47 replies to this topic

[AllStarZ]

No, do you know what is true military folly? Committing troops into combat when they hate their own government more than they hate the enemy.

It's what lost the Germans World War II, and it's what lost the Americans and the South Vietnamese the Vietnam War.

If the Nazi Germans practised their own bigotry more carefully they may have well defeated the Soviet Union long before. Instead they alienated the population to the point that life under Stalin was a better option than Hitler, which is actually a pretty small margin.

[Hobbesy]

Operation Market Garden, the spreading of the landing sites and the logistical problems made it a nightmare.

[Chyros]

NergiZed, on 11 Dec 2008, 21:47, said:

This pretty much applies for most European wars after the 1600s:

DON'T FUCK WITH RUSSIA.

Perhaps a better way to state it would be "DON'T FUCK AROUND IN RUSSIA." The climate and long distance from home and supplies really did the Germans in in WW2. Tanks being frozen in the morning, so the Russians could attack them with impunity, tanks not being able to traverse ice (while Russian tanks would not sink through ice), bitter cold lowering morale, making for more supply demands and making supplying more difficult, etc. etc. etc. The Russian warfare itself wasn't even that successful. In the battle of Stalingrad, due to the Russian ground troops' shortage of weapons and ammo, led to Stalin first throwing a million unarmed soldiers into a meatgrinder ordering officers to shoot anyone who retreated to make the Germans spend their ammo, and when they had none anymore, the armed soldiers were sent in to finish off the now ammo-less Germans. The T34 was a major innovation in tank design at the time but eventually was only so successful because Russia could build a heathenly amount of them, while some types of German tank generally achieved kill-to-death ratios as high as 12 to 1 but which also cost 12 times as much, didn't have gas anymore, and suffered from the cold. Also, Stalin had the very stupid idea that shooting all your generals and everybody else who knew how to wage war was a good idea.

Throughout the war(s) Germany had superior weapons in most fields, but the Gruendigkeit was such that it also cost many times more, and taking on the rest of the world is just not doable, especially because unlike many colonising nations they didn't leave the populations much to themselves but acted like complete and utter jerks, making everybody hate them and work against them. And they didn't have oil which inevitably means defeat. If they had enough oil, and if Hitler hadn't fired his V-rockets at London but at the Spitfire factory, the war would've been a lot more bloody, and a lot longer.

[/WW2 in a highly simplified nutshell]

[Overdose]

TehKiller, on 11 Dec 2008, 19:17, said:

Huh....just cuz they had one of the best navy tacticians doesnt make em "control natural disasters

Many attempted to invade Japan in the past. They never survived the voyage because they would always disappear at sea.

Edited by Overdose, 11 December 2008 - 23:44.

[Zero]

Quote

One of the great flaws of the Axis powers against the Allies is that the Axis wasn't precisely a military alliance. It was more of a way of drawing a line in the sand for the "New World Order". Germany would have Europe, Japan would have Asia, and Italy would have Africa.

I doubt that, Russia thought the same thing and look what happened. Hitler was a MASTER of oration and manipulation, I think he was just using them to win the war, and then use Germany's now unrivaled power (as it was, from the beginning, probably more powerful than the other two). Hitler just wanted to make sure that his enemies weren't EVERYBODY, instead he tried to manipulate them and gave them the "gift" of saving their annihilation for later.

Overdose, on 11 Dec 2008, 21:22, said:

The same can be said about Japan at least until WW2. If you attacked Japan by sea you'd be fucked, It's as if they have control over typhoons and other natural disasters at their fingertips.

I see what you mean. Every invasion Pre-WWII ended with the invading army being destroyed by a typhoon or something of the sorts: look up either of the Mongol Invasions.

[NergiZed]

Chyros, on 11 Dec 2008, 22:49, said:

NergiZed, on 11 Dec 2008, 21:47, said:

This pretty much applies for most European wars after the 1600s:

DON'T FUCK WITH RUSSIA.

Perhaps a better way to state it would be "DON'T FUCK AROUND IN RUSSIA." blah....

QTF

indeed.

I forgot about the whole Russia's lost a lot and being the first European country to be defeated by an Asian power.

[AllStarZ]

Zero, on 11 Dec 2008, 20:58, said:

Quote

One of the great flaws of the Axis powers against the Allies is that the Axis wasn't precisely a military alliance. It was more of a way of drawing a line in the sand for the "New World Order". Germany would have Europe, Japan would have Asia, and Italy would have Africa.

