nah. the big mistake was only having thier main defenses at the beaches....
nah. the big mistake was only having thier main defenses at the beaches....
On the Path to the Streets of Gold: a Suebi AAR
Visited:![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Hvil i fred HoreToreA man who casts no shadow has no soul.
A defense in depth is not practical when
A) you lack the ressources to build a defense in depth
B) your reserves intended to wipe out the enemy who has broken into the defense can't move in the day.
Sorry, but the building of the wall was the result of a sound military analysis, not a "mistake".
I have trouble calling something a mistake when there is no other alternative.
no. they had the resources, or at least most of them. the problem was that he spended them all at the beaches, and not spread them out more inland. after a mile or so, the german defenses were only the troops, many of which were low-grade.
On the Path to the Streets of Gold: a Suebi AAR
Visited:![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Hvil i fred HoreToreA man who casts no shadow has no soul.
I am sorry but "sarcasm" you are [wrong] if you thought the war was unwinnable for the axis in june of 1944. Had Hitler pulled the 6th army out of Stalingrad when he should have (well he shouldn't have engaged Stalin in Stalingrad anyway, it was a blunder and a half, he should have blitzed to the oilfields instead which was the reason he invaded Russia anyway) it would have been a different story. the reason the war became unwinnable was because Hitler insisted that the invasion was coming at Calais.
The biggest mistake of the war the way Hitler invaded Russia... (remember he said Rome was 1st Reich, Napoleon the 2nd.) he should have taken a lesson from the 2nd Reich, and taken the invasion of Russia slow in the North, but Blitzed to the Oil fields in the south. At this point in the war the 3rd Reich was running low on oil reserves, and since the biggest part of their tactics was their reliance on vehicle support. no fuel, no vehicles, shitty defeat. Hitler should also never have gone to North Africa, there was little to no benefit at such an early stage in the war. Hitler could have easily won the war if he did not spread his forces so much and waste them on pointless campaigns. Reforming their tactics should have been key. You cannot blitz when you are defending. (where are you going to take your tanks? into the channel?) however... the 2nd or well its a close tie with the biggest mistake.... Goering's bullshit idea of mass daylight bombing of London. outnumbered pilots (including my own Gramps) fought off wave after wave of bombers and ME109's. Goering was wayyyy too convinced that his planes were invincible. Quite frankly i couldn't have picked a worse man for the job of head of the Luftwaffe. his failure to establish air superiority resulted in the complete destruction of the Luftwaffe. soooo many experienced aircrew died (and when it comes to air combat, if you have no veterans... you are ******!) This allowed the turn of events and switched the allies onto the offencive. since your number one priority when invading a country, and especially when you are embarking on an amphibious invasion, air superiority... without it, you cannot advance or even hold. and since the ME109 and FW190 is a very low range fighter, and the spitfire is quite up to the match to face even a fully fuelled 190 or 109 they stood no chance.
the war was winnable for the axis in 1944... it was a long shot, and what sealed their fate was Hitler losing his mind and the failure of Barbarossa.
The war was lost after the battle of Britain, but as you should know, you can still pull a victory from defeat.
the war was won and lost in the skies, as they are even today.
but that doesn't mean infantry and armour can't turn the tide.
I also agree that WW1 in general was a big mistake... so many lives lost just cause some pompous rich arse got his head blown off by some bloody Serbs... such a waste
but by the same token we could say WW2 was a pointless war... it accomplished nothing, and started all this nuclear weapon bullshit we have to deal with today. what ever happend to the good old days when if someone pissed you off you'd walk out into the forest and have a good old fashioned sword fight to the death? it takes a right old pansy to bring his friends into a fight they have nothing to do with.
Last edited by Foot; 09-08-2008 at 17:22. Reason: Rude and offensive language
'Who Dares WINS!' - SAS
"The republic stands for truth and honour. For all that is noblest in our race. By truth and honour, principle and sacrifice alone will Ireland be free."-Liam Mellows
Who knows? If it's a enough day we may all end up Generals!"
Please, that was just the excuse. Where do you think the first british regiment was deployed in WWI? Basra. Why? Because the orient express was being extended to Baghdad which, once completed, would allow german business men to jump on a train and buy Iraqi oil, pure and black. A problem? Yes, because only recently the British Navy had converted from coal to oil to run their ships. The Germans had no oil-producing colonies and couldn't supply their ships with the black stuff. But if they could get a railway from Germany to Baghdad, nothing could stop them from refitting their ships to once again equal the British Navy.I also agree that WW1 in general was a big mistake... so many lives lost just cause some pompous rich arse got his head blown off by some bloody Serbs... such a waste
It was an arms race, the death of an aristocrat was an excuse not a reason. It would have happened any way.
