• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING: British warships head for Black Sea as Muscovite troops mass on Ukrainian border

Tangmo said:
Normandy failing or succeeding would have burdened the German High Command either way given it occurred in the same timeframe as Bagration which itself stressed out a response by Hitler and his general staff.

Each op improved the likelihood of the other succeeding by launching in the same month.

One, Bagration, was poised at the existing Eastern Front in the USSR while Overlord had as its (successful) purpose the opening of a second, Western, Front. Each op was extraordinarily huge, Bagration in particular being enormous.

While the German Center Army in Russia was commanded by a Hitler yes man, Marshal Busch, and von Rundsted commanded at Normandy (with Rommel), Russian forces were commanded by the formidable Zhukov and Overlord led by the master logistician Ike who had his all star joint commanders and general staff.

In other words, the Germans had a weak command in the East and an unstable command at Normandy given von Rundsted was constantly up and down with Hitler and Rommel under suspicion. Conversely, the Russians had the brilliant Zhukov and typically excellent Russian commanders who'd emerged, while the Americans had a joint force command dream team.

Along this line is the old adage of the major in Frederick the Great's Army cussing out a young lieutenant after an inconclusive battle, "The king gave you a commission because he thought you knew when to disobey an order," the major scolded. Americans have no problem disobeying an order as was shown at Omaha Beach where things were so disastrous the U.S. shore bombardment admiral on the command ship ordered a cease fire and the landing admiral ordered the 8 USN support destroyers in shallow shore water to withdraw and the next wave out on the water in landing craft to stand down.

Yet a Sherman tank commander who'd made it ashore popped out of his spanking new weapon to wave at the destroyers until he was satisfied he'd been noticed. Back inside the sucker he fired a round into a hidden German artillery position. The 8 destroyers blasted the place to all hell. The tankman fired another round into another German hidden artillery position and the Navy blasted away to demolish it in an instant. Rinse and Repeat down the coastline.

On the shore a brigadier stood up and said to the pinned down Americans that, "We can die here or we can die attacking, so let's go." And they got up and went, finding out right away the artillery fire that had pinned 'em down was no more. Nobody retreated.
Click to expand...

Neither operation impacted the other. No forces involved in either theater could be used in the other in any meaningful amount of time.
 
Questerr said:
Neither operation impacted the other. No forces involved in either theater could be used in the other in any meaningful amount of time.
Click to expand...
My meaning you missed entirely is that considered together and simultaneously while being physically apart Bagration and Normandy greatly burdened the German chain of command right up to the General Staff/High Command and the resources of the Third Riech itself.

I never said or implied the forces of each were interchangable or that any would be moved in and out from each zone, or front, to the other. I said considered together simultaneously while being physically apart. Indeed I have found you don't follow or recognize the military aspects at all or in the least bit in post after post.
 
Tangmo said:
My meaning you missed entirely is that considered together and simultaneously while being physically apart Bagration and Normandy greatly burdened the German chain of command right up to the General Staff/High Command and the resources of the Third Riech itself.

I never said or implied the forces of each were interchangable or that any would be moved in and out from each zone, or front, to the other. I said considered together simultaneously while being physically apart. Indeed I have found you don't follow or recognize the military aspects at all or in the least bit in post after post.
Click to expand...

You think the German High Command wasn’t burdened before those two operations were launched? You get that the command staff handling what was happening in the West was different from the staff that handled what was happening in the East, yes?
 
Questerr said:
You think the German High Command wasn’t burdened before those two operations were launched? You get that the command staff handling what was happening in the West was different from the staff that handled what was happening in the East, yes?
Click to expand...
Alas you've fallen back into your old habits, ie, a declaratory statement that presumes to be a pronouncement that is disguised very badly by a question mark as if it were a true and honest interrogatory statement, which it is not.

Your statements are rather "loaded" or "leading" statements that wrongly presume certain negative somethings to the targeted person, ie, moi.

Twice in a single same post besides. That's quite a regression on your part.

So as I'd said and as your target, the only way I could render a false validity to your outlandish presumptive premise is to accept it and to reply to it, which I'd advise you yet again I do not do -- not in any way.

Indeed because of this recurring failure on your part I'll be saying bye now.
 
Tangmo said:
Alas you've fallen back into your old habits, ie, a declaratory statement that presumes to be a pronouncement that is disguised very badly by a question mark as if it were a true and honest interrogatory statement, which it is not.

Your statements are rather "loaded" or "leading" statements that wrongly presume certain negative somethings to the targeted person, ie, moi.

Twice in a single same post besides. That's quite a regression on your part.

So as I'd said and as your target, the only way I could render a false validity to your outlandish presumptive premise is to accept it and to reply to it, which I'd advise you yet again I do not do -- not in any way.

Indeed because of this recurring failure on your part I'll be saying bye now.
Click to expand...
If I had your ignorant, pop-culture level of knowledge about history, those questions would bother me too.
 
Tangmo said:
Given everything I post is wrong let's go with what we can see right there in Russia itself....



Your Russian Fanboy History is a Snow Job.

Strident, scolding and pointing the finger.

A laugh riot indeed.
Click to expand...


TBT...

Had he been in the military he would know about US military screwups...
 
Tangmo said:
Alas you've fallen back into your old habits, ie, a declaratory statement that presumes to be a pronouncement that is disguised very badly by a question mark as if it were a true and honest interrogatory statement, which it is not.

Your statements are rather "loaded" or "leading" statements that wrongly presume certain negative somethings to the targeted person, ie, moi.

Twice in a single same post besides. That's quite a regression on your part.

So as I'd said and as your target, the only way I could render a false validity to your outlandish presumptive premise is to accept it and to reply to it, which I'd advise you yet again I do not do -- not in any way.

Indeed because of this recurring failure on your part I'll be saying bye now.
Click to expand...

Much typing. Nada rebuttal.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
If any conflict started and stayed in the Black Sea, US and UK ships would be sitting ducks for Russian planes, anti ship missiles and ships. The negatives of operating in an are with restricted access and right next to Russian territory.

Overall the only way something starts is if the Ukraine starts it. Russia is not going to do it, but it will be ready for it
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be hard to choke off the exit from the Black Sea.
Tigerace117 said:
Not.....quite. The Argentinian conscripts didn’t perform particularly well, but their Air Force still gave you lot a hell of a lot of trouble.

And Russia is a MUCH bigger fish than Argentina was.

It’s not 1850 anymore bud.
Click to expand...

Sailing right into Russia's back yard may definitely agitate them. I don't think we would like them in the Gulf of Mexico.
 
great news ! Turkey has signed a contract with Ukraine



Ez4pqXhXsAIli5y

for the supply of engines for ATAK-II attack helicopters. The general director of TUSAŞ, a helicopter manufacturer, called Ukraine a brotherly country & noted that there will be no problems with Kiev similar to embargoes & sanctions.
Talha ahmad
@talhaahmad967
https://twitter.com/talhaahmad967
 
Aurora said:
www.state.gov

Russia’s Intention To Restrict Navigation in Parts of the Black Sea - United States Department of State

The U.S. expresses its deep concern over Russia’s plans to block foreign naval ships and state vessels in parts of the Black Sea, including near occupied Crimea and the Kerch Strait.
www.state.gov www.state.gov
Click to expand...
Ukraine will take part in Turkish Navy’s Eastern Mediterranean 2021 exercises • Ukrainian navy officers will be trained at the multinational hq as well as receiving training onboard the Turkish Navy’s ADA class corvettes — Ukrainian Defense Ministry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom