It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Again the defending Panther changed his position. After an hour, the second Panther returned from being resupplied and took up his defensive position. The enemy hadn’t given up their attempt to enter the city. During the afternoon, the enemy with an infantry battalion supported by four SU assault guns, under cover of the tall corn fields, tried twice to break in from the southeast. But, both attacks were completely repulsed by the two defending Panthers. All four SU assault guns that took part in both of these attacks were shot up. Two Panthers defending the city from the south and southeast had broke up two tank and two infantry attacks. The enemy suffered the loss of eleven tanks and very heavy losses of men.
When compared to the eastern front...Germany vs Russia..The OP is correct...
Originally posted by rlever1
Possibly the most ignorant, stupidest post EVER in ATS...I mean wow..loss for words really..Thank God idiots like you cannot re-write the history books (and perhaps you should go actually READ a few.)
Waste of time thread.
Originally posted by Evolutionsend
Soviets pushed the Germans back to regain their own border, and didn't push very far. The Americans helped push back the entire European theater, and met the Soviets at Berlin. Who covered more ground?
Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
The Panther was by far the most feared tank in WW2. They were responsible for so many deaths, per vehicle, that it was really kind of pathetic that no one could do anything about it. They also were more than capable of leaving a road.
Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by Essan
Many, not sure if it was a majority, of the allied senior officers, especially Gen. Patton; felt that the Western Allies should have pushed on to Berlin, if not further. Churchill was probably in agreement with that, but Roosevelt was not, or his cabinet was not. Probably his cabinet, since by then Roosevelt was dying by inches, and may or may not have been in control of his White House.
It's an interesting subject for discussion. What would Europe, the world even; look like had the Western Allies not stopped?
Originally posted by hudsonhawk69
I agee... America didn't do nearly as much as they claim during ww2. They couldn't even start on time... The twats were more than 12 months late for the begining of the war!!! Even then the good ole U.S. of A. only cared about the war because the Japanese bombed the piss out of Pearl Habour. (How embarassing!)
Somethings never change...
Even now America gives little to no recoginition to those nations who have made the war in Iraq possible by lending their support.
COME ON PEOPLE... THE HUMVEE WAS DESIGNED BY A KIWI!!!
In total, the US deliveries through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386[28] of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans);[29] 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras)[30] and 1.75 million tons of food.[31]