|
Thalantos posted:I'll add those to my reading list. Another factor for the German stormtrooper reputation I forgot to mention in the previous post - Germans weren't on the strategic offensive for most of the war. When people think of stormtroopers, they think of small groups, volunteers or hand-picked guys with extra gear and lots of grenades, who infiltrate enemy lines and blow cause havok. Both sides did that - they were called trench raids, and they happened throughout the war with the goals of snatching prisoners, getting intel on enemy positions, etc. Since the Germans were on defense nearly all the time in 1915-17 in the West (Verdun is the big exception), trench raiding is pretty much all they did offensively. Meanwhile the British and French did trench raids largely the same, but they also did the big setpiece offensives with timed bombardments and big formations and many casualties. So when you think of the typical German attack across no-mans-land for most of the war, you think of a stormtrooper-style trench raid, because that was mostly all they did, and when you think of an Allied attack you think of the Somme and you forget all the stormtrooper-style attacks that the Allies did do.
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
By the way, would anyone be interested in a copy of someone's Leavenworth MA thesis I acquired from somewhere, which is a comparative study of German stormtroopers and Canadian trench raiders?gohuskies posted:Except the Germans didn't really get to it first. Infiltration tactics were developed by the French and all-arms coordination was done first and best by the British. I'd say that infiltration tactics (as part of a major offensive, as oppposed to infiltration-for-raiding-purposes), as with defence in depth, were developed mostly at the same time by both French and Germans working along parallel lines; it goes down popularly as a German tactic since they were the first to use them on a wide scale (the first day at Verdun) and then used them again, iconically, in the Spring Offensive. The French were also painfully aware of a need for proper combined arms by mid-1917 after the spectacular failure of the Nivelle offensive and gave a small-scale beta version a run-out in the successful battle for Fort Malmaison (and the rest of the Chemin des Dames, too) in late October; where they learned a lot of the same lessons as the BEF did at Third Ypres and Cambrai, but far more economically.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 00:48
|
|
gohuskies posted:Another factor for the German stormtrooper reputation I forgot to mention in the previous post - Germans weren't on the strategic offensive for most of the war. When people think of stormtroopers, they think of small groups, volunteers or hand-picked guys with extra gear and lots of grenades, who infiltrate enemy lines and blow cause havok. Both sides did that - they were called trench raids, and they happened throughout the war with the goals of snatching prisoners, getting intel on enemy positions, etc. were trench raids really the purpose of german stormtrooper units? or was it an incidental task? does it lessen their development of the concept?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Did the Germans just do it better or something? Or is my pop history just that bad, lol? Wasn't the German success essentially predicated on attacking an opponent who had very little experience in defending a trench network from a major offensive? Something tells me that if the German army of 1918 attacked the German lines of 1917, it wouldn't have been quite as spectacular. Or does that more apply to the British? Lord knows the French went through some poo poo at Verdun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 00:57
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:Wasn't the German success essentially predicated on attacking an opponent who had very little experience in defending a trench network from a major offensive? Something tells me that if the German army of 1918 attacked the German lines of 1917, it wouldn't have been quite as spectacular. The main problem is that plenty of eedjit officers of all ranks in both the BEF and the French Army got told to spend the 1917-18 winter transforming their trench lines into defence-in-depth zones, and then they couldn't be arsed to do a proper job of work, nor to properly garrison the poorly-laid-out zones once they were supposedly complete. Particularly irritating in the French case, since GQG had been writing papers about the need to move towards defence in depth since late 1915...
