A little info on the CETME Rifle

Status
Not open for further replies.

nibb

member
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
134
At the end of WW2, the Nazis were attempting to produce a full sized battle rifle. After much infighting by German high command, the STG44 (Sturmgewehr 44) or "Storm Rifle Model 1944" was adopted in April of '44. It was a universally respected battle rifle, and could have changed the war, had it been released earlier.

At the end of WW2, with the collapse of Nazi Germany, the STG's designer Dr. Vorgrimmler, fled Germany to Spain. Francos Spanish govt existed in no small part to German supplying of arms during the Spanish Civil war. Dr. Vorgrimmler and a few assistants began work on what became known as "Centro de Estudios Tecnicos y Materiales Especiales" or CETME. This arms factory produced the CETME Modelo A, the first in a long line modifications and refinements to a basic design. This was the primary battle rifle for many countries well into the 1990's. This weapon gave birth to the Heckler und Koch G3, MP5, G36 and influenced design on many others.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN0003.JPG
    DSCN0003.JPG
    83.6 KB · Views: 124
I don't think any rifle could have made a difference for the germans, not even to make the war in europe last long enough for the germans to get nuked.

I wish the import laws allowed intact examples of CETMEs and FALs I'd get one of each.
 
I just copied that from a webpage.
As for he germans making difference with weapons you are very wrong. A weapon or gun makes a huge difference on a war, any war. US did not had to invade Japan thanks to Little Boy and Fat Man.

Germany could had won the war with their secrets weapons they had. Just to take 1. If they would had invented the Jet Fuel plane sooner they would had won the Air. Winning the air could had made a huge diference since the Royal Air Force and the Us air force would not exterminated most of german cities, factories and the economy that produced the war monster with the heavy bombings. You will see that on war, the improvements of manufacturing of new weapons if a great concern to enemies or allies. ;)
 
Had Hitler not invaded the Soviet Union, or wasted so much time, money, and manpower in his quest to eliminate the Jews, how many more Germans would have been placed on the western front? A million? How many more Tigers and Panzers would Rommel have had in N africa? Would have been a lot worse for us!
 
I dont think we would speak german. Someone that believes Hitler wanted to conquert the world shoud read more history and why WW2 started. There where millions of germans on the west not just militaries. There where millions of germans slaugethered on the run by soviets, children, women, etc.
Hitler wanted peace after the Poland Invasion. You can download or read tons of speeches and documents where he wanted to make peace with England and allies. But England already had a secret trade with France in case germany invaded Poland.
And now, they did not invaded Poland because they wanted to conquer the world or Europe. I can assure the reasons where more justified then the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan.
 
Hitler wanted peace? Secret Trade? Care to cite some sources for that? Or for the justification for taking Poland? Ever heard of Molotov or Ribbentrop? I guess he decided invade Belgium, Holland, and France on a lark?

About the only thing that bears any resemblance to history in your last post is that Germany did have diplomatic ties in England, especially under Chamberlain. However the Munich Agreement and Chamberlain's general appeasement of Hitler were much the cause of his ouster....

As to speeches and documents by Hitler, ever heard of a guy named Goebbels? Or the department he headed up? I've lost count of the number of books I've read on this subject but here's a few I would recommend if you plan on continuing to be a Hitler apologist:

The Second World War - Keagan
Fall Of Berlin 1945 - Beevor
Enemy at the Gates - Craig
Intelligence in War - Keegan
A Writer at War - Grossman

Intelligence in War has a great chapter on German secret weapons and their impact in the war.
 
The pre-WW2 politics are eyebrow raising and after a bit of research, kind of disgusting. National politics at its worst...on both sides.

France and England declare war on Germany over German invasion of Poland.

USSR invades Poland 2 weeks later....nothing done or said about that?

WW2 over, Poland effectively under Soviet control....hey! what happened to Polish sovereignty!? Why did we go to war again?

Pretty well documented that Hitler didn't want war with England, peace feelers did go out after the Polish invasion and were rebuffed. You won't find that reading Keegan's biased tripe. In historical circles....Keegan is OK to cut your teeth on for basics, but he has been lambasted time and again for being close minded and biased with his opinions.
 
I dont think we would speak german. Someone that believes Hitler wanted to conquert the world shoud read more history and why WW2 started. There where millions of germans on the west not just militaries. There where millions of germans slaugethered on the run by soviets, children, women, etc.
Hitler wanted peace after the Poland Invasion. You can download or read tons of speeches and documents where he wanted to make peace with England and allies. But England already had a secret trade with France in case germany invaded Poland.
And now, they did not invaded Poland because they wanted to conquer the world or Europe. I can assure the reasons where more justified then the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan.


Sorry, but Mein Kampf isn't exactly what you'd call historicaly accurate :neener:
 
Hitlerian Objectives

Hitler had two very ambitious objectives, he wanted to bring all German speaking peoples in Europe into a single political entity and expand the borders of Germany eastward to Poland and Russia to be settled by the German people.

