The article then went on to list a number of Russian weapons systems which were clearly superior to their US counterparts when those even existed. The US definitely has the quantitative advantage, but in terms of quality and training, Russia is way ahead. So what is going on here? Why do otherwise very well informed people have such totally contradictory views?
Interwar Could ww2 be prevented essay example The Vickers Carden-Lloyd tankette seemed a cheap and efficient way to mass-produce armoured vehicles, and to experiment with fully motorized units on a tactical and operational level.
First produced in and largely exported and built under licence throughout the world, it was one of the most serious attempts to built a truly mechanized army. Fast, lightweight and agile, it was designed to carry a single Bren machine-gun, two personnel and some material and could sustain only infantry fire During WWI the tank was first used with mixed success, but its deployment was aimed at cleaning up enemy lines with more precision than a massive artillery barrage.
Tanks were also followed closely by infantry, staying with them during the breakthrough, mostly to deal with machine-gun nests.
This tactic was developed and refined at a steady pace by both the British and the French, and three classes of tanks were defined. Infantry tanks were well-armed and well protected but utterly slow infantry pace. Cavalry tanks were, on the contrary, very fast and agile, but lightly protected and with weak armament.
They were used for scouting operations and advancing deep behind enemy lines. All these tanks types were spread among infantry formations, attached to them as well as supporting artillery units. No really independent mechanized corps concept was defined, at least until the beginning of WWII.
Inthis was the main tactical vision favored by the Allies.
Some British theoreticians and officers like Liddel Hart and J. Fuller were attached to the first tank units during the First World War, and quickly grasped all their potential. Both were published and acquired some fame among German officers, including Manstein and Guderian. The Christie tank suspensions were revolutionary, and fast armored columns were put to the test prior towith Bren Carriers and light Carden-Lloyd tankettes.
However this was not describing a tank tactic, but rather a whole combined arms strategy, and was put in practice with a master principle: This strategy involved several steps: The Blitzkrieg is triggered before the breaking of diplomatic relationships.
Military airfields are the first to be attacked; most of the enemy air forces have to be destroyed before even taking off. Paratroopers or glider-airborne commandos seize by night all the bridges, com centers and other valuable targets.
At noon, the ground assault begins. A spearhead of tanks followed by mechanized infantry, closely supported by the air force. The mechanized spearhead makes a breakthrough and deep penetration in enemy lines. The main forces, still intact, are outflanked, outmaneuvered and surrounded.
Following this mechanized fast assault, regular troops arrive with artillery, to deal with the last resistance pockets. These steps required very well -trained and well-equipped mechanized, supplied and well-armed infantry and tank units, flexibility, a fast decision-making process and a perfect communication capability at all times and at all operational levels.
Terror was another way to obtain capitulation, by pressuring the civilian population while bombarding major cities. This kind of offensive however, proved so successful that, in time, a myth emerged of German invincibility, which was not to prove true in the long run.
Although both Allied camps -west and east- had to push forward an immense industrial capacity and large numbers of men to win, the Allies also learned to use almost similar tactics to forge their own successes. US General Patton for example, showed probably the best Allied version of it, being instrumental in the rapid breakthrough from Normandy to the Rhine.Perhaps the other side will say that had the US gotten involved earlier, the war could have been prevented.
You should have a counter-argument to that. Sometimes, it's more important to have a response to the other side than it is to have your own distinct position.
World War II could have been prevented if The League of Nations would have stepped in when Adolf Hitler was taking over territory.
If The Treaty of Versailles wasn't so hard on Germany by blaming them on the cause of the war. How could WWII have been avoided? Update Cancel. Answer Wiki. 38 Answers. In a essay, WW2 could’ve been prevented, just that another less brutal war might’ve taken its place and the world changed.
NOTE: I tried to make it as realistic as possible. Maybe the Allies might not have sided with Germany but it was highly probable at. After being taken down twice by Blogger within a single week, we got the message: It’s Time To Go.
Gates of Vienna has moved to a new address. "The story of oil is the story of the modern world. And this is the story of those who helped shape that world, and how the oil-igarchy they created is on the verge of monopolizing life itself.".
In this essay, we will discuss how and why realists would also blame Germany for the war. WWI was known as the Great war before WW2 happened as it was supposed to be the war to end all wars. But Germany has also guilt to bear. She could have prevented the world war on three fronts, if she had not waited so long.