Watch:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...40865741878159
Foot
EBII Mod Leader
Hayasdan Faction Co-ordinator
I have to correct you in this. The 1st Reich was the German Empire of Medieval times going back to the Roman Empire of Charlemagne (the later so called "Heilige Römische Reich Deutscher Nation" or "Holy Roman Empire of German Nation"). The 2nd Reich was the reunified German Empire of 1872 through Bismarck (sometimes called "Willhelminisches Reich" or "Willhelminic Empire" due to Willhelm II being its Emperor for the most time of its existence). Nazi-Germany thus was the 3rd "Deutsches Reich" or "German Empire". Hitler would never have put himself in the tradition of ze dirtee French.
hmmm thanks machinor, I remember reading somewhere otherwise, but i will look into this
And foot i do know about the arms race and alliances. there was going to be a war, it was just a question of when, and "why". I just think they could have found a better reason then ferdi...
Last edited by Celtic_Punk; 09-08-2008 at 19:15.
'Who Dares WINS!' - SAS
"The republic stands for truth and honour. For all that is noblest in our race. By truth and honour, principle and sacrifice alone will Ireland be free."-Liam Mellows
Who knows? If it's a enough day we may all end up Generals!"
CelticPunk, for Britain I think a couple of million Germans waltzing unprovoked into Belgium was a fairly strong arguement! Also kinda proved France's paranoia.
"Tell them I said something......"
Pancho Villa
Completed; Rome AD14!
Quite the view on various subjects.
We were talking about the invasion of Europe in 1944, the battle of Stalingrad had been lost at the start of the previous year, so I don't really get what you're saying here. The damage had been done, everything else you wrote was something that was a distant memory of what should have been by June, 1944. BTW, *everyone* was reliant on fuel by this point, not the just the Germans - they just happened not to have enough compared to the other sides.
You give the battle of Britain waaaay to much credit. It was a massive victory for the English yes, in that it prevented the British mainland from being invaded, but it was not that much of a defeat for Germany, in the sense that it was still more than able to continue the war (and indeed they did!). Most, and the best, German aces were created in the war in the East, so loss of veteran pilots was not significant. One can even argue that Seelöwe was a sham - it is highly doubtable that the Germans would ever have had the ability to conduct an amphibious assault with no adequate type or number of landing craft and a much weaker navy than that of the British, even with massive air superiority over the Channel. *Even* if initially successful (and it's doubtful), there would be no chance of maintaining the bridgehead if the Royal Navy happened to launch a major operation against Axis shipping in the Channel...even with heavy casualties, they would most likely be able to jeopardize the entire of operation, effectively trapping 10 divisions in Britain, and probably destroying what was left of the Kriegsmarine after Norway (if they ever dared to oppose the Brits with more than just mines and subs). If you ask me, the German landing would have given the Brits their greatest chance for inflicting a massive defeat early on in the war.
I disagree with you on North Africa. The only mistake there was not supplying enough forces in the first place, not seizing the French navy and not investing upon Malta. This was a superb battlefield for the Germans, one that maximized their advantages, and a great chance to cut the Commonwealth in two, if they had captured the Suez Canal. Also it would rob the Royal fleet of its bases in the East Med and at the same time, secure Europe's "soft underbelly". And if you think oil fields were a primary target for the Germans (and I agree with you), shit man, take Egypt, and the whole Middle East is yours for the taking.
Post Battle of Britain, the allies had proved equally incapable of mounting large scale amphibious operations against the Germans. They were facing the very same difficulties that the Germans had had when attacking, in that their fighters - Spitfires and Hurricanes - were ill suited to provide cover over a potential bridgehead. Their range was inadequate, and early warning systems and AA guns were now on the side of the Germans. It also didn't help that at that time, the Fw-190 A-2 was just being introduced, an aircraft which I'm sorry to break it to you, was markedly superior to the Spitfire V. Dieppe is of course the prime example of what I'm saying...a single understrength regiment kept 6000 men, 250 ships and 40 air-squadrons at bay.
On air-power winning battles alone, may I remind you of Vietnam, Afghanistan, the various Colonial Wars that the European powers fought?
No, my friend, I don't think so. The Germans would have to have a miracle to win the war on their terms at that point.
