Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Germany 1944 vs modern USMC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
    Then explain why after 10 years the USMC hasn't defeated the Taliban?

    If after 10 Years the USMC can't defeat the Taliban (a pack of rag head muzzie knuckle draggers) and never will, explain why you think that the USMC can defeat The Greater German Reich to Unconditional Surrender in 2 to 3 weeks WITHOUT EITHER EVER SIGHTING GERMAN GROUND FORCES AND SUFFERING ANY SIGNIFCANT CASUALTIES?
    The mission of the USMC in Afghanistan is not to wage total war, destroy the leadership ad occupy the Taliban tribal areas.

    The defeat of Germany does not necessaril require unconditional surrender in 2 to 3 weeks. The screamed part is, of course, delusional.
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia’s Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
      Then explain why after 10 years the USMC hasn't defeated the Taliban?

      If after 10 Years the USMC can't defeat the Taliban (a pack of rag head muzzie knuckle draggers) and never will, explain why you think that the USMC can defeat The Greater German Reich to Unconditional Surrender in 2 to 3 weeks WITHOUT EITHER EVER SIGHTING GERMAN GROUND FORCES AND SUFFERING ANY SIGNIFCANT CASUALTIES?

      Little thing called the atomic bomb comes to mind.we could have used it on ww2 era germany,not so today.
      USMC can't wipeout the taliban because the taliban are the all time world champions of hide and seek.nobody can ever win in afghanistan without using nukes.the 2 most powerful countries in the world,the russians and the americans could'nt beat the afghanis in their own element,they may contain them,but it's doubtful without nukes doubt anybody could win over there.
      I am a soldier, I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight.
      General George Patton Jr

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cyberknight View Post
        1. For reasons posted earlier, I and others reject the 9 million number as nonsense. More to the point, one thing you never see opposition doing today is concetrating large numbers of troops against a modern force. Truly, the more the merrier as it makes a target rich environment. So yes, I would prefer a million man force in a small area as the would be slaughtered.

        2. The decapitation of the German leadership is quite feasable, leading to surrender of most of those forces. The supposed "kill every German" requirement for victory is non existent just as it was in 1944. Massive German surrenders on the order of the Russia campaigns is very likely.

        3. That you in the 90s possessed the weapons and capability to immobilize a 1990s tank has no connection to a 1944 army. Battlespaces are far greater as a matter of survival of the opposition forces. Tempo due to extended range of recon and night battle capabilities is something the Germans won't be used to.

        4. The two dimensional perception that you are proposing is precisely the kind of vulnerability I expect the German Army and Army Group commanders to present. Thus covering bridges against ground forces and even paratroops will not prevent the heliborne capture of those bridges. Imagine Market Garden with modern weapons capabilities to bypass and isolate the outmoded forces.
        Hi CK

        I didn't propose the 9million figure and just the same the 240,000 USMC figure is a total figure and not a combat troop figure.

        The terrain for this mythical conflict hasn't been defined, so its a rather abstract argument anyway.

        Yes the means of disabling a tank by means of its tracks is as relevant in 2012, as it was in the 1990's and in the 1940's

        The mass Russian surrenders were only possible by the Germans surrounding and holding the said Russians from any means of escape.

        I'm not talking about holding bridges but just the sheer lack of transport infrastructure in 1940's Europe to accomodate the 68 ton Abrams. The Germans had the same issue moving there King Tigers. Many roads couldn't take there weight and were to narrow. The road bridges that could manage such weights would become node points for crucial battles.

        Technology as I have stated will negate the numbers some what, but in the end it still comes down to the boots on the ground, and the no army of 240,000 (less in terms of combat arms) will defeat an army of even 2/3 thirds less than the 9million proposed.

        Anyway I doubt we will ever agree and I'm happy to leave it at that

        Regards
        "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

        "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

        Comment


        • Originally posted by bigjake1963 View Post
          Little thing called the atomic bomb comes to mind.we could have used it on ww2 era germany,not so today.
          USMC can't wipeout the taliban because the taliban are the all time world champions of hide and seek.nobody can ever win in afghanistan without using nukes.the 2 most powerful countries in the world,the russians and the americans could'nt beat the afghanis in their own element,they may contain them,but it's doubtful without nukes doubt anybody could win over there.
          Does the USMC have direct access to Nukes?