I doubt that, Russia thought the same thing and look what happened. Hitler was a MASTER of oration and manipulation, I think he was just using them to win the war, and then use Germany's now unrivaled power (as it was, from the beginning, probably more powerful than the other two). Hitler just wanted to make sure that his enemies weren't EVERYBODY, instead he tried to manipulate them and gave them the "gift" of saving their annihilation for later.

No, they barely did each other any good at all. Japan was too preoccupied with East Asia and Oceania, and Italy was more focused on the Mediterranean. The Germans however, had to step in with the Italians due to sheer military incompetence. The Italians were poorly led, poorly equipped, and poorly motivated. And as a result of personal relations between the two leaders both nations contributed troops to their respective war efforts.

Again, all three of them were drawing lines in the sand, perhaps for the moment. Politics are fleeting.

[The Wandering Jew]

Speaking of WW2, one of the early military blunders of the US military is the underestimation that the Philippines shall not be attacked by an Axis power. Due to this insight, the Philippine military was poorly equipped. It was based on the "usual" credo of "Why waste resources if no one will attack, right?".

Quote

The Philippine Army received clothing that was of poor quality. Their rubber shoes would wear out within 2 weeks. There were shortages of nearly every kind of equipment. There were shortages of blankets, mosquito bars, shelter halves, entrenching tools, gas masks, and helmets.

During August, MacArthur had requested 84,500 Garand rifles, 330 .30-caliber machine guns, 326 .50-caliber machine-guns, 450 37 mm guns, 217 81 mm mortars, 288 75 mm guns, and over 8,000 vehicles. On September 18, he was informed that, because of lend-lease commitments, he would not receive most of these items. As a result, the Philippine Army was forced to continue using Lee-Enfield and Springfield Rifles.

The shipment of supplies depended upon the US Navy's limited cargo capacity. In September, the Navy announced its intentions to convert three transports into escort carriers, but this was not done after MacArthur observed that the loss of three transports would delay his reinforcements by more than two months.

Then the army approved requests for 105 mm howitzers, 75 mm pack howitzers, 75 mm guns, .30-caliber machine guns, 37 mm guns, 10 250 ft station hospitals, 180 sets of regimental infirmary equipment, jeeps, ambulances, trucks and sedans. By November, there were 1,100,000 tons of equipment, intended for the Philippines, piled up in US ports. Most of this never reached its destination. Meanwhile, the Navy did manage to transport 1,000,000 gallons of gasoline to the island. Much of this fuel would be stored on the Bataan Peninsula.

In 1941, many Filipino units went into battle without ever having fired their weapons. Many of the troops had never even seen an artillery piece fired. The 31st Infantry Division (PA) signal officer was unable to establish radio communication with units in the same camp. Commander of the Philippine 31st Infantry Division, Colonel Bluemel states, "The enlisted men are proficient in only two things, one, when an officer appears, to yell attention in a loud voice, jump up, and salute; two, to demand 3 meals per day."

Training and coordination were further complicated by language barriers. Enlisted Filipinos often spoke one language (such as Bikol or a Visayan language), their officers would speak another (such as Tagalog), and the Americans would speak English. There were some first sergeants and company clerks who could neither read nor write.

Linky

In a nutshell, preparation is the key. Better to have a gun and not need one than to need a gun and not having one.

P.S.

Quote

Due to this insight, the Philippine military was poorly equipped.

Until now, all we have for an airforce are 8 OV-10 Broncos. If theoretically China invaded us, what do we have to intercept MiGs and Sukhois?

[WNxMastrefubu]

i'd say American revolutionary war, britain should of had us but back in britian they sold general status so any idiot could be a general

[Jok3r]

Høbbesy, on 11 Dec 2008, 17:32, said:

Operation Market Garden, the spreading of the landing sites and the logistical problems made it a nightmare.

It was a logistical nightmare for the Americans, but it was important that they cut off the supply lines- they didn't really have many other options.

WNxmastrefubu, on 12 Dec 2008, 20:19, said:

i'd say American revolutionary war, britain should of had us but back in britian they sold general status so any idiot could be a general

I would disagree- the Brits were not all that poorly led- they're doctrine was too old. While they marched in lines and stood at attention, they were picked off by the hundreds (look at the battle of Bunker Hill- it was not a particularly well fortified position, none of the colonials were particularly proficient, yet they kept firing, hitting targets, until they ran out of ammo).

