Allied Superior Leadership

[Roosevelt45]

Originally posted by Liam:

Well, all I have to say is this how many of you think Russia and UK would won alone, without Lendlease/Trade/Technology sharing. Since the Russian's best tank design of WW2 was an American Design

Take USA out of the equation and Japs could've entered Far East after India/Australia fell with couple Million men, that would've be end of Soviet Russia

A.who says that Germany wouldn't have already been defeated at that time.

B.nobody ever said that the US contributed NOTHING to the allied victory. There was just some protest against the statement 'the American spirit won WW2'.

[Retributar]

'Liam'...you are only partially correct on American Tank Design...yes, the Russians borrowed the 'Christie-Chassis' Idea from the Americans when the American Army would not use the idea...or the idea of the Tank nearly at all!.

However the Russians made many improvements to the basic Chassie that Christie never had in his original design.

Wider Tracks, Diesel Engines, Sloped Armour,Heaver Guns, Thicker Armour & this tank was Designed to survive Arctic Winter Weather conditions...which the German Tanks were not...they FROZE-UP!. The KV-1 was the 1st Russian tank to come out, soon followed by the T-34.

The Russian T-34 was so good that the Germans copied many of its design features and implemented them into the Panther Tank!.

The Americans sent the Russians the Sherman and also the next generation of Tanks that they had, but the Russians found them inferior to their own T-34.

As for the rest of your comments...to them, i say that those are fair evaluations.

[SeaMonkey]

xwormwood, no insult taken, my skin is thick, and some say my head is to. Believe me, I'm a WC(world community) promoter, but I'm also a student of the past, the way past. The "spirit" that is being referred to dwells within all of us, not just Americans. All men are created equal, but when we leave the womb the inequities begin. Remember all civilizations/countries/organizations etc. begin the same, with an idea to accomplish something, the same as when we leave the womb. It is the ability of the people to set aside their differences and interact to attain their goal that make some more successful than others. The USA has had many internal differences, same as the others, but somehow, the Americans seem to get past them slowly but surely. The "spirit" is the willingness to compromise your beliefs for the betterment of others, sometimes called "giving". And isn't that what we do right here on this SC forum, we compromise what we would like to see in the game in hopes that all will be fulfilled. A minor exercise in "humanity". No one is saying someone else's sacrifice is greater than any others, some are blessed with the ability to give more and are willing to do so, some are not. The playing field was even once, those sacrifices make one team better than the others, luck aside. I can be whatever I want to be as long as I'm willing to make those sacrifices, and that goes for countries too, but that's a little tougher, because humans must give up some of their individuality to be a successful group. And that my friends encompasses the "spirit".

[Retributar]

No argument there 'Liam'...perhaps lend lease wasnt all that much in the over-all picture throughout the war..but, it just may have been enough to make the difference...by giving the Russians enough military assistance while they were trying to re-organize themselves.

The Russians moved approximately 1100 factories to the Urals with all the accompanying workers to go with them!. Surely...lend lease aid must have been invaluable at this critical time!.

[Liam]

Russians payed dearly in lives, indeed. Could they have beaten the Full Wermacht without England and USA tying it up? Not sure... I doubt it, they weren't as technologically advanced nor did they have the experience, leaders and Blitzkrieg to begin with. They learned, they countered blitzkrieg and outproduced their enemy. Though precious Germans were tied up in other places that could've ended a War in the East much earlier than Winter could have not stopped the German offensive. Every lost German fighter, every German fighter tied up in the West. Every converted 88 Flak Gun. Every German Surface ship. How many Men, AT Guns, Airplanes, tanks in total? Working not towards the Solitary Cause of Destroying the Russian Bear.

In MidEast Rommel's Afrika Corp hitting the Belly of the Beast. What if?

Did the precious 'few' lendlease materials make a difference during BOB or Barbarossa. Maybe those 50 tanks were all the difference. Maybe those 1 million Rifles did it... Who knows... it was what? 5%-10% difference in this battle or that one. That's what usually wins wars, when it is tight.

Don't understimate the Japanese though, if they were garaunteed a victory they would have taken Russia all the way to Urals themselves How could a Siberian Transfer have happen with that huge threat Looming. Don't underestimate the Japanese and their Fighters/Bombers...

