'Hitler's Tailor' Hugo Boss apologises for using slave labour

@RJL518:

The real question to be asked is how would a battle have gone if the Missouri and Iowa took on the Super-Battleships Yamato and Musashi.  
As Samuel Eliot Morison, author of the History of US Naval Operations in World War II, once said…“What a brawl that would have been!”
Even though the Yamato and Musashi had 18.1 inch guns compared to the 16 inch of the Iowa class, the Iowas were still faster and still had better range.  
But who knows.  
IMO it would have depended on the tactics and strategy of the captains in a great battle at that time.

And it was a match-up that nearly happened.  Yamato and two of the Iowa-class battleships, Iowa and New Jersey, missed each other by only a few hours in the area of the San Bernadino Straight during the closing stages of the Battle of Leyte Gulf.  And if Musashi hadn’d been sunk the previous day, there would have been the potential for a two-on-two fight.  I’d have given a lot to get tickets to watch a slugging match like that.

One interesting technical difference is that even though the belt armour of the Yamatos was thicker than that of the Iowas, its performance might not have been better by comparison.  Japanese industry wasn’t capable of producing 16-inch armour as a single block, so the Yamato belt armour was in two layers rather than monolithic, which reduced its effectiveness.  Also, the Class-A armour components of the Iowa’s defenses were more advanced than the grade of armour used on the Yamatos, and thickness-for-thickness had better resistance to penetration.  On the offensive side, the 16-inch AP shells fired by the Iowas were heavyweight designs, with a greater weight relative to their diameter than the 18.1-inch AP shells fired by the Yamatos (2,700 lb vs. 3,219 lbs), and they were fired at nearly the same muzzle velocity (2,500 ft/s vs. 2,600 ft/s) because the Iowa guns had longer barrels relative to their bore (50 calibers vs. 45 calibers).

To be simple… Look at politics as a square.

The top side of the square is 100% government control and authority.  The bottom being 0%

The left hand side of the square is essentially 100% tax.  The right being 0%.

Depending on policy, different groups find themselves at different coordinates in the square.

To answer the original posters question - Communists and Fascists essentially exert the same amount of authority.  But differ in their economic policies.  IE one could be rich in Nazi Germany, where as in communism, the economic freedoms were not as available.  That is one of several conclusions that leads people to see the Nazi’s as right wing.

In simpler terms it’s “Government control of business (Left) vs Business control of Government (Right).”

But is that enough to make the NSDAP a right wing party? In my opinion no. As I feel that all big government is essentially “Left Leaning/Socialistic”.  Meaning that 3/4 of the square is socialism (Anything with more than 50% authority, or 50% tax control of your life)

Again, a very rudimentary and simple perspective, take it or leave it.

One of the major improvements to the Soviet armed forces that came out of the Winter War was the replacement of Kliment Voroshilov by Semyon Timoshenko as People’s Commissar for Defence. Voroshilov had helped Stalin carry out the Great Purge by denouncing some of his military colleagues, and (as I recall) he reversed some of the army reforms that his predecessors had carried out.  He also bungled the opening phases of the Winter War, and was eventually turfed out in favour of the more competent Timoshenko.  After the Soviets won in Finland, Timoshenko set about modernizing the Red Army.

I vaguely recall seeing an old Popular Mechanics cover which showed an alternate solution to the problem of widening the Panama Canal to accommodate warships broader than the 110-foot width of the locks: building a railway that would allow the US to move battleships overland from the Atlantic to the Pacific and vice-versa.

Haile Selassie’s words were to ring true. Four more years the Western Powers allowed Hitler, Mussolini and Japan  to take what parts of the world they wished.
It was only arrogant errors by those same leaders that saw them reversed after some years and millions of deaths.

The second Italian Facist regime : la Repubblica Sociale Italiana (RSI) was set up today, with its capital, not in Rome, but Salo, a small town in Lombardy on Lake Garda,  Northern Italy, where the RSI had his Foreign Office.  
Mussolini was its head, but it was nothing more than a German puppet, dependent on its military and financial support.
Mussolini had been rescued from captivity in a daring raid by a soon to be famous German SS Colonel, Otto Skorzeny on September 12th.
Italy had  surrendered on the 8th and the Allies had  landed at Salerno on the 9th and were fighting the Germans in the south of Italy at this time, though they had not yet captured the city port of Naples.

@Gargantua:

Are you on DRUGS?

Uhm, I won’t answer any questions without my lawyer present.   :wink:

I regard most television documentaries as highly entertaining, but at least sometimes containing information of dubious reliability.  They are there to entertain and inform, and sometimes propagandize, not simply inform.

It is in stacks of dry dusty books that one finds interesting facts, and hot lonely librarians.   :evil:  The internet also does decently as a search tool, although you often have to have a good idea of what you are looking for.  (For example, you won’t typically find mention of “The Protocols of Zion” in any discussion of the Holocaust, which is, well, really bad.)

My understanding of the history of the StG 44 is that production of the gun itself was generally approved of by Hitler.

The MKb 42, FG 42, and MP43 were the predecessors.  I think the referred to “stoppage of the StG 44 by Hitler” (to paraphrase an earlier post) referred to the real infighting in Germany over the design and production of these various predecessor guns.  To sum up, there were various plans for various assault rifles / machine guns, but there was a lot of bureaucratic infighting.  Rather than allowing them to continue arguing to no positive end, Hitler at various points told them to shut up and shut down.

So naturally there was some delay in StG 44 production, but saying Hitler made a stupid decision, or that he completely lacked vision, is like yelling at your cat after you burn your toast.  It’s not the cat’s fault, even if it was in the room at the time.

@Raunchy:

At least 749 U.S. sailors and soldiers would be dead by dawn.
Code-named Exercise Tiger, the ill-fated D-Day dry run was at the time America’s costliest incident of the war (only Pearl Harbor was worse).

:roll:sigh, people just dont know anything about history

But very interesting article, I dont blame you for the  author being an imbecile