What army would you join in World War2. Now I’m talking about the beginning of the war. What army would you join without knowing who would win. Please tell me your rank you would want to be. Tell me what army. Tell me what you would want to do in that army. Please leave a message on what you want.
German Military since that was the height of their power. I’d probably want to start off as a private since that’s what everyone does…
I’d want to be a Panzer IV commander in the Waffen-SS since they were issued better equipment and were givin better training. I want to…blow up tanks…?
Swiss, Swedish, Portuguese or Spanish…
Rank - General…
What do to - staying alive…
Sorry to be predictable but I would only join the British army, its the country of my birth and I can’t imagine fighting for anybody else. The ranks would do for me as officers are targeted.
Rob
I would have chosen the British Army, and the rank I would prefer would be Captain.
Reasons:
(a) The Britsh Army had some pukka, sunny postings at this time, including Malta, Cyprus, Crete, Egypt, The Persian Gulf, Africa, Burma, Malaya and Singapore, Hong Kong and various South Paciifc islands, India…The Raj!
(b) A Captain’s Dress and Mess uniforms were also rather smart, especially good for attracting ladies, and even their working uniforms were better than soldiers’. Captains were considered to be dashing young blades, whereas Majors and above were considered to be ageing fuddy-duddies. They were not as wet behind the ears as Lieutnants and the ladies thought them better experienced and in their prime of life. They also didn’t get all of the rubbish duties to perform as Lieutenants did and, of course, they were better paid than Lieutenants…therfore a better social calendar. Captains could also intimidate lieutenants into paying for the drinks in the Mess…what better life could there be??? :twisted:
I would join the German Army.
Rank-Corporal
Reason-Because the power they had in the beginning.
What Class-Flakpanzer IV Wirbelwind
On the western front.
Because of the U.S.A planes had a great reputation on the western front.
Why would you want to be in a FlakPanzer on the Western Front if the US had a great Air Force reputation? That means you have a better chance of getting blown up by a Jabo
As we are discussing a ‘war-footing’ situation, I would have to choose to be a rifle platoon commander with British Expeditionary Force (BEF).
The BEF was a small force as compared with continental armies. However, it was fully motorised –no horse and carts here! There were no elite or fanatical regiments, just typical, infantry, line battalions of well trained and well led professional soldiers that new their duty and were steady under fire.
When the BEF was forced to retreat to Dunkirk, random units were chosen to fight rearguard operations. They fought doggedly, bloodying the noses of all that came up against them, including the mighty Waffen S.S. They were only beaten when attacked by overwhelming forces and were out of ammunition, or were destroyed by the superior firepower of the Luftwaffe and panzer units, sacrificing themselves to gain time for the withdrawal of the main body of the BEF.
The average ‘Tommy’ was a nice sort of chap, who gained his confidence from his training, and his inspiration and courage from the junior officers and NCO’s that led him, and his mates that fought alongside him - and he certainly showed his mettle.
Why a platoon commander?
To lead from the front and experience the hardships and sense of brotherhood that only soldiers that have fought together can share!
A very good point Bravo. A lot of people assume that the British retreated on Dunkirk because the Germans were too good. I understand the truth to be they retreated in good order as a result of their flanks been exposed by the French retreat and that when they did come up against the Germans they gave a very good account of themselves. The battle at Arras was said to have seriously unnerved more than one German General because of the quality of the British fighting capabilities.
I fall far short of being an authority on the action at Arras, but my understanding is that British armoured brigade carried out a deliberate attack as a delaying action against the rapid advance of the German panzer units. The panzer forces, on the other hand had been charging across France using ‘Encounter Battle’ tactics, and routing all that they came up against. By the time they reached Arras, the panzer units were well ahead of their supporting infantry and expected to meet little resistance. Therefore, they were taken by surprise by the British attack which took stopped them. It was once again the arrival of Rommel on the scene, and his quick and versatile mind for a tactical situation, which saved the day.
Realistically, the British could not have held the Germans for long, it could never have been anything more than a delaying action. At this early stage in the war, they had not discovered the use of various arms working in close support of each other – the Battle Group.
The mentality of the officer cadre of the British tank regiments was never much more than that of the cavalryman, accustomed to chasing foxes about the countryside – as proven in the Western Desert. It would be a long hard slog before they got the massage.
I agree, the British were not in a position to hold the Germans for more than a short time. Tactics & equipment had changed while the BEF’s training had not. Add to that the Germans were good.
However, they gave a much better account of themselves than a brief look at history would indicate and the action at Arras did seem to affect German tactics. I know this is contentious but Von Runstedt is said to have held panzers back because he was worried about the heavy loss of tanks inflicted on him by the British. His concern related to finishing off the rest of France not daring to believe the allied collapse would be so complete.
Yes, the Germans were very good. They had been preparing for many years, and they had had the opportunity topractise and refine their tactics in Spain.
