]

Absolutely no operational surprise. Before the offensive is launched the initiative laid with them, not sure, but maybe right there and then see what terms one might get with the leverage of strategic initiative on your side.

[@Anlushac11]

The Tigers played a small role in Prokhorovhka as they were intended to guard the left flank and the bridgehead over the Psel river. You make no mention of 2nd SS Das Reich's role in the battle or the real reason Citadelle was canceled which was the Allies Operation Husky. The main actors at Prokhorovhka were PzIVG's and PzIIIM's. The vast majority of Soviet losses were T-34/76's and T-70M's. When Das Reich inspected the battlefield after a number of lend lease Churchill III's and a few KV-1's were also found. It is recorded that some SU-76i's were at Prokhorovhka and that some were lost. I do not have info on if the Germans recoved them and repaired and used them. In General captured SU-76i's were considered comparable to STuG III's and were used along side them. Operation Husky was the Allied invasion of Sicily that started with airborne landings the night of July 9th with the seaborne Invasion starting on July 10th. Operation Citadelle was canceled and forced pull from Kursk and rushed to Italy to counter the Allied invasion. Sicily fell in 7 days so the forces rushed to Italy didnt make it to Sicily but they were there for the Allied landings shortly after on the Italian Peninsula. Das Reich's 1st medium tank battalion handed their vehicles over and went to Germany to pick up their brand new factory fresh Panthers. Upon arrival Das Reich's veteran tankers looked over their Panthers and inspected them. And refused them. Instead, they handed the factory a list of changes and fixes that needed to be completed before acceptance. The factory was outraged and neither side would give. In the end a third party had to arbitrate a agreement. LSSSAH was in Italy (I want to say Sept 43) and were issued their batch of brand new Panthers. They refused them as not combat worthy. Not sure what that outcome was other than eventually LSSAH eventually used Panthers.

[@nasmi1409]

That what i call a good comentary, if iam not wrong germans captured few su but they not use them in that battle, if iam not wrong there was somthing od 4 them

[@RussianThunderrr]

wrote: "You make no mention of 2nd SS Das Reich's role in the battle or the real reason Citadelle was canceled which was the Allies Operation Husky. " -- Well, there was yet another German offensive operation 2nd SS Corp to which all three Panzer Division were present including SS Division Leibstandarte, SS Division Das Reich and SS Division Totenkopf after Allied invasion of Cecily on July 10th, 1943, and did not go to Italy just yet, even after Eric von Maistein meet with Hitler, and after operation Husky. And it was fought at Prokhorovka, until July 17th, it called Operation Roland, that also failed to achieve the objective of capturing and breaking through Prokhorovka, and only then SS Division Leibstandarte distributed all of its remaining tanks between SS Division Das Reich and SS Division Totenkopf before departing to R&R in Mediterranean Island, while remaining two SS Divisions Das Reich and Totenkopf were redeployed to other developing Soviet strategic offensive in Donbass region South of Kursk near Mius River. -- That is NOT to even mentioned operation "Kutusov" that of major Soviet counter offensive that began on July 12th, 1943 on the Northen part of Kursk salient, which is by its sheer scale easily eclipsing operation Husky by magnitude of 5 to 1 , yet no one talking about it...

[@rodjarrow6575]

Anlushac11 ...You are mistaken! Because the operation in Sicily was not the reason for the cancellation of Operation Citadel! I remind you that not a single Wehrmacht tank was transferred from the eastern front to Sicily ( to Italy ) ! Alas! The modern Western historical propaganda is silent: Because, all the tanks of the 2nd SS Das Reich division, were transferred by another panzer divisions of Wehrmacht to replenish losses during Operation Citadel in East in Russia... The das Reich division itself went to Italy in personnel only without tanks. (All the tanks of the Das Reich Division remained there in Russia) New tanks (for Italy) were received by the 2nd SS Das Reich division, upon arrival in Germany, from where, on new tanks, the Division went to Italy. (This is a fact that is silent in the West today, , inventing a false reason for stopping operation citadel! Alas, the reason was different! The reason is the failure of Operation Citadel itself)

[@rodjarrow6575]

2) For comparison: a) "Husky" - as a whole 60,000 German troops all. b) "Operation Citadel" 800,000 German troops all. Alas, with the beginning of the Russian offensive near Kursk, the Germans became not less, but more troops 950.000 German troops took part in an attempt to stop the Russian offensive near Kursk, which began on July 12..(Statistics show that with the beginning of Husky in Sicily and Italy, alas, there are more German soldiers on the Eastern front, not less!) Question: Who helped whom in the summer of 1943? Were "Operation Husky" a real help for the Russians? Or was it really the other way around: The Russian offensive near Kursk did not allow the Germans to withdraw enough forces from the eastern front to send them to Italy and Sicily to throw the anti-Hitler allies into the sea...(Statistics of the number of troops: ...the summer of 1943, there were 4.5 million German soldiers in Russia In Eastern front all, compared to 60,000 German soldiers in Sicily and Italy. This is 1.5% (1:75) compared to 100% of the Wehrmacht forces in Russia in the summer of 1943)

[@RussianThunderrr]

@@rodjarrow6575 wrote: " Because the operation in Sicily was not the reason for the cancellation of Operation Citadel! I remind you that not a single Wehrmacht tank was transferred from the eastern front to Sicily ( to Italy ) ! ... Alas, the reason was different! The reason is the failure of Operation Citadel itself" -- Yes, those are good points, that is where I should be start explaining, its a Soviet counter offensive on July 12th on Norther part of salient, and Donbass offensive(that is where 2nd SS Corp went for redeployment), and Eric von Mainstein inability to even get past Prokhorovka a week later i.e. operation Citadelle complete failure that cancelled it.