          Regards
          "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

          "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

          Comment


          • Originally posted by bigjake1963 View Post
            Little thing called the atomic bomb comes to mind.we could have used it on ww2 era germany,not so today.
            USMC can't wipeout the taliban because the taliban are the all time world champions of hide and seek.nobody can ever win in afghanistan without using nukes.the 2 most powerful countries in the world,the russians and the americans could'nt beat the afghanis in their own element,they may contain them,but it's doubtful without nukes doubt anybody could win over there.
            You forgot about the British Empire before the Russians. And I even doubt that a nuke would completely eliminate the Taliban. Even if you completely level A-stan, there are chances that the Taliban will be somewhere else, like in Pakistan or some other "stan". And you'll completely kill all the innocent Afghans, which isn't a good thing. Anyhow that is totally off subject.

            The problem here is the eternal problem of quantity vs. quality. The Marines have quality, LOTS of it. The Germans have quantity, LOTS of it... In some ways I do believe that the Marines can be overwhelmed since they are outnumbered at something like a 1:36 ratio.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Andy H View Post
              Does the USMC have direct access to Nukes?

              Regards
              since the USMC is part of the us navy,and the navy launches ballistic missiles from subs,i would like to think they had acess to nukes if they needed them.
              I am a soldier, I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight.
              General George Patton Jr

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Ubermensche View Post
                You forgot about the British Empire before the Russians. And I even doubt that a nuke would completely eliminate the Taliban. Even if you completely level A-stan, there are chances that the Taliban will be somewhere else, like in Pakistan or some other "stan". And you'll completely kill all the innocent Afghans, which isn't a good thing. Anyhow that is totally off subject.

                The problem here is the eternal problem of quantity vs. quality. The Marines have quality, LOTS of it. The Germans have quantity, LOTS of it... In some ways I do believe that the Marines can be overwhelmed since they are outnumbered at something like a 1:36 ratio.
                probably the hardest place to win a war fought without using nukes and bio weapons in the world. The germans did out number the marines,but the usmc has acess to better weapons and can stockpile supplies better than the germany of the 1930s and 40s ever could.
                I am a soldier, I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight.
                General George Patton Jr

                Comment


                • Originally posted by bigjake1963 View Post
                  probably the hardest place to win a war fought without using nukes and bio weapons in the world. The germans did out number the marines,but the usmc has acess to better weapons and can stockpile supplies better than the germany of the 1930s and 40s ever could.
                  Yes. But even at a 1:36 ratio? I'm pretty sure that the USMC will win every single engagement at a tactical level, but in the long run, they'll just win the battle and lose the war. They'll experience what the Germans experienced in Russia: killing masses of enemy soldiers only to see them replaced out of the blue the next day. This definately will have an affect on the Marines...

                  That being said, I don't believe that the Marine won't stand a chance. Compared to the Marines the Germans are deaf and blind but not dumb. But if the USMC can locate German HQs and eliminate them with precision airstrikes, than their enemy will be deaf, blind and dumb. In such a situation, there will be considerably less, if not no more organized resistance.

                  Comment


                  • Logistics, numbers, and a capitol too far...

                    From Le Harve to Berlin is 739 miles. 4 divisions would be hopelessly cut off from supply and bleed to death at the tip of the spear. They are not strong enough to hold the necessary territoy. The Luftwaffe will inflict significant casualties by virtue of having 10,000 to 50 fixed wing aircraft. Even 10,000 bi-planes would be able to swarm over the battlefield initially. The entire Kriegsmarine will eventually sink the handful of Marine support ships, or atleast force an airwar first until the Kriegsmarine is destroyed. The Germans still have the Tirpitz and numerous cruisers that need to be sunk, the Channel needs to be made secure from being cut-off by naval elements. I'm doubtfull these support ships can survive indefinately, and once they are gone, so is the Marine Corps supply line to their English depots. I have no doubt that wherever the Corps ground forces are in strength and fully supplied, they will obiterate the German army. The German army's only hope to even the odds is in urban combat. These 4 divisions will be able to travel at will and destroy all opposition until they overstrain their supply lines. I have seen how this works in Iraq during the invasion in 2003. The supply convoys will be unsupported and left to their own devices, gradually destroyed by mines and roving isolated infantry platoons. The lack of a trained and willing opponent is what saved me, certainly not the planning, or combat support for my motor transport convoys. Logistics determines what you are capable of doing with an army, same as the amount of gas in the tank of your car determines how far you can drive. The Corps would bleed to death fighting West of the Rhine.
                    If war is Hell, why was the Eastern Front so damned cold??!!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by bigjake1963 View Post
                      since the USMC is part of the us navy,and the navy launches ballistic missiles from subs,i would like to think they had acess to nukes if they needed them.
                      If you read the OP the USMC only get support ships to land those forces, they do not get support from the rest of the USN, so no modern subs, nor do they ger access to Nukes period.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by bigjake1963 View Post
                        probably the hardest place to win a war fought without using nukes and bio weapons in the world. The germans did out number the marines,but the usmc has acess to better weapons and can stockpile supplies better than the germany of the 1930s and 40s ever could.
                        Again the OP addresses this by limiting the USMC to only 12 months supply, no more.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by american1975 View Post
                          From Le Harve to Berlin is 739 miles. 4 divisions would be hopelessly cut off from supply and bleed to death at the tip of the spear. They are not strong enough to hold the necessary territoy. The Luftwaffe will inflict significant casualties by virtue of having 10,000 to 50 fixed wing aircraft. Even 10,000 bi-planes would be able to swarm over the battlefield initially. The entire Kriegsmarine will eventually sink the handful of Marine support ships, or atleast force an airwar first until the Kriegsmarine is destroyed. The Germans still have the Tirpitz and numerous cruisers that need to be sunk, the Channel needs to be made secure from being cut-off by naval elements. I'm doubtfull these support ships can survive indefinately, and once they are gone, so is the Marine Corps supply line to their English depots. I have no doubt that wherever the Corps ground forces are in strength and fully supplied, they will obiterate the German army. The German army's only hope to even the odds is in urban combat. These 4 divisions will be able to travel at will and destroy all opposition until they overstrain their supply lines. I have seen how this works in Iraq during the invasion in 2003. The supply convoys will be unsupported and left to their own devices, gradually destroyed by mines and roving isolated infantry platoons. The lack of a trained and willing opponent is what saved me, certainly not the planning, or combat support for my motor transport convoys. Logistics determines what you are capable of doing with an army, same as the amount of gas in the tank of your car determines how far you can drive. The Corps would bleed to death fighting West of the Rhine.
                          You see this is a major problem for the USMC and that you start out with 240,000 USMC personel from all sorts of branches within the USMC from the fighter jocks, tank jocks to the lowly supply clerk flying some desk. The USMC can't replace battlefield casualties, the main problem is that when the ground forces begin to confront the enemy on the ground those forces will begin to mount up, those medivac and surgical theatres onshore and off shore will be swamped by casulty rates that the modern USMC can never hope to handle, meaning that just in basic medical supplies by day one will be stretched to breaking point, the logistics to medivac wounded and the dead stretches the USMC, vital choppers that would be assigned to bringing in supplies are re-assigned into flying ambulances. Plus you need to escort those choppers into the frontlines to medivac those dead or dying troops, so the USMC will have to re-assign the Cobra gunships away from anti-tank duties to escort those choppers. Then with those losses on the battlefield, the USMC now has to disband many non-combat units to incorporate them into comabt units, thus further creating a paper pushers menace.

                          Then there is the USMC Air Wing, i will say that those F/18's will be almost untouchable, but what many don't realise is that the Hurcules C-130 Tankers are sitting ducks, and no amount of anti-aircraft whiz bangs they deploy they just don't stop 30mm and 20mm cannon bullets, they as i said are sitting duck, imagine having those lumbering gas tanks having to orbit over Western Europe waiting to refuel the jets.

                          Then there is the issue of tank v tank, the Abrams is superior to anything the Germans have, but as good as their armour is, a Tiger 88mm would shred an Abrams tank track thus disabling it, modern weapons have their advantages but they also have their weaknesses.

                          Then their comes the last issue and that is Psychology, the Germans of 1944 are used to losing 10's Thousands in one singel battle, but does the USMC 2012 have that same Psychology.

                          Comment

                          Latest Topics

                          Collapse

                          Working...
                          X