KiloIndie, on 06 June 2014 - 05:42 PM, said: This is interesting but lacks sufficient qualification. After all,
excuses were in order.... More salt please. further,
there is a singular failure to publish both accounts, of tanks
arriveing as well as those defending. Not to mention, with Russia's
presence at the DDay landings, an account of the simultaneous
Soviet offensive designed to relieve pressure on the western
allies. I think you have a few hours left to get it right...
TheKroo: I agree with one point of your comment, if you find yourself
on the loosing side of a conflict, you do tend to try and find
mitigating circumstances to report, but usually facts tell the true
story, if you know how to properly analyse them. I disagree with
the statement of failure to publish both side's views. I believe
even with a bit more emphasis on the German point of view, the
presentation of the opposite account was sufficient for the
understanding of the point, without distorting the facts on certain
side's behalf. "Not to mention, with Russia's presence at
the DDay landings" - can you please explain this? Operation
Bagration?
Maxmk6, on 06 June 2014 - 06:24 PM, said: Excellent piece, more would be good as always but it's a really
interesting angle, ty WG :-) There's been quite a lot on
D-Day on the documentary TV channels recently. Apparently, all
the Allies on every front quickly came to the conclusion that if
they ever engaged the Germans on anything like equal
terms they were virtually guaranteed to always lose, because
of the German's superior commanders and tactics, weapons, but most
of all, their fighting spirit. That fighting
spirit manifested as the difference between the Allied troops
suffering a huge number of casualties from psychiatric break down
(not just combat fatigue, but from the moment troops first entered
combat), compared to the Germans who had virtually no such problems
at all. They commissioned psychiatrists to study this, and the
conclusion was that Hitlers 3rd Reich from 1933 was a better
preparatory society for war than democracies could ever be. But
maybe it goes deeper, maybe it explains some of the brutality of
the regime, they simply never escaped the brutilisation of
WW1, considering how that ended and it not being resolved in their
eyes. But whatever, seems truth is D-Day was only a success
cuz we massively overwhelmed the Germans with quantity of
manpower & material, exactly the same way the Russian's turned it
around on the Eastern front. Makes you realise just how dangerous
they were, if they'd just had a little bit more sense in finishing
off one front before starting on another they'd have
been unstoppable. And it makes sense of what Guderian said in that
report about feeling confident relying on the fighting spirit of
his troops, it really was an enormous difference and advantage and
would have been decisive if not for numbers & material and lack of
air & sea power.
TheKroo:
sleepysteve22, on 06 June 2014 - 07:34 PM, said: thank you wargaming for your alternative view on D-day found it a
great read, keep up the good work:-)
TheKroo: Really glad you guys liked the article. And very happy it
has sparked some proper historical debate :)