VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, [9], 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:33:04 10/31/05 Mon
Author: Celebaelin
Subject: Strategy
In reply to: manwitch 's message, "Not entirley fair" on 05:16:20 10/31/05 Mon

I've found it difficult to get access to maps which are in any real sense informative regarding the conduct of the battles of the ACW so assessing the battle plans in any objective manner is like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling. I accept that Jackson is considered to be a competant and courageous general and luck was considered relevant by at least one historical figure of note when choosing his subordinates

I don't care if he's any good, is he lucky?"

Napoleon Bonaparte

It is widely reported that Napoleon was a veritable colossus in his Italian campaign, I know relatively little about it to be honest but such are the reports. Having said that the book "The Italian Military Mind" consists of 4 blank sheets bound in white kids leather so perhaps this is not such great praise as might otherwise be assumed.

The Blitzkrieg is a flawed tactic, the Germans almost suffered a disasterous turn-around on the eve of their high water mark of the Dunkirk evacuation. In fact the reason that the Germans did not press their advantage at Dunkirk was that the cheap, primative, under-armed 'Matilda' tanks of the British Tank Corps as it was at the time had very nearly cut off the supply lines to the advancing Panzers as they had not waited for their supporting infantry; tanks without fuel are just so much target practice. The Germans were saved by their last line of defence behind which any British counter would have been free to cause absolute devastation. This last line was incidentally another of the Germans great ideas - the dual use 88mm anti-aircraft gun. The design of this gun had been adapted such that it was capable of firing downhill to the extent of 8 degrees and this artillery piece was capable of penetrating the ridiculously thick front armour of the Matilda. I should point out that in tank to tank engagements the Matilda was hopelessly outclassed since its other armour was next to non-existant, but then again all the Allied armour was inferior to the German armour throughout the entire war. The Sherman was the best of the Allied tanks and that was because it was fast and agile and latterly armed with a 75mm gun. The air cover available to the retreating allies gave protection from the Stukas and Blitzkreig stuttered, but by then its job was all but done.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.