[@makebritaingreatagain8199]

Just found you !!!!! Where have you been hiding !!!! Great work love this first insight to your work . I can see I have many hours of view to get through . My family fought for Hitler , Franco and Churchill 😂😂😂 so I have a lot of knowledge of the eastern front ✌️

[@ponz-]

I watch WW2 battles in color the other day and they have a great deal of footage of this battle I actually recommend it. Also I think they said the ss battle group in the north didn’t lead with tanks?! Why on earth wouldn’t you break through with armor but they lead with infantry. I mean you have arguable the best tank force or the most battle tested tank force of the time and you try to punch through with infantry? lol At least that’s what this show said. I think that was the cause of different success among armored companies.

[@nordlandak6853]

The ss group was in the south and made the furthest progress. Blitzkrieg was not about tank on tank battles. It was supposed to have surprise and speed neither of which the Germans had at Kursk.

[@craigclemens986]

Why show Rommel in the video?

[@krestense7096]

Liebstandarte for Leibstandarte 😄 and the T34/85 often showed was only avayable from 1944

[@torstenpflug5084]

Gut gemachtes Video, aber beschissene Aussprache! Warum laßt ihr euch nicht die Truppennamen vorsprechen? Es klingt doch reichlich seltsam, wenn aus der "Leibstandarte" eine "Liebstandarte" wird.

[@rodjarrow6575]

ha! ha! ha!

[@mobilant1]

Nice short version of the battle. BUT we need to send someone back in time to convince Hitler not to use the name Leibstandarte. British historians get it wrong and pronounce it "Liebstandarte". The difference is as follows: the 1st one is like bodyguard unit and the 2nd British version is like "lieb = kind, nice, lovely" and therefore sounds like nice unit for aSS formation of hardcore Nazis (usually). Who wants to give a try and report it to Adolf?

[@lyndoncmp5751]

This narrator is not British. He's American.

[@dimas128]

from that video i understand that after loos of one Tiger Germany decided to retreat.

[@sharminstyle9716]

Totally 1 sided perspective

[@gregthompson3274]

Having Hitler commanding German forces was the best asset the allies had

[@Wolf-hh4rv]

Video of Rommel?? 1.32 stock footage thrown together randomly lol

[@andrewquick4133]

Check out Ben Wheatley University of Norwich analysis of Luftwaffe aerial photographs and his analysis of the battle many interesting conclusions

[@josephstabile9154]

Thanks for the informative video. One minor correction: name of 1st SS Panzer div. Is pronounced "Lyebstandarte", same pronunciation as English word "lye", as in lye soap. German word for "life" is "Leib". German word for "love" is "Liebe", which does have your pronunciation of "leeb(eh)".

[@oskar6661]

These videos are read by voice software apps...not real people, so you're going to get a lot of funky pronunciation issues.

[@traxel14]

Wrong! The German word for "life" is "Leben", "Leib" means Body.

[@josephstabile9154]

@@traxel14 Note that my comment was primarily directed to correct PRONUNCIATION, of which "Liebstandarte" is wrong & clearly misleading. Etymology: from Middle High German [lib], Old High German [lib], Proto-West Germanic [lib], West Germanic [libe] ("life, body"). Ergo, the meaning of "Liebstandarte SS Adolf Hitler" is the unit to protect (implied) Hitler's person, to wit his body, specifically his LIFE (goal here, after all, is more than just protecting his body, it's keeping him ALIVE.) Soo, I'm going to have to call "WRONG" on the "Wrong", and instead say "PERFECTO"!

[@luisgonzagaosollo7970]

BATTLE OF STALINGRAD By the way, whenever there is talk about Stalingrad, please consider the following information that is usually left out for anti German propaganda purposes: Context. During the war Germany’s population was 80 million inhabitants, and its army was fighting against the Soviet Union with 202 million inhabitants, reinforced by the unlimited resources of the United States, the British Empire, and another 30 allies. The German 6th Army was initially led by experienced Field Marshal Walter von Reichenau during the first phases of the war. After he died in January1942 he was replaced by his inexperienced chief of staff General Friedrich von Paulus. Also, during the battle of Stalingrad 6th Army forces totaled 350,000 troops, including two Rumanian divisions. Upon entering Stalingrad on the 17th of September 1942, the 6th German Army clashed with the Soviet 62nd Army under General Vasili Chuikov, which was soon reinforced by the Soviet 16th Army under General Rokossovski, which saved the 62nd from collapsing under German pressure. For the next two months bloody house to house battles ensued, until 9/10ths of Then on the on the 19th of November, the Soviets launched a pincer attack on the northern and southern German flanks. The German 6th Army was encircled by the Soviet 66th and 24th Armies to the North, 65th and 21st Armies to the West, 57th and 64th to the South, and 5th to the Southwest. The German 6th Army, by then reduced to 235,000 troops after 64 days of combat, was battling a total of 7 Soviet Armies, totaling over one million and a half fresh troops. Nevertheless, under grueling conditions, freezing temperature, dwindling food, ammo and petrol supplies, the 6th Army resisted encirclement 71 days before surrendering on the 1st of February 1943. Still some German pockets of resistance held their positions until first days of March. 107,800 were taken alive, of which only 6,000 remained alive 10 years later. All in all, around one million casualties on both sides according to some accounts, including civilians, and perhaps the bloodiest battle in history. The odds were 7 to 1 against the Germans, and their supply lines cut off, and hundreds of miles away. It was just a matter of time before the inevitable outcome.

