America's Army Sucks, Fact

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
Leonidas knew about the goat path that would allow bad guys
to get behind him but didnt send reliable sentries to watch it.
DOH !

He would be defeated anyway,but a little bit later maybe .


The Confederates were disorganised and inept, hell
they couldnt agree on ANYTHING, so every army
they fielded was a quartermasters nightmare with a
dozen different types of personal weapon and no
commonality in uniforms. This latter led to Confederates

Excellent description plus they faced a 4,5 times bigger opponent.

In terms of the field army perhaps double

So why mighty union needed four years to defeat a such incompetent ragtop
opponents and lost more soldiers than incompetent and poor Confederates ?.

Because attacking an entrenched enemy with late 19th century
weapons was as difficult as it was to prove in WW1


BTW,Among confederate foot soldiers there were many sons of southern
dynasties
and they together with the sons of less priveledged families fought wars
even
without shoes till the bitter end.
Confederates were truly Aristocrats and Knights of North America.


Not to mention slavemasters

The Germans in WW2 were so convined of their natural
superiority over the untermencshen that were their enemies
that they didnt merely content themselves with fighting on 2
fronts like their Fathers in WW1 but opened hostilities
in the Mediterranean and Balkans

But every time to contain and defeat Germans you needed to create a
"Global
Alliance" of countless nations and countries.

Note that in neither WW1 nor WW2 did Germany fight on its
own. In WW1 it allied with the Austro-Hungarian Empire
and Turkey. In WW2 its allies included Italy, Rumania, Hungary
and Bulgaria

As far as I know GB did not need a global alliance to subdue Boers which
tells
something about the caliber of Germans.


The Boers were rather fewer in number than Germans

Keith

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
And everyone knows Germany's windtunnel data on the swept-wing (in all
configurations) was far more valuable than anything the Allies had
under development. I'm surprised how stupid you are to mention that at

Well,not only swept wing but also swing wing concept too.

The swing wing concept was first advanced by Barnes Wallis.
He proposed a swing wing aircraft in the immediate post war
period long before the German design work was available.

Keith

On 5 Jun 2004 12:00:09 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...


Or better those morons like you that cannot accept the fact that
Germany is the size of just 1 US state and took on the world and was
winning half the time.

And losing the other half. Overunning Belgium was no
great trick and Norway was no super power. They managed
to beat France to be sure but the first time the vaunted Luftwaffe
met a technically equal but smaller force it was stopped dead.

By late 1940 Britain alone was outproducing Germany in terms
of most major military systems despite a much smaller population
and economy,

In 1940, you ditched all your equipment on the beaches of Dunkirk and
had little more than the Home Guard to protect you from invasion. Your
armor was garbage just like your ships and the Kreigsmarine only
needed around 300 U-boats to choke your little nation to death WITHOUT
a need to invade. You brag about production while accepting massive
handouts from the US that saved your sorry ass... pardon me for
laughing my ass off!


Remember the "Bismark"? or the "Tirpitz"? or any other German
ship of WWII? That little Navy with "garbage" for ships sank virtually
all of them. And, despite your parroting of Nazi propaganda, the UK
was never in danger of "choking". Also note that the UK produced
virtually all of its own aircraft and ships.


Then the Fuhrer attacked Russia - STOOPID

ALL Germans would agree with you there... still they did launch the
world's greatest land invasion in history and would have made it to
Moscow had they not been bogged down in the earlier offensive in the
Balkans bailing out the Italians.

So you think wars are won by huge defeats??

Then after defeat, your VICTORIOUS and SUPERIOR
armies raped the entire German nation for all of its technology
ensuring postwar victories without any real effort on your part to
develop them yourself... in areas so unimportant as say... aviation
and space technology... just to name two!


The USA had better jet aircraft in 1945 than Germany did
The late model Meteor was faster than the Me-262
and far more reliable. The Germans never did get their
engines to work for more than 25 hours while the
Rolls Royce engines in the Meteor were good for 2000

Huh, really? That's why the US engineers asked the GERMANS for advice
on the future of jet engine development. The Germans told them
axial-flow was the future even though the US/UK chose to toy around
with centrifugal dead-end jet engines for years afterwards and even
still continued producing PROP AIRCRAFT!
The Germans in 1945 had the world's greatest engine the DB 109-016 @
28,652 lb st and the world's first afterburning engine the Jumo 004E.
Of course Germany lack the strategic materials necessary for higher
quality coonstruction of jet engines but they also had synthetics
developed under a time of round-the-clock bombing; nevertheless, THEY
introduced two jet fighters, a jet bomber, a rocket figheter, and had
two supersonic designs under construction- the Lp DM-1 demonstrator
for the Lp P.13 and the DFS 346 (which flew Mach 1 in the USSR
postwar).

