Debunked fake history you probably believe

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
3,783
Slovenia
#12
I remember hearing the "cavalry" was more like dismounted infantry - with some antitank weaponry to boot - but German propaganda got involved... I defer to any WW2 experts on this...
I think that they charged from a forrest on a tank unit which was taking a rest- tank crews were out of tanks. They were pretty close to Germans and surprised them. Horses helped to pass a distance fast. Something like that. It was a battalion of cavalry not more.

Is it true that whole divisions of Soviet cavalry charged German tanks in Ukraine in1941 and 1942 and got massacred? I think that it was a Budyonny's bright idea.
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
3,031
Australia
#13
I heard / read ? once that Ethiopians charged a modern Italian unit that was assaulting a beach, with hand weapons and fighting lions .

True ?
 

Shtajerc

Ad Honorem
Jul 2014
6,469
Lower Styria, Slovenia
#14
I think that they charged from a forrest on a tank unit which was taking a rest- tank crews were out of tanks. They were pretty close to Germans and surprised them. Horses helped to pass a distance fast. Something like that. It was a battalion of cavalry not more.

Is it true that whole divisions of Soviet cavalry charged German tanks in Ukraine in1941 and 1942 and got massacred? I think that it was a Budyonny's bright idea.
I heard they charged mothorised infantry that had tanks further back, which the Poles didn't see until they already charged and routed the infantry.

But I also read once something about a charge of a Polish cavalry unit as part of the Red Army in 1944 or '45 but I can't remember where and I think I recall tanks, but I'm not sure at all ... Might jusz have been the last cavalry charge of ww2 or something.
 
Likes: macon

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
3,783
Slovenia
#15
I heard they charged mothorised infantry that had tanks further back, which the Poles didn't see until they already charged and routed the infantry.

But I also read once something about a charge of a Polish cavalry unit as part of the Red Army in 1944 or '45 but I can't remember where and I think I recall tanks, but I'm not sure at all ... Might jusz have been the last cavalry charge of ww2 or something.
There was Italian cavalry successfully charging Soviets in 1942.

Charge of the Savoia Cavalleria at Izbushensky - Wikipedia
 
Likes: Shtajerc
Oct 2018
1,209
Adelaide south Australia
#16
As long as you don’t try and spin the equally fallacious lie that concentration camps were a British invention....

No, of course they were not 'sakes. .Concentration camps were invented by the Americans to contain Native Americans.

The English merely used concentration camps to hold Boer women and children. Hundreds died from cholera and typhus. But no, the English did not invent concentration camps.

To be fair, it was the Nazis who perfected the notion, deliberately limiting the amount of food given to inmates to 600 calories a day. That mean they would slowly starve to death, whilst being especially susceptible to disease.
 
Aug 2017
42
Canada
#17
Actually, I did think that Hitler created the Autobahn. But now I know better.

Sometimes.error results because real history is often too complicated to teach to a bunch of kids in school, so it gets simplified and becomes, if not actual false, very misleading.

300.Spartans did fight against the Persians, it is just history neglects to mention the thousands of others that fought with the Spartans too. However, it was mostly just the 300 Spartans and 700 Thespians that fought to the death. When King Leonidas realized the Greeks were being outflanked thanks to the Greek traitor, he dismissed the bulk of the Greek army and acted as a rear-guard to allow them to escape. The 300 did fight to the death, as did 700 Thesbians, and the Greeks were heavily outnumbered. Herodotus put the total number of Greeks at 6,100, modern scholars the number at 7,000, and modrn scholars estimate the Persians at around 120,000. But all of that is a lot more complicated to.explain to a 11 year old, it is just easier to talk about just the 300 Spartans.
I made a entire episode on the Battle of Thermopylae explaining the rear-guard and how based on your interpretation, one can argue "300 Spartans" did stand alone against the Persian forces in the end, though if i remember correctly the Thesbians stayed long also. The notion that Hitler created the Autobahn is something I also believed, only really learnt the underlining history when I was taking specific courses on the age of dictatorships. The funniest thing about the story is, Hitler in the 1930's says he thought up the Autobahn idea himself in 1924...while during 1924 the Nazi party (and him) argued against the creation of an Autobahn as it would only benefit "rich Jews".
 