[@IhorBodnarchuk]

The largest tank clash is battle near Brody, in Ukraine between soviet and German forces, two years before Kursk

[@lyndoncmp5751]

The tanks were mostly far smaller and lighter at Brody. Vast majority were light tanks. Not really comparable.

[@explorer1968]

The irrational delay on the German offensive at Kursk costed Germany all chances of victory. If Hitler (who else??) didn't interfered with Field Marshall von Manstein's plan, it could force the withdrawal of the Soviet forces...

[@andraslibal]

Brody-Dubno was a larger tank battle in 1941.

[@craigclemens986]

No, it wasn’t.

[@craigclemens986]

4,250 tanks at Brody. About 7,000 tanks at Kursk

[@frankylee7442]

What is not very well known : The delay came from the betrayal of the date - not only one time. This was a big reason, why Hitler postponed the attack.

[@christopherthrawn1333]

Well done here. 👍

[@greatndit]

so... how many tiger deployed in operation citadel ? how many tiger were destroyed ?

[@arekofpoland8735]

How many were operational ? 30-50 %? Under prohorovka LAH HAD 1 tiger operational and 10 in Totenkopf - 5 DR

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

146 Tigers deployed. 6-13 total losses, depending on source.

[@greatndit]

@@TTTT-oc4eb And they decide to pull back

[@arekofpoland8735]

@@TTTT-oc4eb Yeah - Hard to kill Tiger if it is not on battlefield. :)

[@kawythowy867]

They should have by passed Stalingrad and let it wither on the vine. Hitler was a fool!! He focused on the name of the town and also his hatred for Stalin pick the horrific fate of his Army. And it was awful! We will never know the horrors of battle. Thank Christ for that.

[@elizabethmiller7918]

So many myths are taught in Europe surrounding this campaign. "Bypassing" Stalingrad was never a realistic option. It controlled all the railway junctions and bridges. Even if you could cross the Volga w/o taking Staingrad, why would you? You cannot cross the Volga and have Stalingrad behind u held by the soviets. The Germans needed to take and hold Stalingrad to secure the flank of the armies driving towards the caucasus oil. While taking Stalingrad was not a sufficient pre condition for winning the war in the east, it was a necessary one. It had nothing to do with the name of the city. Also the 6th Army not surrendering for a long time after encirclement helped the germans extricate their even larger armies from the caucasus in time, there simply was no option for the 6th Army to surrender early and waiting until the huge withdrawals in the South were nearly complete saving 600,000 german troops from encirclement in the south.

[@Stratigoz]

​@@elizabethmiller7918 They should have bypassed the whole eastern front and hit and encircle the Soviets from the south xD. If only the internet generals could take direct control of the armies lmao!

[@jameshamilton4327]

So 5 tanks lost against many hundred of the enemy and then you retreat after winning the battle .Yeh right!

[@julianmarsh1378]

Yeh, right. Coz there are hundreds more yet to show up and at any rate, it became apparent that the initial plan of encircling large Russian armies simply was not going to happen, so why keep fighting?

[@sharminstyle9716]

@@julianmarsh1378 You don't get the point. This is a video from German perspective. He only mentions loss of 1 Tiger in the Liebstandarten

[@DowJonesDave]

Just listen to the last sentence. The Germans didn't "lose' at Kursk. The allies landed at Salerno and the Kursk offensive was called off to reinforce the defence of Italy.

[@marksummers463]

They withdrew bc the Allies just landed in Italy & the tanks were needed there.

[@AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg]

Winter and Willi froze

[@kjragg1099]

It’s no surprise the 3 strongest SS divisions absolutely decimated the Red army at prokhrorovka. Those guys were trained ferociously and were an incredibly tough nut to crack.

[@ShamanKish]

Nobody. It wasn't a tank battle at all. It was a defensive battle where tanks were useless. And, please, find someone to read.

[@rodjarrow6575]

The beginning of the video is an episode from the 1968-71 soviet film series "the Liberation": kzbin.info/www/bejne/oYLKm4eceshnd5o tank attack, Russian tanks move at maximum speed to shorten the distance in the battle with the enemy, which would deprive German tanks of the advantage in defeating the enemy at a long distance. The film is not accurate, alas, in the summer of 1943, during the Battle of Kursk, there were short 76 mm caliber guns on the T-34, however, on the contrary, 85mm caliber guns are shown in the film, which appeared only by the end in 1944 (who were able to fight against all types of heavy tanks of the Wehrmacht). (Bonus from series "the Liberation": The Russian tactics of the false attack are shown in the episode of the death of a rifle battalion, from which 14 people survived, who managed to escape from the encirclement in a false bridgehead on the river bank, which was created with the aim of distracting the main forces of the Germans from another place of the main movement of the Russian offensive: kzbin.info/www/bejne/kGjVoamFjr6titk ) An episode of the film based on the 1957 book "Battalions ask for fire" (Infantry Battalions require artillery fire support) literary genre "realism".