Whatever you are smoking must be *really* good stuff.

Germany never managed to build a succesful heavy bomber,
the USA had 3 types in service and the B-36 under development

That's Hitler's fault for cancelling any four-engined type. Germany
could have built the Me-264, Ju 390, and a wide range of jet bomber
projects that HEAVILY influenced postwar designs. If you think not
then buy "Luftwaffe Secret Projects, Strategic Bombers 1939-1945".

The NACA in the USA was alreay working on swept wing
technology in 1945\

And everyone knows Germany's windtunnel data on the swept-wing (in all
configurations) was far more valuable than anything the Allies had
under development. I'm surprised how stupid you are to mention that at
all.

Von Braun acknowledged that all his work was built on
the foundations laid by Goddard.

... and Oberth, who proposed rocket artillery as far back as WW1!

The rocket engines used in the X planes post war were designed by
Goddard's team and were far BETTER and more reliable
than those in the Me-163

Yet the US stole the X-15 configuration/concept from the Peenemunde
EMW A6 and the US NEVER fielded a rocket fighter, making the Me-163
Komet unique in air combat history.

And utterly useless. It was an idiotic design.

Then there is the fiasco that was the German nuclear project.

Which is the entire basis for the US rush to develop it's own bomb.
Germans got a bad deal with bad graphite- thank God for that. Yet the
Germans also were smart enough to realize that nuclear power could be
used for other purposes too:

The Germans never achieved criticality in a reactor.

radiological weapons, a nuclear power reactor, and for use in
submarines long before Nautilus was built. They also realized than an
atom bomb coulb be mounted on a missile and launched from sea
(Prufstand XII container).

The myth of German technical superiority is just that.

No, hundreds of thousands of captured technical documents stored at
Wright Field in 1946 prove you wrong. The US Govt even was "low"
enough to sell non-classified technical documents to other nations for
cash- including the USSR!
And if German technology is just a myth then why is 85% of America's
arsenal derived from German weapons from WW1 and WW2? Why do we even
use their tactics and wear their helmets?

Rob


You are a loon.

Al Minyard

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
Your armor was garbage just like your ships .....

The Maltida II was the main British tank of mid-1940 and (for 1940) was
immune to all German tank guns at that time. It's frontal armor could only
be penetrated by the 88mm A gun. The German Panzer I, II and early III
(with 37mm gun) could not scratch it neither could the standard AT guns in
German service, hence its nickname of "Queen of the Battlefield" in 1940 and
1941. Its limited turrent ring stopped it being upgunned. Its use in the
Battle of Arras (1940) caused Guderian to consider stopping the attack on
France and it wsa only when Rommel used 88mm AA guns against the Matilda
II's were destroyed (there were only 16 in the battle).

David

"David Nicholls" wrote in message
...

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
Your armor was garbage just like your ships .....

The Maltida II was the main British tank of mid-1940 and (for 1940) was
immune to all German tank guns at that time. It's frontal armor could
only
be penetrated by the 88mm A gun. The German Panzer I, II and early III
(with 37mm gun) could not scratch it neither could the standard AT guns in
German service, hence its nickname of "Queen of the Battlefield" in 1940
and
1941. Its limited turrent ring stopped it being upgunned. Its use in the
Battle of Arras (1940) caused Guderian to consider stopping the attack on
France and it wsa only when Rommel used 88mm AA guns against the Matilda
II's were destroyed (there were only 16 in the battle).

David


The Matilda II went on to create havoc with the Italians
in North Africa were it tore through Italian tank and
anti-tank formations and also served with some
distinction in Russia which received over a 1000
of them at a critical period when their own tank production was
being relocated beyond the Urals.

Keith

On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 17:22:23 +0100, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:


The Matilda II went on to create havoc with the Italians
in North Africa were it tore through Italian tank and
anti-tank formations and also served with some
distinction in Russia which received over a 1000
of them at a critical period when their own tank production was
being relocated beyond the Urals.

Shame about the idiots who insisted that such a fine tank be armed with a
gun which had no HE round.


