User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 10:18:07 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Ww2 German infantry company would be a better fight. For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:26:41 AM EDT
[#2]
I would love to see what Iran and Hanoi would look like with a WWII Curtis Lamay in charge of the air war. I see what they look like with our new modern ROE's. I don't care how good modern is, it does no good if we don't use it. ymmv
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:36:19 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ww2 German infantry company would be a better fight. For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. Who would have had the best infantry during the Second World War, then? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:58:46 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who would have had the best infantry during the Second World War, then? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ww2 German infantry company would be a better fight. For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. Who would have had the best infantry during the Second World War, then? Really depends on time frame, theater, and campaign. Sometimes the Germans were straight killers, motivated and well trained, other times their ranks were filled with unwilling conscripts just waiting for the chance when they can surrender to the western allies. Some US Army and USMC infantry units were top notch throughout the war, while others fluctuated between good and shitty depending on time and amount of casualties sustained in previous campaigns. Any serious study of actual historic battle accounts shows pretty clearly that German infantry weren't the uber warriors that German war machine aficionados claim they were. The veteran and highly trained German infantry were nearly bled dry in the Eastern Front by '42-3, when attrition overlapped maneuver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:07:38 PM EDT
[#5]
WWII guys, hands down.
They were waaaaaaaaaaaay less pussified, then todays Americans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:08:34 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WWII guys, hands down. They were waaaaaaaaaaaay less pussified, then todays Americans. Is this based on your active service as an infantryman serving in Iraq and Afghanistan? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:10:20 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: WWII guys, hands down. They were waaaaaaaaaaaay less pussified, then todays Americans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:13:42 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Really depends on time frame, theater, and campaign. Sometimes the Germans were straight killers, motivated and well trained, other times their ranks were filled with unwilling conscripts just waiting for the chance when they can surrender to the western allies. Some US Army and USMC infantry units were top notch throughout the war, while others fluctuated between good and shitty depending on time and amount of casualties sustained in previous campaigns. Any serious study of actual historic battle accounts shows pretty clearly that German infantry weren't the uber warriors that German war machine aficionados claim they were. The veteran and highly trained German infantry were nearly bled dry in the Eastern Front by '42-3, when attrition overlapped maneuver. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ww2 German infantry company would be a better fight. For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. Who would have had the best infantry during the Second World War, then? Really depends on time frame, theater, and campaign. Sometimes the Germans were straight killers, motivated and well trained, other times their ranks were filled with unwilling conscripts just waiting for the chance when they can surrender to the western allies. Some US Army and USMC infantry units were top notch throughout the war, while others fluctuated between good and shitty depending on time and amount of casualties sustained in previous campaigns. Any serious study of actual historic battle accounts shows pretty clearly that German infantry weren't the uber warriors that German war machine aficionados claim they were. The veteran and highly trained German infantry were nearly bled dry in the Eastern Front by '42-3, when attrition overlapped maneuver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:26:11 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Early war id go with Germans after that it becomes more of a toss up. The Common Wealth seemed to produce good infantry particularly Australians and Canadians. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ww2 German infantry company would be a better fight. For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. Who would have had the best infantry during the Second World War, then? Really depends on time frame, theater, and campaign. Sometimes the Germans were straight killers, motivated and well trained, other times their ranks were filled with unwilling conscripts just waiting for the chance when they can surrender to the western allies. Some US Army and USMC infantry units were top notch throughout the war, while others fluctuated between good and shitty depending on time and amount of casualties sustained in previous campaigns. Any serious study of actual historic battle accounts shows pretty clearly that German infantry weren't the uber warriors that German war machine aficionados claim they were. The veteran and highly trained German infantry were nearly bled dry in the Eastern Front by '42-3, when attrition overlapped maneuver. Germans were the best in '39, mainly because they had a good five year head start in mobilizing compared to everyone else. I'd agree, Commonwealth infantry were pretty good too. I might actually be willing to say that they might have been the best in the ETO overall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:27:40 PM EDT
[#10]
lol
Grandpa wouldn't stand a chance, even with both Mike Tyson and Bruce Lee on his side. Grandpa probably wouldn't know what hit him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:47:44 PM EDT
[#11]
I've never heard a WW2 infantryman say he's ready for a new war because he misses killing stuff and wrecking shit.