[@davidharman7245]

Thanks dude! I appreciated learning that. I have seen some of your other comments. I like your insightful takes and the facts you share. I quite dislike the arrogant patriotism on the internet by those who lack knowledge of the technology and history of the events and rant like = "our general, or soldiers, or this tank, or that plane was the greatest! And that's why we won the war singlehandedly, or would have won if not for _excuse_." Bless you and I hope you have a good one.

[@arekofpoland8735]

T34/85 was introduce in spring 1944

[@rodjarrow6575]

@@arekofpoland8735 Ta informacja jest wymieniona w moim poście

[@arekofpoland8735]

@@rodjarrow6575 ja to rozumiem ...pod koniec 1944 ...85mm caliber guns are shown in the film, which appeared only by the end in 1944 ... ale OK

[@rodjarrow6575]

@@arekofpoland8735 Właśnie o tym jest napisane w moim pierwszym poście..., na górze.

[@shmegsbenedict6062]

Corps is pronounced "Core" can't cover military history if you don't really know the jargon.?

[@stephenobrien5909]

This was not the biggest tank battle in history.

[@greatndit]

10:55 was hitler decission to withdraw from kursk wa wrong ? what if they keep attacking ? can they win ?

[@HiTechOilCo]

The main reason that Nazi Germany was totally crushed in W.W.II was because of a lack of fuel. They were critically short of fuel all throughout that horrific war.

[@greatndit]

@@HiTechOilCo So , they almost run out of fuel

[@frankalbert7687]

Once and for all: If you make Videos about WW2 please try to pronounce the glorious names of the SS-Divisions a bit more german Leibstandarte, Das Reich and Tortenkopf, good god?????

[@majungasaurusaaaa]

So the fat cats delayed the offensive while not making up for it. Just another example on how those things were boons for the allies.

[@grossdeutschlandpanzerdiv.1086]

There were no T-34/85s at Kursk. Only model 42s and 43s. Panther model Ds were still mechanically unreliable. The early SU-152 was a big plus for the Red Army. The German Elephant turned out to be a disappointment for the Wermacht.

[@Stratigoz]

Still their k/d ratio was pretty good all things considered including their mechanical problems, the lack of machine gun and their stupid way to use assault guns as a tank.

[@markochs2495]

Thanks for bringing this to attention. Gross Deutschland. Most ww2 videos are incorrect. They through in tanks and videos from any time period. And any front. Most information is incorrect. They always exploit any German defeat with out giving all the details. They don't say much about the second battle of Targu furmus. Spelling error.

[@ktg8030]

The Elephant was excellent in a defensive role.

[@bazzakeegan2243]

At Kursk, the "Elephant " was in fact the "Ferdinand "..........!

[@darth_elsa6681]

That's the thing about the Ferdinands....a lot of them broke down during the attack and a lot were destroyed. However, the ones that managed to make it to their objectives did perform well enough given the situation they were in.

[@ericvantassell6809]

Leibstandarte is not a Spanish word.

[@JDDC-tq7qm]

While Russians can lose battles it just keeps coming and coming stronger the Germans on the other hand they lose battles they lose the war that's the difference

[@scotttyson8661]

Why deploy Wittman to Italy.Germans had the High ground plus The defense lines.

[@user-mh2cc4jf3f]

Thanks to intelligencе Kim Philby, the USSR found out exactly where the Reich was planning to strike a decisive blow (near the village of Prokhorovka) and held off a powerful attack by German tanks, which later allowed the USSR to win the Battle of Kursk. When Philby was asked what the main thing in his biography he did, he repeatedly repeated: "Prokhorovka"

[@arekofpoland8735]

No - Russians were sure main attack would come from north a this is why they panic on the south and sent 5 TA

[@marksummers463]

Philby was a Russian agent I think.

[@marcelgroen6256]

A good video. Always nice to hear the English pronunciation of German names.

[@WH-um2gx]

In this case one knows the pronunciation as "frontier English" which is a USA subset of English. 'No longer amazed this videos' speaker not even trying to pronounce German or Russian correctly. None seem to even know how to pronounce Adolf.

[@rahjah6958]

It’s a bot voice lol

[@rahjah6958]

And I’d like to hear a German say any 1 English word properly

[@marcelgroen6256]

@@rahjah6958 Don't feel insulted. btw I am not German, but speak both English and German (and both with limitations).

[@HiTechOilCo]

Many KZbin creators do not speak English, or if they do, not very well. So instead they use a computerized voice that many times does not pronounce words correctly. So it's either that, or no video.

[@ianjapp9805]

It seems to come down to A) VON RiBBENtROP and his PZ. MK IVs on the Hill 252.2 knocking out dozens and dozens of t34-76 and in the process losing 3 PZ MK IVs themselves and B) WittMANN and his TiGERS taking on those 181st T-34s or whatever and slaughtering them = I feel grateful and very sorry for the Russian soldiers who fought these T-34s on this day and were massacred ..