[Zero]

AllStarZ, on 12 Dec 2008, 21:11, said:

No, they barely did each other any good at all. Japan was too preoccupied with East Asia and Oceania, and Italy was more focused on the Mediterranean. The Germans however, had to step in with the Italians due to sheer military incompetence. The Italians were poorly led, poorly equipped, and poorly motivated. And as a result of personal relations between the two leaders both nations contributed troops to their respective war efforts.

Again, all three of them were drawing lines in the sand, perhaps for the moment. Politics are fleeting.

I disagrees. Why? Hitler was trying to avoid conflict by himself. He had probably wanted the Japs to keep US occupied (which was a HUGE folly, taking on !3! WORLD POWERS!!!!!) Italy.... don't know, but it was obvious that Hitler would-sooner or later- kill them. Why? He was fanatical in his beliefs of a pure, German world (ironically enough the bastard was a Jew) and was just waiting for the time to strike. Another reason for this is that both countries also defied some of Hitler's wishes (Mussolini REFUSED to send is Jews to Germany to be executed), and as we all know, the bastard had some SERIOUS temper issues....

[Jok3r]

Zero, on 12 Dec 2008, 21:14, said:

(ironically enough the bastard was a Jew)

No, no he wasn't. This is a common misconception because he had his family records erased- that was because he was known to be from a family replete with retards- not jews.

[CommanderJB]

The first thing that springs to mind here is Operation Eagle Claw. It has been regarded one of the greatest military fiascos of modern times and certainly represented a huge blow to the image of US special forces for a long while afterward, and triggered a massive reorganisation of the way US spec ops did business, including the formation of Special Operations Command.

In a nutshell Eagle Claw was the rescue attempt mounted by US troops after the Iranian Embassy hostage crisis in 1980. It was an elaborate plan involving the insertion of spec ops teams by RH-53 helicopters and MC-130 Combat Talon transport, supported by EC-130 electronic warfare aircraft. Sneaking into Iran under the electronic protection of the Compass Call aircraft, they would capture an airstrip, fly in a huge team of 100 rangers, storm the embassy, extract by helicopter to the airstrip and get everyone out by C-141 Starlifters. The helicopters would be destroyed upon leaving. In the event, a sandstorm caused 3 RH-53s of the 8 assigned to carry the preliminary Delta Force team into the area to make forced landings, one of which did so heavily and was written off, and another one to lag behind picking up the crew of the last helicopter. They pressed on to the airstrip, at which MC-130s were waiting with fuel, but technical problems soon sent another helicopter back to base, and though the two that landed safely were able to make it to the airstrip they got there an hour late, and shortly afterwards one of the stragglers was found to be unsafe. This left only five helicopters serviceable; the absolute minimum required for the operation was six, and so the attempt was called off, almost before it had even begun. However, before they could extract, one of the RH-53s crashed into a parked MC-130 while being moved; both aircraft were destroyed. In the conflagration that followed eight US servicemen were killed and another four wounded. Not only this, but when the rest of the Delta Force men exfiltrated aboard the remaining MC-130s, the order to destroy the left-over aircraft and remains was never followed in the chaos following the crash. When Iranian forces finally became aware of the situation at the airstrip, they found all the empty aircraft, including top secret plans inside. The CIA agents inserted into Iran to prepare for the operation were almost captured, and the Iranians spread out the hostages, making any further attempts impossible.
There's heaps of information about it available, which is mildly surprising given the utter secrecy that surrounded it. Basically it was badly planned, extremely overcomplicated and the aircraft crews were simply not trained for the job.

Another story, even more recent, is the Russian Army's disastrous attempt to recapture Grozny from Chechen separatists in 1994. However, I'll post more on that later.

[The Wandering Jew]

And I almost forgot. I do not know if it shall be considered as a military blunder, but nevertheless, one of the failed operations is the CIA-backed Bay of Pigs Invasion in Cuba.

Click here for more details.

I'll try to check more failed military operation here in our shores. Our government have successfully covered up most of the blunders.

[CommanderJB]

It most certainly shall. One more sortie by the USAF and things may have been very different in Cuba. It would probably still have failed... but without an air force the Cubans would have been at a severe disadvantage.

[Zero]

Swimmer, on 13 Dec 2008, 3:10, said:

Zero, on 12 Dec 2008, 21:14, said:

(ironically enough the bastard was a Jew)

No, no he wasn't. This is a common misconception because he had his family records erased- that was because he was known to be from a family replete with retards- not jews.

