That particular one isn't entertaining if you are even slightly knowledgeable about military history. For the average idiot it is good enough I suppose
really depends. You got shills, you got actually good attempts at analysis
Things to look out for >sourced, links provided to primary sources >videos at least half an hour long >the whole video is more a power point than a video. If it got animated bs, discard
Fore the ex-military guys, I find a good guide is by how vague they are with what they did.
If they are repeatedly bringing it up and saying stuff like "As a marine..." then it tends to mean they are full of shit. If they mention it once or twice on occasion to the point where you won't know they were in the military without doing some digging, then they probably know what they're talking about.
Thats why I like Paul Harrel so much. He only brings some shit up as examples of his experience with the subject, and even then you can just see the autism such a life would give anyone dripping from him. His exonerations alone saw more action than most SOCOM fuckbuddy grifters.
every military youtuber sucks 12 donkey dicks like a jersey whore except for the following >militavia >the chieftian >oxide >usually hapless (extremely entertaining AARs)
>still no military space youtuber
no not some historyfag, but someone who does recent news and provides analysis and why the news is important
i want in depth theorycrafting about the latest spysat launch
That particular one isn't entertaining if you are even slightly knowledgeable about military history. For the average idiot it is good enough I suppose
really depends. You got shills, you got actually good attempts at analysis
Things to look out for
>sourced, links provided to primary sources
>videos at least half an hour long
>the whole video is more a power point than a video. If it got animated bs, discard
Fore the ex-military guys, I find a good guide is by how vague they are with what they did.
If they are repeatedly bringing it up and saying stuff like "As a marine..." then it tends to mean they are full of shit. If they mention it once or twice on occasion to the point where you won't know they were in the military without doing some digging, then they probably know what they're talking about.
Thats why I like Paul Harrel so much. He only brings some shit up as examples of his experience with the subject, and even then you can just see the autism such a life would give anyone dripping from him. His exonerations alone saw more action than most SOCOM fuckbuddy grifters.
for me, its operations room
this and liveth for evermore
Correct answer. Also the chieftain
Montemayor is also 10/10 but he hasn't uploaded in a year.
>Montemayor
Aka the laziest mfer on Earth.
every military youtuber sucks 12 donkey dicks like a jersey whore except for the following
>militavia
>the chieftian
>oxide
>usually hapless (extremely entertaining AARs)
Simple history - its big shit.
Bro...could you imagine? Someone in vietnam...smoking weed?
the shit my grandfather told me "his friends" did in afghanistan is way more intense
(soviet afghan war - i'm not american)
so raping each other?
no it was rubbing alcohol, drugs(mostly smuggling back to russia) and moonshine from locals
said they would bribe MPs with moonshine too
>still no military space youtuber
no not some historyfag, but someone who does recent news and provides analysis and why the news is important
i want in depth theorycrafting about the latest spysat launch
Mark Felton is one of the only ones I enjoy watching
Dr Felton is a historian, now really a military analyst though.
I suppose the question posed by OP wasn't exactly specific on this.
>Thinnest Texan
i look just like that
Sometimes I wish they hammed up the South Park ripoff style more
My favorites in no particular order
>Drachinifel
>Rex's Hangar
>Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles
>Operations Room
>The Chieftain
No love for military history visualised?
I don't always agree with his takeaways, but he always sources his shit, almost to a fault.