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Wasn't the German success essentially predicated on attacking an opponent who had very little experience in defending a trench network from a major offensive? Something tells me that if the German army of 1918 attacked the German lines of 1917, it wouldn't have been quite as spectacular. A pretty big part of their success was the fact that they had achieved a ludicrous local superiority prior to operation Michael. The Germans collected all their spare manpower in 44 divisions or so and launched an offensive against 26 British ones. spectralent posted:Would your tank speed ever matter? Like, was anything fast enough that the response time from recon was soon enough that it'd be faster, or slow enough that getting going from a resupply point would add extra time needed to get to a front line, or whatever? Or is rated speed just basically immaterial for the period? Yes, it's perfectly feasible on the tactical scale for a tank to zip along at top speed for a while. Closing distance faster is always useful, it's just that the law of averages hits harder when you're dealing with larger scales.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
MassivelyBuckNegro posted:were trench raids really the purpose of german stormtrooper units? or was it an incidental task? does it lessen their development of the concept? What lessens the German development of the concept is that they didn't develop it in any unique or special way. All three armies on the western front developed the concept of using small units of picked or volunteer men with combined arms support and lots of grenades and special weapons to carry out specialized tasks alongside and ahead of the main body. Different armies came up with different elements in different orders but it's not like there was some dramatic revolution on one side while the other spent the war fighting like the 19th century. The trench raid example is just to show how the stereotype of what a German attack vs a British attack looked liked could have gotten into people's minds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Urban warfare is still cumbersome and terrifying, didn't the Russians basically just shell cities in Chechnya instead of sending troops in? You'll be a very rich man if you can figure out how to get urban combat out of the way cleanly and quickly. I'm sure people in the Pentagon aren't really thrilled when they have to figure what to do about places Beijing, Mexico City, or Moscow. I live in Los Angeles and I've thought about how you would try to invade this place. The north has a huge mountain range, the northwest is also hilly and forces you into valleys, and the south and east are all sprawl. Coming in from the north to the city proper is limited by mountain (as commuters know well). Invading by ocean probably would work, but youll have air and sea power to contend with the whole way. And then what do you have if you do? This city is challenging to traverse and control during peace. It offers no resources and a lot of angry mouths to feed with handguns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 02:03
|
|
|
my dad posted:Vogon bureaucracy strikes again. more like vogon poetry
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:more like vogon poetry I'm pretty sure I'd recognize your mother's writing. 
my dad fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Jan 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
Any city after a certain size would be a nightmare to attack. Hell, I think the only easy way to handle a city would be to use chemical warfare to make the city impossible to hold.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
skooma512 posted:You'll be a very rich man if you can figure out how to get urban combat out of the way cleanly and quickly. I'm sure people in the Pentagon aren't really thrilled when they have to figure what to do about places Beijing, Mexico City, or Moscow. This short video details the American war plan for taking Moscow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
I think the only real military solution to a modern city is to cut off access to power, water, and food, and wait until everyone inside is dead or unwilling to fight you. So you know, a political solution is preferable in all cases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:By the way, would anyone be interested in a copy of someone's Leavenworth MA thesis I acquired from somewhere, which is a comparative study of German stormtroopers and Canadian trench raiders? Very interested!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:Yes, it's perfectly feasible on the tactical scale for a tank to zip along at top speed for a while. Closing distance faster is always useful, it's just that the law of averages hits harder when you're dealing with larger scales. Yeah, I know that, I was specifically asking if there was any WW2 tank that was speedy enough or slow enough that this had any bearing on it's strategic mobility, or if you basically just threw all tanks in a bin that says "'bout 10mph" and that was it. Come to think of it, wouldn't Hellcats kind of count? I know the Bulge was a really specialised use case, but were hellcats travelling from significant distances to meet German breakthroughs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
Sure, you could form up a tank company or two and floor it down the highway. Then what? Your tanks can fight until nightfall, at which point they're going to need resupply and maintenance which can only be provided by the men and equipment you just left in the dust. While your tank's top speed might be 70 kilometers per hour, they go that far in a day. Also if you didn't bring any infantry with you, you're going to have one hell of a time holding the ground your offensive just took. Now, there were situations where there was no choice but to load up tanks with as much fuel and ammo and infantry as possible and try to beat the enemy to a strategically vital village or river crossing or some such, but these were very rare events that were accompanied by much moaning and cursing on behalf of those involved and a rich bounty of medals rained on them if such a stunt actually succeeded.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Yeah, I know that, I was specifically asking if there was any WW2 tank that was speedy enough or slow enough that this had any bearing on it's strategic mobility, or if you basically just threw all tanks in a bin that says "'bout 10mph" and that was it. T34s with tankodesantniki on them?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:T34s with tankodesantniki on them? tankdesantniki - (singular tankdesantnik)
