67 thoughts on “New Ranzar video

  1. The videos are funny but you have to be blind to not see the Russian propaganda. I don`t know if the creator actually wants to create propaganda videos or he just makes the Russian tanks the “good guys” and the Germans the “bad guys” because he`s from Russia but either way it gets annoying.

    • Actually most if his old stuff is regular WoT random game tanks, he just added a bit more setup and scenario in his recent vids. :)

    • …because historically the Germans *weren’t* genocidal warmongers or anything right? Takes kind of active effort to NOT have them as the “bad guys” you know…

      • Historically Germans were soldiers fighting in a war for their own country. Just like Russians, Americans, French, Brits, and all the other nations. If you mean someone in specific, please do say so, else your generalization fails on an epic level.

        • What fails on an epic level here is your bullshit generalised whitewashing, which falls flat the second you remember “for their own country” isn’t worth shit given that *they started the whole thing*.
          For no other reason than the raving lunacy of their leaders, to boot.
          Speaking of which, to round it off unlike the other guys -the Japanese aside- they were fighting for a cause that was fundamentally abominable; whether a random soldier genuinely believed in it or not is irrelevant as it wouldn’t have made fuck-all difference to the consequences had they not been defeated.

          • So if you get drafted (or you are already serving in the military), because the leader of your country is an asshat, you will automatically become a “genocidal warmonger”? Interesting logic.

            • Did that make any difference for the millions killed for no other reason than their *genetics*? Would it have made any difference for the few hundred million scheduled for extermination postwar for the same reason? Or the millions on all sides who died fighting the war that only started because Germany *decided so*?

              “Just following orders” has, I believe, long since been established as not worth shit as a defence.

            • This would make a 100% sense if the whole population of Germany would have been executed after the Nuremberg trials, not only a handful of political and military leaders. After all, if following orders in not an excuse and they are all “genocidal warmongers”, they all deserve the same fate.

              No, the country as a whole received different punishment (ka-ching), because intelligent people know that they can’t generalize and kill everybody for war crimes. It’s another way of saying “You followed _that_ idiot? Well, dude, that was a bad move, so here’s the bill for the damage you guys caused.”

            • Also, you might not realize, but “following orders” is the way for every single soldier in the whole world. If you get a lame order, you will execute it. If you have a morally questionable order, you will execute it, and _after_ you executed it, you can put in your complaint. The only case when you can instantly deny an order if it puts your or your fellow soldiers’ lives in unnecessary danger (that’s put there so “mentally wounded” superiors can’t give orders like “Go kill yourself”, or “Go throw a grenade in the shower room”).

              Most people don’t understand what does it mean to be a soldier. It means you give up rights, actually a lot of rights, in hopes to serve and help your country. If the order is a bad one, you still have to do it. There’s no “but”s and “if”s in the military, or you can go bust your ass in jail forever, or get executed, depending on the situation. And believe me, when most humans face the “do-or-die” or “do-or-you-won’t-see-the-sunlight-for-ten-years” situations, they _will_ pick the “Live today to fight another day” theory.

            • “Or the millions on all sides who died fighting the war that only started because Germany *decided so*?”

              The beginning of WWII wasn`t just because “Germany decided so”. It was a more complicated situation which practically forced Germany to go at war,if it is to blame someone for the beginning of the war you should blame the allies.On the other hand,judging from your comments,I suppose you`re just another brainwashed person who can`t see pass the cheap documentary he once saw while waiting at the dentist…

            • >> It was a more complicated situation which practically forced Germany to go at war

              No one forced Hitler to anschluß the Austria, annex Poland, and so on.

              NO ONE.

              Go away, you little nazi shit.

            • Don’t try to make everyone think that there were some mythical Nazi Martians, that accidentaly invaded Earth. The whole nation had a HUGE carrot in Generalplan Ost. And there IS a reason Russians think the way they do, no westerner will understand this as the occupation of the west was much milder. As for you German kids, it strangely happens so that every one of your ancestors was a “cook” or a “writer” or another kind of remf that never committed himself to war, not even mentioning nazi atrocities…

            • So Adam, I take it you missed the part where the Allies for several years went to great pains to try and sort out the “bad” Germans from the “good” ones, termed “denazification” (not terribly succesfully, and the French apparently mostly didn’t even bother – presumably having realised the futility of the effort with their own collaborators), and the short-lived (~2 years) but entirely serious realisation of the Morgenthau Plan immediately postwar?
              Sure smacks of holding the Germans collectively responsible to me…

              And by your logic, where DOES the individual moral responsibility of an individual soldier actually start then? Your reasoning sounds an awful lot like it’d exculpate nigh *anything* on the basis of a higher authority with coercive powers giving the orders – and wholly ignores the little detail the Nazis AFAIK for the most part had fairly little need for such anyway, as quite enough of the soldiers bought into enough of their bullshit to follow their dictates quite voluntarily.