“We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars”
-- Oscar Wilde
Cannae was a military mistake. First of all Hannibal deployed his weaker troops in the center and the stronger ones in the sides and in one flank hannibal cavalary outnumberd the romans in 3 to 1 while in the other flank was 1 to 1. What happened is as folow, the 3 to 1 flank hannibal cavalary beat the romans an then they cross all the field and beat the romans in the other flank. At this moment the legions had already pulled hannibal center but the cavalary charged them in the rear and circle them.
A brillant victory nevertheless.
Not so much a military mistake as a great innovation by Hannibal. The double envelopment had not been used before, and the Romani had all reason to believe that the center was buckling due to their own strength rather than deceit. The engagement itself was sound, the Romani had the upper hand in numbers and should come out of it on top in a conventional battle.
Having problems getting EB2 to run? Try these solutions.
================
I do NOT answer PM requests for help with EB. Ask in a new help thread in the tech help forum.
================
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image. - Stephen Hawking
agreed cannae wasn't a military mistake but rather a brilliant victory by hannibal
Mini-mod pack for EB 1.2 for Alexander and RTWSpoken languages:
![]()
![]()
(just download it and apply to get tons of changes!) last update: 18/12/08 here
ALEXANDER EB promoter
Winter War
Old as the internets, I know.
I has two balloons!
that's legend nowadays-of respct. but IIRC, the soviets got what they wanted, so it can't be the the worst military mistake. you might actually have to open a new thread: "most dumbassed military mistakes", or "most extraordinary feats of valour". either way, you finns put up a helluva fight..
moral: don't mess with the little guy.
Last edited by Ibrahim; 09-09-2008 at 17:11.
I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.
my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).
tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!
"We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode" -alBernameg
You're thinking Mers El Kibir in Algeria. The French fleet at Toulon was still largely intact until 1942.
“We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars”
-- Oscar Wilde
Oh, I quite agree it was necessary. I asked after it because Sarcasm wrote that Hitler should have seized the French fleet, and I thought it was taken out in that incident.
Thanks, I didn't know that. What happened in 1942 to the French fleet, then? And why didn't Hitler use them earlier?
Looking for a good read? Visit the Library!
In order to give WW2 a break, I'll mention two mistakes from the Spanish Civil War, which in my opinion is often overlooked in context of military history mainly because it's so overshadowed by WW2.
1-Battle of Guadalajara: Here's where all those jokes about useless and cowardly Italian soldiers were proven to be absolutely right (and a few new ones were started!). Deployment-wise, the Italian and Nationalist troops didn't do anything wrong, plus they outnumbered the Republican forces roughly 2 to 1 and they called upon large amounts of mechanized troops to aid in the offensive. Basically everything that could have gone for the Fascists, went wrong: Poor weather that made armoured forces useless, lack of proper air support, and then there was trusting the brunt of the assault to the Italian infantry (plus the fact that Mussolini himself devised the offensive). The result, of course, was a total disaster for the Italian/Nationalist forces. The battle isn't so much a mistake as more a case of, as said before, anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Here's the wiki link, though I recommend googling other sites to read up on the battle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Guadalajara
(Insert 'how many gears does an Italian tank have?' joke here)
2-Charge of the American International Brigades at Jarama: Unlike the previous case, this IS a full-blown mistake, and it belongs to the Republican side this time. The final stage of the basically inconclusive battle of Jarama was the charge of over 400 American volunteers up the rocky, uneven terrain of the Pingarrón hill (and if anyone here has gone trekking over Spain, you can guess how bad that can be) straight into concentrated machine-gun fire, all the while without any real artillery support. Predictably, the American volunteers were slaughtered. A mistake made all the worse by how much of an utter failure the maneouvre was, and by the fact that previous offensives up the hill had met much the same result, so there should not have been any need to repeat the same blunder again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jarama
Again, I recommend googling better sites.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Last edited by J.Alco; 09-11-2008 at 13:28.
Well essentially this happened at the time when the allied forces had landed in Vichy North Africa in Operation Torch. In a quick move the Germans moved south to secure the French southern coast, and prevent the remaining French state from becoming a potential bridgehead for the Allies. Securing southern France, militarily speaking, is securing Toulon, the best and main Mediterranean naval base of the French (and one that had served their colonial pretensions before the war) along with the entire fleet stationed there. And it was significant - from the top of my head can't remember exact numbers but at the very least 2 modern battleships, 7 cruisers and 30 destroyers (sorely needed after significant losses). Remember, the Royal Navy reigned supreme at this time in the Mediterranean, the Italians having been given a licking at Taranto (1940) and Cape Matapan (1941), essentially ceasing to be an effective force and depriving the Axis powers of its naval assets in the North African theatre.