One wonders how many needless deaths were caused by that oversight.



greg


--
"vying with Platt for the largest gap
between capability and self perception"

Remember the "Bismark"? or the "Tirpitz"? or any other German
ship of WWII? That little Navy with "garbage" for ships sank virtually
all of them. And, despite your parroting of Nazi propaganda, the UK
was never in danger of "choking". Also note that the UK produced
virtually all of its own aircraft and ships.

Please tell of your great success with your vital shipping. Exactly
how many MILLIONS of tons did you lose to German surface ships,
raiders, S-boats, and U-boats?
Hitler was the one who gave the orders that relegated the surface
fleet to the dustbin; however, ISTR that the Kreigsmarine evacuation
of East Prussia in 1945 was the greatest evacuation in history. It was
accomplished with what was left of the surface fleet and roughly over
2 million German citizens and soldiers were
evacuated- which makes the paltry 300,000+ evacuated at Dunkirk a joke
by comparison.






Then the Fuhrer attacked Russia - STOOPID

ALL Germans would agree with you there... still they did launch the
world's greatest land invasion in history and would have made it to
Moscow had they not been bogged down in the earlier offensive in the
Balkans bailing out the Italians.

So you think wars are won by huge defeats??

In the winter of 1941 it wasn't a huge defeat. The defeat came at
Kursk years later. As stated earlier the Germans would have won in
Russia had they started their offensive in the Spring instead of the
summer. They wouldn't have bogged down in the mud and they wouldn't
have been scarce of winter clothing. Russia wouldn't have had the time
to fully mobilize for the counter attack.

Then after defeat, your VICTORIOUS and SUPERIOR
armies raped the entire German nation for all of its technology
ensuring postwar victories without any real effort on your part to
develop them yourself... in areas so unimportant as say... aviation
and space technology... just to name two!


The USA had better jet aircraft in 1945 than Germany did
The late model Meteor was faster than the Me-262
and far more reliable. The Germans never did get their
engines to work for more than 25 hours while the
Rolls Royce engines in the Meteor were good for 2000

Huh, really? That's why the US engineers asked the GERMANS for advice
on the future of jet engine development. The Germans told them
axial-flow was the future even though the US/UK chose to toy around
with centrifugal dead-end jet engines for years afterwards and even
still continued producing PROP AIRCRAFT!
The Germans in 1945 had the world's greatest engine the DB 109-016 @
28,652 lb st and the world's first afterburning engine the Jumo 004E.
Of course Germany lack the strategic materials necessary for higher
quality coonstruction of jet engines but they also had synthetics
developed under a time of round-the-clock bombing; nevertheless, THEY
introduced two jet fighters, a jet bomber, a rocket figheter, and had
two supersonic designs under construction- the Lp DM-1 demonstrator
for the Lp P.13 and the DFS 346 (which flew Mach 1 in the USSR
postwar).

Whatever you are smoking must be *really* good stuff.

Facts bother you? Not surprising...

Germany never managed to build a succesful heavy bomber,
the USA had 3 types in service and the B-36 under development

That's Hitler's fault for cancelling any four-engined type. Germany
could have built the Me-264, Ju 390, and a wide range of jet bomber
projects that HEAVILY influenced postwar designs. If you think not
then buy "Luftwaffe Secret Projects, Strategic Bombers 1939-1945".

The NACA in the USA was alreay working on swept wing
technology in 1945\

And everyone knows Germany's windtunnel data on the swept-wing (in all
configurations) was far more valuable than anything the Allies had
under development. I'm surprised how stupid you are to mention that at
all.

Von Braun acknowledged that all his work was built on
the foundations laid by Goddard.

... and Oberth, who proposed rocket artillery as far back as WW1!

The rocket engines used in the X planes post war were designed by
Goddard's team and were far BETTER and more reliable
than those in the Me-163

Yet the US stole the X-15 configuration/concept from the Peenemunde
EMW A6 and the US NEVER fielded a rocket fighter, making the Me-163
Komet unique in air combat history.

And utterly useless. It was an idiotic design.

Which as an interceptor could climb at 16,000 fpm and was armed with
two 30mm cannon. It wasn't a solution to win the air war only intended
as a point-defence interceptor. It made some kills and a place in
history.
What exactly did the British Meteor do besides swat some V-1s?

Then there is the fiasco that was the German nuclear project.

Which is the entire basis for the US rush to develop it's own bomb.
Germans got a bad deal with bad graphite- thank God for that. Yet the
Germans also were smart enough to realize that nuclear power could be
used for other purposes too:

The Germans never achieved criticality in a reactor.

