Magpie_Oz

I think MengJiao makes a good point, the Panther is designed to take out other tanks so the worst thing to attack them with is a tank.

I'd contend that the confusion would be equal to both and numbers of losses where an when for what reason would be unclear. Do you know of any accounts which seem to match the parameters of the action? Any listings or references to US losses in the general area on the days around the event? I have had a bit of a look and have not found a lot of tactical detail in the US accounts of the Breakout from St Lo

The instructions are on the website, just download, extract and then run the BAT file and all should be good.

Module 2 for that 'un

Certainly their sides are really weak as compared to the front

Attacking where they are not

The issue remains in doubt and probably will forever more, who can say which is the accurate account?

Isn't Morgan Freeman from the the deep south of the USA?

Go to this link http://cthruview.sourceforge.net/#installation Groovy little program that lets you place an "always on top" image on your screen and make it transparent. So you could open the editor underneath and Bob's your uncle

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/gen5.htm That is a link to the widely regarded account of the action by Barkmann, it has no references tho' so no idea where the account comes from. I have read a similar but more detailed account in a book many years ago but cannot remember the name. The two accounts could of course be based off each other. It is always hard to know what to believe, I am sure there is a certain amount of "sexing up" of the Panzer Aces, I mean Herr Goebbles was a master at such things.

Who ??????????

And which end of the stick you get.

nah we'll just go back to 'Merkin bashing if you wanna do the Moors

Yes but we distilled all of that into : Blame the French Quite a tidy bundle for mind

lol and killed everyone they found, Xenophobia is just a fear of foreigners, not travel

You know she is like 900 by now ?

-sigh- perhaps you should look into the meaning given to root in Australia

shhhhhh, we are bashing the French now

I thought the roots of the Franks were the Normans? I'm getting confused

Yeh +1 for blaming the French, I mean they even supported the USAlian hissy fit, tried to pinch Canada and blew up the Kiwi's.

ummm weren't the Normans French ?

I didn't see any point at all in regards of the Aboriginals. Despite the name the Australian Antarctic Territory is recognised by very few countries, mainly the others who also claim parts of Antarctica. And claiming various politicians who are immigrants who have policies that have not worked out the best is something of a stretch as support for the notion that immigrants are bad for a society. It just means they are crap politicians nothing to do with immigrants.

Just tell them you got a note from God in a hat to say they had all best go home.

YEH ! In fact now that you mention it it is ALL your fault. We are just misguided children who were neglected by our motherland.

Nice try but the initial Europeans that displaced and dispossessed the Aboriginals were not immigrants and you are correct at the time the Aboriginals were not Australians, in fact they were not Australians until 1966. Of course you are no doubt taking the piss yourself as you know Australia itself did not exist until 1901 by which time the writing was well and truly on the wall for the Aborigines. And by the by, the Antarctic is not actually part of Australia, it is not even a recognised territory.