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:tankdesantniki - (singular tankdesantnik) I thought the desantniki were supposed to get off well before they actually reached the front lines?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
Clearly you haven't played World of Tanks, or you'd know that it was the radio operator.Davin Valkri posted:I thought the desantniki were supposed to get off well before they actually reached the front lines? It's a dumb joke from an ancient image macro.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
A true badass has died, the journalist who broke the story of the German invasion of Poland right before it happened. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/...WT.nav=top-news 1911-2017, my God.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 08:11
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:A true badass has died, the journalist who broke the story of the German invasion of Poland right before it happened. quote:Ms. Hollingworth was never so happy, she often said, as when she was roaming the world equipped with little more than a toothbrush, a typewriter and, if need be, a revolver. holy gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:holy gently caress quote:Ms. Hollingworth’s scoop comprised two parts. The first was her story of Aug. 29, about the advent of war. The second was her report on the start of the war itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 08:21
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:read the one about her holding the phone out the window: Trouble with a cop? Threaten to beat his rear end with a shoe!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 08:57
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:I think the only real military solution to a modern city is to cut off access to power, water, and food, and wait until everyone inside is dead or unwilling to fight you. I went to a talk a couple of days ago by a Syrian couple who have lived in the UK for decades, but set up a help group for Syrian refugees coming to the UK now. The number of times the line "the government surrounded the town, cut off water, food and electricity then shot anyone trying to help" was said was pretty 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 10:37
|
|
FAUXTON posted:holy gently caress I'll say. MikeCrotch posted:I went to a talk a couple of days ago by a Syrian couple who have lived in the UK for decades, but set up a help group for Syrian refugees coming to the UK now. I was quite surprised nobody pointed out recent events with that in the thread, guess most of us still have our gently caress YOU 2016 filters on.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 12:00
|
|
|
So, basically, it's a medieval siege.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
So I think the thing that distinguishes the German WW1 stormtrooper concept from Allied infilitration tactics is the same thing undepinning the development of the Volksgrenadier divisions in WW2, namely that the Germans weren't seeking to develop a full combined-arms doctrine in the way that the Allies were, they were searching for a way to use manpower to mitigate their deficiencies in artillery, armour, and in the air. The Germans don't get a creeping bombardment for suppression, so they have to infiltrate as far forwards in advance. They don't get armour support to remove strongpoints, so the initial attack has to develop in a way that bypasses them. Or to put it another way; Allied infiltration tactics were driven by a desire to minimise casualties in the assault. German infiltration tactics were driven by the need to find a way to make a successful assault by employing infantry without generous support, with an acceptance that increased casualties might be the price paid for success.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
I'd also opine that the dedicated assault platoon was far from gone by 1942. Soviet developments aside, the brits also kitted batallions out with extra SMGs, grenades and satchels when attacking fortified positions and gave them training to that end. Some time ago I read about indians in Italy using this approach, I'll see if I can remember where I saw it 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The Germans don't get a creeping bombardment for suppression, so they have to infiltrate as far forwards in advance. They don't get armour support to remove strongpoints, so the initial attack has to develop in a way that bypasses them. Germans didn't use creeping bombardments as much because they preferred the use of extremely intense but short preparatory bombardments, around 30 minutes at absolute maximum effort for the artillery crews, in order to achieve maximum surprise. The Germans also didn't need to soften up Allied positions as much since Allied trenches were both of worse quality and in worse positions than German ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Scrree posted:At some point a while ago a 1944-era soviet assault troop manual was posted here, and the main takeaway I got from it was 'grenade every building, grenade every floor of every building, grenade every room of every floor of every building - a grenade is far cheaper than your life!' which I think shows a lot about how terrifying and cumbersome city clearing must have been. This is from a bit ago, but Americans did the same thing. My grandfather was an armored infantryman in the 2nd armored and when they were clearing buildings it went something like this according to him. (The times when he was drunk enough to be willing to talk about it). "Grenades through the windows and any open doors. Then you enter and start shoving grenades under any doors you find. DO NOT ENTER THE BASEMENT. Throw a pair of grenades down there. Wait a few seconds and throw a few more. Bring shotguns and Thompsons just in case the grenades leave anyone behind."
