I was more saying in fat that they would have been a force worth fighting with, using the knowledge at the time...
Knowing what we do now perhaps we could have won.
Yeah, I Am Going There (Cold War Gone Hot)
- Thread starter CurtisLemay
- Start date
Knowing what we do now perhaps we could have won.
Which China? the commie one? or the one under a Nationalist Dictator?
I just saw a video by Mark Felton about the first encounter between M26 Pershings and T-34's in the Korean War.
In the last minute of the video he actually lays out the ratios of tank kills to losses of three major tanks versus the T-34.
M26's knocked out 38 T34's and in return lost 6 to T34 fire.
M4 Shermans knocked out 47 T34's for the loss of 20 Sherman tanks.
The M46 Patton surprisingly knocked out 12 T34's but 8 of the Pattons were lost in return.
The ones in the early part were knocked out
The Chinese used human wave tactics in Korea with horrendous results for both them as well as NK
And for people who would dispute this while I acknowledge the t-34 was a better tank in a few way's than the shermans these t-34's were being commanded by Norks with nowhere near as good training as the U.S. tankers many of whom were veterans of ww2 so this loss ratio is understandable.
The T34 was worst in most ways
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
The Chinese suffered/inflicted loss ratios weren't that bad until the war reached attritional stage where UN troops relied on fortified lines, heavily supported by artillery and air strikes. In the manouver phase of the war they relied on outflanking and infiltration instead. And even their fabled human wave tactics were a far cry from media portrayal of dense masses of men blindly runnining into machinegun fire, but spread out squads trying to use terrain and suppressive to close in with the enemy.
If USA went full out with material support of Nationalist China 1945-49 it would have prolonged the war, but it wouldn't have saved the Chiang regime, the rot was deep to overcome with just guns.
If USA went full out with material support of Nationalist China 1945-49 it would have prolonged the war, but it wouldn't have saved the Chiang regime, the rot was deep to overcome with just guns.
According to Yugoslavia, T-34 had better off road mobility, better armor layout and better gun, while being easier to maintain. M-4 had better crew ergonomics, better radios, better optics and was easier to drive. T-34s were kept in reserve until the dissolution wars, while M-4s were pulled out of service in 60's and mostly expended as firing range targets. Interestingly, M-18s were kept in reserve and M-36s even in active service (albeit modernized).
Don't also forget the T-34 used diesel instead of the M4's gasoline as well as had a lower profile the M4 was no doubt a better quality tank than the T-34 but it has a lot of flaws which drag it down.
Higher survivability as well. It was favored over the T34 for a reason.
And the M4 was easy to maintain as well, to change the tranny you just remove the lower glacial and boom. Simple.
The M4s were pulled out because they were useless against Tanks like the M48 and M60 Pattons, the biggerbgunned and better armored vehicles.
The Israeli modified them with bigger guns, but you can only do so much.
The T34 was so far outdated by the 60s in real combat they are useless.
The M18 and M36 were also dedicated Anti Tank vehicles, and people still thought having Tank Destroyers were neccessary and as we know, they arnt.
The M4 had better survivability, better everything besides armor on the sides.
Sure it was taller, that does not mean much at the time.
The M4 is a better tank all around then the T34
Potton knew enough to be sure to beat soviets after 5 days of fighting.Problem was with american politics - FDR really made soviet usefull idiots important,for example vice president was Wallace, who come to Magadan Gulag,saw fat NKWD guards cosplaing as happy prisoners, and said how great soviets are.
In reality,usually 75% of prisoners there died after one year.
And main soviet problem was shitty air forces - Germans used against them not only Ju88,but also Ju87 during day till they ran out of fuel.How long Ju 87 would survive attacking Allies in 1945 ?
Even more important - only Ła-7 and Ła-5 was capable at 7000m,where B.17 operated.Most fighter was Jak,which could do almost nothing at that attitude.
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
Also Patton was a warmonger who knew jack shit about the wider picture. He was lucky that he got to fight the Germans after they were bled white, otherwise his style of command would have made him the second Custer.
Patton had his problems but he wasn't as bad as you make him to be as I haven't seen many failures on his part that resulted from it.
The main problems and flaws of the man were.
- He was overly brash as a commander.
- He was biased against some individuals infamously those with PTSD and Jews. (Patton reaction to visiting the recently liberated concentration camps was one of complete indifference)
Incorrect. Patton *vomited* upon visiting a satellite camp of Buchenwald and refused to enter one building. He visited the camp alongside Eisenhower and Bradley and following his visit he ordered his MPs to round up 'notables' from the nearby towns and forced them to tour the camp.
Okay my source of information might have been flawed or biased I will have to doublecheck
Aaron Fox
Well-known member
Patton is basically an American Rommel in a variety of ways from my readings of the man... if Rommel was from the cavalry corps.
His biggest flaw is that he didn't recognize the greater picture being incredibly important. Another thing that makes Patton different than MacArthur is that he actually respects the chain of command. People say that if Patton was forced to be under MacArthur, Patton would fucking frag MacArthur.
His biggest flaw is that he didn't recognize the greater picture being incredibly important. Another thing that makes Patton different than MacArthur is that he actually respects the chain of command. People say that if Patton was forced to be under MacArthur, Patton would fucking frag MacArthur.
Okay here are a few statement's I found that were from his journals
“Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews who are lower than animals,”
And another.
Patton wrote. He told of taking his commander, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, to tour a makeshift synagogue set up to commemorate the holy day of Yom Kippur.
“We entered the synagogue, which was packed with the greatest stinking mass of humanity I have ever seen. Of course, I have seen them since the beginning and marveled that beings alleged to be made in the form of God can look the way they do or act the way they act.”
Keep in mind I am not character assassinating the man ,their is ample enough evidence that the man himself wrote down himself which proves it.
That being said Anti-Semitism was a heck of a lot more common in people born in the late 1890's than later people so I don't hold it entirely against him as unlike the Nazi's his bigotry really didn't matter and only affected his relationship with others.