Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About abneo3sierra

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 06/13/1974


  • Location
  • Interests
    tactics, history,sports.
  • Occupation
    US Army Officer
  1. For sure games are often used. From a military standpoint in games the idea is not necessarily to win the game, but to learn the ideas behind specific techniques, and sometimes to test out how a tactic might work in theory.
  2. I am quite aware of Overlord. I am also quite aware of many books on the subject, which all state that the British knew there would be no invasion, at the same time as the German Command decided it, because the British read the dispatch to that regard, before the German corps commanders in France even did. You do not give your British Empire as much respect as I am even giving them.. Enigma/Ultra were incredible, war winning, efforts. As far as tactics on the field of battle however, to state that the British were in a different time zone, is quite inaccurate. The Germans kicked them off the c
  3. I hadn't really thought of this as an argument. My original line which you referred to, was only one small part of my reply to another post, as to my opinion on why there were no mention of "tank aces" in the desert war, with my opinion PRIMARILY being that in the desert war, the Germans were not really in the overall strategic position that later created the tank aces. Phil, also replied directly below your original reply. While my interest in WW2 has primarily been that I had family fighting in it on the German side(father's family) and the Allied side (mother's family). Phil, as a designer
  4. True..even wiki says this, however, as also wiki says, they were only deployed in negligible numbers in Africa. And I will grant your point, as I also said above, about the French front, albeit that to me just says that the British High Command was not very capable, if devoting ""the major part of Britain's armed forces-army,navy and air- for years" when they did nothing at all on the ground save the disastrous "invasion" of Dieppe, from 1940-1943 in France. But I do get that there was a continued effort to make the Germans guess that an invasion was imminent, etc, which tied down many forces
  5. I do actually get your point, it just seems that you are not getting mine, which was perhaps not even answered as well by myself, as by Phil directly below yours. I understand the "Middle East Command" was stretched, but my point is that was Britain's primary command. Jon above has made a good argument that this was not the case. While for certain, also, the German DAK was far from the primary German front. So Britain had to fight an air war over France, and skirmish in Iraq, Iran, Syria, that you mentioned. The German "other front" was along a many-thousand-km line through the Soviet Union. Y
  6. That is possible, really. It makes sense in one way (home defense should be priority) but really not sure WHY in another way (They were reading the enemy's mail via ULTRA/ENIGMA..they knew there was no longer any threat of invasion to the home isles)..as far as France, it was already occupied/conquered long before there was a DAK. Are you referring to their (British) plans for the "Second Front"? Not sure when these plans began, but yes, that is possible, I agree.
  7. That is true, but the German forces "in theatre" were fighting in what their high command regarded as a sideshow, and relegated resources to them based upon this fact. The British were fighting in their primary theatre against Rommel, and the others for them, were the sideshow that Rommel was for his command. There were in the vicinity of a million German and Axis troops that I am certain the DAK would have loved, that were not available to them because their High Command was fighting against the USSR. While anything the 8th Army asked for, they got, essentially, as no other serious threat exi
  8. Actually in that snippet it says the military occupation ended in 1947, but close enough. My only argument was that the earlier post here, questioned why there were not "tank aces" in the desert, and this somehow has led to the question of who was stronger, while my point is primarily that tank aces were not probably (yet still possible) until their side went on the defensive. As I noted a few posts back, my entire comment that these have been based on, was actually an error in my reading of the post that I was replying to. Still though, having replied to Michael above regarding his statemen
  9. Technically you are correct in that they were not colonies, yet the people the British were fighting in these operations were partisans seeking to rid British colonialism. The British governed these countries after WW1 as occupied lands, and the British forces fighting there, were not fighting "axis" powers, but rather "insurgents" trying to gain their own freedom.(albeit I am sure with help from the axis) Also the comparison of numbers of divisions does not account for the fact that during Op Crusader, the German Italian divisions you mentioned were short on pretty much everything, from arti
  10. Actually Mr Emrys..the Germans were fighting on a rather large front (Russia) as well as in Greece against the British you mentioned (already won there by the way before the date you give). Perhaps ROMMELS mission only involved Libya, but you compare one German unit whose mission was Libya, then compare the entire British Empire with all of their missions, your logic is flawed in that. You mention Greece, that ended in spring 1941. Syria? Never a theater of war in any normal sense of the word, Iraq, Iran..the British Empire was trying to keep these colonies from rebelling, but at the same time
  11. I think, to be fair, we should say that every front the British were fighting on, was against the Germans, so the idea one was on more fronts, is not accurate, unless including the Pacific, which was mostly a sideshow, as the Western Desert was also to the German command. Also because the German command was putting secondary emphasis on the desert, the DAK received mostly secondary vehicles, and generally insufficient amounts of ammunition, not to mention the petrol as you said. A tank without petrol, is a sitting duck. I agree with the part of the code in that Rommel apparently never (? occa
  12. Oh I misread your question, sorry about that! and it is a good one. But of course at that point the Germans still did not have the VI, and really had very few of the V (not sure if ANY in the desert?).. I still think sitting inside of a nearly impossible to kill beast (VI) with desperation, with nowhere left to retreat to in some instances, created a GUARANTEE that you will do two things..1--kill ALOT of them, and 2--finally be killed yourself.
  13. In the western desert a British force that had heavy advantage in number, and quality, and with the abillity because of "enigma" to read their enemies mail,was beaten for some years very soundly by a German Italian force with no advantage save leadership and tactical ability...not much chance for a western "hero" there, until Monty finally turned it. As for Soviet claims, they kept records which even at best could be described as "shoddy", and kept even these classified for many years, while the Germans penchant for recordkeeping led them to even document things which put them in a bad light,
  14. I think the war crimes went in both directions, especially in the east, less so in the west. The east was a war of total hatred, on both sides, the west had its moments, but there was much more respect between enemy armies there, until you get to almost the very end.
  • Create New...