The first objective was at least somewhat legitimate as the Versallies Treaty was an ill-advised document that punished Germany unduly for WWI for which it was only partially responsible and put millions of ethnic Germans living under foreign flags. The second ojective, "lebensraum" was overambitious and would have caused more violence and instability in Europe even if it had been partially achieved in the short term.

Hitler was not a "man of peace" but he had no intention of conquering the world or the USA, that is just old timely WW2 war propaganda.
 
Pretty well documented that Hitler didn't want war with England, peace feelers did go out after the Polish invasion and were rebuffed. You won't find that reading Keegan's biased tripe. In historical circles....Keegan is OK to cut your teeth on for basics, but he has been lambasted time and again for being close minded and biased with his opinions.

If you can recommend a better basic, compact and readable WWII history than Keegan's I'm all ears. I don't disagree he has bias, but dismissing all of his work as tripe seems a bit much. He does mention diplomatic sparring between Germany and England before the Polish invasion as stalling Hitler slightly.

I'm still looking for decent German perspectives on the war, have any suggestions? "Forgotten Solider" was interesting, but it's been dismissed as fiction by many. Also read "On Hitler's Mountain" and "Until the Last Hour" but those are more personal narratives of life under Hitler then actual perspective on the conduct of the war.

So, er, about those CETMEs.... anyone know how to get one not produced by the monkeys at Century Arms? I've seen them between $350 and $600 and the receivers are usually crude. Also heard horror stories about ground bolts, sand in the receiver, and general lack of quality control.
 
Well most books you set are mostly novels as far as i know. Also any history book has always have an impartial point view. I dont think those writers are very impartial.
I agree. Hitler was not a peace man. But to say he wanted to be the world leader is just plain childish. War propaganda is not history or even close to true.
You want to know why they invaded Poland?

It started over the Danzig corridor which was part of Germany until the Versailles treaty gave it to Poland. Imagine we gave now Texas back to Mexico. Im sure the US will go into war for this.
Hitler was pleading with Poland to give Germany a 1 mile access to their providence of East Prussia . Both parties were in agreement when in 1939 Poland suddenly broke off all negotiations.
In 1938, thats 1 year before the war started Roosevelt gave Churchill assurances that the USA would be brought into war against Germany.
1939. Still one year before war the Anglo French Assurance. That would be viewed today as conspiracy.They secretly made a pact with Poland to come to their defense if Germany attacked and then Poland threatens war.
Emboldened by Roosevelt and Churchill guarantees Rydz Smigly and Ignacy Moscicki , the head of Poland's army and it's president were saber rattling .
Smigly said -- "Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." He threatened to overrun Germany in three days. Again that is considered today as directi treat to any country.
Then in the year 1939 started the Danzing Massacres. Yes. Im 100% sure the US will defend their population anywhere today is they are killed or slaugethered.The Polish Bolsheviks kill 58,000 German Nationals in the Danzig corridor.
Germany had protesting in writing to the League of Nations literally dozens of times with no results.
On 'Bloody Sunday' 5500 Germans were murdered:
The "Bromberg Bloody Sunday" is perhaps best known. Polish were confident they would win against Germany and went on a rampage of ' Blood Lust ' that was unmatched. Groups of Bolsheviks attacked from Ponz, Lotz and Warsaw approached the town and started killing the farmers on the outskirts. Children were nailed to barns, women were raped and hacked to death with axes men were executed where they stood. We still have to remember that Danzig was germany before WW1, some years ago before WW2 started. If you want pictures or more info just take any history book. So are those motives good enough for a war? I dont think anything is good for going into war, but i can assure you the US or others countries went to war for far less then that.

It also susprises me you say you never saw or read Hitler wanted peace. I guess your books have a huge lack of info. Maybe you should not only read books written by the ones that won the war. There is always 2 sides of any story. Anyway i did not invented that here you have some facts besides all the speeches Hitler said England did not wanted peace. He always said England did not wanted germany to become a power in Europe since England would lose their control over Europe. Imagine in how many years Germany raised to be a super power. That wansnt very nice for the people ruling England. He can seach speeches, read hitlers life, or tons of documents where you can see hitler wanted peace with England and France.
Read for example this:
http://forums.filefront.com/showthread.php?t=142581
And something more incredible. Some wanted to give Hitler the nobel peace prize. Yes unbelievable !!! Just google it.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n5p22_Weber.html
Everybody knows today that Hitler Ruling the World is a myth. He actually wanted England as an allied not as an enemy.
Just some facts. There are millions but i dont want to put all here.
As early as 14 October 1933, as Germany left the League of Nations, the Führer took the opportunity as Chancellor of the Reich to explain his thinking about France. He said:

I speak in the name of the entire German people when I assure the world that we all share the honest wish to eliminate the enmity that brings far more costs than any possible benefits... It would be a wonderful thing for all of humanity if both peoples would renounce force against each other forever. The German people are ready to make such a pledge.

