• _stranger_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      They’re allowed to take out one German tank with light cavalry, for old time’s sake.

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        You know…as the battlefield becomes ever more automated, there might be a very brief window where the winged hussars could make a comeback.

        Let’s say you have a battlefield riddled with smart drones. They have image recognition and immediately attack anything resembling a tank or other military asset. Do you think anyone bothered to program the drones to seek out and attack a unit outfit like 18th century Polish cavalry? A charge on horseback just might be able to ride completely undisturbed through the right kind of drone-controlled battlefield.

    • sik0fewl@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Last time Russia and Germany invaded Poland together. Presumably this would be Germany and Poland invading Russia.

      • Etterra@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Does that mean in 100 years it’ll be Russia’s turn to team up with Poland against Germany? Is that how this works now? Can’t we just rock-paper-scissors best 2 of 3 instead?

      • AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        After the refusal of France, England and Poland to enter a military alliance against the Nazis with the USSR, the only alternative to a partial Soviet occupation of Poland was a total Nazi occupation of Poland. Tell me, would you prefer a total Nazi occupation of Poland?

        • VoodooMug@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Erm, Stalin did a deal with Hitler, the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. In a secret protocol, they agreed to carve up Europe between them with the USSR to take Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Bessarabia and half of Poland. The Finland part didn’t work out so well, and Hitler went on to break the pact. The details of this were proven only when it was made public during the Nuremberg trials.

          • AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            2 days ago

            You haven’t answered my question: would you have preferred a total Nazi occupation of Poland?

            Erm, Stalin did a deal with Hitler, the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact

            Yes, to postpone as much as possible the war between the 100-year-old industrial power that was Germany, and the 10-year-into-industrialization USSR. This was done after the Soviets were consistently denied mutual defense agreements with Poland, England and France, in which Stalin offered to send ONE MILLION soldiers to France and Poland to defend against the Nazi threat (together with artillery, tanks and aviation). The Soviets even offered to collectively start war against the Nazis instead of the Munich agreements in defense of Czechoslovakia, which the western powers again refused. It was then and only then when the Soviets changed the previous minister and put Molotov in place, to postpone the inevitable war against the Nazis for as long as possible during the key industrialisation years.

            Please, answer my question above