Hun Hunter

Here is the website address: http://www.761st.com/ BigMik1 </font>

Yes, it is always a group effort but when one unit makes claims to the denigration of others or says "we were the first, fastest, best" no matter the color, then evidence needs to be shown. If a unit claims to have spent more time in continuos combat in the ETO than any other US unit the burden of proof is on them, not on those that dispute it. Greg

I wouldn't be surprised if the 761st got Chaffee's to replace their M5's in early 1945. I agree it may be impossible to ever actually sort out the casualties they inflicted from those of the units they were attached to (well, unless you wanted to spend a few years pouring through after action reports in the National Archives). It was the common practice in the ETO to attach an Independent Tank Battalion (such as the 761st) to an Infantry Division and then the tank would be spread amongst the division's sub units to provide armored support. It's very common to read of infantry companies in infantry divisions having a platoon of tanks in support. Since these divisions didn't have their own tanks they usually were coming from the attached tank battalions. I don't have the book "The Liberators" but the snippet's I hav seen about it claim that the 761st liberated Buchenwald, can you verify that's what the book says? Also, I believe the movie named the Liberators claims they liberated Dachau. I don't know if that's from the book or "artistic" license. I also came across some information about Black Marines in World War 2. Not a bunch of them but there were definitely a few units. That was news to me, thats for sure. Greg

Ok, the 130,000 number just fails the common sense test but if the only way to convince you is to get the total strength of every German unit in the 761st's areas of operation and add them up and see them fall short of 130,000 then I should start working Seriously, for the 761st to inflict those levels of casualties every member of the 761st (including the clerks & medics) would have to have killed, wound or capture at least 163 Germans EACH!!!! (note I assumed 800 members in the Battalion as that is the high number I found on web sites, TOE strength was in the mid-600's I believe). Does that not even move the needle on your BS guage? As far as the "in the field", I accept the official chronology for now as it appears similiar to others. I don't think it is detailed enough to quantify each day of the 761st time in theater. I am perfectly content with the fact that they spent a significant amount of time on the line. I am not convinced that they spent more than all white units because I see no evidence presented, just a claim. Do I care to enough to do a quantitative study comparing WW2 US Army Tank Battalions in the ETO, not really though it would be mildly interesting. Oops, I hear Mr. Slade pulling the whistle, quitting time, more later.. Greg

BigMik1, First off, no need to get testy, I respect the accomplishment of this unit (and other Black units). I also agree the story should be told. I also happen to think that the TRUE story is compelling and courageous enough. Using "facts" that are obviously wrong to embellish their great story tarnishes the whole story. Yes, they were in action a serious amount of time. This basic chronology shows that. It also shows several periods of maintenance. Can you PROVE they were in action longer than white units? I can't, but then again neither can I disprove it as I don't have the times in action for every US Battalion in the ETO. I do know that the 45th Infantry Division spent over 500 days in combat (not consecutive) so that at least makes me take the "longer than white units" claim with a raised eyebrow (Though I guess one could question if the 45th was all-white as they had a significant number of Native Americans in the Division). Common sense tells me the 130,000 number is wrong. Furthermore, I see nothing in the official documents (so far, the Presidential Unit Citation mentions "thousands" which is a far cry from 130,000) that supports it, thus I await evidence that it is true, until then I assume it is an unfortunate embellishment to this excellent unit's record. Greg

I just used a figure of 8,100,000 total German casualties (Killed, Wounded, Missing) that came from what seemed to be a reputable web site (don't have it with me at work here). I'm sure that number is not 100% correct but it does get the point across that 1 Battalion did not inflict 130,000 casualties on the Germans. Feel free to use whatever overall casualty figure you want for the Germans and do the math yourself. The Germans lost @ 250,000 casualties (Killed, Wounded, Prisoner) at Stalingrad? Is it believable that 1 Battalion of ANYBODY, Red, Green, Yellow, White, Black or whatever (except maybe Finns) inflicted 130,000 casualties on them? Of course I am open to actual evidence that they did, I just believe that outlandish claims require proof. Greg

Whoa there, that was probably one mistake. In many items I have read about this unit they do not make this claim about Dachau. So watch how you throw the bogus claim around . And the casualities they put on the Germans is true. They were in the field sooo long without a break they could do nothing else but fight and kill the enemy. These men would not rewrite history to make themselves look good, they would like their REAL story to get out. Many have tried to put their story in the background for years. When most folks see the US soldiers in WWII, they see only white, when it was so many colors that contributed to the victory. BigMik1 </font>

Here is the exact quote from the 761st Presidential Unit Citation ... "were responsible for inflicting thousands of enemy casualties and for capturing, destroying, or aiding in the liberation of more than 30 major towns" Not sure what a "major" town is defined as but it obviously omits any smaller villages and hamlets. Greg