[@cz1589]

Some notes *Some historians point out Russian losses at Kursk were even greater then assumed, but from a strategic point of view, it was a Russian victory indeed - also because the Germans halted the offensive. *A spy helped the russians with crucial information. Wich was great, for intelligence is just as important in warfare, nothing to be ashamed of: reason for succes of Rommel and Afrika Korps *It was a mix of reasons, but the Russian did have a better trained and motivated army there, compared with 1941 standards. They were fighting back in a professional way. *Myth of Russian overwhelming forces is a german narritive, to spare them embarresment of loosing battles without being seriously outnumbered. Historians often trust german perspectives too much. *A lot of Hitlers strategic actions make sense, because of serious fuel shortages, after the fall of 1941, reserves was depleted, sounding the end of the effective blitz krieg tactics. So, a more static warfare was hated by his generals, but from economic-strategic perspective rational. *Conquering the Caucasus was a sound target, rather then moscow. Oil was the only way to continue and win the war. Hitler: if we dont take the Caucasus, I must end the war.

[@davidharman7245]

Howdy! Cool facts. (And, I agree with most of them. not that it is significant) What are some of your favorite Eastern Front sources? Have you ever read accounts of Russian soldiers who fought in WWII? (The ones I have do make it clear that in many places the Russians had more men and equipment. However, "overwhelming odds" can be subjective.) Russian equipment and manpower losses were higher than the Germans due to the tactics of both Commissioned and Non Comissioned Officers, and tank commanders. (radios in most T-34 tanks only permitted the leader tanks to transmit. Meaning that having a keen eye to changes in momemtum and seeing targets as soon as possible was key to staying alive, as all tanks could not alert the others of the changing situation in battle)

[@luisgonzagaosollo7970]

@@davidharman7245 As if losing hundreds more Soviet tanks than the Germans on almost al encounters wasn't an embarrassing enough. Also, Germans were almost always outnumbered by the Soviets. What are your sources?

[@davidharman7245]

@@luisgonzagaosollo7970 Sorry for the delay. I was not home. And I had to get my pets taken care of when I got home. The following books are memoirs (year published in English) [country of perspective] Blood Red Snow (2002) [German] Tigers in the Mud (1992) [German] Panzer Destroyer (2010) [USSR] Death Traps (1998) [USA] I must have loaned a memoir by Russian infantryman away before I moved and forgot because it is missing. Most of my thoughts on tactics in urban warfare on the Eastern Front come from an English translation of a documentary of the Russian Public Broadcasting Service on Stalingrad found on KZbin. Sadly, I forget the name. I now realize the Account and Altas of WWII in all it's theatres I read again and again (published in the 1990s and from a US perspective) is at my childhood home.

[@dusty7993]

The Soviets having overwhelming forces isn't a myth, they did deploy more men and had more tanks and trucks and all other resources on the eastern front in total, even after taking more casualties overall they still ended up outnumbering the german troops. The key difference was the soviets could absorb the losses and replace them while the germans couldn't because the soviets had more manpower and supplies in reserve and by the late war it is fair to say they had overwhelming forces, even after taking more losses overall.

[@conceptalfa]

👍 👍 👍!!!

[@chuckliebenauer3656]

This presentation continues to support the notion that German offensive could have been successful except Hitler stopped. This battle was the third disaster for the Germans in1943. More significant were the Battle of Stalingrad and the surrender of German troops in North Africa. These two battles effective cost the Germans over a half million TRAINED men. Plus all of their equipment. Kursk was a sausage grinder for German armor and infantry. Neither of which could be replaced. The presentation does even mention the debacle on the north side of the salient with 9th Army stopped in it’s tracks. After this the Germans were on the run both figuratively and literally. The Germans might have have had good tactics and equipment but their lack of a real strategy for the war was what killed them most. Even if they had won at Kursk they were going to lose the war. Their over all arrogance in thinking the Russians could beat them ultimately did them in.

[@HiTechOilCo]

The main reason that Nazi Germany was totally crushed in W.W.II was because of a lack of fuel. They were critically short of fuel all throughout that horrific war.

[@chuckliebenauer3656]

@@HiTechOilCo the population of Germany was 1/3 of Russia, 1/2 of USA, equal to the UK, let alone significantly short on production capacity. When they were stupid enough to declare war on the USA on December 11, 1941 it was just a matter of time for them to lose. Oil was just part of their resource issues.

[@salvadorvillegas3569]

​@@chuckliebenauer3656 : People of USA and England NEVER will accept and supported any army massacre like in the USSR ...

[@TheYeti308]

Yeah they did and then had to bail to help lil ducie .

[@ktg8030]

This was not the largest tank battle in history up to that point!!

[@chopperking007]

When Fritz was made to eat humble pie .

[@elizabethmiller7918]

You havent been paying attention have you? the soviets losts so many tanks at Prokhorovka, their commanders lied to Stalin about the losses they inflicted in the Germans.

[@lorimeyers3839]

The greatest armored battle in history was at Brody in 1941 during Barbarossa. Kursk is not the largest tank battle ever.

[@daviddoran3673]

You can't rewrite history by pretending Kursk never mattered....

