The Nuclear problem isnt really an issue today since the USSR no longer exists.
These days its more about terrorism and biological warfare than the great doomsday clock
Printable View
The Nuclear problem isnt really an issue today since the USSR no longer exists.
These days its more about terrorism and biological warfare than the great doomsday clock
Nuclear weapons are a problem today. If someone could aquire just one, (and that's less difficult than you'd think,) they could EMP nearly the entire U.S. Another gets a good chunk of Europe. More...
Just because it was a plot device for MW2 doesnt mean it is likely that someone will EMP america
Nuclear material is watched more carefully than you think and even if someone does get their hands on some enriched uranium it takes a real genius and alot of hard to aquire equipment to turn it into a nuclear bomb
Unless you are Macgyver
*clears throat*
Can we get back to the subject of the Heer and Waffen-Schutzstaffel defending Italy from the Allies?
I believe that the Germans, had the Italians actually stood and fought, they would've crushed the Allies on the beaches of Anzio and at the Gustav Line.
I didn't get the idea from a video game. I got it from One Second After, a book that, (though fiction) seriously tries to examine the matter. And its author, William Forstchen, is an intelligent guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesterus
Well since the Italians surrendered later on in 1943, it's hard to consider how things would have been in January 1944. The problem with the Italian troops is that they were under-equipped, poorly trained and had not much will to fight on. They would be relegated to static defensive roles, and would need to have their resolve bolstered by German troops fighting beside them, otherwise they might have given away crucial parts of the line.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrotherhoodUK
There was a complete lack of troops in Sicily too (and the Italians fought there), so I don't think that was actually winnable unless the Italian coastal divisions actually chose to stand and fight rather than caving in. If they were able to hold out then the German and Italian divisions located on the island could have reacted speedily and pressed on to the beaches, perhaps repulsing a potential invasion. Unlike the situation in Operation Neptune (6 June 1944), the Axis troops were actually very close to the invasion points so throwing the Allied troops in to the sea truly was a possibility.
I see your point... Like I was saying earlier, the Italians were extemely useful in supporting the German, so long as the Germans were indeed there to be supported. It seems lik everything we say comes back to the simple issue of:
If the Italians had stayed and fought longer, the Axis could have won the Italian campaign.
Am I right?
(And by the way, I kind of like the idea of the EMP thing getting discussed, as One Second After has a lot to say on the subject... Anyone want me to make a new thread for it?)
With the lost of the Afrika Corps in Tunis. The German force under Rommel was successful repelling the Allies forces. However Rommel got sick and was force to leave. That when the Afrika Corps fell apart.
I think you're oversimplifying things a lot by chalking success or failure up to a sngle person. Rommel was amazing, yes, but he couldn't have made all the difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by KwokYuen
True, Hitler abandon the Afrika Corp instead of falling back to Sicily or Italy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bree Fletcher
The Afrika Corp lost was great blow to the german defender in Italy. Who was both leaderless and demolarized. The Italian troop was less loyal and ill prepare for the onslaught. They basely let the German do all the defending.