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
A case really of leaving all compassion and mercy at the doorstep of a hourse. Urban combat is horrible. Also the Forgotten Weapons guy has finally decided to cover the infamy that is the Enfield L85A1. Enjoy.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Germans didn't use creeping bombardments as much because they preferred the use of extremely intense but short preparatory bombardments, around 30 minutes at absolute maximum effort for the artillery crews, in order to achieve maximum surprise. The Germans also didn't need to soften up Allied positions as much since Allied trenches were both of worse quality and in worse positions than German ones. Creeping and box bombardments were more about preventing the movement of reserves. The Germans had to work around using them because by 1918 they don't have the shells.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Also the Forgotten Weapons guy has finally decided to cover the infamy that is the Enfield L85A1. Enjoy. Yes please.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
JcDent posted:So, basically, it's a medieval siege. Or just a siege?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:A case really of leaving all compassion and mercy at the doorstep of a hourse. Urban combat is horrible. The only hourse I know of was full of Greeks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
skooma512 posted:You'll be a very rich man if you can figure out how to get urban combat out of the way cleanly and quickly. I'm sure people in the Pentagon aren't really thrilled when they have to figure what to do about places Beijing, Mexico City, or Moscow. Blow up the San Andreas fault and sink LA into the sea, imo As for what to do in the event of an invasion,
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'd also opine that the dedicated assault platoon was far from gone by 1942. Soviet developments aside, the brits also kitted batallions out with extra SMGs, grenades and satchels when attacking fortified positions and gave them training to that end. Some time ago I read about indians in Italy using this approach, I'll see if I can remember where I saw it And everyone else, really, to different degrees and based on their war experiences. Soviets accumulated a lot of experience on urban warfare in Stalingrad, although it's another matter if using all the tricks in the book were that practical to put into use. E.g. attacking a multistore building from top down is a good idea, but it's not the most time efficient or least risky method unless there is a quick, safe approach to the roof. Meanwhile the Allied armies fighting in Normandy had to develop novel methods of fighting in bocage, likewise a very close terrain to fight in. Finnish army didn't have that much experience of fighting in cities, but fighting in close terrain has mostly the same requirements whether it's trenches, city blocks or forest and so storm squads with flamethrowers, submachineguns and satchel charges were formed up when there wasn't space for a normal frontal attack. In the final phase of the battle of Nietjärvi in 1944 the tip of Soviet infantry and tanks had reached the last defensive trench line, but only on a narrow frontage. The next morning Finnish artillery fired a brief preparation of 1000 shells from altogether 160 tubes into a half square kilometer area, after which infantry counter-assaulted along the trench line from both ends, rotating the lead platoons as they took casualties. Swamps on one side and open fields on the other meant that the attacking spearheads had to follow a rather narrow wooded isthmus and so the point platoons' firepower had to be maximal. And the same happens even today: armies will organize and equip themselves differently depending on the environment, even more so than before and maybe even applying some rules of engagement if the civilians are lucky enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:Blow up the San Andreas fault and sink LA into the sea, imo Demolish overpasses. Between the lack of alternatives and all the refugee traffic clogging up the road any initiative and momentum you hope to gain will be dropped to nil. This place barely functions on a good day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
Plus I imagine most of that is wooden construction suburbs, no? Just see that a wildfire coincidentally starts on a day the wind is blowing towards the city center, that'll make your job much easier.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 00:24
|
|