[@falcondmp]

Stupid reaction… nobody claims that Kursk did not matter

[@lorimeyers3839]

@@daviddoran3673 I’m not saying it never mattered. But people who lack the knowledge on this subject are convinced that Kursk was a crushing loss for the Germans. Quite frankly, that’s not the case. They weren’t as powerful or as mobile as they were in 1939-1941 for several reasons, but German intelligence is what failed their military time and time again throughout the course of the war.

[@Stratigoz]

@@lorimeyers3839 Of course it was a crushing defeat. They never launched a similar sized offensive with good support and good chances of success ever since.

[@nasmi1409]

@@Stratigoz in that moment there was no chance to win that battle, look what's happen after that battle, constans retreating for german side

[@francoismart]

+1

[@roblouw3038]

Pretty good summary - yes, the Russians lost more than 600 armoured vehicles at Prokhorovka in about 24 hours - to around 65 armoured vehicles lost for the Wermacht with only 1 Tiger which was recovered - so it was a crushing defeat for Russians that somehow didn't turn into ultimate victory in taking, and cutting off Russians in Kursk - those prepared defences were so well done that the Germans actually did extremely well from the South East attack - Model just had to hold in the North and Von Manstein should have been given free reign to encircle - taking all those Elite divisions away to Italy was a massive decision which scuppered Von Manstein - weaker divisions from somewhere else should have been sent to Italy and Kursk left intact especially Von Mansteins forces - so it was actually a LOST victory for Germany - and if Germany had just one or two more factories producing Tigers that would have made a HUGE difference to all theatres - imagine 100 more Tigers at Kursk - especially from the South East - mincemeat.....

[@Vlad79500]

"taking all those Elite divisions away to Italy was a massive decision" All? Two divisions that left their equipment were sent to Italy and performed police functions to combat partisans and protect Mussolini. Already in November they received equipment and were sent to the eastern front. You apparently forgot that during the Battle of Kursk the Red Army launched an offensive operation. And a little later the second. That is why Hitler gathered Model and Manstein for a meeting and stopped Operation Citadel.

[@galatura]

The Russians got wrecked, mostly by Panzer IV's.

[@JDDC-tq7qm]

Still captured Berlin while the Germans got split in half

[@Franky46Boy]

Very good overview, but 'Leibstandarte' should be pronounced as 'Laybstandarte' or 'Lybstandarte' (like in the English word 'Lie'), not 'Leebstandarte'...

[@HiTechOilCo]

Many KZbin creators do not speak English, or if they do, not very well. So instead they use a computerized voice that many times does not pronounce words correctly. So it's either that, or no video.

[@TheFunkhouser]

Why does it cost to subscribe to you!? Annoying!

[@edwardhanson3664]

This narrator has a definite bias in favor of the fascists'.Lots of German film clips, damn little Soviet coverage.

[@jamesruddy9264]

Probably because German film is more available than Russian film.

[@KKRioApartments]

The assertion that the Germans lost only 5 panzers is nonsensical and illogical on many levels. An entire SS panzer corps gave up and turned around, conceding defeat in the summer's main strategic offensive after losing only 5 tanks (and 850 men)? How ridiculous is that? Those are drop-in-the-bucket level losses.

[@stormtrooper8420]

Those are high casualties for germans. But a drop in the bucket for the Soviets because they didn't care about their soldiers. SS retreated because they knows that they can't hold on for long. Smart move

[@zakmarsden5997]

@@stormtrooper8420" didnt care about their soldiers???" NO commander or leader on earth "cares about their soldiers" The soldiers job is to fight and die ,even suicidally,at the behest of their leaders. The Soviet soldiers knew that German captivity meant death for them by that time.,so they fought bravely and fanatically, The commanders will send in as many troops as they think will win a battle without consideration for casualties IF they can achieve the desired outcome or victory, Soldiers lives ANYWHERE do not matter one jot!

[@stormtrooper8420]

@@zakmarsden5997 a smart commader will order his men to retreat if the situation is bad

[@JDDC-tq7qm]

​@@stormtrooper8420not the Spartans or Russians 😂😂

[@stormtrooper8420]

@@JDDC-tq7qm Spartans knew they was going to loose. It was pretty much a suicidal move. But Spartans was efficient because they inflicted more casualties to the enemies but that's not the case for the Russians 😅 Russians are just straight up dumb

[@chrisigoeb]

If hitler had shown a little more military skill operation citadel could have been won. Just let your generals do their Jobs for once Adolph

[@timothyhouse1622]

MOST historians no longer consider Kursk the greatest tank battle. The Battle of Brody in 1941 actually had a lot more tanks involved, but since it was one of those battles early in Barbarossa it gets overlooked. It also involved early war tanks that aren't as "sexy" as Tigers and Panthers.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Yes but let's be honest. At Brody in 1941 the vast major of the tanks were light, compared to 1943. BTs, T-26s, Panzer IIs, 38ts etc. Not really comparable. Do it in tonnage and Kursk was much larger.

[@ryanconnolly1950]

@@lyndoncmp5751 tonnage is by how I reckon the measure is made

[@gwmba1989]

The Germans had better tanks, guns, soldiers and equipment but they were heavily outnumbered in every aspect and their attack was telegraphed. The Russians had months to prepare extremely strong defences. Operation citadel was never going to be a success because it lacked the key element of surprise and the Germans were just too few in number to go up against the Soviet hordes and their never ending supply of reserves of both men and machines.

