@Caesar:
Okay then lets make a rule where Submarines can do a “raid” against factories, airfields, and ports.
Um, my point was actually to argue against such raids, not for them. I mentioned that such raids “would have been hazardous business” for the sub, and I stated various reasons for it.
To look at this from another angle, here’s a point that applies to both the concept above and to the recent discussion in another thread about AAA firing at infantry. The point is that there is often an important difference between what a real-world unit can do (capability) and what a real-world unit normally does (application) – and that when certain capabilities are not applied in a given context, there’s usually a darn good reason for it.
Let’s take a non-military example, because the above concept doesn’t just apply to military hardware. A subcompact automobile has the physical capacity to drive on a Formula One racetrack, and a Formula One racecar has the physical capacity to drive on a highway. In practical terms, however, subcompact automobiles don’t normally (if ever) drive on a Formula One racetracks, and Formula One racecars don’t normally (if ever) drive on a highway, because that’s not where they belong and because that’s not what they’re designed for and because it would create a safety hazard for them to do so. Yes, AAA guns do have the capability to shoot at infantry, and yes, submarines do have the capacity to shoot at coastal targets, and yes, these things were sometimes done during WWII. The point is that it was rarely done, and that it was rarely done for darn good reasons.