Due to bad graphite which was rejected as a moderator. If they would
have gotten good graphite AND official backing by Hitler AND some
investment AND an order to produce the weapon... then, well history
might be different. Germany never had a true atomic bomb program- just
war research.

radiological weapons, a nuclear power reactor, and for use in
submarines long before Nautilus was built. They also realized than an
atom bomb coulb be mounted on a missile and launched from sea
(Prufstand XII container).

The myth of German technical superiority is just that.

No, hundreds of thousands of captured technical documents stored at
Wright Field in 1946 prove you wrong. The US Govt even was "low"
enough to sell non-classified technical documents to other nations for
cash- including the USSR!
And if German technology is just a myth then why is 85% of America's
arsenal derived from German weapons from WW1 and WW2? Why do we even
use their tactics and wear their helmets?

Rob


You are a loon.

No, history doesn't bother me like it does you. You are the loon that
keeps trying to assert that the US ruled forever and invented
everything. You can't admit that most of our modern a/c, designs, and
space program came from the Reich. It's a fact pal and the German
scientists were made US citizens. Why don't you talk to them about
"whose" technology was stolen.

Al Minyard

Rob

"robert arndt" wrote

No, history doesn't bother me like it does you. You are the loon that
keeps trying to assert that the US ruled forever and invented
everything. You can't admit that most of our modern a/c, designs, and
space program came from the Reich. It's a fact pal and the German
scientists were made US citizens. Why don't you talk to them about
"whose" technology was stolen.


If the Germans had such superior:
planes
tanks
armor
guns
helmets
Generals
leadership
etc, etc...

Why did they lose?

Pete
I'm sure you can pull out some 'facts' that show their bayonets were better
"Fine German cold rolled steel!"

On 6 Jun 2004 12:56:12 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

Remember the "Bismark"? or the "Tirpitz"? or any other German
ship of WWII? That little Navy with "garbage" for ships sank virtually
all of them. And, despite your parroting of Nazi propaganda, the UK
was never in danger of "choking". Also note that the UK produced
virtually all of its own aircraft and ships.

Please tell of your great success with your vital shipping. Exactly
how many MILLIONS of tons did you lose to German surface ships,
raiders, S-boats, and U-boats?

OK, the war totals for ship losses to U-Boats was 272 ships. That was sell than
1% of ships transiting during the war. During that time the US alone
built 4,716 ships. more than 17 *times* the losses to U-Boats.

This Allied losses to U-Boats amounted to 5,358,874 GRT. The losses to
German surface raiders was negligible.

During that same time period the Germans lost 713 U-Boats.

Hitler was the one who gave the orders that relegated the surface
fleet to the dustbin; however, ISTR that the Kreigsmarine evacuation
of East Prussia in 1945 was the greatest evacuation in history. It was
accomplished with what was left of the surface fleet and roughly over
2 million German citizens and soldiers were
evacuated- which makes the paltry 300,000+ evacuated at Dunkirk a joke
by comparison.

Of course it also resulted in a massive loss of life, Not to mention the fact that
Dunkirk was under attack.

Then the Fuhrer attacked Russia - STOOPID

ALL Germans would agree with you there... still they did launch the
world's greatest land invasion in history and would have made it to
Moscow had they not been bogged down in the earlier offensive in the
Balkans bailing out the Italians.

You mean that your dear Fuhrer actually made a mistake, amazing!

So you think wars are won by huge defeats??

In the winter of 1941 it wasn't a huge defeat. The defeat came at
Kursk years later. As stated earlier the Germans would have won in
Russia had they started their offensive in the Spring instead of the
summer. They wouldn't have bogged down in the mud and they wouldn't
have been scarce of winter clothing. Russia wouldn't have had the time
to fully mobilize for the counter attack.

After the winter of 1941 German forces in the USSR were beaten. Ever heard
of a place called "Stalingrad"??

Then after defeat, your VICTORIOUS and SUPERIOR
armies raped the entire German nation for all of its technology
ensuring postwar victories without any real effort on your part to
develop them yourself... in areas so unimportant as say... aviation
and space technology... just to name two!


The USA had better jet aircraft in 1945 than Germany did
The late model Meteor was faster than the Me-262
and far more reliable. The Germans never did get their
engines to work for more than 25 hours while the
Rolls Royce engines in the Meteor were good for 2000

Huh, really? That's why the US engineers asked the GERMANS for advice
on the future of jet engine development. The Germans told them
axial-flow was the future even though the US/UK chose to toy around
with centrifugal dead-end jet engines for years afterwards and even
still continued producing PROP AIRCRAFT!

