Started By
Message

re: In hindsight; was removing Saddam Hussein a good idea?

Posted on 3/1/18 at 7:34 am to
Posted by ILeaveAtHalftime
Member since Sep 2013
2889 posts
Posted on 3/1/18 at 7:34 am to
quote:

Name a worse one?


Vietnam
17th Amendment
Not letting Patton take Berlin
Posted by ChewyDante
Member since Jan 2007
16926 posts
Posted on 3/1/18 at 7:52 am to
quote:

Not letting Patton take Berlin


Explain this one. The Battle of Berlin was savage, desperate fighting. It would have cost the United States tens of thousands of lives, perhaps more, for no appreciable gain. The allies had already agreed to split up Berlin by sector regardless of who took it. Allowing the Soviets to take Berlin was a no brainer.
This post was edited on 3/1/18 at 7:53 am
Posted by antibarner
Member since Oct 2009
23748 posts
Posted on 3/1/18 at 7:56 am to
I am not so sure we wanted to take Berlin. If we really wanted to be ruthless we could have paused at the Elbe rested and refit and done what Patton really wanted to do. We would have known in advance we were going to hit them so we step up M26 Pershing production to deal with the Russian T34's and Heavies.

The Russians were exhausted and we could have kicked Uncle Joe all the way back to Russia. The Germans would have fought right along with us to keep their necks out of the noose. We bomb hell out of his Caucasus oil fields from the south and this little skirmish is over before Stalin knows what hit him.
This post was edited on 3/1/18 at 8:03 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram