|
the JJ posted:What happens to a regiment that manages to disband on good terms (e.g. people paid, not due to everyone dying or whatever)? “when the dismissal publicly takes place the cornets in the presence the riders ripped from their poles not only the riders but also the rittmeisters gets sad in large part and so everyone count in his purse and then have to deal with his affairs...” I'm translating as closely as I can from the original: “wan aber die abdanckungk öffendlich gesehen die cornet in presntz die Reutter von der Stangen gerissen wirdt der mundt niht allein den Reuttern sondern auch den Ritmeistern zum guthen theil fallen unt sih also ein jchliche nach seinem beuttel rechten unt seine sache darnach anstellen mushen...” His letters are just five or so pages of that, closely packed on much larger sheets of paper than everyone else's. Edit: He was trustworthy and competent, I mean Mansfeld sent him north to negotiate a handover of the regiment to Imperial service with Wallenstein, it's just every time he picked up a pen it came out like that. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 10:26 on Feb 22, 2016 |
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the cornets in the presence the riders ripped from their poles not only the riders but also the rittmeisters gets sad in large part and so everyone count in his purse and then have to deal with his affairs...” I still can't parse this part. Wasn't Russian conscription at the time - and later - was for something like 25 years or so?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
If I've got this right, Riders had their lances (poles) taken and the whole regiment (especially the officers) are upset. Everyone collects their pay and moves on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 10:53
|
|
|
Dejan Bimble posted:Tito uniting Yugoslavia is one of the most herculean feats in world history. I am going to respectfully disagree. First of all, it ignores that Yugoslavia existed before him, though to be fair, he too liked to pretend in didn't. Second, Tito was a piece of poo poo who took a lot of credit for things he never did, and even for some things that happened despite of him. "Tito's" Yugoslavia was formed from the same people the previous Yugoslavia was formed of (well, minus a million or so), and there's no chance in hell "brotherhood and unity" would have worked so well without an already existing will to live together. Speaking of Tito, I could go on for a loooong time talking about all the crimes and fuckups of his regime, some of which I already mentioned in another thread. The biggest is the whole loving cult of personality he built and cultivated. And spread around globally, too. (I cannot even begin to describe the bitterness I feel when I see, for example, a French leftist quite rightfully outraged by FN's racist attacks on Christiane Taubira suddenly turning his gaze towards the people over here and saying how we all "need the Marshal (Tito) to put them back in line") Yeah, verily, without Him, the Great Marshal, we are all insignificant little worms incapable of rational thought, doomed to an eternity of chaos and strife until another Great ManTM steps forward and makes it all better again. Gee, I wonder what happened when Tito died, and left a deliberatily crafted void yearning to be filled? Who were the Great Men who stepped forward? As an aside, for all the flak I give Tito, the actually miraculous part of his regime was the rebuilding of the burnt out husk that was the WW2 ravaged Yugoslavia, and a restructuring of economy that allowed for decades of prosperity. Also, if someone remembers me being twitchy about people talking about communist crimes and fuckups in one thread, yet mentioning them in others, like this one, that's because all too often this kind of talk tends to be followed by "well, actually, the fascists weren't really all that bad" for which I am steadily running out of patience for dealing with. Nebakenezzer posted:To be honest, dude, me too. I just toss it into a bucket of "sectarian-ethnic strife" and forget about it. A bunch of people hate each other because religion/ethnic groups, and you rumble that around for a few hundred years and you have a bunch of people who hate each other for wrongs done to their ancestors because of religious/ethnic groups. I am not going to deny the existence of "sectarian-ethnic strife" because, yes, it existed, it obviously exists, and is/was quite strong in some places. But, don't you just think that maybe, just maaaybe, there's something fishy about the line of thinking that the innocent disciplined little fascists got horribly overwhelmed by the barbarian rabble's inexplicable bickering? Hmmm, yes, Albanian(or Croatian) fascists pursued the goals of Albanian(or Croatian) fascists instead of the goals of the German fascists whenever they were able to get away with it? Gee, what could have possibly been the reason for this, after all, all fascists are in perfect lockstep with one another and never ever have conflicting goals, right? Clearly, it must have been those Balkan barbarians' blood boiling with the cries of their murderous ancestors that made them disobey the reasonable orders of the gentleman Nazi. Also, doesn't it strike you as a teeeny tiiiny bit racist to toe the "these people have been hating each other since forever" line? Just a tiiny little bit? I mean, Germans have been quite effective at killing each other for a long loving time, pick any two neighboring countries in Europe and you'll see a neverending history of violence, and dig a little deeper to see a lot of still existing localized hatred for the most bizzare of reasons - take a look at some parts of Italy, for example. Hell, just read this loving thread for all the examples you'll ever need. But nope, nobody says "these people having been hating each other since forever, might as well give up on trying to understand them" for the people living in these places. I wonder why. Someone might even start getting the preposterous idea that this line of thinking is complete and utter bollocks. But who am I to judge? Deteriorata posted:Learn some history, dude. Yes, I am sure that the economic war against Yugoslavia during the Reagan/Thatcher years in the decade prior to the fall of Yugoslavia and the constant stream of totally-not-fascists-or-fundamentalist-extremists being "returned from unjust communist exile" from the West had absolutely nothing to do with the disaster that followed. my dad fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Feb 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 12:49
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:"1911: The British Secretary of War announced that he was considering the large-scale replacement of horses by motor vehicles. A so-called 'subsidy scheme' encouraged civilians to purchase suitable 30cwt and 3-ton truicks at a reduced price on the understandting that they could be taken into military service should the need arise. Elsewhere, in France, Germany and in the Austro-Hungarian empire, similar schemes were established." In WW2 Americans volunteered family pets to serve in the military. These doggies mostly did not come home.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:In WW2 Americans volunteered family pets to serve in the military. Didn't most of them go to the Coast Guard? Its been a while since I last saw dogs in WW2 photos but I usually see them as: Squadron pet Explosive Coast Guard
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
Can anyone help me find or point me in the right direction to find orders of battle for NATO and the Warsaw pact in Europe as close as possible to October 1968? Need them for a project I'm working on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:A couple of interviews with my step-grandad, just in case anyone is interested. (in Russian, obviously) I am guessing the Douglas is likely the A-20. The A-20 was widely used by the VVS with about 3,000 delivered.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
Hey my dad, I'm getting an implication that Tito deliberately made himself more necessary to the continuation of a unified Yugoslavia, is that right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
100 Years Ago Day 2 at Verdun. Now the Germans start to turn the screw. By the end of today they've advanced three miles with a highly favourable casualty ratio. Regardless of whether the objective is attrition or Verdun, they're doing very well for themselves. And, back at GQG, General Joffre has now moved me to quote Blackadder, something I attempt to reserve only for the most serious of situations. He's still determined not to see the seriousness of the situation. Which, very practically, means that they'll have to make do with only local reserves for the time being. Elsewhere: Mahmut Kamil gets the tin tack as his reward for losing Erzurum; Edward Mousley gets orders and rumours at Kut; Robert Pelissier gets some good news on the Hartmannswillerkopf (I wonder if I should start a sweepstake for who will be our first French correspondent to go to you-know-where?); and, on the Somme, Bernard Adams tells the story of being the next unit across from a German trench raid/diversionary attack. (For all he knew, that might have just been the start of a major German push...)
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Hey my dad, I'm getting an implication that Tito deliberately made himself more necessary to the continuation of a unified Yugoslavia, is that right? That is the impression I have, based on what I've heard and read of the Tito years, yes. But this, like everything else I say, comes with the caveat that I am not a historian, just a random dude trying to figure out what the hell is the deal with the past 100 years of history here from the jumbled mess of information I have available to me, filtered through the lens of my personal biases.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I am guessing the Douglas is likely the A-20. The A-20 was widely used by the VVS with about 3,000 delivered. It could very well be the Li-2, a licenced copy of the DC-3 with a turret in the back.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
my dad posted:I am not going to deny the existence of "sectarian-ethnic strife" because, yes, it existed, it obviously exists, and is/was quite strong in some places. But, don't you just think that maybe, just maaaybe, there's something fishy about the line of thinking that the innocent disciplined little fascists got horribly overwhelmed by the barbarian rabble's inexplicable bickering? Hmmm, yes, Albanian(or Croatian) fascists pursued the goals of Albanian(or Croatian) fascists instead of the goals of the German fascists whenever they were able to get away with it? Gee, what could have possibly been the reason for this, after all, all fascists are in perfect lockstep with one another and never ever have conflicting goals, right? Clearly, it must have been those Balkan barbarians' blood boiling with the cries of their murderous ancestors that made them disobey the reasonable orders of the gentleman Nazi.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Not-so-WW2 Data Communist China is finished in this update! Save for me blundering the package images, which I'll upload ASAP, we get to check out some recoilless rifle rounds that are (mostly) copies of US munitions. Some entries fit into the rocket and pyrotechnic groups which is always exciting. What kind of recoilless rifle rounds did they use, and what were their origins? Which rocket had collapsible fins? Which signal cartridges were the Chinese ones interchangeable with? All that and more at the blog!
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
my dad posted:Yes, I am sure that the economic war against Yugoslavia during the Reagan/Thatcher years in the decade prior to the fall of Yugoslavia and the constant stream of totally-not-fascists-or-fundamentalist-extremists being "returned from unjust communist exile" from the West had absolutely nothing to do with the disaster that followed. The single largest factor in the breakup of Yugoslavia was the rise of Milosevic and Serbian nationalism in the 80s. Yugoslavia was going to stay together not as Yugoslavia but as Greater Serbia and the various republics wanted nothing to do with it whatever. It wasn't so much a matter of them choosing to break up, it was Serbia driving everyone away. Outside actors played a part, certainly, but the vast majority of the acrimony that led to the break up came from within Yugoslavia itself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Which plane(s)? Was curious about how control systems were designed...and there isn't a whole lot on it. You can get breakdowns of powerplants and guns down to individual cotter pins but god help you if you want to know about how ailerons are actuated.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:That got me thinking. How much money did war widows get in WWI and WWII? This is a really messy question. Pensions for surviving widows - or children if there was no surviving wife - was set after the Civil War at the amount a soldier would receive for full disability. I THINK that is the model that was followed up through at least WW1, but this poo poo changes over time. I do know that the surviving spouse's benefit for a soldier who lived and died of old age is the same for WW1 and WW2 widows today, and it's something like $1000 a month. It should also be remembered that veterans benefits were a real political hot button between WW1 and WW2 and they bounced all over the place. The whole VA system that we have now was largely set up because of what a clusterfuck WW1 benefits were. I think there were 3 or 4 separate government agencies involved with benefits and over the course of about a decade they were consolidated into the VA as we know it. I think the final wave of consolidations was in the early 30s. After WW2 there was a huge expansion of VA benefits that produced the system we recognize today. Importantly most of those changes were also retroactive, so veterans of previous wars (and therefore surviving spouses, whether widowed in 1917 via bullet or 1977 via old age) also became eligible for them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Was curious about how control systems were designed...and there isn't a whole lot on it. You can get breakdowns of powerplants and guns down to individual cotter pins but god help you if you want to know about how ailerons are actuated. Metal string and pulley system. That's literally all their is too it. I should have a book or two that covers what little there is on it though. Do you need the info ASAP?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Metal string and pulley system. That's literally all their is too it. Well, more specifically I was curious about the 190s and P-61s systems as they're apparently pushrod actuated versus pulleys (and I suppose the handful of hydraulically boosted surfaces that were out there too), if you have anything on that stuff that'd be cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Well, more specifically I was curious about the 190s and P-61s systems as they're apparently pushrod actuated versus pulleys (and I suppose the handful of hydraulically boosted surfaces that were out there too), if you have anything on that stuff that'd be cool. I might be able to find stuff on the 190, but dont get your hopes up for the P-61. Ill need a few days to go through my library.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
I think it was this thread where the relative difficulty in making rifles compared to smoothbores was brought up. Can't remember, but my potentially false memories are a good excuse to repost this video! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lui6uNPcRPA Compare to someone today making a .22 caliber semi-automatic pistol in a small workshop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfvJtjbY9TM
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Well, more specifically I was curious about the 190s and P-61s systems as they're apparently pushrod actuated versus pulleys (and I suppose the handful of hydraulically boosted surfaces that were out there too), if you have anything on that stuff that'd be cool. Got some deets on the FW-190 system, but actual drawing of the complete layout is missing. I'll try to get some good photos lifted from my books that will hopefully be able to show it off as a whole alongside the various descriptions given to them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:That got me thinking. How much money did war widows get in WWI and WWII? In Finland the war widow's pension depended on the late husband's military rank - a private's widow would have had to do with measly 980 euros per year. This was changed in 1948 when everyone was entitled to the same compensation regardless of rank and then everyone got a base pension of 1500 euros per year. Children would also be paid a compensation. This wasn't enough for living by itself and struggling widows could apply for additional pension. So what would that 1500 euros get you in 1948? Why I'm glad you asked! Either 2860 kg of potatos, 2 kg of coffee or 2,5 litres of vodka. Unfortunately my sources don't tell how much Oltermanni cost in 1948.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:In Finland the war widow's pension depended on the late husband's military rank - a private's widow would have had to do with measly 980 euros per year. This was changed in 1948 when everyone was entitled to the same compensation regardless of rank and then everyone got a base pension of 1500 euros per year. Children would also be paid a compensation. This wasn't enough for living by itself and struggling widows could apply for additional pension. 3 tons of potatoes sounds like a lot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Hazzard posted:If I've got this right, Riders had their lances (poles) taken and the whole regiment (especially the officers) are upset. Everyone collects their pay and moves on. Edit: ripping the flags from their poles is an important part of the whole disbanding process, so even though he never says the word "flag" I'm pretty sure that's what he means. Edit 2: I'm not exaggerating when I say that his letters are nothing but five to ten pages of this on the largest paper he can find. His handwriting is a shitshow as well. Most of it, fortunately, is about horses and hanging out with Vratislav Eusebius von Pernstein, the other Obrist Lieutenant of the cavalry in this regiment. This dude and von Pernstein are the guys I mentioned who write in the same ink, which means I know they were usually sitting near each other when they did it. (Von Pernstein's handwriting, incidentally, is beautiful. His problem is that German is obviously not his native language.) HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Feb 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Fangz posted:3 tons of potatoes sounds like a lot. Granted I know nothing of making vodka but it seems like you should be able to get more than 2.5 liters for something that's equivalent to three tons of potatoes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:The U.S. didn't need gratuitous nudity because we had the world's sexiest flight manuals. Hot drat those are fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Thanks! Raskolnikov38 posted:Granted I know nothing of making vodka but it seems like you should be able to get more than 2.5 liters for something that's equivalent to three tons of potatoes. Quick googling says 1kg = 1l. Of course there would be other expenses too, and also that would be very illegal in Finland. 2.5 liters still seems a very small amount.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:I think it was this thread where the relative difficulty in making rifles compared to smoothbores was brought up. Can't remember, but my potentially false memories are a good excuse to repost this video! Goddamn I love that video. It's basically porn for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Goddamn I love that video. It's basically porn for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
So, the Swedish allotment system of 30W was basically as follows : The country is split into adminstrative districts, läns (singular : län). Each län was supposed to provide at least an infantry regiment of about 1200 men, split into eight companies, with cavalry coming from some (but not all) läner. These regiments and companies were adminstrative units only, with battlefield formations being different. The regiment of Savolax län (the one our group re-enacts) sent five out of its eight companies with Gustavus Adolphus when he sailed to Germany (about men 850 reportedly arrived), the rest were posted on the Russian border. By the time of the Battle of Lützen there were about 150 of them present in the Swedish Brigade. Like mentioned above getting recruited was no fun for anyone, with replacements being mustered to compensate for the losses of the regiment. In the later half of the 17th century the system changed, but this was about as it was when Sweden intervened in the 30YW. A guy form our group held a presentation about this yeasterday had he had researched the period quite well. One funny anecdote about the start of the Swedish participation was that the regiments from Finland were, for a brief period, stationed in ships outside the city of Turku, waiting for favorable winds. The soldiers were issued cloth and were told to sew their own clothes while waiting and under way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Ataxerxes posted:The soldiers were issued cloth and were told to sew their own clothes while waiting and under way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Oops, I totally hosed up while converting between old Finnish marks and Euros  The correct purchasing power for 1500 EUR/35000 FIM in 1948 would be 2.7 tons of potatoes, 50 kg of coffee or 58 litres of vodka. Life was good back then after all! For comparison, the same money would buy you 1.5 tons of potatoes, 200 kg of coffee and 130 litres of vodka. :cryingpotato: source: http://apps.rahamuseo.fi/rahanarvolaskin#FIN Nenonen fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Feb 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Granted I know nothing of making vodka but it seems like you should be able to get more than 2.5 liters for something that's equivalent to three tons of potatoes. I'm assuming that back then Finland like other Nordic countries had mad high taxes on alcohol and/or near prohibition? Even today buying hard liquor in Norway is pretty brutal, for instance, and up until like the 70s you literally had to go to the police to buy a licence to buy a barrel of beer (and there was a yearly cap on how much you could buy).
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Mostly it's because Nenonen is a goof and made a unit error.  But also, producing alcoholic drinks by any means other than fermentation requires a licence, so moonshining all those taters is prohibited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
my dad posted:I am not going to deny the existence of "sectarian-ethnic strife" because, yes, it existed, it obviously exists, and is/was quite strong in some places. But, don't you just think that maybe, just maaaybe, there's something fishy about the line of thinking that the innocent disciplined little fascists got horribly overwhelmed by the barbarian rabble's inexplicable bickering? Clearly, it must have been those Balkan barbarians' blood boiling with the cries of their murderous ancestors that made them disobey the reasonable orders of the gentleman Nazi. lol innocent fascists. No, I was trying to make the point that not all Waffen-SS (ohgod, *not ALL Waffen-SS*) were Nazi fanatics who fought to the Third Reich. Some were, but especially post Battle of Kursk, the Nazis used the concept of Waffen-SS as a kind of Nazi foreign legion, except some of these units were only in the broadest sense loyal to Nazi Germany. my dad posted:Also, doesn't it strike you as a teeeny tiiiny bit racist to toe the "these people have been hating each other since forever" line? Just a tiiny little bit? I mean, Germans have been quite effective at killing each other for a long loving time, pick any two neighboring countries in Europe and you'll see a neverending history of violence, and dig a little deeper to see a lot of still existing localized hatred for the most bizzare of reasons - take a look at some parts of Italy, for example. I'm sorry if it sounded like I was dismissing the Balkans as just some sort eternal tumble dryer of pointless bloodshed - but honestly, I only know the broadest strokes of the conflict. Even when it comes to the discussion of the Yugoslavian breakup, I'm following along what been written in this thread and don't know who's full of poo poo and who knows what they are talking about. It is a mess of sectarianism and ethnic strife to me, but that doesn't dismiss the conflict as inevitable or if only those drat [ethnic group] could grow up everything could be fine; it's just a statement about what I know. My Chemistry knowledge is poo poo too - I joke that the only thing I know about chemistry is that stuff happens, plus or minus energy - but that doesn't dismiss chemistry as a subject, or say that the subject is unimportant. Or that frankly, I'm not all ears when people talk chemistry (or the Balkans.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:100 Years Ago What is really sobering, what really puts it all into perspective is that you'll still be talking about this battle in your daily updates in December.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I'm sorry if it sounded like I was dismissing the Balkans as just some sort eternal tumble dryer of pointless bloodshed - but honestly, I only know the broadest strokes of the conflict. Even when it comes to the discussion of the Yugoslavian breakup, I'm following along what been written in this thread and don't know who's full of poo poo and who knows what they are talking about. It is a mess of sectarianism and ethnic strife to me, but that doesn't dismiss the conflict as inevitable or if only those drat [ethnic group] could grow up everything could be fine; it's just a statement about what I know. My Chemistry knowledge is poo poo too - I joke that the only thing I know about chemistry is that stuff happens, plus or minus energy - but that doesn't dismiss chemistry as a subject, or say that the subject is unimportant. Or that frankly, I'm not all ears when people talk chemistry (or the Balkans.) I'd honestly be kind of surprised if the sort of assholes who join the Waffen SS weren't prone to having some pet war crimes they really wanted committed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
MrMojok posted:What is really sobering, what really puts it all into perspective is that you'll still be talking about this battle in your daily updates in December. It's ok, there'll be plenty of stuff to distract us by then! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
Comstar posted:So...Verdun. 100 years ago today it all started. Was it worth it for the French? Certainly doesn't seem to be worth it for the Germans..why didn't their morale crack like the French afterwards? They treated the blokes with the bare minimum of decency and foresight. Morale was far from ideal on the German side of the hill after getting walloped in 1916, but it was good enough to keep going. On the one hand, you have soldiers who when they get shelled they disappear into a large, dry concrete bunker with drainage, electric lights, and a store of iron rations. En le autre main, vous avez soldiers who in the same situation are cramming into tiny mud hovels and making the decision "would I rather get blown up out of this dugout, or drowned inside it?" Meanwhile, their officer puts a little more fuel on the fire in his deep, safe shelter and continues his game of cards. quote:Should the French have fallen back to the western bank? No. There are two ways of looking at this. Both of them suck mightily, but they both point in the same direction. If you are looking at the situation with the idea that the war will end with a military victory, if you give up the whole east bank then you're hosed for getting back there any time soon. It's far too strong a position to assault directly without horrendous loss of life. Immediately to the south you have the Meuse Heights to get in your way. Just to the north you have German guns destroying the only railway worth the name. Unless you're willing to build pontoon bridges over the Meuse out of dead Americans (and at this point they don't know that they're going to get any Americans, dead, building pontoon bridges, for the use of), the only thing to do would be to launch offensives off to the west and the far south in an attempt to break through and make it untenable for the Germans to keep holding Verdun. Which is what Joffre tried to do in 1915 with offensives in Artois and Champagne to winkle the Germans out of Noyon, except Herbert Sulzbach is still sitting right there at Noyon with his guns and his collection of venereal diseases, having barely noticed anything was amiss. If on the other hand you're looking at it with the idea that the war will end with some kind of negotiated settlement, it's still a bad idea to give up the ground. The further the German Army gets into France, the bigger the size of the bribe that will be needed to make them go away again. The last thing you want to do from a political standpoint is to hand them two-thirds of a fortress complex that the Kaiser can parade through in triumph and make out like he's just overseen a major victory; that only gives the enemy more reasons to keep fighting. As long as you are committed to winning the war, and as a nation it is generally better to win wars on one's own territory than it is to lose them, it makes sense to hold on as long as there's a hope that the position is tenable. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Feb 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 00:52
|
|