Which WWII Axis nation produced most dangerous pilots?

FLYBOYJ · 05-20-2005, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

yes and how many big battles were there?? and how much of it was jungle fighting where america got their arse's kicked??

To educate you my young friend the NVA attempted twice to remove US forces from the South by force. The first time was in 1968 known as the TET offensive which ended in a military disaster for the NVA but scored a huge political victory for North Viet Nam. The second was the 1972 spring offensive where the NVA even attempted to roll tanks into SVN, and once again they got slaughtered. Nixion at the same time bombed Hanoi into oblivion.

Viet Nam was a rough go but don't be swayed by all those movies that continually show US forces getting hammered from the enigmatic Viet Cong. Although "Charlie" was a tough foe, and there were many tough large scale firefights, the US Army and Marines took care of business despite their losses, poor morale, and poor leadership from those idiots in charge of running the whole debacle. Although the whole action in my opinion was wrong, there are many who believe (and want the world to believe) that the US Military performed poorly there when in fact it was the other way around. My brother was there for 2 tours and although he doesn't talk much about it, he's a great source to seperate the fact from the BS

FLYBOYJ · 05-20-2005, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

i didn't think it was harsh at all, it was no more harsh than FB's comment............

My comment wasn't harsh Lanc, just the truth!

plan_D · 05-20-2005, 12:39 PM

The U.S did have an extremely hard time though. It wasn't a walk in the park for the U.S nor was it all Hollywood makes it out to be. I'd safely say it was a U.S disaster.

The 1972 Offensive was actually pretty impressive from the Vietcong point of view. I'm impressed with their use of armour anyway, it was quite effective. Tactically sound too but against an obviously firepower superior enemy.

The bombing of Hanoi, the most vicious bombing campaign known to man. 11 days non-stop B-52s smashed that place to pieces, with a loss of 15 B-52s.

FLYBOYJ · 05-20-2005, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plan_D

The U.S did have an extremely hard time though. It wasn't a walk in the park for the U.S nor was it all Hollywood makes it out to be. I'd safely say it was a U.S disaster.

The 1972 Offensive was actually pretty impressive from the Vietcong point of view. I'm impressed with their use of armour anyway, it was quite effective. Tactically sound too but against an obviously firepower superior enemy.

The bombing of Hanoi, the most vicious bombing campaign known to man. 11 days non-stop B-52s smashed that place to pieces, with a loss of 15 B-52s.

Thanks D - I get a little steamed when it comes to Viet Nam, and Lanc, if you think i was a bit harsh, my apologies

the lancaster kicks ass · 05-20-2005, 12:57 PM

well you cannot deny that you struggled to come with the guerilla tactics of troops that really knew the terain.......

FLYBOYJ · 05-20-2005, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

well you cannot deny that you struggled to come with the guerilla tactics of troops that really knew the terain.......

Oh Absolutely! But once "in country" many of the US soldiers learned how to deal with these disadvantages and learned a lot of dirty tricks themselves. My brother had a friend who was there a year before he was. This guy learned to move through the jungle better than the Viet Cong and was often the guy sent "over the wire" to suppress a sniper or any other problem their firebase was experiencing. My brother told me he owed his life to this fellow who taught my brother not only to fight, but to survive.

By the time the fighting ended for the US soldier in 1973 "Charlie" was figured out but not suppressed. As my brother put it, it was like trying to exterminate roaches in a dirty kitchen.

plan_D · 05-20-2005, 01:44 PM

The British forces in Burma took a while to work out how to fight in the jungle, with a year of thought they turned out to be better than the Japanese. The British carried their memories into Indonesia with them.

It seemed, with the U.S, that they had forgotten their pacific actions during World War 2. Platoon is a good movie to watch if you want to see how it was like for those learning and those that had learnt how to fight in the jungle during Vietnam.

FLYBOYJ · 05-20-2005, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plan_D

The British forces in Burma took a while to work out how to fight in the jungle, with a year of thought they turned out to be better than the Japanese. The British carried their memories into Indonesia with them.

It seemed, with the U.S, that they had forgotten their pacific actions during World War 2. Platoon is a good movie to watch if you want to see how it was like for those learning and those that had learnt how to fight in the jungle during Vietnam.

Very correct D! My brother said he lost 2 Lieutenants (West Point Grads) who wouldn't listen to the guys that were in country for awhile.

the lancaster kicks ass · 05-21-2005, 03:51 AM

yes we watched part of platoon in history.......

FLYBOYJ · 05-21-2005, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

yes we watched part of platoon in history.......

Although a good film, don't believe everything in it. My brother told me at times it was very boring and lonely, that's why many soldiers took to drugs

the lancaster kicks ass · 05-22-2005, 12:06 PM

i don't take everying in it as gospel, but i've seen allot of backround information and class works that backs up most of the true stuff in the film..........

cheddar cheese · 05-22-2005, 12:33 PM

Apparently the director of it was himself a Vietnam veteran, and all the actors were required to go through the training he did. He didnt allow them to wash either, and when they got tired and wanted to go home, thats when he decided it was time to start filming!

plan_D · 05-22-2005, 01:16 PM

Yes, Oliver Stone was a real Vietnam veteran. He filmed it out in Indonesia and made them dig the trenches, march and do exercises.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 05-22-2005, 01:38 PM

The problem with Vietnam was the Polotics. The US Army did in most cases have a military advantage over the NVG. Yes they were fighting an up until now relativly new kind of guerilla warfare but overall the US military crushed the North Vietmanese.
What killed the US was the polotics. A company of men being told to take Hill 324 and then after they took it by killing 34 VC and losing 4 of there own men in combat they are ordered to leave the hill. VC comes back and takes it all back, and what do we have: "And Next: The Taking of Hill 324 Part II!" Other factors not being allowed to bomb Hanoi or other targets until the Operation Linebackers. The whole war was a poloticians wet dream and it cost the war for the soldiers.
Now with all that said, I am not trying to make it out to be a cake walk for the US soldiers. They fought many hard battles and lost many too.

plan_D · 05-26-2005, 06:39 AM

On the first page of this thread CC asked if the FAF used the Hurricane. I never thought they did but I've seen a few profiles of Hurricanes with Finnish markings.

However the only information I've been able to find is about the FAF capturing a Hurricane IIA. Does anyone have informations on the units that used the Hurricanes delivered from Britain, if they did have any.