I was reading this article about the 761st and at the end I noticed this quote by Joe Wilson (author of 761st "Black Panther" Tank Battalion in World War II) ...During that time, the unit inflicted 130,000 casualties on the German army... :eek: One battalion inflicted 130,000 casualties!!! I saw him quoted other places claiming the same number so I don't think it's a typo. There was also a film (based on a book) that asserted the 761st liberated Dachau. I'll bet that's news to the 45th & 42nd Infantry Divisions. This bogus claim even made it to MSNBC . WHY do people try to rewrite history (rhetorical question folks ) The 761st earned their Presidential Unit Citation and served their country well, making up fake accomplishments for them just cheapens their actual ones. On the general subject of Blacks in the US Army this is a great starting place. Some fairly detailed info on the various combat units including those in the CMAK area. Greg

In his book about Pegasus Bridge Ambrose does mention that there were two black soldiers in D Coy on D-Day (one was called "Darky" Baines). Greg

That's interesting that the KIA/WIA were so close to the actual historical result. I too would be interested to see if a squadron of green P-38s in the same situation would pounce on all of the vehicles or just seek out the hidden FO Greg

I don't think it's necessarily a matter of control if more realism is the goal. Just a reduction of the target acquisition skills & leathality (along with a adjustment of point cost perhaps), along with misidentifcation fom ground units and allowing units to defend themselves would IMO be "good enough" (and could probably be done within the current engine). Now if you got to the point of simulating each country's system, with FACs in vehicles, ground designation of targets, etc then you could really highlight the differences and capabilities of all the different countries (same with arty). The one thing is that a relativly high rate of Blue on Blue incidents with CAS was apparently common in WW2 and ANY game system that allowed the player to avoid them totally could not even pretend to represent reality. Again, all in my opinion. Greg

I agree 100% about the leathality of CM CAS but in the P-38 attack note that they did manage to damage/destroy most of the companies vehicles/AT assets. That would have probably meant 2-3 per plane average, not out of line with many CM results. Perhaps the low # of personnel casualties was due to the fact that it seems most of the company were out of their vehicles waving at the planes :eek: But as I said Jason, I think you're right, they do seem to be way to accurate. Of course who would pay several hundred points for an asset that could be (is?) such a double-edged sword. Any changes like that and the point cost would, in my opinion, need to be adjusted, perhaps drastically. I'm sure the commander of the tank destroyer units felt he wasted his points on 11 P-38s! Greg

A quick look through a few of my books produced these gems: From An Army at Dawn (pg 201 in the paperback version)... "On the rare occasions when allied planes dominated the skies, fratricide added to the ground troop's torment. Word soon spread of an incident near Medjez-el-Bab, where a company of American tank destroyers was helping to secure the town on Thanksgiving when eleven U.S. P-38 Lightnings flew over. Jubilant at the unexpected help from friendly fighters, the tank destroyer crews raced across the open terrain, waving and smiling. Built with twin fuselages, the P-38s languidly circled until the sun was behind them, then dropped to fifty feet and executed five textbook strafing runs in three minutes. The attack all but destroyed the shocked company, which fired not a single retaliatory shot. Five men were killed - including the unit's only World War I veteran- and sixteen wounded; nearly every vehicle and antitank weapon was destroyed or damaged. One outraged company commander in the 1st Armored Divison ordered his men to shoot any airborne object larger than a goose. And another bromide circulated among American soldiers: "If it flies, it dies."" So the Army Air Corps pretty much destroyed an entire company that was in action. And this interesting bit from The Rock of Anzio (History of the 45th Infantry Division) (these incidents were in Sicily); "Contact with the retreating Germans was again lost on October 1, but the 45th didn't need Germans to suffer casualties. The 179th was strafed by American P-51s, resulting in one man killed, one wounded and three trucks destroyed." (Okay technically this would not have been a CAS mission in CMAK term as they apparently wern't even in contact with the enemy!) These were just two incidents of many. While they are anecdotal it is obvious that the problem of friendly fire from the US Army Air Corp was a very serious problem, especially earlier in the war. From reading these and numerous other similiar incidents CMAK CAS should perhaps only change in these ways: 1. All units/sides would defend themselves against air attack even if the aircraft are "friendlies". 2. All ground units should have a chance of misidentifying air units and shooting at them (or not shooting if the misidentify enemy as friendly). 3. Maybe let the Axis player buy conscript American air support for the American player, expecially in 42-43. Greg

Horsesh1t. The U.S. Army and U.S. Army Air Corps were able to develop the most advanced system of close air support that the world had ever seen to that point in time. Granted this took time, and the system was not perfect, but it was extremely valuable and effective. Try reading any of the following books to educate yourselves: Patton's Air Force: Forging a Legendary Air-Ground Team by David Spires Angels Zero: P-47 Close Air Support in Europe by Robert Bulle Tactical Air Interdiction by the USAAF in WW2 (Series) by Col. Dupuy </font>