The Germans, meanwhile, produced NOTHING. They have not built a
successful aircraft since the FW-190.

The Germans in 1945 had the world's greatest engine the DB 109-016 @
28,652 lb st and the world's first afterburning engine the Jumo 004E.
Of course Germany lack the strategic materials necessary for higher
quality coonstruction of jet engines but they also had synthetics
developed under a time of round-the-clock bombing; nevertheless, THEY
introduced two jet fighters, a jet bomber, a rocket figheter, and had
two supersonic designs under construction- the Lp DM-1 demonstrator
for the Lp P.13 and the DFS 346 (which flew Mach 1 in the USSR
postwar).

Whatever you are smoking must be *really* good stuff.

Facts bother you? Not surprising...

Germany never managed to build a succesful heavy bomber,
the USA had 3 types in service and the B-36 under development

That's Hitler's fault for cancelling any four-engined type. Germany
could have built the Me-264, Ju 390, and a wide range of jet bomber
projects that HEAVILY influenced postwar designs. If you think not
then buy "Luftwaffe Secret Projects, Strategic Bombers 1939-1945".

The NACA in the USA was alreay working on swept wing
technology in 1945\

And everyone knows Germany's windtunnel data on the swept-wing (in all
configurations) was far more valuable than anything the Allies had
under development. I'm surprised how stupid you are to mention that at
all.


WHAT wind tunnel data?

Von Braun acknowledged that all his work was built on
the foundations laid by Goddard.

... and Oberth, who proposed rocket artillery as far back as WW1!

Solid fuel. That was a dead end at the time.

The rocket engines used in the X planes post war were designed by
Goddard's team and were far BETTER and more reliable
than those in the Me-163

Yet the US stole the X-15 configuration/concept from the Peenemunde
EMW A6 and the US NEVER fielded a rocket fighter, making the Me-163
Komet unique in air combat history.

And utterly useless. It was an idiotic design.

Which as an interceptor could climb at 16,000 fpm and was armed with
two 30mm cannon. It wasn't a solution to win the air war only intended
as a point-defence interceptor. It made some kills and a place in
history.
What exactly did the British Meteor do besides swat some V-1s?

The Meteor (and the P-80) were not needed.

Then there is the fiasco that was the German nuclear project.

Which is the entire basis for the US rush to develop it's own bomb.
Germans got a bad deal with bad graphite- thank God for that. Yet the
Germans also were smart enough to realize that nuclear power could be
used for other purposes too:

The Germans never achieved criticality in a reactor.

Due to bad graphite which was rejected as a moderator. If they would
have gotten good graphite AND official backing by Hitler AND some
investment AND an order to produce the weapon... then, well history
might be different. Germany never had a true atomic bomb program- just
war research.

Due to stupid mistakes by their scientists.

radiological weapons, a nuclear power reactor, and for use in
submarines long before Nautilus was built. They also realized than an
atom bomb coulb be mounted on a missile and launched from sea
(Prufstand XII container).

The myth of German technical superiority is just that.

No, hundreds of thousands of captured technical documents stored at
Wright Field in 1946 prove you wrong. The US Govt even was "low"
enough to sell non-classified technical documents to other nations for
cash- including the USSR!
And if German technology is just a myth then why is 85% of America's
arsenal derived from German weapons from WW1 and WW2? Why do we even
use their tactics and wear their helmets?

So you are saying that the Germans had Kevlar helmets in WWII? Do you have
any idea what the Bundswere wears today?

No, history doesn't bother me like it does you. You are the loon that
keeps trying to assert that the US ruled forever and invented
everything. You can't admit that most of our modern a/c, designs, and
space program came from the Reich. It's a fact pal and the German
scientists were made US citizens. Why don't you talk to them about
"whose" technology was stolen.

You quote a neo-nazi web site that deny's the holocaust as a source
for your "facts". You are a Nazi loving loon.

Al Minyard

Greg Hennessy wrote:

On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 17:22:23 +0100, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:


The Matilda II went on to create havoc with the Italians
in North Africa were it tore through Italian tank and
anti-tank formations and also served with some
distinction in Russia which received over a 1000
of them at a critical period when their own tank production was
being relocated beyond the Urals.

Shame about the idiots who insisted that such a fine tank be armed with a
gun which had no HE round.


One wonders how many needless deaths were caused by that oversight.

Almost as absurd as a Typhoon with no gun. What is it with these
whacked-out Brits? Too much Norman inbreeding?

Grantland