If you cannot create 85% of the war “business” (logistics) your stupid…regardless of your genereals (especially if they outnumber you by aircraft by about 8:1(conservative
Yeah, the part that most people forget about. :) I agree, without logistics, it doesn’t matter how go of a general you are on the battlefield.
@TG:
They were underequipped and undersupplied :-? Notice when I talk about economy I said numbers AND production. If the Chinese nationalists were better equipped, no doubt they would’ve bleed the Japanese (Zeros vs. nothing does not make for a very good arguement)
I was talking about the Chinese Civil War after World War 2. Chiang Kai-Shek’s superior industry and numbers over the communists did not help him secure victory.
superior industry? I never got any indication of that.
@TG:
superior industry? I never got any indication of that.
Congquing, Shanghai, Nanjing, Mukden, Harbin, Shengyang, Nanking, Tsingtao, Peking etc. were all controlled by the Nationalists and had facotries. Mao’s forces were bottled up in the plains in northern China yet still won the war. In comparison, Chiang was much more powerful than Mao in terms of industrial resources.
Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.
Congquing, Shanghai, Nanjing, Mukden, Harbin, Shengyang, Nanking, Tsingtao, Peking etc. were all controlled by the Nationalists and had facotries. Mao’s forces were bottled up in the plains in northern China yet still won the war. In comparison, Chiang was much more powerful than Mao in terms of industrial resources.
Haven’t looked into it myself yet, but I’ll take your word on it.
(well my username and my first post…)
Guerrilla activity might have defeated whatever during The Post-WW2-Chinese War…
shermans sucked
Actually Shermans worked very well at what they were designed for, infantry support. With the machine guns and heavy load out of HE shells they could support infantry far better than their German counter-parts.
When put up against jerry armor shermans didn’t fair too well. A side or rear shot was required for the heavier “cats”. Otherwise ya can sit and watch the 75mm shells bounce off the hull. The U.S. relied more on Tank Destroyers to dispatch enemy tanks.
The U.S. relied more on Tank Destroyers to dispatch enemy tanks.
That and artillery or air power. It’s a sight to behold a King Tiger flipped upside down on its turrent from a flight of American bombers. :)
I think it was Tom Clancy who insisted Logistics win wars more than anything else. I gota agree with him, and Janus.
Exactly. Operation: Desert Shield, and the subsequent Operation: Desert Storm are prime examples. Compared to the logistics of getting that many personal, equipment, weapons, supplies, tanks, etc. to the Gulf, the tactics of the actual combat were minor. It took much more than the already in use military transports and cargo ships, it required the use of civilian vessels, and Jets borrowed from airliners. The result, the swift and stunning victory over Saddam’s army.
@TG:
If you cannot create 85% of the war “business” (logistics) your stupid…regardless of your genereals (especially if they outnumber you by aircraft by about 8:1(conservative
Yeah, the part that most people forget about. :) I agree, without logistics, it doesn’t matter how go of a general you are on the battlefield.
I trying to make a bigger point… most people call you “less intelligent” if you have logistics over “crafted” weapons… I disagree and think that the germans were stupid in glitching it up in the beginning… the allies knew how to win a war…
I trying to make a bigger point… most people call you “less intelligent” if you have logistics over “crafted” weapons… I disagree and think that the germans were stupid in glitching it up in the beginning… the allies knew how to win a war…
I dunno. The Germans had pretty good logistical support going into the war… in fact, much of German doctrine was concentrated over logistics versus superior numbers.
the axis knew how to win a war too. there were many problems plaguing the axis that prevented them from victory. not least of which, the size of the area they were fighting in (Europe, into Africa and Asia, on two fronts. ) when you have essentially two countries fighting in an area that big against enemies of that size and power (US, UK, Russia), the odds are not in your favor. combined with many other factors, thats what screwed hitler and decided WWII.
Yeah, fighting across a 3,000 mile front generally isn’t a good thing…
I’d say the anti-semitism and “people without room” policy decided it.
No, that wasnt it.
Thanks for sharing your indeed very deep thoughts.
It didnt deserve a deep response, because that was most definetly not the deciding factor. my remarks were sufficient.
Well just imagine if those Jews had faught in the German army. You’re talking about a million-plus soldiers here. Plus German Jews were some of the toughest ones around. I believe German Jews won more (or had a higher percentage) “Blue Max” (the German medal of Honor) awards than any other ethnicity in the German army during WWI.
Imagine the jewish scientists had not left.
That means, no Einstein letter to Roosevelt. (And if Italy behaved similarily, what about Fermi?)
What does that mean: A nuclear bomb on top of a ballistic missile.
Guess that would never have decided the war.
And of course: The jewish part of the economy would not have been stolen or brought out of the country by their owners as long as there was time. Germany would not have suffered of an intellectual and financial drain.
Last but not least: If the germans had not seen the slaves as inferior, they could have come as liberators (which the ucrainians and white russians thought they would be in the beginning). Means: way less guerillas active against them, more volunteers for the Army or Waffen SS.
Surely these points would not have had any impact at all.
Oh, btw: Janus, please do not answer this. It would be a waste of space.
@TG:
I trying to make a bigger point… most people call you “less intelligent” if you have logistics over “crafted” weapons… I disagree and think that the germans were stupid in glitching it up in the beginning… the allies knew how to win a war…
I dunno. The Germans had pretty good logistical support going into the war… in fact, much of German doctrine was concentrated over logistics versus superior numbers.
Give me evidence…
