Which weapon could best helped Germany?
Rolling Barrage Tactics,
Or a vastly superior Airplane.
keeping america neutral
Tanks, lots of Tanks!!…
Germany in WWI had a huge need for a mobile machine gun. The 140 lb MG 08 was not friendly to troop movements. The Germans stripped down the MG 08 in 1918 in preparation of breaking the Western Front and could only reduce it to 80 to 100lbs.
I’d say self-propelled artillery. On both sides, breakthroughs tended to grind to a halt once the advancing troops got beyond the range of their artillery support.
Artillery mounted tactical nukes, AR-15’s and Helicopters.
Artillery mounted tactical nukes, AR-15’s and Helicopters.
Gar, you always think of the best things! :-D
If Germany had more soldiers and a better ally they would have won. They inflicted nearly 3 times the casualties on the allies. If they would have had more troops they would have been able to defeat France sooner ending the war. German artillery was vastly superior to anything the allies had. If any of you guys have the chance read Myth of the Great War by Mosier. It is awesome and a real eye opener.
If Germany had more soldiers and a better ally they would have won. They inflicted nearly 3 times the casualties on the allies. If they would have had more troops they would have been able to defeat France sooner ending the war. German artillery was vastly superior to anything the allies had. If any of you guys have the chance read Myth of the Great War by Mosier. It is awesome and a real eye opener.
Germany held the western Allies in check, while dealing the Russians defeat after defeat, all the while keep two dead allies in the War. And the Kaiser’s armies also captured Serbia and Romania. The Kaiser had a much better chance of victory than Hitler ever did.
What about an independantly targetting particle beam phalanx?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHYGgOXww48
VWHAP! Fry half a city with that puppy…
Phase Plasma Pulse Rifles? RPG’s? Sharp Sticks? Foul Language? :D
@ABWorsham:
The Kaiser had a much better chance of victory than Hitler ever did.
On the other hand, note that Hitler managed to defeat France in six weeks, something which the Kaiser failed to do in four years, and that he accomplished this at a cost in German casualties (I think it was about 60,000 dead) that looks trivial compared to the number of troops who were killed during various major WWI battles.
Yea but the Kaiser also defeated Russia… whilst still at war with France.
I’m sure hitler would have accepted that in Trade. :P
Yea but the Kaiser also defeated Russia… whilst still at war with France. I’m sure hitler would have accepted that in Trade.
I’m sure he would have taken that trade too, though the irony is that part of the credit for Kaiser Wilhelm’s victory in Russia goes to the Bolsheviks who overthrew the Tsar and made peace with Germany. As I recall, Germany even helped them do this by allowing Lenin to travel by train through Germany (from Switzerland to Russia) during the February 1917 Revolution.
LOL… That is Irony…
Also, didn’t the Czasrists let the Communists and criminals out of jail to fight the Germans? To then only have them of course turn coat?
Also, didn’t the Czasrists let the Communists and criminals out of jail to fight the Germans? To then only have them of course turn coat?
I hadn’t heard that one. It’s certainly possible because the pressures of war can make governments do strange things. When Germany invaded the USSR in 1941, Stalin’s government basically flung open the doors of the churches (after years of anti-clericalism) and happily allowed people to draw divine inspiration for their struggle against the Fascist hordes. You can see an example in Frank Capra’s film “The Battle of Russia” (a movie which Stalin very much liked), which at one point shows a service in a Russian Orthodox church while the narrator talks about “men of God praying for victory” and a title card quotes Sergius, who was elected Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia in 1943 with Stalin’s, um, blessings.
@CWO:
Yea but the Kaiser also defeated Russia… whilst still at war with France. I’m sure hitler would have accepted that in Trade.
I’m sure he would have taken that trade too, though the irony is that part of the credit for Kaiser Wilhelm’s victory in Russia goes to the Bolsheviks who overthrew the Tsar and made peace with Germany. As I recall, Germany even helped them do this by allowing Lenin to travel by train through Germany (from Switzerland to Russia) during the February 1917 Revolution.Â
Lennin had no choice, by 1917, in resisting the Germans. He had to sign a peace treaty, giving up the ‘bread basket’ of the Russian Empire. Had he not, the German Army would marched into St. Petersburg and Moscow and got a much bigger piece of the Empire.
John Keegan, in The First World War suggested that the large amount of land the Germans took from Russia save the Allies the following year. The Germans had to leave such a vast amount of men in the East to police and gather material. Had the Germans added these hundreds of thousands of men into the storm that they were to unleash on the British Fifth Army the Allies may have sued for peace.
Thanks Worsham and others. WW1 not in my military history knowledge, so have been following you all without commenting. I had understood the Germans’ 1918 offensive nearly worked. I think the US’ arrival on the Western Front, therefore, probably tipped the balance against them.