Good education on the Russian Armor, I stand corrected. Although Still, the Americans could've done more, yes.. they didn't partition Eastern Europe with the Nazis though. They didn't sit idly by when various nations and provinces were annexed. They didn't sleep whilst others Mobilized for War<Churchill showed the figures to Parliment about German War Production, noone listened till it was too late>. USA were Isolationists, that hurt the progression of WW2.. Sadly it took Pearl to make the USA realize that and U-Boats the War could hit their home. So could Japanese Carriers and Naval ships. We payed relatively speaking, not like the others though.

France you could say was soooo weak and unprepared along with England they gave Hitler his early victories. You could claim that Stalin's purges and Paranoid Dementia was why Hitler nearly conquored the Red Bear. Who and what was really responsible?

[Edwin P.]

Don't understimate the Japanese though, if they were garaunteed a victory they would have taken Russia all the way to Urals themselves How could a Siberian Transfer have happen with that huge threat Looming. Don't underestimate the Japanese and their Fighters/Bombers

I agree, if the Japanese did not have to deal with the American Navy they would have been free to threaten Russia. However, as they were occupied fighting the Americans and the Chines the Russians felt free to send forces west to fight the Germans.

It would be interesting if the US had a choice when it entered the war to adopt one of three strategies;

1. Historical Europe First - No Effect on Game

2. Japan First - US Production Reduced but Russian Siberian transfer activated earlier as Japanese divert more resources to fighting the Americans.

3. Peace with Japan (US Avoids Pearl Harbor by accepting Japanese Sphere of Influence in Asia) - US production for the ETO increases and US receives Pacific Naval Forces but Russia does not receive the Siberian Transfer as the Japanese army is not diverted to fight the Americans.

[ May 24, 2004, 12:22 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Liam]

The USA should be given the option. That way a Full European knock-out could go into effect. Hey! The American's could say, we'll hit the Japanese after Germany is taken down but now Europe is our main priority.

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Don't understimate the Japanese though, if they were garaunteed a victory they would have taken Russia all the way to Urals themselves How could a Siberian Transfer have happen with that huge threat Looming. Don't underestimate the Japanese and their Fighters/Bombers

I agree, if the Japanese did not have to deal with the American Navy they would have been free to threaten Russia. However, as they were occupied fighting the Americans and the Chines the Russians felt free to send forces west to fight the Germans.

It would be interesting if the US had a choice when it entered the war to adopt one of three strategies;

1. Historical Europe First - No Effect on Game

2. Japan First - US Production Reduced but Russian Siberian transfer activated earlier as Japanese divert more resources to fighting the Americans.

3. Peace with Japan (US Avoids Pearl Harbor by accepting Japanese Sphere of Influence in Asia) - US production for the ETO increases and US receives Pacific Naval Forces but Russia does not receive the Siberian Transfer as the Japanese army is not diverted to fight the Americans. </font>

[Liam]

Lastly on this point, by 1941 the German fighting man was the best in the World. In 1945, the US Fighting man was. If 1 Million US/UK Troops would've died in Japan siezing it then perhaps the History of the World and the Death Toll wouldn't be the question of American dedication to V-Day in WW2

From mobilization, victories, economic gains... Whatever way, the only competitor for the USA was Russia and that was a well known fact

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Liam:

Lastly on this point, by 1941 the German fighting man was the best in the World. In 1945, the US Fighting man was.

ALWAYS!

Much easier to go rolling along singing out loud and strong, a "V" for victory song, WHEN

Your side is... winning.

When your rear is covered by... fighters with fresh stalking pilots, and reams of artillery and Endless stocks of fill-the-hungry-gut supply,

AND... our old sing-along pal... "momentum."

Which is why that guy

Who has the smell of conquest... on his side,

IS... the briskly! marching man.

... why, you wouldn't hardly even need ANY

Leaders.

Everyone! IS a leader then! :cool:

[... how does that old JFK quote go?

"Victory has many fathers, but,

Defeat is an orphan."]

[ May 24, 2004, 01:07 AM: Message edited by: Desert Dave ]

[Retributar]

This subject should be staying on the topic..."Allied Superior Leadership"...and im just as guilty as anyone for veering away from it.

What some of you are discussing is or are "What-If's"...or 'Alternate Situational Timelines',...so now i will try to advance a 'What If' Leadership position myself.

-------------------------------------------------

***These are the original comments i posted under this previous subject: 'ARMY + TANK GROUP COMMANDERS'

http://www.needham.k12.ma.us/high_school/cur/Baker_00/2002_p5/bakerp5_df_1-02/de_gaulle.htm

During the time between World War I and World War II, de Gaulle promoted mechanized warfare, and the tank, accusing the French Army as being insufficiently mobilized and mechanized. He was shunned and ignored, and promotions were given to others. Petain became Marshal of the French Army. De Gaulle wrote a book, The Army of the Future, which was not well known in France itself, but part of German Military curriculum.

(1932-1937) He was dubbed 'Mr. Motor' for his pro-mechanized views. Although he did get recognition in the late '38 months, when two armored divisions were assigned to the Rhine, he said it was "too little too late" . De Gaulle said he could see war written in the skies of the Rhine.

When World War II came, the German First Panzer Army used Gaullist tactics against France, and sent the country down

-------------------------------------------------

If leadership was an issue in WW2...we could postulate another 'What-If',...what if 'De-Gaulle's ' suggestions on Mechanized Armoured Warfare were recognized by the French High Command???.

If they had been, the Germans would most likely NOT have attacked France like they did in the opening stages of WW2...as the French had Superior Quality Tanks and Superior numbers of these tanks.

So had they been organized into Armoured Formations as 'De Gaulle' had insisted on...WW2 might not have started when it did!...it may have never happened at all!.

In fact had De Gaulle's Leadership had been a factor...as it might have,...the French could have taken the offensive to the Germans after the Germans had invaded Poland.

Hitler was desperately hoping that the French would not upset his apple-cart and stay out of his way and not upset his plans!.

He read them correctly...but, then, De Gaulle was not in charge as he was passed up several times for promotion because of his Heretic Ideas ,which Guderian and the German High Command embraced!.

Finally...if the 'De Gaulle' Leader-Ship factor had been prevailing at that time, the road to WW2 may have been quickly squashed much more quickly with this 'What If' situational timeline.

[Desert Dave]

This subject should be staying on the topic..."Allied Superior Leadership"...

I do believe I am on topic.

And, am serious.

Assess the Allied leaders for each country, based in relevant part on the following apt criteria:

1) UK... before and after... Operation Torch.

2) Russia... before and after... Stalingrad.

3) USA... before and after... St Lo.

There is one kind of leader, who can rally and enthusiastically tactic when he is fair certain his Country will... lose.

There is another kind of leader, who can do the same when the "game" is yet hanging in the balance.

And there is a 3rd kind of leader who rises to the fore when most of his, or, the Hated Foe's troops are demoralized.

It's like Sports or Politics or standing in line at the Gas Station when rationing is in effect.

WHO! Can do all these wondrous things when the times are... MOST dire?

Keep in mind each "psychologicial context" when rating your favorite leader, is all I am suggesting.

The winners write slightly "giddy-up" History, eh?

[Ron]

Just a few points here:

Lend-lease did play a vital role in the Russian war effort, not in supplying weapons or tanks or fighters, but in the mundane area of logistics, ie radio wire, trucks, boots etc.

The Japanese Army, while having a high fighting spirit, was woefully outmoded in equipment and doctrine. Their two clashes with Russia, more specifically at Khalkhin-Gol in Aug 1939, to 'test' the waters were total disasters. At the latter the Japanese suffered over 61,000 K/W/M while the Russians under Zhukov lost 23,000 K/W/M. Japan immediately signed an agreement with Moscow, securing Russia's backdoor, and 'looked' elsewhere. Japan's Army would have needed a serious overall to realistically contend with a Continental Army, something I'm not so sure she was capable of in the short-term.

During the inter-war period all the major powers struggled with new military theory because of modernization, including Russia. Because of the restrictions on Germany's military, the Germans couldn't 'openly' test new theories so they collaborated with the Russians extensively. The Russian Generals developed a 'modern' doctrine in 1936, however because of Stalin's fear of the Army and the subsequent purges(estimated 30,000 out of 75,000 officers), most of her 'brilliant' thinkers were either eliminated or ignored at the outbreak of the war.

Some food for thought.

Ron