View Single Post
  #416  
Old 19 Apr 12, 17:18
Nick the Noodle's Avatar
Nick the Noodle Nick the Noodle is offline
General of the Forums
Wales
Distinguished Service Award ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Greatest Westerns Campaign Greatest Spy Movies Campaign 
 
Real Name: Tin Pot Noodle
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Land of the Red Dragon
Posts: 17,663
Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Nick the Noodle has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBark View Post
Let me see if I understand this:

-The G.I.'s quoted in White's "report" state the Sherman is inferior to German armor.

-You state repeatedly that you feel the Sherman is superior to German armor ("The Sherman has many strengths that makes it a better overall weapons package than any German tank imo." and "The M4 is certainly superior to any Cat as a complete package.")
From your post 394 here, you use the report here, to state the Sherman faired rather well in combat with tanks. Whites report has more than 50 statements by veterans that the Sherman is inferior than the German tanks. If you took the time to read those actually doing the fighting, you would realise the the US tankers are getting their shots off first and with enough accuracy to hit the target time and time again. This shows skill, not least because German optics were better.

The reason that the Shermans were equal to the German tanks at a tactical level is because the US tankers in both reports were obviously better than their adversaries imo. If the M4 tank is better than their counterparts at the tactical level, then the US crews must have been worse for the results to be even when both sides are in similar situations. The evidence is just not there to support the inferiority of US tankers compared with their opponents.

I realise it is not fashionable to praise US tankers in WW2, especially when many Nazi tank 'Aces' appear so prominent, and so-called Tigerphobia caused all the W Allies to apparantly panic and hide . However, they did advance against better armoured and armed machines to get close enough so that their numbers could make a difference. That takes courage.

The numbers element is important. The fact that the M4 was simpler, cheaper and more reliable and maintainable than the German tanks meant more could be fielded at once. It is also true that despite what many claim, achieving hits on any target in combat is far more difficult than many believe. It is the number of Shermans that could be fielded that allowed for US to win, coupled with crews that were willing to take losses while advancing. The individual tank itself was nothing special for most of its WW2 service, just the crews were.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JBark View Post
-You want me to prove the G.I.'s are wrong.

Did I miss something?
Yes you have missed something. You've already said that the G.I.'s were wrong. I'm asking you to prove it.
__________________
How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
Reply With Quote