[@rodjarrow6575]

You're wrong! There are accurate statistics of enemy troops on both sides of the battle ! unlike the "countless hordes" - this old propaganda lies! In total, in the summer of 1943 there were 4.5 million Hitler soldiers on the eastern front in Russia! Alas, the whole history of the world's wars is not comparable to the number of "countless hordes of soldiers that Hitler gathered to attack Russia, including in the summer of 1943, but alas, it was unsuccessful again! I will remind you that in the USSR under the rule of Stalin there were fewer people than under the rule of Hitler, who subordinated the whole of mainland Europe to his power, which all worked for Hitler during the attack on the USSR, as an analogue of the modern EU, but led by Hitler in those years, who eventually lost everything! The difference between Stalin's time and Hitler's time is that factories in the USSR produced more military equipment than factories in Germany & EU together, under the rule of Hitler (The truth about which the narrators of the war II are silent today: As a result of the war II by the spring of 1945 in Soviet captivity among 5,200,000 soldiers of Hitler's army, alas, every second soldier was not of German nationality, while all were Europeans (Western)) Because the whole of Europe was subordinate to Hitler during the war against Russia...- A reminder of the past to our deceitful time!

[@nasedo3129]

@@rodjarrow6575 Maybe the reason the Russian factories out produced the German factories was that the Russians were fed millions of tons of aid from the United States while the German factories were bombed into smoking ruins by the Americans and the British.

[@rodjarrow6575]

@@nasedo3129 1) The aid that the United States sent under Lend Lease was no more than 10% of the total production potential in the USSR 2) Hitler also received assistance from the United States and Britain...An example of this help: Without oil from the United States and Britain for Hitler, this war would never even have begun and more than 50 million Europeans who died, all would have remained alive ...! More than 50% of all German oil is 8 million tons of oil annually until the summer of 1944, Germany received from Romania and Hungary, whose main oil production companies were owned by the British-American Consortium Shell and Standard Oil.

[@wilku8888]

@@rodjarrow6575 how outrageous it is to put blame for helping starting the war on Britain and US whereas the oil you are talking about was supplied by Soviet Union after Nazi Soviet alliance. Hitler would have never started the war with west without guaranteed supplies of oil and raw materials from Soviet Union. German war economy would have collapsed without this help, because british naval blocade blocked other sources of import. Are you commie or something?

[@rodjarrow6575]

@@wilku8888 The alliance of Communists and Nazis is nonsense, exactly the same nonsense as the alliance of the Jews of Israel with the Muulmans of Iran! So I remind you that the USSR fought against Hitler, starting with the 1936 war in Spain, and starting from 1938 to September 17, 1939, the USSR fought against Japan, Hitler's ally! 2) Requiem to convoy PK-17: Alas, Lend Lease was not a gift, it was a debt... that the USSR paid to the USA right up to the beginning of the 70s! And, I feel sorry for the courage and sacrifice of American and British ordinary sailors from the Northern Convoys in the USSR, because these sailors did not know that they would die in the cold Northern Seas, torpedoed by German Submarines that went hunting at sea, went out on diesel fuel, which was produced in Germany from oil that Hitler received from Anglo-American oil companies right up to the summer of 1944! Alas, the truth is never pleasant! I quote from the New York Times of June 24, 1941: "Senator Hary Truman Democrat of Missouri suggested that the United States help which ever side seemed to be losing: If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany and that way let them kill as many as possible..." So the questions: a) Are Shell and Standard Oil not the Anglo-American oil consortium of the 30s and 40s? - So, take the trouble to independently find out the biography of Shell and Standard Oil about who during these years was the owner of the main oil production companies in Romania - the main supplier of oil to Hitler throughout the war? And, for dessert, read the biography of Morgan Jr. in the open access network, who, since the 20s, collected "aid" money from US banks ..., it was billions of dollars of aid from US banks for the development of the beggars... beggars of the Nazi parties in Europe, in order to bring them to power in Italy and Germany, at the very time when the compassionate Morgan held the post of Minister of Finance of Germany, concurrently with collecting aid for "beggars...in Italy & Germany") The Morgan's biography is just one person out of the whole Wall Street gang. b) And, think about it, ponder why, back in 1938, already possessing B-17 squadrons, the US and British governments did not deprive Hitler of the production of synthetic gasoline in Germany, however, very quickly, within one month, they bombed all this production to zero, already only in May-June 1944, before the Normandy landings... So, what did they wait for so long, starting from 1938 and until the summer of 1944...? Response name: "The Breton Woods Conference in the USA in the summer of 1944, which brought together the financiers of all the war-torn economies of Europe (competitors of the USA) who with a bow of the defeated arrived in the USA for the coronation of the dollar - the main currency of the world! - This is how the IMF began, it began with sacrificing more than 50 million Europeans and destroying all European economies (competitors of the USA) in the fire of war II, followed by the "export" of all European gold to the USA and enslaving their economies with DEBT, according to the Marshal's Plan, as a result of the War II.

[@BobSmith-ui4qu]

The p in corps is silent!

[@craigclemens986]

Corps is not pronounced corpse.

[@HiTechOilCo]

Many KZbin creators do not speak English, or if they do, not very well. So instead they use a computerized voice that many times does not pronounce words correctly. So it's either that, or no video.

[@falcondmp]

Lean how to pronounce leibstandarte please.