              Do I also need the remind you that wartime German resistance to the Nazis was almost entirely down to small conspirational cliques of senior officers, whereas by way of comparision in Italy where the totalitarian regime was both far less morally abominable and rather longer-established the Party *itself* sacked the Great Leader when it became indubitably clear he’d been full of shit?

            • I take it you never had to serve in any military unit (which is totally fine), hence your question about the morality of a soldier. In wartime, no country needs soldiers who constantly fall into moral dilemmas: there’s simply no time for such a thing: it’s a luxury. Soldiers are not used for ethical and moral thinking, they are in service to follow orders and accomplish their tasks with maximum efficiency. Of course this is not a zombie state, and this is why the option to object to an order is always there; however, you can only complain afterwards. There are numerous examples in modern wars where soldiers hesitated to kill a woman or a child, and they got a bullet in their backs because of that decision. War is everything but fair and ethical. It’s also a necessity, whether people like it or not.

              All of the countries involved in the Second World War committed heinous crimes, but as always, the winners write history. To this day there are horribad politicians leading countries, and people aren’t doing crap about it. So the “all Germans in WW2 were genocidal warmongers” is just as correct as the “all Rusians were vodka-inhaling rapists” and the “all Americans were dumb, racist hillbillies” generalizations.

            • I am well aware of the peculiar psychology and pressures of armed forces, thank you. I am also aware of the little detail you elected to entirely overlook in your little obfuscatory word-game that there’s something called “rules of war” in place to try to restrain the barbarism of warfare, which militaries with a shred of moral fibre also follow and enforce to the best of their ability.
              As it happens the Germans quite explicitly and deliberately followed none of such in the East, and for that matter had already on several occasions breached in the West by summarily massacring surrendered French colonial soldiers.

              I cannot but note that you also seem to quite insistently try to steer the discussion away from the German war goals in the East, which were quite simply morally bankrupt in the extreme and would have made Genghis Khan blink in disbelief – namely the eventual extirpation of a few hundred million “subhumans” west of the Urals. Between that and the policy of systematic murder of POWs it makes fuck-all difference how some individual trooper may have felt of such policies; in practical terms the further east the panzers went the more helpless civilians and prisoners were exposed to oppression far beyond the pale.
              Soviet propaganda had a very easy time convincing the average “frontovik” that he was fighting for the survival of not only himself and everyone and everything he held dear but his entire *nation*, not to mention to avenge unspeakable offenses against them all, for the very good reason it was basically *true*. (The vengeance bit got hastily de-emphasised after East Prussia for a number of practical reasons…)

            • Canicatti, Dachau, Biscari massacre anyone? Nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Japenese prisoner to death ratio 1:100 in ’44? These are totally conforming to the “rules of war”, right?

              I’m sorry, the world is not about good and bad, black and white. And it goes for every/any country involved in a war.

          • Also: “for their own country”: if I start a war because I want my country to be the biggest, bestestest and prettiest in the world, I’m doing it “for my country”. Not for someone else’s.

            • It’s a pretty fucking retarded reason to start a war and unlikely to win you any sympathy points you know. Also, as proven empirically, rather contrafinal.

              See the thing is Germany had NO sane reason to start a second Great War and any number of good ones to not to.

            • It still does not change the fact, that if you start a war for _any_ reason, you are doing it because you want your country (and indirectly yourself) to benefit from it (whether you win the war or not is secondary).

            • Yeah, well. It’s also a pretty good way to earn yourself a deserved reputation as a warmonger. All the more so if the *previous* attempt kind of totally failed, too, since that sort of demonstrates a certain inability to learn important lessons.

            • Most people DID learn their lesson from the Great War already, you know. It was pretty much taken for granted – quite correctly as it turned out – that a rerun would be the end of the European Great Powers and the main beneficaries would be the “powers at the periphery”, the US and USSR, among *sane* strategists and statesmen. That’s one reason the appeasement policy with Hitler went so far – few people believed he was actually so mad as to be hellbent on starting another Great War and instead assumed he was engaging in particularly reckless brinkmanship instead.

