Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:11 am Post subject: DDay Normandy
"les sanglots longs des violons, d'automne blessent mon couer d'une langueur montone"
the words that signalled to the French Resistance the invasion was about to happen.
Forget words,actions will show your true ambitions!The Battlefield,In many cases, the terrain of a battlefield can be the best resource a commander has. A clump of trees, an abandoned house, or a drainage ditch can all be powerful tools in the right hands
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:21 am Post subject: Hobart`s Funnies
After the disaster at Dieppe, the British had learned that infantry assault troops must be preceded and supported by armour specially adapted to meet the expected obstacles and defences on the Atlantic Wall.
In March 1943, Major-General Percy Hobart was brought out of retirement. His command was to be over the specially formed 79th Armoured Division.
This was no ordinary armoured division, the task for Hobart and his men was to produce and be able to operate some of the most unusual pieces of military equipment ever seen.
These became affectionately known as……HOBART'S FUNNIES
Churchill and Sherman tanks were used as the platforms for the "Funnies" most still maintained their firepower even after conversion.
The funnies were offered to General Bradley to support the landings on Omaha and Utah, the offer was declined!
Forget words,actions will show your true ambitions!The Battlefield,In many cases, the terrain of a battlefield can be the best resource a commander has. A clump of trees, an abandoned house, or a drainage ditch can all be powerful tools in the right hands
in this point you can see how WW2 was the catalyst for asymmetric warfare we face today... Couple of reasons:
1) Shrinking technology gap between state and non-state actor.
2) Different interest asymmetry ( this means that totalitarian regimes and non-state actors fight withouit limits, while democratic states tend to fight with limited means)
3) Tactical asymmetry : Conventional versus guerilla warfare
4) strategic asymmetry: Germany had to win, Marquis just had to survive -->
check Kissinger:
“The guerilla wins if he does not lose. The conventional army loses if it does not win.†1
the Marquis fullfills all but the second peer. Their contribution to overall victory at normandy can indeed not be denied. In June alone they blew up over 1000 crosspoints of railroads, thus hampering the german supply lines.
I read in memoirs of allied field commanders that without the resistance, the allied landings may have ended in catastophy.... But thats just a what if..
-------
1 Kissinger, Henry: The Vietnam Negotiations, Foreign Affairs 47:2, January 1969, p. 211-234, here p. 214.
About the resistance, u can just check about how long it was for German column
to made 100Kms. Of course allied plane was for big part in that, but the resistance
can take at least the same part of responsability in that.
Resistance cannot fight like the Army can. But by using some guerilla tactic,
they can slow done or cut off communication of enemis. What will defenetly give
a serious advantage to the friend army.
But Resistance still hidden face of what "friend army" did. That's not right,
but that's not surprise me. Simple exmple of that return of fire about Resistance is
The greece resistance, who were "annihilated" by Uk during 1945/1949.
Just to keep a door opened for possible Russian war.
Tout est possible ... il faut juste connaitre quand.
oh yes i agree... People today dont know nothing about honoring the dead of wars... Thats why i actually love the CC community. we at least keep touch with the past, our past ...
ZAPPI4 wrote:
The greece resistance, who were "annihilated" by Uk during 1945/1949.
Just to keep a door opened for possible Russian war.
hmm thats a good example for a conventional army (greek republican forces) being able to force the ELAS (greek communists) to fight in a style which favors the conventional army.
This means that by 1947 ELAS (Peoples Liberation Army of Greece) engaged in direct strategy a much better equpped force (Greek Army + British support).
Just a summary of what happended in greece strategically...
1945-1946 Direct attack(Greek army) vs. indirect defence(ELAS) --> favored ELAS
1947-1949 Direct attack accompanied with barbarism (Greek army) vs. direct defence (ELAS) --> favored Greek Army.
subnote: The concept of barbarism is actually indirect, but favors the strong actor. It is understood as a strategy aimed not directly against an enemy but against everything the enemy might find useful.
1945-1946 Direct attack(Greek army) vs. indirect defence(ELAS) --> favored ELAS
1947-1949 Direct attack accompanied with barbarism (Greek army) vs. direct defence (ELAS) --> favored Greek Army.
hey that's pretty same as for Chechen Caqmpaigns:
1993- direct attack (Russian Army) vs inderect defence (Chechen insurgents)--> Favored Chechens.
1999- direct attack (Russian Army) vs direct defence (Chechen insurgents) -->favored Russian Army
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!