Just sayin.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 3:24:54 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. My Grandfather leveled an entire hill in Germany with artillery (he called it in) for one sniper. They were not worried about hurting someone's feelings or environmental impact..... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
ROE of their respective era's? WWII guys win. Their ROE was kill the enemy and break his shit. This. My Grandfather leveled an entire hill in Germany with artillery (he called it in) for one sniper. They were not worried about hurting someone's feelings or environmental impact..... And we leveled an entire small town because we lost a dude in it. We sent a battalion in to secure it while the engineers bulldozed every fucking mud hut. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 3:41:19 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You young guys have no ideal how fast you would lose. men where a different generation back then. hard working farm boys , and they lived in a time when parents kicked there asses. no crying about being cold or hungry . WWII guys were hunting for food as teens not playing video games. 300 men company wouldn't survive a day with a 300 men WWII troop with equal amount of weapons no electronics Hahahahahahaha you have no fucking clue of what is like in a Marine infantry company. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 3:47:44 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
given equal weapons... WWII every time. Both sides are equally willing to kill for their country but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. When things get hairy, that generation got things done at whatever cost while this generation... not so much. Man some of you are dumb as shit. What has your generation done? Beat the Russians? Lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 4:13:24 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Man some of you are dumb as shit. What has your generation done? Beat the Russians? Lol. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
given equal weapons... WWII every time. Both sides are equally willing to kill for their country but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. When things get hairy, that generation got things done at whatever cost while this generation... not so much. Man some of you are dumb as shit. What has your generation done? Beat the Russians? Lol. You're forgetting that you are talking to the "Millennials are all worthless lazy pieces of shit." crowd. You know, the ones that conveniently forget that it was the 'Greatest Generation' AND the Boomers that gave use FDR and LBJ, respectively? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 4:29:12 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're forgetting that you are talking to the "Millennials are all worthless lazy pieces of shit." crowd. You know, the ones that conveniently forget that it was the 'Greatest Generation' AND the Boomers that gave use FDR and LBJ, respectively? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
given equal weapons... WWII every time. Both sides are equally willing to kill for their country but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. When things get hairy, that generation got things done at whatever cost while this generation... not so much. Man some of you are dumb as shit. What has your generation done? Beat the Russians? Lol. You're forgetting that you are talking to the "Millennials are all worthless lazy pieces of shit." crowd. You know, the ones that conveniently forget that it was the 'Greatest Generation' AND the Boomers that gave use FDR and LBJ, respectively? And Carter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 4:45:39 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're forgetting that you are talking to the "Millennials are all worthless lazy pieces of shit." crowd. You know, the ones that conveniently forget that it was the 'Greatest Generation' AND the Boomers that gave use FDR and LBJ, respectively? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
given equal weapons... WWII every time. Both sides are equally willing to kill for their country but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. When things get hairy, that generation got things done at whatever cost while this generation... not so much. Man some of you are dumb as shit. What has your generation done? Beat the Russians? Lol. You're forgetting that you are talking to the "Millennials are all worthless lazy pieces of shit." crowd. You know, the ones that conveniently forget that it was the 'Greatest Generation' AND the Boomers that gave use FDR and LBJ, respectively? Nah clearly all of us liberal socialist millennials used our time machines to elect those guys. They did everything perfectly when they elected Reagen and beat the USSR in a "war" without ever firing a shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 4:53:46 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nah clearly all of us liberal socialist millennials used our time machines to elect those guys. They did everything perfectly when they elected Reagen and beat the USSR in a "war" without ever firing a shot. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