              So, yeah, the Germans pretty seriously failed to digest a number of important lessons most of the rest of the world (or in any case, the major states) HAD already learned.

          • you’re being remarkably ignorant, if not racist.

            UK and France declared war on Germany when Germany tried to retake the lands they lost in 1918.

            In 1939, to the rest of the world that was a perfectly legit war. Today it’s not and today we know more than we did in 1939.

            • You’re speaking of land which what later became a part of unified Germany seized by force from the crumbling Polish realm *centuries* ago, which renders your apologist argument nonsensical from its own dubious premises.

      • But luckily, the Americans, defenders of the world, who only killed evil Germans soldiers (apart from few million civilians by bombing German cities) won, and prevented the evil Germans to exterminate everyone non blue-eyed and blonde-haired (black, Asian, Arabic people served in Wehrmacht).

        Go away Kellomies you troll.

        • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#Casualties
          “Few million” my ass, try 600k TOPS. Also the Germans were eventually desperate enough to start letting damn Russians into the Waffen-SS if memory serves (volunteers weren’t that hard to find, given the policy of systematic starvation of the POWs…), which has little relevance to what they dreamed of doing with the lot in the increasingly fantastical event of a final victory over the “subhuman” hordes.
          Watta moron.

          • Let’s not forget that Americans are/were well-known for their racism: against black people (to this day), against Japanese and Germans during WW2 and for a few decads afterwards, and against all arabian people nowadays. Racist behaviour is basically “subhumanizing” other nations.

            • Right, because limited civil rights and individual people being prejudiced jackasses are *totally* comparable to an official ideology and policy of physical extermination of “undesirables”, and well-run internement camps are clearly in the same league as the fucking Auschwitz-Birkenau and a policy of systematically starving POWs to death en masse.
              Not sure if Nazi or fucking retarded.

            • If you have this attitude IRL, you should be executed… just sayin’. Or to make an ad hominem: not sure if 16 with a zitty face, or a 60 year old with erection problems.

              To get back to the topic: yes, it’s totally comparable, I guess you never heard about the vote in the U.S. after Japan capitulated regarding “What to do with Japan now?”, where a sizeable portion of the population voted for “let’s just kill them all”? So if the people in a country are bloodthirsty racists, but the president luckily isn’t, then all is well?

        • You had that coming. It’s you who taught rest of the world how to commit all kinds of atrocities. You shouldn’t have started that shit…

          • This always amazes me of the internet even a harmless cartoon can result in a flame war with some poor nazis thinking their soldiers are represented badly.

  2. wow.. i mean, i get it. you guys were taking in big fat Russian dik for good half a century up you know what. But that wasn’t even you, personally. your parents and grandparents maybe. And you have no one else to blame but your forefathers to put your country in a position where such a thing was even possible.

    While i am not pro communist and/or pro stalinst, despite movements being popular in the unschooled and ignorant layers of our society, your blind hate for everything pro-russian, even a funny cartoon, is even more miserable. I genuinely feel sorry for you.

  3. These cartoons are always funny and amusing, specially the m18 one with the chaffee apprentice!

    now now, if someone takes offense because of a CARTOON, i truly feel pity for you. after all its meant to generalize, ridiculiuze and above all, be amusing.

    of course, if you think you can do better, you re welcome to start your own cartoon.

  4. Poor little Panzer 38(t), he tries so hard just to lose his hat and his dignity in the end.

  5. I have seen all Ranzar videos, and they are not pro russian. In some way he mages to create a personality dor the tank, and that caracteristics fit in different videos. An exampler: the T1 Cunningham es the tank used in tournaments to get the comentators in the game, they die fast in sort of a bully ;) and in the videos ths T1 is the one that’s always need help and is in problems

  6. it’s seems that *old school* Germany sympathizers are the real bitchy whiners…
    it’s just a nice arty vid, get a F life Nazi lovers and go serve your country by playing video game ya whiners.

  7. Howdy, simply changed into alert to your site via Bing, determined that it’s actually insightful. I am going to be cautious with regard to belgium’s capital. I’ll appreciate in the event you keep on this kind of later on. Other people today will be reaped the benefit from the publishing. Kind regards!