Why didn't Hitler use them earlier? No idea. I assume it was one of the conditions of the armistice. Was it wise to allow such a valuable resource go to waste? Absolutely not, and it probably lost him North Africa for not doing it earlier. But then again Hitler was never a very wise person.
Last edited by Sarcasm; 09-09-2008 at 20:55.
“We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars”
-- Oscar Wilde
Useless and coward? Say very bad armed and guided instead. When an enemy tank weight is like 2-3 of yours and your officers don't even have a map of the battlefield is difficult for a soldier to prove his valour..
However, only an idiot (Mussolini) could enter war with such an army
One can carry that further and say Italy's entry into WWII was a huge mistake, putting Mussolini near the top of military incompetents.
Now I'm defining a mistake as taking a decision contrary to the evidence and advice presented to one BEFORE the event.
Which means I'll go back to the one I first posted 7/12/41, howler!!!!
"Tell them I said something......"
Pancho Villa
Completed; Rome AD14!
Looking for a good read? Visit the Library!
You can't count the Italians as part of the war effort... maybe economically, and providing a buffer so the allies would take more time to close in on germany... but their performance on the battlefield is one to forget.
here's an account I read from a history book when i was a wee lad- ill paraphrase it since its a large paragraph. - When the Allied armies landed in Sicily (10 July 1943) an American dog named Chips was moving up with his company, attacked a concrete machinegun nest, got wounded, and dragged an italian out screaming, the three others surrendered, he also rounded up another 10 of them later in the day. he got a DSC a silver star and a purple heart, but a commander argued "brave men shouldnt have to share their medals with a dog" and he lots his medals.(this is from a kids history book- Horrible Histories, by Terry Deary but its still true.)
as the saying goes, Italian tanks have 16 gears, 15 in reverse, and one really fast one that goes forwards incase of an attack from the rear. (infact the fastest tank in the WW2 part of the Bovington tank museum in Britain is an Italian)
Germany's mistake in all this was trusting Italy to the Italians.
i say this all in jest![]()
Last edited by Celtic_Punk; 09-11-2008 at 12:14.
'Who Dares WINS!' - SAS
"The republic stands for truth and honour. For all that is noblest in our race. By truth and honour, principle and sacrifice alone will Ireland be free."-Liam Mellows
Who knows? If it's a enough day we may all end up Generals!"
Italy had exactly the same problem as France.
While having a semi-decent industry they lacked in natural resources and tactical coordination between army, navy and air force. All in all, Italy would have been much more effective entering war in 1942-43.
Had it been properly supported by the air force the italian navy would have been capable of effectively counter the royal navy in the mediterranean, cutting off british supply lines in Africa. That would have changed the outcome of quite a few things in the war, while starting later would have helped to not send a WWI army into WWII.
The best is yet to come.
ZX MiniMod: Where MTW meets AOE
https://www.wmwiki.com/hosted/ZxMod.exe
Now on beta 3 with playable golden horde!
Not turning over the Shah to a vengeful people.
Several effects, the disastrous rescue attempt, and the Iran Iraq War that saved many Shah Pilots from execution and enabled the development of the Iranian Defense Agency.
Now Iran is beholden to no one, makes its own weapons and has been reverse engineering and expanding on the F-14 which the Russians still have yet to match, which is why the Russians have been unable to sell much in the way of planes to the Iranians. Outside of ACIG, Speartip, and F-14 Sunset, few people realize that Iran's 50 F-14s and AIM-54s are fully operational and will soon be joined by a Super Tomcat known as FB-44 Iranian Lion.
Meanwhile due to McNamara and Rumsfeld's stupid policy decisions, the U.S. Military is just falling apart. Fewer and fewer aircraft are flight worthy, fewer vehicles are able to run, and fewer soldiers are enlisting.
I send you greetings. Need I say more? You are remembered.
umm well the big mistake adolf did was starting a war with russia ...wasn't ready for a 3 frontal war should have killed the other ones firstly![]()
Pin you must also take into account hitler desperately needed fuel. russia was the best choice hitler could think of... i personally think he could have just gotten it diplomatically. sure he hated commies(if WWII never happend i bet the americans and him woulda been best buds during the cold war lol) but keep your friends close, and your enemies even closer, as the saying goes.
Last edited by Celtic_Punk; 09-12-2008 at 13:02.
'Who Dares WINS!' - SAS
"The republic stands for truth and honour. For all that is noblest in our race. By truth and honour, principle and sacrifice alone will Ireland be free."-Liam Mellows
Who knows? If it's a enough day we may all end up Generals!"
Bookmarks