given equal weapons... WWII every time. Both sides are equally willing to kill for their country but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. When things get hairy, that generation got things done at whatever cost while this generation... not so much. Man some of you are dumb as shit. What has your generation done? Beat the Russians? Lol. You're forgetting that you are talking to the "Millennials are all worthless lazy pieces of shit." crowd. You know, the ones that conveniently forget that it was the 'Greatest Generation' AND the Boomers that gave use FDR and LBJ, respectively? Nah clearly all of us liberal socialist millennials used our time machines to elect those guys. They did everything perfectly when they elected Reagen and beat the USSR in a "war" without ever firing a shot. I keep telling you guys, replacing the garand, the invention of button phones as opposed to rotary phones, and fuel injection is the reason America died. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 4:54:19 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nah clearly all of us liberal socialist millennials used our time machines to elect those guys. They did everything perfectly when they elected Reagen and beat the USSR in a "war" without ever firing a shot. damn dude, next you're going to say you agreed with Trijicon and they didn't deserve discounts on ACOGs for their service. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 4:57:09 PM EDT
[#20]
WWII infantry hands down unless you consider mech infantry then Modern will take the win.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:10:27 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's a real strong myth about the quality of the average American WWII Infantryman. Unfortunately it's a false myth. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You young guys have no ideal how fast you would lose. men where a different generation back then. hard working farm boys , and they lived in a time when parents kicked there asses. no crying about being cold or hungry . WWII guys were hunting for food as teens not playing video games. 300 men company wouldn't survive a day with a 300 men WWII troop with equal amount of weapons no electronics There's a real strong myth about the quality of the average American WWII Infantryman. Unfortunately it's a false myth. Yup. I heard somewhere that WW2 infantrymen were infantry because they were not smart enough to get into the Air Corps |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:11:18 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And Carter. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: given equal weapons... WWII every time. Both sides are equally willing to kill for their country but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. When things get hairy, that generation got things done at whatever cost while this generation... not so much. Man some of you are dumb as shit. What has your generation done? Beat the Russians? Lol. You're forgetting that you are talking to the "Millennials are all worthless lazy pieces of shit." crowd. You know, the ones that conveniently forget that it was the 'Greatest Generation' AND the Boomers that gave use FDR and LBJ, respectively? And Carter. Don't forget Cloward and Piven! That said, the geezer worship here is ridiculous. I loved my WWII g'pa as much as the next guy. But not to the point of being an obtuse fuckwhit' with no common sense... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:22:10 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WWII infantry hands down unless you consider mech infantry then Modern will take the win. Less experience, poor training, very bad childhood nutrition, lower intelligence, and having nowhere near the actual time in combat. Sure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:33:09 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
... and some in this thread are touting that as if it counts in the WWII GI's favor. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. Yes, no one has ever died in the GWOT. There were 6 battles in WW2 where there were more Americans killed than all of Iraq and Afghanistan deaths combined. ... and some in this thread are touting that as if it counts in the WWII GI's favor. What they are saying is that in WW2, they were more willing to accept casualites. What do you thing would happen today if 5000+ us soldiers were killed in a single battle, let alone in 12 years? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:38:26 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What they are saying is that in WW2, they were more willing to accept casualites. What do you thing would happen today if 5000+ us soldiers were killed in a single battle, let alone in 12 years? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. Yes, no one has ever died in the GWOT. There were 6 battles in WW2 where there were more Americans killed than all of Iraq and Afghanistan deaths combined. ... and some in this thread are touting that as if it counts in the WWII GI's favor. What they are saying is that in WW2, they were more willing to accept casualites. What do you thing would happen today if 5000+ us soldiers were killed in a single battle, let alone in 12 years? They did it because they couldn't help it, due to poor training, logistics, and experience. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:38:42 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Want me to tell you a secret? Better medivac systems, better trauma care, and better PPE make that comparison useless. We'd have lost a lot more men in Iraq and Afghanistan using technology from the 40s, too. That doesn't mean that your fantasy that all people under the age of 45 are weak pussies true, however. Arfcom's feelings on people who volunteer to spend a good bit of their adult life at war is quite interesting. 