His grandfather was Jewish and he had the records destroyed to conceal it. Another good one: Vietnam War, we entered a war we had NO chance of winning out of fear

[nip]

Zero, on 13 Dec 2008, 23:50, said:

Swimmer, on 13 Dec 2008, 3:10, said:

Zero, on 12 Dec 2008, 21:14, said:

(ironically enough the bastard was a Jew)

No, no he wasn't. This is a common misconception because he had his family records erased- that was because he was known to be from a family replete with retards- not jews.

His grandfather was Jewish and he had the records destroyed to conceal it.

Your assertion was disproved decades ago. Read the book
"Hitler: Legend, Myth and Reality"
by Werner Maser

[Zero]

nipthecat, on 14 Dec 2008, 3:30, said:

Zero, on 13 Dec 2008, 23:50, said:

Swimmer, on 13 Dec 2008, 3:10, said:

Zero, on 12 Dec 2008, 21:14, said:

(ironically enough the bastard was a Jew)

No, no he wasn't. This is a common misconception because he had his family records erased- that was because he was known to be from a family replete with retards- not jews.

His grandfather was Jewish and he had the records destroyed to conceal it.

Your assertion was disproved decades ago. Read the book
"Hitler: Legend, Myth and Reality"
by Werner Maser

WHAT PART OF BROKE AND LOOKING FOR MONEY DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND!!!!

[Waris]

Is called a library. Haven't been in one before?

[Zero]

Waris, on 14 Dec 2008, 23:58, said:

Is called a library. Haven't been in one before?

Mine is closed on weekends, and closes right before I get home from school, so no, I can't go to a damn library!

[Razven]

Zero, you're missing the point. It's about Hitler not being a Jew, not about libraries.

Another big military blunder of WWII:
Pearl Harbor - the one surprise attack that although very surprising, did not sink all the aircraft carriers of the US Navy AND forced America to enter a war that was pretty unpopular before Pearl Harbor happened. If one takes the USA out of the WWII equation, the chances of a Nazi victory or a Soviet one would be much more real.

Or perhaps the war would've dragged on long enough for nuclear arms to develop and instead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki we have today, we would remember Berlin and Frankfurt.

Edited by Razven, 15 December 2008 - 01:08.

[nip]

Zero, on 15 Dec 2008, 0:40, said:

nipthecat, on 14 Dec 2008, 3:30, said:

Zero, on 13 Dec 2008, 23:50, said:

Swimmer, on 13 Dec 2008, 3:10, said:

Zero, on 12 Dec 2008, 21:14, said:

(ironically enough the bastard was a Jew)

No, no he wasn't. This is a common misconception because he had his family records erased- that was because he was known to be from a family replete with retards- not jews.

His grandfather was Jewish and he had the records destroyed to conceal it.

Your assertion was disproved decades ago. Read the book
"Hitler: Legend, Myth and Reality"
by Werner Maser

WHAT PART OF BROKE AND LOOKING FOR MONEY DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND!!!!

@Zero:

Don't raise Cain, spare me your pompous attitude, your caps locked bullshit and stop hitting the enter key inconsiderately.

Your Hitler-was-jewish claim is wrong, let there be light. Hitler had no jewish ancestors because the main actor in this story, a certain (Jewish) Mr. Frankenberger from the Austrian town of Graz who is said to be Hitler's grandfather, is a fake. An imperatorial decree banned Jews from settle in Graz for centuries, from the 15th century until the late 19th century no Jews lived there. The existance of a German or Austrian Jew named Frankenberger is unproven throughout the whole 19th century, few Frankenbergers exist in Graz but weren't Jews and are ineligible, all this is verifiable fact.

Furthermore, the allegation that Hitler's grandmother Maria Anna Schicklgruber got laid by Frankenberger while being employed in his household is false because 1. see above and 2. an employment of Maria Anna Schicklgruber as a housemaid in Graz is not traceable. Neither in Graz' so-called "Bürgerbuch" nor in the "Dienstbotenbuch", both local official registries for citizens and employees. In short, they never met. All allegations made by several book authors or historians concerning Hitler's Jewish ancestry do lead to a sole originator - Hans Frank, Hitler's Governor General of Poland and as chief of civil administration responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands. A totally unreliable source for such claims, a savage anti-Semite who - after the war and facing death penalty - simply tried to pin responsibility for a Jewish Hitler and complicity on the Jews. Most likely incest was the real reason Hitler concealed his family record, nothing else.

/@

On topic the biggest military blunder is to 'democratize' other nations using military force.

[Dauth]

Tbh this is getting off topic, and frankly it is always a topic that should be treated with respect rather than, "Look who fucked up". One chance to get back to topic or I'll lock it.