- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How were German armored divisions so much more elite than their US counterparts
Posted on 10/25/14 at 2:59 pm to ChewyDante
Posted on 10/25/14 at 2:59 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
You mentioned Prussia's history dating back 8 to 10 centuries
I said 8 to 10 generations.
quote:
why I mentioned even more recent French and British military traditions to point
France went from inspiring/beating/ultimately succumbing to a massive international coalition, to losing to just Prussia, to getting rolled up in 6 weeks. Prussia went from kicking butt and taking names, to leading Germany against pretty much the entire world except Japan and Italy.
Britain's military tradition has been anchored on the Royal Navy for almost all of its history, going all the way back to the English tradition. I didn't denigrate the Royal Navy during WWII.
quote:
I reject the argument all together.
We'll just have to agree to disagree.
quote:
Their military defeat was largely due to strategic error and a very new style of warfare of which their enemy was highly skilled and they were not.
Now, this is true. It is almost impossible for tactical acumen to overcome strategic blunders - while strategic genius can overcome any number of tactical failures and even some operational ones.
quote:
My rejection was of the notion of Prussian historical militarism as the reason for Germany's performance and remarkable spirit of effective resistance against what became insurmountable odds.
And I can concede that the German people, generally, were pretty motivated for the early part of the war, and their inherent strength showed until the bitter end. Not limited to just Prussians, although it is impossible to ignore the Prussian influence on German military traditions.
1
Posted on 10/25/14 at 3:16 pm to Ace Midnight
Good stuff guys, good thread to read.
Question for you WWII buffs. I'm not too familiar with Germany's navy other than the U-Boat, but how different would the war have been for the US/Allies if Germany had a naval fleet along the lines of the Japanese (or the US)?
The Pacific was a cold-hearted bitch, so if we had to fight that front, while also dealing with an equally formidable navy on the other front, how big of a difference would that have made? It seems that Germany was pretty much all in on the U-Boat (and having good success until they had to battle a real fleet) but lacking in other departments of naval warfare (specifically battleships/aircraft carriers....at least I think..)....It would seem to me that the US at least would be stretched pretty thin in that scenario, and might not have had the impact we did. The Allies would still have won IMO, but it might have taken quite a bit longer. Did we even have carriers in the Atlantic or were they all focused on the war in the Pacific? I mean, maybe we didn't have any over there because we didn't need any over there, so we were able to focus the majority of our naval fleet on the Pacific...but if we had to split them up because we were fighting fierce wars with other carrier divisions in both oceans, things might be different?
Seriously, WWII has to be, for me, the most fascinating war ever.
Question for you WWII buffs. I'm not too familiar with Germany's navy other than the U-Boat, but how different would the war have been for the US/Allies if Germany had a naval fleet along the lines of the Japanese (or the US)?
The Pacific was a cold-hearted bitch, so if we had to fight that front, while also dealing with an equally formidable navy on the other front, how big of a difference would that have made? It seems that Germany was pretty much all in on the U-Boat (and having good success until they had to battle a real fleet) but lacking in other departments of naval warfare (specifically battleships/aircraft carriers....at least I think..)....It would seem to me that the US at least would be stretched pretty thin in that scenario, and might not have had the impact we did. The Allies would still have won IMO, but it might have taken quite a bit longer. Did we even have carriers in the Atlantic or were they all focused on the war in the Pacific? I mean, maybe we didn't have any over there because we didn't need any over there, so we were able to focus the majority of our naval fleet on the Pacific...but if we had to split them up because we were fighting fierce wars with other carrier divisions in both oceans, things might be different?
Seriously, WWII has to be, for me, the most fascinating war ever.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News