Consider: the German armour had sexy names such as Panzer, Tiger and Panther. The battle goups and combat teams contained units sporting names such as Panzer Grenadier and Panzer Jaeger. Now here is a name which indicates where the menatality of their British opponents was at at this time - what did the British name their tank?.. Matilda!!!
It was a long transition from the mentality of ‘Matilda’ to developing the tactics of combined forces with armoured combat teams and battle groups, using close air support. This transition had to take place after having suffered a devastating defeat and while hostilities continued against a very able and ruthless enemy on land (in the Western Desert), in the air(particulaly over Britain) and at sea (with the Atlantic and mediterainian convoys running the gauntlet of the U-Boats and the Luftwaffe).
As I understand it, at Arras, the Panzers were un-nerved because they had outrun their infantry support and paused in order to allow them to catch up?
Because I would want to try to make a difference on the Western Front. Maybe I would not, but it would be worth a shot. It doesn’t matter if you die during war, you died to try to keep your country safe. That is what you will be remembered as.
…unless you are trying to take control of all of Europe… 
I am in awe of, and it is indeed very noble of, those who lay down their lives for their country, providing their cause be true and just. However, it is ignoble in the extreme to defend and preserve a regime as evil as that of the Nazis was, and bring about the resulting death and destruction not just of those who fight to rid the world of such evil, but also the people and country to which they claim loyalty.
Yeah, but i’m saying if you were raised like that you would be loyal to your country.
Platoon Commander was also the most dangerous job in the army, although IIRC the job of Company commander was a whisker more dangerous in WW1.
And yes, at the start of the war Platoon commanders were expected to lead from the front. Drills were changed by the time of Anzio such that they were a short distance back and so the platoon had some chance of their leader surviving any length of time, but it remained extremely dangerous. Only one man in the British army survived as a Platoon commander all the way from Normandy to VE-day, and that was Sidney Jary MC. Every other one who landed at Normandy was either killed, wounded or promoted.
Remember, the higher the rank the better the prize for enemy snipers
That is true. Shoot the commanding officers between the eyes if you get a chance.
Well, German Soldier, this statement makes sense to me. I’m really not trying to be hard on you, but I have to respond to earlier statements you made because I am concerned for your spiritual well being. Just kidding. I really just like giving you a hard time. Seriously, though, your earlier statement did not make sense to me so here is my response. Please take it in the friendly spirit in which it is meant, because I am really not trying to pick on you, so I hope you don’t feel that I am.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfgang Von Gottberg
Why would you want to be in a FlakPanzer on the Western Front if the US had a great Air Force reputation? That means you have a better chance of getting blown up by a Jabo
German Soldier: “Because I would want to try to make a difference on the Western Front. Maybe I would not, but it would be worth a shot. It doesn’t matter if you die during war, you died to try to keep your country safe. That is what you will be remembered as.”
I don’t understand your reasoning here about “dying to keep your country safe.” When you say you would want to keep your country safe, are you
referring to every citizen of Germany? Because there were approximately 12 million people of both German and non-German descent who were murdered in Concentration Camps because of Hitler’s policies. We must also never forget the people who survived the camps, but had to live with their experiences for the rest of their lives. If you were fighting for Germany, you certainly would not have been helping to keep those portions of the German population safe who were being exterminated or tortured in the Concentration Camps. In fact, you’d be helping to prolong their suffering. These were not, by any means, the only lifelong victims of Hitler’s twisted policies. Another example of truly innocent victims were Hitler’s Children, a.k.a. the Lebensborn.
Even if you didn’t know the outcome of the war before joining the German army, (assuming we are still pretending to have a choice of which army to fight in) it would seem likely that you would know enough about Hitler’s policies leading up to the war to be able to decide if you agreed with them enough to defend them by voluntarily joining the German army.
On March 20, 1933, the first concentration camp, Dachau, was established.
The site below has an entire chronology of the Jewish Holocaust.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...logy_1933.html
This is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust and is a short overview of the other disenfranchised people, besides the Jews, who were targeted and exterminated by Hitler’s regime:
"Millions of other minority members also perished in the Holocaust. About 220,000 Sinti and Roma (Gypsies) were murdered (some estimates are as high as 800,000) — between a quarter to a half of their European population. Other groups deemed by the Nazis to be “racially inferior” or “undesirable” included Poles (6 million killed, of whom 3 million were Christian, and the rest Jewish), Serbs (estimates vary between 500,000 and 1.2 million killed, mostly by Croat Ustaše), around 500,000 Bosniaks[10], Soviet military prisoners of war and civilians in occupied territories including Russians and other East Slavs, the mentally or physically disabled, homosexuals, Africans, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Communists and political dissidents, trade unionists, Freemasons, Eastern Christians, and Catholic and Protestant clergy, were also persecuted and killed.
Some scholars do not include the Nazi persecution of all of these groups in the definition of the Holocaust, rather limiting the Holocaust to the genocide of the Jews. However, taking into account all minority groups, the total death toll rises considerably; estimates generally place the total number of Holocaust victims at 9 to 11 million, though some estimates have been as high as 26 million."