What if I told you the average soldier now spends more time doing patrols and combat duty than the average soldier from WW2?  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. Yes, no one has ever died in the GWOT. There were 6 battles in WW2 where there were more Americans killed than all of Iraq and Afghanistan deaths combined. Want me to tell you a secret? Better medivac systems, better trauma care, and better PPE make that comparison useless. We'd have lost a lot more men in Iraq and Afghanistan using technology from the 40s, too. That doesn't mean that your fantasy that all people under the age of 45 are weak pussies true, however. Arfcom's feelings on people who volunteer to spend a good bit of their adult life at war is quite interesting.
What if I told you the average soldier now spends more time doing patrols and combat duty than the average soldier from WW2? If the WW2 vets had the same medivac, trauma care and PPE, there still would be over 1500 killed on the beaches and thousands of casualties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:41:12 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Over 100,000 Americans surrendered to the enemy in WW2. Almost all instances of units getting over run in GWOT they fought to the death. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
WWII units proved that they could take massive casualties and continue to be effective. Over 100,000 Americans surrendered to the enemy in WW2. Almost all instances of units getting over run in GWOT they fought to the death. because they knew they were dead if they surrendered |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:50:07 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Even if you couldn't hold out until night and use magic see-in-the-dark goggles with invisible lasers, comms alone (and the fact that they're now compact enough that anyone can carry them in a pocket) would blow them out of the water. Take out single radioman in enemy company, now they are dead to anything they can't see or hear directly. My grandpa is a badass, don't get me wrong. He's just a badass who would find himself astonished at the capabilities of the modern military. I would have to assume that the WW2 guys would be experienced in loosing a radioman so they would know what to do when one goes down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:52:44 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would have to assume that the WW2 guys would be experienced in loosing a radioman so they would know what to do when one goes down. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Even if you couldn't hold out until night and use magic see-in-the-dark goggles with invisible lasers, comms alone (and the fact that they're now compact enough that anyone can carry them in a pocket) would blow them out of the water. Take out single radioman in enemy company, now they are dead to anything they can't see or hear directly. My grandpa is a badass, don't get me wrong. He's just a badass who would find himself astonished at the capabilities of the modern military. I would have to assume that the WW2 guys would be experienced in loosing a radioman so they would know what to do when one goes down. Not really. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 5:54:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the WW2 vets had the same medivac, trauma care and PPE, there still would be over 1500 killed on the beaches and thousands of casualties. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
but only WWII warriors were willing to die for their country. Yes, no one has ever died in the GWOT. There were 6 battles in WW2 where there were more Americans killed than all of Iraq and Afghanistan deaths combined. Want me to tell you a secret? Better medivac systems, better trauma care, and better PPE make that comparison useless. We'd have lost a lot more men in Iraq and Afghanistan using technology from the 40s, too. That doesn't mean that your fantasy that all people under the age of 45 are weak pussies true, however. Arfcom's feelings on people who volunteer to spend a good bit of their adult life at war is quite interesting.