May 2018
646
Michigan
#18
HItler didn't create the Autobahn, it was a project that had been around since the earlier days of the Wiemar Republic. However, HItler did, upon assuming power, pursue the project much more vigorously than previous governments. Hitler "built the Autobahn" as much as "300 Spartans stood at Thermopylae": true in some respects, but requires clarification and context to be considered honest statements.

It is statements like the ones you listed, plus:

-"Wellington never lost a battle."
-"Hannibal was the Father of Strategy"
-"The ACW was/was not about slavery" (both sides annoy the hell out of me on this). Most accurately, the Civil War had its original "root causes" in slavery, was specifically started over States Rights, and ended as a moral crusade against the "peculiar institution." And for the individual soldiers, most of which didn't actually own slaves, fought for a variety of reasons, including Southern Patriotism (as claimed by some black soldiers who fought for the Confederacy). More importantly, there was a massive cultural divide between North and South: some regions of the world that were legally separate countries had more in common with one another than the North and South. I would hazard that your average Confederate soldier believed he was fighting for "his way of life" as opposed to "I hate black people, want to enslave them, and do horrible things to them." While I would personally support neither philosophy, the former is at least justifiably rational whereas the latter is not.
-The whole way we think of "Roman Emperors." Until the rule of Diocletian, the whole concept of a "Roman Emperor" as we see it today was so removed from those men who actually held the position of princeps ("First Citizen") our popular notion of Roman Emperors is closer to Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars than to reality.
 
Last edited:

Bart Dale

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,095
#19
No, of course they were not 'sakes. .Concentration camps were invented by the Americans to contain Native Americans.
Reservations are not concentration camps, the Native Americans still live on them, and some have manage to create lucrative operations running casinoz , since states laws don't restrict them.. America's treatment of natives is nothing to be proud of, but Australia's treatment of its Aboriginals was not better.

The English merely used concentration camps to hold Boer women and children. Hundreds died from cholera and typhus. But no, the English did not invent concentration camps.

To be fair, it was the Nazis who perfected the notion, deliberately limiting the amount of food given to inmates to 600 calories a day. That mean they would slowly starve to death, whilst being especially susceptible to disease.
The Japanese did the samd thing to American prisoners of war.

But of course Australia extermination the Aboriginals.was a noble thing. You succeed inTasmania, but what happened in Australia mainland, why didn't you succeed.
 

MAGolding

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,710
Chalfont, Pennsylvania
#20
As long as you don’t try and spin the equally fallacious lie that concentration camps were a British invention....
The phrase "concentration camp" referred to as a camp where persons are concentrated. If "concentrated" means gathered from a wide area and assembled in a smaller area, it can be quite innocent in meaning, unlike if it means crushed, squeezed, and squashed into a higher density mass by some kind of pressing devices, which would be evil. For example, children could travel hundreds of miles to a summer camp with an area only a tiny fraction of the total area the children had come from. Thus one could say that the children concentrated at the camp, and thus one could call it a "concentration camp" in an entirely innocent sense of the phrase.

It was because the Nazis called their prison camps and extermination camps by the innocuous sounding phrase "concentration camps" that the phrase became sinister.

Before WWII, or at the very earliest the Boer War, the phrase "concentration camp" would not have sounded sinister.

In fact, I once read online an account by a veteran of the US Civil war of 1861-65 where he stated that he and other recruits were sent to what he described as a "concentration camp" to be formed into regiments and mustered into service. His use of the phrase doesn't give the slightest indication that he considered it sinister.

No, of course they were not 'sakes. .Concentration camps were invented by the Americans to contain Native Americans.

The English merely used concentration camps to hold Boer women and children. Hundreds died from cholera and typhus. But no, the English did not invent concentration camps.

To be fair, it was the Nazis who perfected the notion, deliberately limiting the amount of food given to inmates to 600 calories a day. That mean they would slowly starve to death, whilst being especially susceptible to disease.
If you think that an Indian reservation was like a Nazi concentration camp, you are wrong. Because Nazi concentration camps were an euphemism for prison camps at best, and extermination camps at worst - extermination camps where the vast majority of the persons who arrived were killed the first day they arrived.

Note that by 1890-1900 the populations of Indian reservations stopped declining and started rising which they have continued to do ever since. That would not have happened if Indian reservations had the same goal as Nazi death camps pretending to be relatively harmless ""concentration camps".
 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions