Search found 3662 matches
- Fri May 20, 2011 6:54 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: May 10
- Replies: 104
- Views: 54452
Re: May 10
I've come to believe that responses to my posts are coming closer and closer to ridiucle and direct personal attacks. I'm not having fun here anymore ... Karl was probably right when he posted here a long time ago to the effect that there is no place here for people who don't believe in German supre...
- Fri May 20, 2011 10:50 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: French Battleships
- Replies: 14
- Views: 10560
Re: French Battleships
The US triple turrets in the fast battleships had bulkheads between guns, and widely spaced guns compared to those used in Richelieu (and KGV for that matter). They also used a 60ms delay between each gun (left, right, center). I suspect the British got around the interference problem by firing half...
- Thu May 19, 2011 6:06 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: May 10
- Replies: 104
- Views: 54452
Re: May 10
There were incursions into Iraq but they were designed to cut off the Iraqii forces in Kuwait. Question - if the purpose of Desert Storm was simply to clear the Iraqi forces out of Kuwait, then why block their exit routes? Obviously to destroy as many of them as possible before they could get back ...
- Thu May 19, 2011 6:03 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: French Battleships
- Replies: 14
- Views: 10560
Re: French Battleships
However many seconds it is, that lengthens the firing cycle of both guns in the pair by that many seconds. Also, any delay in loading effects both guns. If a powder bag is torn or any other error in drill delays the return of one gun to firing elevation, it effects both guns. Instead of having one g...
- Thu May 19, 2011 5:21 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
- Replies: 146
- Views: 91318
Re: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
Good Lord! Sorry for causing such an uproar (it is a good argument though isn't it)? The quote from the US infantry training manual I made was from a TV documentary about infantry weapons and tatcics from ww2, can't remember what it was called but it was part of a series. I remember the program sho...
- Thu May 19, 2011 3:23 am
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: May 10
- Replies: 104
- Views: 54452
Re: May 10
Karl, not everyone feels the way you do about international agreements.
- Thu May 19, 2011 3:20 am
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
- Replies: 146
- Views: 91318
Re: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
Bgile: How about Lee's army in the US Civil War? Outnumbered most of the time and won. What's the point in this comment? It's completely irrelevant. You said the Germans were inferior to the Marines in WWII because the only comparable fight was at Stalingrad and I prove you wrong (whatever your pal...
- Wed May 18, 2011 4:33 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: May 10
- Replies: 104
- Views: 54452
Re: May 10
If you actually read about the coalition agreement, you will see that there was no authorization to go past the Iraqi border. There were no military plans to do so. No lines on a map with phase lines, no supply organization, nothing. The Arab cooperation was dependent on not invading Iraq. It's as ...
- Wed May 18, 2011 4:29 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
- Replies: 146
- Views: 91318
Re: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
How about Lee's army in the US Civil War? Outnumbered most of the time and won.
- Wed May 18, 2011 6:02 am
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
- Replies: 146
- Views: 91318
Re: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
It was not historically incorrect. I suggest you read "With the Old Breed at Peleliu and Okinawa" by Eugene B. Sledge. Particularly you might want to focus on the lack of R&R, other than in insect infested jungle while waiting for reinforcements. The movie "Pacific" doesn't c...
- Wed May 18, 2011 5:21 am
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: German tanks
- Replies: 169
- Views: 41959
Re: German tanks
There were several Pershings at the Remagen bridge, but couldn't cross because they were too heavy.
- Tue May 17, 2011 6:19 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: German tanks
- Replies: 169
- Views: 41959
Re: German tanks
These were the same geniuses who botched the project to mount the US 90mm in the Sherman while claiming that their new 76mm gun design would defeat any German tank from any aspect at normal combat ranges - an untruth that became all too regrettably evident when the first tanks so armed FINALLY reac...
- Tue May 17, 2011 6:02 pm
- Forum: Military History and Technology
- Topic: World best soldiers ever
- Replies: 120
- Views: 87397
Re: World best soldiers ever
Yes, you make us sound like the Chinese in Korea with their human wave attacks.Karl Heidenreich wrote:Bgile,
Calm down, the US still was one of the victors against the Germans, by the sheer weight of numbers but still on the winning side.
- Tue May 17, 2011 5:55 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
- Replies: 146
- Views: 91318
Re: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
It is clear that German soldiers, man for man, were better than any in the world (generally speaking). They were more willing and motivated than any other nation to fight to the death if necessary. I think it is self evident that Japanese troops were more willing to fight to the death than German t...
- Tue May 17, 2011 5:51 pm
- Forum: World War II
- Topic: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
- Replies: 146
- Views: 91318
Re: Was US participation in WWII superfluous?
... This IMO results in superior British carrier design, for example HMS Illustrious vs Fliegerkoprs X in the Med she took massive amounts of damage and still survived albeit barely. ... This has been agued endlessly on navweaps forums. There are advantages to armored flight decks and there are tra...