What if I told you the average soldier now spends more time doing patrols and combat duty than the average soldier from WW2? If the WW2 vets had the same medivac, trauma care and PPE, there still would be over 1500 killed on the beaches and thousands of casualties. I see you have no idea what you're talking about. Better trauma care has absolutely changed the casualties seen in warfare, and anyone with any actual knowledge of warfare will tell you that. Even just the ability to reliably and most importantly, quickly, stop hemorrhaging from extremities would have reduced the casualties at ANY battle in WW2, even the chaos that was Omaha beach. You can disagree if you want, but you're still wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:13:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The modern infantry is going to be better in every way physically. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Being an 11B as recently as 2014, I really want to say modern but I still think it'd have to go to the old guys. Their only disadvantage against us is optics. They don't have 130lbs of PPE to slow them down. Their rifles can outrange ours. The individual soldier is going to be a tougher, leaner, meaner sumbitch; while half of ours won't be in the fight because they went red on dental and have a profile for fibromyalgia. Disagree. My dad was Korean war period, and his average level of fitness left gym rats in the dust. Most guys back then did REAL manual labor. They were mentally tougher as a result. They were generally more comfortable than modern soldiers with weapons, and as previously mentioned they were MUCH more accepting of casualties. Dad stayed in right up into the 90's, and he consistently out-PT'd the younger guys. Also, the WW II era guys were more disciplined culturally. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:25:24 PM EDT
[#32]
The modern American Infantryman is an animal that didn't exist in WWII. He is bigger, stronger, faster, smarter, and meaner from the get go. Built upon that is the extreme best of what the most combat effective military that has ever existed on this planet can provide for training. With their eras respective gear, the thought that a company from FSSF would be able to do anything other than a withdraw while taking heavy losses with little chances of survival from just about any modern infantry company is delusional.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:26:40 PM EDT
[#33]
A couple of additional notes on the difference between the two armies:
The World War II army fought a uniformed enemy. People try to apply the Iran and Afghanistan ROE that were designed to protect civilians when our guys fought against non-uniformed combatants. Several veterans already described the effect of the ROE against these people and I think that if the Iraqi Army was foolish enough to fight in uniform, even those rules wouldn't apply. The ROE would be: destroy everything you see. Advance. My father explained the World War II method of clearing a building. Throw a grenade. Wait for it to explode. Shoot everyone in the room. Repeat until the building is clear. In the event that some dead civilians complained that you killed them with indiscriminate use of explosives and bullets, the CO would order you to go to church. Are we applying the World War II ROE to the modern army or the Iraq ROE to World War II? Both sides have to use the same ones and the modern army will move very quickly when you tell them that they can do whatever they want. Next, go practice room clearing drills with a Garand and then your M4gery. Obviously the M4 is more effective. Someone will say that the World War II GIs would do this with an M1 Carbine, or better yet, an M2. Oh, no they wouldn't. M2s were rare. They made 600,000 of them. They made 6,250,000 Garands and 6,000,000 M1 Carbines. You wouldn't find a guy with a Carbine anywhere near the front because the Wehrmacht found out that we issued them to lieutenants and captains. If you had a carbine, you died first. Urban combat in World War II was fought with 43" rifles that had 8 round clips. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:31:18 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That said, the geezer worship here is ridiculous. I loved my WWII g'pa as much as the next guy. But not to the point of being an obtuse fuckwhit' with no common sense... Quote HistoryQuoted:
That said, the geezer worship here is ridiculous. I loved my WWII g'pa as much as the next guy. But not to the point of being an obtuse fuckwhit' with no common sense... The "but mah grand pappy" shit accounts for a good chunk of GD's derp. Quoted:
What they are saying is that in WW2, they were more willing to accept casualites. What do you thing would happen today if 5000+ us soldiers were killed in a single battle, let alone in 12 years? lol Are you 12 years old? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:32:03 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The following was paraphrased from http://www.trailblazersww2.org/history_infantrystructure.htm THE RIFLE COMPANY (WWII) (Authorized Strength - 193): Three rifle platoons (1st, 2nd, and 3rd), a weapons platoon (sometimes called the 4th Platoon), and a company headquarters formed an infantry rifle company of six officers and 187 enlisted men, commanded by a captain. The weapons platoon (authorized strength - 1 officer and 34 enlisted men) contained two light machine gun squads and three 60mm mortar squads. The weapons platoon commander advised the company commander on disposition of the machine guns and mortars, which could be positioned to support the whole company generally, or to reinforce fires in a particular area of concern. Usually, the three mortars were grouped together in a single firing location. The two machine guns were doctrinally employed in “pairs” so that the fields of fire converged to cover as much of the company front as possible -- but this could be done with the machine guns positioned quite some distance apart. Using Wiki as for the TOE of a modern USMC Company shows https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_(military_unit)#Modern_use (Authorized Strength - 185) Modern guys will have 6 SMAWs, 3 60mm mortars, 6 M240s, and 27 M249s. Practically every weapon will have some type of optic. Troops will have easy access to M203 grenade launchers instead of rifle grenades. Modern troops will have better uniforms, equipment, comms, rations, and armor (eSAPI vs wool shirt). WWII guys would not know what hit them. WWII guys do have better E-tools (as long as its the M1943 version) and a helmet that can be used to boil water. Their rations would have smokes. Modern guys will have professionally trained O's and NCO's with years of experience. Lower ranking troops will have been through more training as well. Also, I believe that even a basic infantry company is authorized a few Humvees which crush a WWII Jeep in performance (3/4 ton 4X4 truck vs a glorified Gator ATV). Driven both Mutts and Hum-Vees.... the Mutts will go places you can't even FIT a Humvee. For road use, Humvees are faster and bigger. For off-road, gimme a Mutt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:43:11 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And we leveled an entire small town because we lost a dude in it. We sent a battalion in to secure it while the engineers bulldozed every fucking mud hut. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ROE of their respective era's? WWII guys win. Their ROE was kill the enemy and break his shit. This. My Grandfather leveled an entire hill in Germany with artillery (he called it in) for one sniper. They were not worried about hurting someone's feelings or environmental impact..... And we leveled an entire small town because we lost a dude in it. We sent a battalion in to secure it while the engineers bulldozed every fucking mud hut. Rangers lead the way! .... after the Engineers make sure it's safe. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:59:50 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would have to assume that the WW2 guys would be experienced in loosing a radioman so they would know what to do when one goes down. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Even if you couldn't hold out until night and use magic see-in-the-dark goggles with invisible lasers, comms alone (and the fact that they're now compact enough that anyone can carry them in a pocket) would blow them out of the water. Take out single radioman in enemy company, now they are dead to anything they can't see or hear directly. My grandpa is a badass, don't get me wrong. He's just a badass who would find himself astonished at the capabilities of the modern military. I would have to assume that the WW2 guys would be experienced in loosing a radioman so they would know what to do when one goes down. And one would have to assume our SDM and snipers would know what to do when someone runs to pick up the radio. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 7:01:32 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are we applying the World War II ROE to the modern army or the Iraq ROE to World War II? Both sides have to use the same ones and the modern army will move very quickly when you tell them that they can do whatever they want. . The ROE of the modern army in iraq was very similar to WWII for the first couple years. 3rd ID killed pretty much anybody they saw outside on the initial push to take Baghdad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 7:07:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The ROE of the modern army in iraq was very similar to WWII for the first couple years. 3rd ID killed pretty much anybody they saw outside on the initial push to take Baghdad. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Are we applying the World War II ROE to the modern army or the Iraq ROE to World War II? Both sides have to use the same ones and the modern army will move very quickly when you tell them that they can do whatever they want. . The ROE of the modern army in iraq was very similar to WWII for the first couple years. 3rd ID killed pretty much anybody they saw outside on the initial push to take Baghdad. I would somewhat have to disagree, both 3ID or 1st MarDiv used considerable more constraint in combat than they would have in WWII. In World War II there was not a need to positively ID targets. Most of the restrictions are not really on direct fire system either, we are no where as willing to use fire support unless troops or in contact and there additionally would not have been anything like a "Structural" restriction when firing artillery. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 7:58:43 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What they are saying is that in WW2, they were more willing to accept casualites. What do you thing would happen today if 5000+ us soldiers were killed in a single battle, let alone in 12 years? Look at 9/11. America got hit very hard for a terrorist attack. Did America suddenly want to surrender or did the country get pissed and a wee bit bloodthirsty in its search for vengeance? Do you have a clue how many people signed up to fight the GWOT? Lots lots. And sorry to break it to you, but the military itself doesn't have any issues with casualties asking themselves. The issue is that insurgencies are one long, two unpopular, and three often turn into wars attrition, but of political will, not bodies. To keep civilian morale up high enough to sustain the war the military has to limit casualties so rival party political hacks can't use casualties as a way to influence elections. Even the casualties and ocassional excesses of the counter insurgencies in Central America during the Banana Wars of the 1920s and 30s wasn't immune from lies of the same restrictions we face today. If need be, and as proven during many of hard company and platoon level fights in Iraq and Afghanistan, American infantry are willing to not just soak up casualties and keep fighting, but fight to the death. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 8:23:07 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Ww2 German infantry company would be a better fight. For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. No, the problem the Germans had was that a 14 year old kid and a 60 year old with arthritis aren't really motivated to fight, unless you threaten them with death. Suddenly, they'll fight, until they can find a place to surrender. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 8:39:20 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
this. IMO WW2 was the last war where our troops were allowed to do what was needed to win, if the enemy used civilian areas for cover we just blew everything up. Every war since the politicians have been more worried about offending the other party or their actions getting someone else involved. You can't win a war when you're burdened with a bunch of rules. The soldiers on the modern battlefield win the battles but are still held back by ROE. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
ROE of their respective era's? WWII guys win. Their ROE was kill the enemy and break his shit. this. IMO WW2 was the last war where our troops were allowed to do what was needed to win, if the enemy used civilian areas for cover we just blew everything up. Every war since the politicians have been more worried about offending the other party or their actions getting someone else involved. You can't win a war when you're burdened with a bunch of rules. The soldiers on the modern battlefield win the battles but are still held back by ROE. Those pesky ROEs sure held us back when we invaded Iraq....oh wait. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:35:25 PM EDT
[#43]
Modern infantry wins all day long and twice as hard at night. Better tactics, much better training, belt feds and optics galore, and commo light years beyond what they had in WWII. Plus modern infantry is physically much stronger. Look at pictures of the average WWII 11B or 0311 and compare to their modern counter parts. Guys that look like the average WWII grunt are nowadays put on double rations and sent to the gym for extra PT after work.
ETA: read Helmet for my Pillow for some insight. The physical and combat training doesn't hold a candle to what is done in the modern Army and Marines. The guy that wrote the book was a private with about a month of experience when Pearl was attacked. The military was in such need of bodies that him and most other privates instantly were promoted to E-5 Sergeant and were team leaders suddenly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:41:11 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, the problem the Germans had was that a 14 year old kid and a 60 year old with arthritis aren't really motivated to fight, unless you threaten them with death. Suddenly, they'll fight, until they can find a place to surrender. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ww2 German infantry company would be a better fight. For much of the war the average German infantry company was even worse than the Americans. The only advantage they had was firepower, and even in that case they had major issues hauling enough ammo to support it. If they weren't fighting from prepared defenses they weren't all that great. No, the problem the Germans had was that a 14 year old kid and a 60 year old with arthritis aren't really motivated to fight, unless you threaten them with death. Suddenly, they'll fight, until they can find a place to surrender. The German infantry was no slouch. A nation of 60 million people doesn't take over an entire continent and hold off the Allied onslaught as long as they did with shitty infantry.The US, English, and Canadian armies only fought around one fifth of what Germany could bring to a fight. The other 4/5ths were on the eastern front desperately trying to hold back the Russians. ETA: When you study from the German perspective it is actually absolutely amazing they were able to hold out as long as they did considering what little they had to work with by '44. The fact they were able to even assemble a force to launch the battle of the bulge is pretty amazing considering the Luftwaffe was almost non-existent by that time and allied fighters and bombers were pounding their railways, factories, roads, and any troop formation they saw. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:03:02 AM EDT
[#45]
My grandpa was a Korean era veteran, but all of his older brothers were in WWII. They were considered among the biggest guys around at their time; one was a boxer in the U.S. Navy 5th fleet, and was supposedly one of the best. I think they were all around 6'2 and 195. Today, there are a TON of guys that would physically dominate them. In WWII, the average recruit was something like 5'8 and 140 lbs. Probably something like the average 14 year old now.