Since we voluntarily accept the provisions of the peace treaties, I declare openly that there are no territorial obstacles between the two countries. Once the Saar returns to Germany, only a lunatic could want a war between the two countries, since there is no moral or reasonable grounds for one.

A few days later on 18 October 1933, the Führer said the following to Ward Price, the special correspondent of the English "Daily Mail":

I was deeply unhappy on 4 August 1914 that the two Germanic peoples were now at war with each other, though they had been at peace with each other so many hundreds of years despite all the confusions and uncertainties of history. I would be delighted if this unhappy psychosis were finally at an end and both nations, related as they are, were again joined in friendship.

In his proclamation to the German people on 16 March 1935 on the institution of universal military service, the Führer said:

It (the Reich government — the editors) has given France solemn assurances that Germany has no territorial claims against France after the successful resolution of the Saar situation. It believes it has, by making a major political and actual sacrifice, laid the foundation for an end to the centuries-long conflict between these two great nations.

In his speech to the Reichstag on 21 May 1935 he said:

We want to do everything we can to build a true friendship with the French people. . . The German government has the honest desire to do everything to build good relations with the British people and their government, and to prevent a recurrence of the only war between the two nations.

In an interview with Bertrand de Juvenile of the "Paris Mid" on 21 February 1936, he said:

I want to prove to my people that the idea of hereditary enmity between France and Germany is nonsense. The German people has understood this.

In a speech to the Reichstag on 7 March 1936:

Over the last three years I have always attempted to build a bridge of understanding to the French people... The German people has no desire to see the French suffer, nor do the French desire that for us. What advantage does France have in Germany's misfortune? I have eliminated any hatred of the French people from the German press.

In his Reichstag speech of 20 February 1938:

Germany had no territorial demands on France. We hope that, with the return of the Saar, territorial conflicts between Germany and France are forever finished. . . Neither does Germany have any difficulties with England, aside from colonial issues. There is no reason for any kind of conflict.

Thats only about France. You will find 100 more views where Hitler wanted peace with England.

This post could be forever so lets stay on the Cetme topic.
 
Every time I watch specials on the History Channel about just how bad ass the German military was and could have been, I thank the western world's collective lucky stars that Hitler was the raging, bouncing, steaming nutjar that he was. If he hadn't been completely and totally up off his eggplant (e.g., obsession with "vengeance"/"terror" bombing instead of doing things that work, just generally degenerating into a worthless moron toward the end of the war, invading the USSR, etc.), I don't think we could've won.

~GnSx
 
Well most books you set are mostly novels as far as i know. Also any history book has always have an impartial point view. I dont think those writers are very impartial.

None of those books are novels, and I've yet to find any history book that doesn't have some sort of bias imparted by its author. Historians are human. I certainly give the authors I listed more credence than wikipedia or links to neo-nazi affiliated "historical review" groups.

WWII started as a result of WWI and Versailles crushing the German economy and creating a situation in Germany where a creature like Hitler and his party could come to power. (If we're going to grosslly simplify) You're focusing on Poland, but it was far from the first land grab Hitler made. Austria, Czechslovakia, etc had already been pulled into the Reich. France and England's treaties with Poland weren't secret, when Hitler invaded he either knew war would be declared, or assumed the British and French would rollover like they had for his previous land grabs. They didn't.

I do not dispute that Hitler regarded England as a potential ally, he'd be a fool not to with their navy. Also, I do not believe he had world ruling aspirations, but I do believe he wanted the whole of Europe.

You reference massacres in Poland and claim I can find this information in "any history book". I certainly don't doubt this happened (massacres we're an unfortunately common occurance on all sides) but again I'd be happy to look at printed source if you have one. Also, if he felt these attacks on German people we're justification for war why did he stage border incursions as pretext? As I mentioned I'm looking for a decent German perpsective on the conduct of the war.

I notice you cited IHR (Institute for HIstorial Review) in one of your links. Aren't these the same people who continue to deny the Holocaust? They also have co-sponsored conferences with Neo-Nazi groups like the National Alliance. If you want to berate people over their choice of sources you might want to check your own....

You'll have to excuse me if I take any speech by Hitler with a grain of salt. Talk is cheap, especially when the man talking a is a megalomaniac!
 
The real truth about Hitler is far more sinister than most people can accept. His fundamental aim was to kill as many people as possible. He had a priority list and we know what group was at the top. One of the main goals of his invasions and attacks was to give him power over those he wanted to kill. Stalin killed mainly for power. Hitler wanted power in order to kill. He did not have to kill many of his own leading scientists and businessmen In order to maintain his power. For him killing was at least as important as winning the war. Hence the fact that his extermination program occurred during wartime and required the diversion of resources needed for fighting. When the end came, Hitler had no interest in saving the German people. He wanted Germany to go up in flames like the Valhalla of his favorite Wagner operas. He was an equal-opportunity killer and not even his fellow "Aryans" were immune. Hitler was mainly responsible for WWII; an estimated 55 million people died in that catastophe.

Drakejake
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top