Andreas

You are an idiot. Sorry, make that a clueless idiot. This anti-French tripe was not particularly funny when it first appeared, it is absolutely not funny now. It is mostly delivered by people like you who have not got an effing clue what they are talking about. That is really the only excuse that one can accept in those circumstances. Since you obviously can not comment on any French generals (you even managed to stupidly put Foch into WW2), you are probably not quite qualified to make any judgements. But of course that won't stop you, because you are another one of those cases that merge their utter ignorance with the unstoppable desire to tell the world about their great opinions, which stops them from shutting up even when they are making total fools of themselves. Have fun. All the best Andreas

What score? You clearly do not have any clue what you are talking about. Parroting rubbish purveyed by Fox News on French military performance is not good enough. de Gaulle, Juin, Koenig, Leclerc. All solid to outstanding generals, with de Gaulle also capable of developing modern doctrine and providing some superb leadership from exile. Clearly they had bad generals, but so did everybody else. To say that all or most of the French generals could qualify for worst is just stupid and shows your ignorance. All the best Andreas

Why? RAF Bomber Command and the USAAF were busy trashing German cities for a number of years without regard for the civilian population. I see no reason to suppose they would not have used any weapon at their disposal - there was a war to be won.

Just shows how little you know then. All the best Andreas

No you could not. I agree that Foch would have been a very bad commander in World War II. He died in 1929. He would probably have been worse than Perceval if they still had given him command despite this drawback. But maybe not.

That recent opinion somehow appears to be ignoring that the Soviets had another front standing ready to defend. Also, only one division was sent to Italy (LSSAH), and it is open to question how much of its equipment it took. Finally, the Soviet attack on the Mius was a serious threat that needed to be defeated, and Armeeabteilung Hollidt was not capable of doing so without reinforcement. At the same time the Soviets were putting serious pressure on the 2nd Army front around Orel. In these circumstances an operational breakthrough by one pincer would have been meaningless, because it would not have achieved any of the aims which the operation was trying to achieve. So I think that this recent opinion is somewhat optimistic about the ability to break-through in the first place, and using blinders to studiously ignore what was going on elsewhere, making it less valuable or relevant as it may appear at first.

Mekhlis still takes the first spot. The Cattle Reporter is spot on. Had he been on Crete, he would have had his officers lined up, shot and replaced with privates who had read 'Das Kapital. ' He would have his radios destroyed as counter-revolutionary instruments, except for the one which he had used to send fawning messages of to Stalin, and only released carrier pigeons on missions that could fly a star-pattern to demonstrate their allegiance to the cause of the workers. He would have spent his time collectivising the peasants, and this would have created a pro-German partisan force. Then, with paratroopers dropping around him and the invasion fleet approaching, he would collect his men in political meetings, lecturing them on why fascism can not win, and employ them to destroy church icons while the paras stand around scratching their heads. Finally he would flee on a submarine leaving everybody else behind, denounce the new officers as traitors and have their families deported to Siberia. All the best Andreas

So what you are saying is that mathematical models of WW2 armour penetration are particularly inaccurate?

You need to read 'No triumphant procession' if you believe that. All the best Andreas

I'll try to forget all about that. So please don't remind me. But I think yours are toast now.

Hovercraft - I'd toss that dictionary if I were you. But you are an engineer, so no need for language beyond a few grunts anyway. I like AT guns. Have good success with them too. Ask Mattias.

Bonvulu aslendi la pordiston? Estis rano en mia bideo. </font>

You have just seen me in action mate.

Depends on what your basis for measuring it is. All the best Andreas

If you were a true follower of Jamoomba (who sees all and smells all), you'd know.

http://www.battlefront.com/products/books/nafziger/sovietinfantry.html http://www.battlefront.com/products/books/nafziger/sovietarmor.html

Good info dandelion

Ah, but I have a picture of my grandfather in the rear of a truck in Russia in 1941 with a French m1924 lMG. [Yoda voice]Neither security, nor Waffen SS, was he.[/Yoda Voice]

Witness the dangers of asking two totally unrelated questions in one post.

My opponent made a strong advance in the centre, to the woods north of the cross-roads. He did not penetrate beyond the road though. As a consequence, my formations in the southern-most village, and some in the village with all the Bocage were cut off during setup, but I decided to leave them there, since they really had not been attacked at all. But somehow he could just move right past me in those sectors, and in the village on my left flank he appeared right in front of me. Personally I find that only static ops work properly, so I would blame it on the engine. I enjoyed your Gebirgsjaeger ops for CMBB, two of which I played PBEM, and found them to be very balanced too.

The MMGs looking like Schwarzlose may also have been MG 08/15.

I have sent you an email regarding Blut & Ehre. I think you need to redesign some things there, at the very least the briefings.

If you look at this thread I started on AHF, you'll find the numbers for AFVs in AGNU. Depending on how and which you count, you end up with somewhere around 800, almost 100 of them Tigers, on 1st July. It appears that all of these formations were still with the Army Group by the end of July, with the possible exception of one of the Tiger battalions.

It is a different situation, but fundamentally I do believe the answer is yes, not enough infantry to hold the frontline, and the infantry that was there did not have the AT capability that was needed to stand fast against Soviet combined arms attacks and/or the tactical maneuver capability to engage in flexible defense. There is a very good book on the subject of the retreat from the Dnepr to the Dnestr by a German regimental commander (in German only) that describes this quite well.

Good Luck mate, and thanks for all your hard work over the last few years. Bummer of a way to go though! All the best Andreas