Somewhere I read, that by every statistic (amount of ground held, number of enemy killed, etc) that per man, the German Wehrmacht dominated every other nation on earth during WWII. Another factor I would consider important to the German's ability: they were used to fighting in the face adversity and holding it together when they were severely outnumbered and things weren't going their way. How would most modern Americans handle being on the losing end of a fight, outnumbered, and with no hope of rescue other than their own two legs and the guy next to them? Not that I'm questioning the fortitude of our soldiers but that would be a different game than kicking someone's ass with total dominance of the skies and a huge force disparity like we've had in pretty much any conflict since WWII and to a lesser extent Korea. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:25:39 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How would most modern Americans handle being on the losing end of a fight, outnumbered, and with no hope of rescue other than their own two legs and the guy next to them? Not that I'm questioning the fortitude of our soldiers but that would be a different game than kicking someone's ass with total dominance of the skies and a huge force disparity like we've had in pretty much any conflict since WWII and to a lesser extent Korea. I think you should study more about Iraq and Afghanistan. Battles like Fallujah, 73 Easting, Debecka pass, Medina Ridge, Bagdad, and Kamdesh will show you what modern forces do when they are outnumbered and taking a hit. The short answer is that they keep kicking ass taking names until the enemy is either dead or runs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:29:33 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think you should study more about Iraq and Afghanistan. Battles like Fallujah, 73 Easting, Debecka pass, Medina Ridge, Bagdad, and Kamdesh will show you what modern forces do when they are outnumbered and taking a hit. The short answer is that they keep kicking ass taking names until the enemy is either dead or runs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How would most modern Americans handle being on the losing end of a fight, outnumbered, and with no hope of rescue other than their own two legs and the guy next to them? Not that I'm questioning the fortitude of our soldiers but that would be a different game than kicking someone's ass with total dominance of the skies and a huge force disparity like we've had in pretty much any conflict since WWII and to a lesser extent Korea. I think you should study more about Iraq and Afghanistan. Battles like Fallujah, 73 Easting, Debecka pass, Medina Ridge, Bagdad, and Kamdesh will show you what modern forces do when they are outnumbered and taking a hit. The short answer is that they keep kicking ass taking names until the enemy is either dead or runs. They didn't run at 73 Easting. But they did all die, every one of them who tried to stand toe to toe with us. And that was 25 years ago. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:32:48 AM EDT
[#48]
The WW2 guys win.
They aren't "the greatest generation" for nutting... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:35:58 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The WW2 guys win. They aren't "the greatest generation" for nutting... Please justify that. They were barely peer with anyone of that time. Now, there is no army in the world that would give us a fight longer than a week, or perhaps a month. It's difficult to comprehend just how far we've come, we're too close to it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:46:13 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They didn't run at 73 Easting. But they did all die, every one of them who tried to stand toe to toe with us. And that was 25 years ago. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How would most modern Americans handle being on the losing end of a fight, outnumbered, and with no hope of rescue other than their own two legs and the guy next to them? Not that I'm questioning the fortitude of our soldiers but that would be a different game than kicking someone's ass with total dominance of the skies and a huge force disparity like we've had in pretty much any conflict since WWII and to a lesser extent Korea. I think you should study more about Iraq and Afghanistan. Battles like Fallujah, 73 Easting, Debecka pass, Medina Ridge, Bagdad, and Kamdesh will show you what modern forces do when they are outnumbered and taking a hit. The short answer is that they keep kicking ass taking names until the enemy is either dead or runs. They didn't run at 73 Easting. But they did all die, every one of them who tried to stand toe to toe with us. And that was 25 years ago. Thus my point good Sir. Even though US forces were greatly outnumbered by Saddam's best trained, most loyal , bravest, and well equipped soldiers the 2nd armored calvary regiment absolutely destroyed that entire division. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