[@HiTechOilCo]

Many KZbin creators do not speak English, or if they do, not very well. So instead they use a computerized voice that many times does not pronounce words correctly. So it's either that, or no video.

[@falcondmp]

@@HiTechOilCo True

[@GardenerEarthGuy]

Stalin knew how to party...

[@mpravica]

It's strange that to this day, people dig around Kursk/Prokhorovka and keep finding buried Nazis who were killed during the battles. The numbers just seem off.

[@HiTechOilCo]

The vast majority of German soldiers were not Nazi's.

[@rodjarrow6575]

Unfortunately, the authors of this video demonstrate their ignorance, or are lying!, telling about the losses in 1 tank, and in general, allegedly, there were no more than 10-15 tank losses for all tank divisions! Because, the entire Das Reich division was sent to Italy by personnel only, alas, without tanks at all! Alas! Only upon arrival in Germany, the new tanks were received by the division's personnel for departure to Italy... Explanation to the ignorant! The Germans never included in the lists of losses of tanks that could not be repaired, restored after a battle! This is the difference between German statistics and Russian statistics - which completely included all tanks in the lists of losses, damaged in battle, but, after the battle restored a larger number!(Usually, after a battle, a large number of tanks damaged in battle could be restored! ) Therefore, the Germans get few losses in battle, and the Russians always have a lot losses in statistics. The German statistics of tank losses in battle, this is the same as the wounded soldiers carried off to the surgeon's table, should not be recorded in the list of losses in a particular battle. Tricky statistics is the real name for such statistics, quoted by the authors of this video.

[@arekofpoland8735]

Actually LAH was sent to Italy and without equipment - LAH took only command tanks. DR and T were sent in the south. LAH handover all tanks to DR and T. As you explained LAH lost 5 tanks due to the fact that they hold ground and could recover another tanks. This is how they made statistics !!!!

[@user-vj8bq1pe4e]

Забываете, что после Сталинграда у Красной армии был дух победителя.

[@perkunas8651]

Red „Army“ had no „spirit“ nor mentality. Simply because it was no army, but hordes of barbarians.

[@JDDC-tq7qm]

​@@perkunas8651Red Army destroyed the fascists and conquered Berlin cry me a river 😂😂

[@xapocotacox]

Kinda weird how you glorify the German tankers so much honestly

[@MasterMalrubius]

Why? They were not fighting for the Nazi ideology but for their country and families. Many brave people fought in war throughout history and it was not always the victors who were in the right. If anyone was.

[@rickmoreno6858]

Oh geezus stfu.so if they were glowing and blowing about the Soviet and or allied nations tankers you'd be so gleefully praising them. But since it's the "bad giys" then it's no good, please just shut up, and don't beeed

[@vvr881]

@@rickmoreno6858 it's not that nazis get idolized...its their tactics and equipment were so revolutionary and their tactics are used today( Desert Storm)...they also fought against massive odds. It's interesting to watch as an ex soldier myself. Krauts were dam good soldiers

[@rickmoreno6858]

@@vvr881 yes I understand, my comment was directed towards the author that wrote, "weird how you guys are glorifying german tankers" that's why I replied with my comment.

[@ArcticWolf00Alpha0]

Kinda funny that you say that, i see a lot of videos on this channel focusing on the allies more than the Germans.

[@daviddoran3673]

Even as the Wehrmacht retreated from the Kursk salient they continued their vicious and criminal scorched earth tactic...lynchings and massacres of civilians were commonplace in Orel and Belgorod as was the wholesale burning of towns and crops.....the SS can't be blamed for this as they had been withdrawn....

[@rickmoreno6858]

Oh shut up with this shit I'm so tired of someone's Biased Bullshit being spewed in the comments. War is a fucking hell.

[@RussianThunderrr]

@@rickmoreno6858 wrote: "Oh shut up with this shit I'm so tired of someone's Biased Bullshit being spewed in the comments. War is a fucking hell." -- Oh, if you claim that you are "SO TIRED", then go give yourself a rest, perhaps study some root causes for this Genocidal Conquest of A. Hitler and Nazis, then you "might" talk, but until then STFU yourself, since you know nothing about that war.

[@rickmoreno6858]

@@RussianThunderrr lol OK dude

[@rickmoreno6858]

@@RussianThunderrr you want to talk atrocities let's talk about the atrocities the Soviets did to their own Soviet citizens Mass starvation of the entire Ukrainian population the pols the fins the Latvian s lithuanians ,Estonia I can go on and on and on about how the Soviets atrocities were far nastier than anything the Germans thought about doing or did I do know a little bit about WWII there big guy and it's not like your bias bs

[@RussianThunderrr]

@@rickmoreno6858 wrote: "lol OK dude" -- What so funny!?

[@GP-fw8hn]

this video is so bad on so many levels, cant go into all of them

[@dan_mer]

You are still repeating the old lies. This is what happens when your only source of information is Cold War propaganda. You mentioned Russian sources, but didn't say what these sources say. The Germans lost over 500 tanks in one day at Prokhorovka.

[@captain0080]

He said the liebstandarte lost one tiger, not the total of all the german loses.

[@wilku8888]

If I am reading about Cold War propaganda then I know I am dealing with Russian, probably even internet troll hired by state and I can stop taking seriously what he is saying.