Posted on 06/21/2007 7:37:25 AM PDT by SShultz460
Long-range ASW patrol aircraft are, for the most part, worthless unless a boat decides to crank up some RPMs.
Yes, but back then the damage was impressive. Its replacement must be great.
In theory, yes. In practice, things work a bit differently.
I was thinking much the same thing, actually.
LOL! Men on boomers? Whodathunkit?
Thankfully, that particular suicide weapon went the way of steam-powered torpedoes and the Mk 117 FCS.
No navy in the world could devastate the US Navy in the first day of battle - not even the Rooskies. i also think some 688 drivers would have a thing or two to say about who got close to their protected asset.
There was no replacement for SUBROC. SeaLance was fooled around with for awhile, but nothing ever came of it.
Gurnard, ssn-662
A Small Nuke makes a whole fleet vulnerable. In any all out dust up with China all our surface fleet will be destroyed in one fell swoop. They have publicly said as much by the way.
No, not a real war, a feel good, limited war was launched. Every limited action since Korea has been a disaster.
Think Faluja, then think Patton, or MacArthur, or Churchill.
An individual’s perception of the “reality” of a war is directly proportional to their likely hood of getting killed or injured.
If there was a man in the White House, this stupid police action in Iraq would have been over in a few days. War is Hell. Putting men in vulnerable vehicles to be potshot by a bunch of nutso's is not a war. Having a King's line in any war is stoopid. Korea, Vietnam, being the worst examples. Had Truman not wimped out to the State Department, we would not have a China problem today, same with Russia, if we had let Patton and Churchill do what they knew to be right, The Commie State Department that FDR had installed were protecting their friends. Macarthy was correct.
True. Very true.
(But it was intended as a Hillary!™ bi-itch slap)
Source?
ping
1. It tied down resources that would have allowed Nazi Germany to hold the Russians off. Freeper LS presents an analysis in his book America's Victories that shows the Battle of Kursk would almost certainly have gone to the Germans if they had been able to devote their Reich Defense resources to the Eastern Front. Note that about 1 million men served in the Luftwaffe's anti-aircraft gun units alone. What difference could a million troops have made on the steppes of Russia, or in Normandy in the Summer of '44? In a sense, there were two fronts in Europe years before D-Day, and the Western Front was in the skies above the Reich.
2. Damage to Germany's production capability was often far underestimated because German efforts to increase production made up for the damage. In his last book, The Bomber War Robin Neillands backs that up, and notes that in the early years of the war, when England and America were already running their factories around the clock, Germans were still working one ten hour shift. As the bombing offensive destoyed production capability, they went to round the clock and brought in slave labor.
3. The P-51 destroyed the Luftwaffe. Most importantly, it brought them to a point where they had plenty of planes, but their pilots were dying so quickly that replacements got little or no training. No strategic bombing, no P-51. No P-51, no deep excursions into Germany, leaving the Luftwaffe able to provide tactical support on the Western Front after D-Day, or (as previously mentioned) in the East where it would have made all the difference.
Now, that said, the idea that the bomber could bring a nation to its knees on its own was not feasible...but the bomber did win the war in Europe, just as surely as the ASW forces did.
a passion of mine to get on a sub..........I’ve single handed a 33 hans christian ketch from Ca to Hawaii and back
but a ride on a sub would be a dream fullfilled
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.