(Part 2) Top products from r/WorldofTanks

This is a good place to start.

https://www.amazon.com/Never-Lied-Again-Conversation-Situation/dp/0312204280

One of my best friends is a Military interrogator at a VERY high level. We're talking, if DEVGRU hadn't made a paper weight out of OBL, he'd have been on the team questioning him. I gave him a PDF of this book and he said 90% of it is accurate and useful. He's been an amazing mentor for about 6 years now in my other work, so to me, his word is gospel on the subject of lying. So running the conversation thru a mental filter, it doesn't really ring either completely true or untrue.

>“I do know that the slickest way to lie is to tell the right amount of truth... then shut up.” - Robert A. Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land

I think this takes a few truths and expands enough on them to make them sensationalist. Regardless, those few truths are disturbing in and of themselves.

Oh sweet! Hanging out with Leo! Oh... different Leo. Well, that's okay too, I guess.

I bought this book two weeks ago. Very interesting if you like history of WW2 tanks. Preface starts with WWI and the book does not talk exclusively about German tanks.

Highly recommended.

Hitler's Panzers

To adapt a quote from a quote from the back of a great book...

> Only the slow-witted are reading this anywhere other than in line at the cash register. Ask an adult to help you if you’re still not sure you want to buy the book tank.

My favorite tanker book is Brazen Chariots about a British tanker in a stuart during operation crusader in north africa. It's a really good read.


http://www.amazon.com/Brazen-Chariots-Robert-Crisp/dp/0393327124/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417819283&sr=8-1&keywords=Brazen+Chariots

mfw "$50 is a heavy price":

New

Used

At no point is $55 a really heavy price, given the content of the book. And shipping internationally costs more because customs is a thing.

Now, if you dont want a reference book (and thats what this is) then yea, I can see the price being an issue. But in the realm of reference books, this price is pretty good.

I recently picked up R.M. Ogorkiewicz' book Tanks: 100 Years of Evolution, which I think did a good job of charting out the development of tanks, with diversions into their use and the politics thereof, which dictated design decisions.

You're the (#(#*( "***", I have a background in mathematics. This isn't even hard.

Here's the book: http://www.amazon.com/Probability-Springer-Texts-Statistics-Pitman/dp/0387979743

I don't have an article but I listened to the audio book The Second World War by Antony Beevor. He talks about Rommel.

http://www.amazon.com/Survey-Warfare-Europe-D-Day-August/dp/1468192396/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8

Is it this?

Much like the locals learnt to do during the Siege of Leningrad, you need to avoid the one side of each street that is vulnerable to artillery.

It's a 2" smoke mortar (2-inch Mortar M3), the brits wanted it. There's a paragraph or two in the book M4 Sherman at War about it. Apparently not very popular since it was in the way when loading the main gun.

According to a wikipedia source citing this book, written by John P. Irwin, a veteran who served during WW2 and went on to teach philosophy at Lock Haven in Pennsylvania. I haven't read the book, but he recounts several battles in the T26, in which he was the gunner of the tank.

To read about the effect of an artillery barrage and air support:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tigers-Normandy-Wolfgang-Schneider/dp/0811710297

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tigers-Mud-Commander-Stackpole-Military/dp/0811729117/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1369443808&sr=1-1&keywords=tigers+in+the+mud



http://www.battlefieldhistorian.com/tiger_i_flipped_.asp

When naval guns, high caliber Russian artillery, IL-2s, Typhoons, even freaking heavy bombers throwing bombs/rockets/projectiles at you, you are dead. Tigers were not armored very well on the top by the way- no tank is. Especially the Western Allies had the tendency to pull back and ask for artillery/air support when they ran into some problems.

And if you want numbers, there are books about the Tigers with all 1400 listed. Look them up.

>Switzerland had no tank-building capability until the 1950s, when it decided to build the Panzer 58, armed with a Swiss-produced 90mm/3.54in gun, to replace their ageing fleet of British Centurions. In the mid 1960s this MBT was replaced by Panzer 61, armed with a British gun. Based on the previous Pz 58, itself a development of the American M48/M60 series, the Pz 61 was designed and built by RUAG Land Systems, its appearance resembling it's predecessors.

according to this source.

Also, i doubt the Swiss had no tank building capability until the 50's, since the Nahkampfkanone 2 exists.

I understand your sentiment but your history is off:

1. USSR was not "poorly supplied at first". It was the best equipped army in the world before the war started. It was better supplied than Germany, and in the midst of an offensive mobilization when attacked.
   
   USSR lost entire armies, supply depots, trains loaded with equipment - in the first month of the German invasion. Thousands of planes and tanks turned useless by the Blitz. Millions of troops encircled.
   
   USSR planned for 100% losses in terms or resupplies - but ended up needed much more as millions were thrown away in ill-conceived counter-attacks. This is where the aid from the US became needed.
   
   
2. Regarding Finland:
   
   According to modern day estimates the conquest of Finland in the winter was Impossible. The Red Army managed to do the Impossible, suffering tremendous losses.
   
   From the perspective of the people, it was an unforgivable waste of life.
   From the perspective of Stalin, it was a successful test of his slave army.
   
   ___
   
   Again, the Myth that USSR was "unprepared" for the German invasion must be crushed.
   It wasn't the lack of material preparation that caused the collapse - but the highly offensive stance of their mobilization that proved vulnerable to a pre-emptive strike.
   
   Nazi Germany was an abomination, but the invasion of the USSR was a necessity at a point where Stalin was mobilizing to invade the Romanian oil fields and amassed the greatest invasion army in human history on western borders.
   
   Some references:
   Caveat: Some of V.Suvorov's conclusions are weak, and some evidence is off - but the general idea is brilliant and started a movement of research to properly support.
   
   http://www.amazon.com/Icebreaker-WHO-STARTED-SECOND-WORLD-ebook/dp/B007WTZ372/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408717006&sr=1-1&keywords=icebreaker
   
   There is massive evidence supporting the Offensive nature of Soviet mobilization, particularly the dismantling of defensive lines, de-mining of bridges, and positioning armies in front of natural defensive lines, instead of behind them.
   
   Regarding German supplies, here's a perspective from the ground:
   http://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Combat-Soldiers-Eastern-Studies/dp/0700611223/
   
   He describes events where Russian corpses lined the battlefield in seasonal layers, where machine gunners had to be replaced after breaking down mentally from the slaughter.
   He also supports the evidence that Germans engaged USSR unprepared, to strike early and first, and were helped greatly by taking over supplies and equipment.
   
   Video, Suvorov's lecture in 2009:
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Clv-c6QdBs
   
   Skip his joking at the start and watch the rest. He starts talking about USSR readiness about 29 minutes into this video.