Marlow

That was a particular case with the ukranian Hilfstruppen, most of the normandy coastguards were WWI veterans, undertrained paratroopers or Luftwaffe Field units which were not very battle tested</font>

Quite right, I did not intend to imply that an offensive operational stance was the norm, only that it did happen.

You're right, too many choices for your feeble brain. How about a nice simple strech on the rack instead.

As much as I hate to say this since I don't like the old "do a search" bit, this subject has been covered pretty well. In general, I'd say that the Sov. Union did carry the lions share of the fighting against Germany; however, the Western allies probably contributed a bit more than you are giving credit for. A few quickies (again you can find more with a search): German ground force casualties on the Russian front were (IIRC) more like 2/3rds of the total, not 80%; the Western allies carried the load in destroying the Luftwaffe; lend lease more than weapons, also huge quantities of food, boots, 250,000 trucks, etc...); Western allies took Italy out of the war, and defeated Japan; Stratigic bombing put a rather large dent in Germany's industrial capacity (how large can be debates). Main point is counting ground casualties in the East is only part of the story.

Also, while Germany was on the stratigic defensive, I take issue with the Germans being on the operational defensive. Hitler was always looking for a chance to go over to the offensive, and did in a number of situations. The 21st panzer at Normandy (and more broadly the attack in the beachhead), the Mortian counteroffensive, Wacht am Rhine, Norwind, the attack against the Anzio Beachhead, etc... Not to mention the counterattacks in the east thattook place even into 1945.

True after 1943 on the Western Front, after the Western allies destroyed most of the Luftwaffe, but by the same logic, German victories in 1939 - 1941 are similarly "tainted," since Germany ussually had air superiority. Also, it doesn't apply to the same degree in the Vosges campaign (my example of an "even fight." See the previously mentioned book by Bonn). Weather made air support a non-factor. It might have have an impact on supplies, but this is neutralized to some degree by the fact that the Germans were on the defense in an area that they had lots of time to fortify and build up a supply base.

Good book, but a little too much self interest to be seen as an unbiased account.

With regard to inspired tactical decisions by an allied general at the Battle of the Bulge: Patton’s rapid shifting and movement of the 3rd Army to attack the southern shoulder of the Bulge. As far as no western general beating a German general when the Germans were stronger, you may have a point, as I can’t think of any good examples (I’ll keep thinking). However, the Vosges campaign is an example where an American army attacked a similar strength German army under very unfavorable (for the attacker) condition, and won. Further, I can’t think of any good examples where an inferior German army defeated a British or American army in any large scale battle or campaign. Well, maybe Market Garden, but that was quite frankly one of the worst plans of the entire war barring maybe Zitadelle or Wacht am Rhine. By the way, read the evolution of the plans for Zitadelle. It was by no stretch entirely Hitler’s doing. [ November 14, 2002, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: Marlow ]

Hey, I got something you can apple.</font>

Would that be the desk clerk at the Schloss Peng? I never did get properly checked in during your story/challenge.

Unfortunatly, the same could be said for most of the band of dolts that has been around these parts lately. Personally, I blame you and your lack of dicipline. What the heck good is a Justacar if he won't get out and do a little Justacarring. Time for you to get going with some trials (you know, try them a little before you convict them). Better yet, how about appling some 2X4 justice to the assembled idiots.

Not according to my reading of Glantz, Ericson and Clark. Also, Clark (among others) makes a strong case that Hitler was on a fair number of occasions correct, and his Generals wrong (example, his hold fast orders during the Moscow counteroffensive). [ November 13, 2002, 02:34 PM: Message edited by: Marlow ]

Aha, temper temper! I knew exposing that statement would cause some opposition. But believe what you want[/QB]</font>

You don't read much either, do you? You need to get away from accounts written by German generals and their apologists. Sorry to barge in, I was just checking on the posts of Mr. Seibold, after his trolling in the General forum. Now to the point. There are a great many accounts of the German military's shortcomings, from their very poor military intelligence, substandard operational art, no better than average strategic decision making, awful industrial utilization… the list goes on. Now they did excel in a number of areas, including tactics, training, NCOs, among others. This idea that the Germans only lost because they were (take your pick) a) outnumbered, b)constantly subject to Hitler’s interference, c) Rommel the genius wasn’t in Russia, d) Rommel the overrated was in Normandy, e) [excuse of the day here] flies in the face of numerous accounts of serious historians. Even on the tactical level, where many will acknowledge that the Germans were very good, they were by no means always better, particularly as the war went on. They also didn’t have a terribly good track record in urban fighting on either the attack or defense.

Well if that's not the pot calling the kettle black.

I don't know, Lard, It sounds like you are into this whole rub some fox piss on yourself bit just a bit too much (not that there is anything wrong with that). I much prefer to hunt for my food in the gorcery store, where the prey doesn't move, and comes in convienent 1 lb plastic wrapped trays.

More likely the cold war. Same reason most Soviet kids didn't learn much (anything?) about the Western Allies in WWII.

Pish. He doesn't even pass the CessPool rule of 37. And Jo, since you are keeper of MBT tradition, what in the name of Fred were you doing trolling in the General forum? One would expect more from the self-appointed defender of the Peng Challenge thread

Well I can't speak for Berli, but my suggestion is ... STAY OFF THE OUTERBOARDS ... doofus. Joe</font>

Well, I admit that skull thickness is relative. While far thicker than the skull of an ordinary person, SSN pool dipper skulls ARE thin in comparison to Aussie skulls. However, the SSN skulls are significantly more resistant to subtlety, irony, and anything other than the most obvious and bludgeoning of insults due to their highly sloped forehead (the Aussie heads being rather block-like, with little slope). Blunt insults, much like the blunt nosed Russian AP ammo, are the most effective means of penetration. While effective at deflecting insults, the high degree of slope does have one significant drawback. It results in a total cranial cavity volume that smaller than that of an average sized hedgehog, and only slightly larger than that of New Zealander (or Kiwi, or whatever they call themselves).

I for one still complain about the poor quality of SSNs on the MBT. They are obviously overmodeled, as in any realistic simulation they would not be able to post at all after a healthy volley of "shut the hell up" or "sod off." Yet, strangely they (you more specifically) continue to post. And don't give me the old worn out answer that SSNs have highly sloped and very thick skulls, and insults glance off this impressive armor. I am quite familier with the armor stats of the typical newbie pool wader. While there is some merit to this argument, and any penetration of said skull is not likely to cause any serious damage anyway (due to the lack of any brain to injure), what BTS fails to consider is that while impervious to most shots, the typical SSN has very low morale and is easily confused. In a realist simulation, the SSN would not be permitted to select the "post message" button. FIX OR DO SOMFINK BTS!!!

Berli, where did you get a map of Kalach?

Truer words have never been spoken.

That is downright unAmerican of you (and probably against the Patriot Act). Get back to England you bloody Pom before I sick John Ashcroft on you sorry bum.

Jo, you got any Jabo like battles for these two useless pillocks to kill each other with? Give them somfink, so they will shut up and die-a-lot.