I recently played call of duty 1 where they have that storyline. Its quite funny, when you play that mission you dont have a gun, and all the rifles carried by other soldiers disappear into thin air the moment they die. Its a miracle that Russia won the battle under such circumstances.
It’s regarded as ahistoric nonsense by a wide array of historians, including anti-communist ones. But anti-communist armchair historians are still like “yeah but, it’s real tho right? because I learned about it in Enemy at the Gates, and Hollywood would never lie to me”
It doesnt make any sense if you take just a few moments to think about it. Russia was a major military producer back then (still is), producing 57 thousand T-34 tanks. And such a country cant produce some simple rifles? Besides, whats the use in sending unarmed soldiers to war, if they could be used to produce weapons instead?
I recently played call of duty 1 where they have that storyline. Its quite funny, when you play that mission you dont have a gun, and all the rifles carried by other soldiers disappear into thin air the moment they die. Its a miracle that Russia won the battle under such circumstances.
It’s regarded as ahistoric nonsense by a wide array of historians, including anti-communist ones. But anti-communist armchair historians are still like “yeah but, it’s real tho right? because I learned about it in Enemy at the Gates, and Hollywood would never lie to me”
It doesnt make any sense if you take just a few moments to think about it. Russia was a major military producer back then (still is), producing 57 thousand T-34 tanks. And such a country cant produce some simple rifles? Besides, whats the use in sending unarmed soldiers to war, if they could be used to produce weapons instead?
Thats the difference between someone that actually knows history, and someone that is high on that cool juice.