Search results

  1. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    Actually, most of the Linebacker II strikes were singletons. Even today the B-52 operates in three plane cells at the most.
  2. What if the death camps had been in the West?

    Quite correct. The othe primary targets were Communists & Slavs. Those were found in the East, so it was sensible to move to the mountain, rather than move the mountain to you. There is also the question of cost. The Reich NEVER intended to hold France permanently, save for the security zone...
  3. Japan forced to accept reality of its crimes

    Fair enough. As you say, each culture is different. It is, however, very difficult to see through the eyes of others. I didn't intend to cause this level of upset. My apologies.
  4. Japan forced to accept reality of its crimes

    I hope not, especially since I'm 1/2 slavic by ancestory. The point I was trying to make was that Japan violated basic international code, not because of some perverted teaching enforced by a single group of wack-jobs, but because it simply couldn't be bothered to follow treaties it had...
  5. Japan forced to accept reality of its crimes

    Cultural or not, the result is the same. Million of Japanese of this generation have been taught that the U.S. bombed the hell out of Japan, including nuking the country without ANY context. Now, the day they stop teaching about Hiroshima, and stop trotting out the last few pitiful survivors...
  6. Japan forced to accept reality of its crimes

    You rather gloss over the certral point, that the average Japanese student ISN'T TAUGHT about the crimes of Japan, just that Japan was firebombed and nuked. I won't go into great detail as to the War crimes committed by the IJA, but of all the countries that you mention in your post, Japan is...
  7. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    Even in the pre-"High Tech" era bombers cost several times the cost of a fighter. A four engine bomber cost much more than 4 single engine fighters You actually DO need state of the art in your bombers. You pretty much want the planes to return for reuse, otherwise you would be using rockets...
  8. WI No Bombing Civ Targets in WWII

    Short answer - Yes Slightly longer answer - Without the effort put into building massive number of four engine bombers, you could also have put a number of escort carriers, each with a half dozen F4F/TBF into service. The Bomber Offensive was very expensive, both in men and material.
  9. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    The point is that no other country HAS bombers. This has been the case for a generation. Many countries drop bombs, but all of them use modified fighter or "ground attack" aircraft in a tactical bombing role. A few countries have some obsolete 1950's design light bombers (India & the PRC are the...
  10. WI No Bombing Civ Targets in WWII

    Once sufficient B-24's became available, the Liberator became a very capable U-boat predator. They were quite manuverable at low level for such a large aircraft and armed to the teeth. More than one U-Boat was caught on the surface and strafed to pieces by B-24 ball turret & tail gunners...
  11. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    A few minor points. The Afghan situation is a difficult example to show the usage of massive bombing. The USSR controlled the major cities & frankly lacked the capability to conventionally bomb on a massive scale. The TU-95 is also not really a comparable platform to the B-52 as it was never...
  12. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    Nukes are pretty unlikely, if for no other reason than they are not needed. If you can drop 60,000,000(:eek: ) pounds of bombs (60k lb x 1000 aircraft) per raid a nuke is sort of excess to needs. :p
  13. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    Not really. With the Traid Strategy more or less gone (along with MAD) the U.S. has more or less taken the gloves off regarding ECM, although most SAM systems the U.S. has encountered since the end of the Cold War haven't belonged to the 1st Team (unlike the SA-2 systems that the NVA was using...
  14. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    Shooting down bombers may be easy if you are in a SU-35, MIG-31, F-15 or Eurofighter and your AWACS has steered you to the target. If not, its a bitch. Problem with MANPADS is the effective range and engagement envelope. They are very effective against helos, somewhat effective against...
  15. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    This statement is so far out of reality that it is stunning. To start with you seem to assume that the only POSSIBLE target of U.S. attack are Arab Islamic states. No doubt this will be greeted with considerable joy by the Democratic Republic of Korea and The People's Republic of China, and with...
  16. What if the United States still belived in Mass Bombings.

    1st we would need to build 900 more B-1's, thereby bankrupting the country & making it impossible to buy bombs. This would make the raid more or less a waste.:p IF this was done it would be the same as a 15,000 plane (B-17/24) raid since each B-1 can carry 15x the bombload of a B-17 over...
  17. Better Iranian Tactics During Praying Mantis

    True, except the SAMs in use by Iran in 1988 were 1) extremely vulnerable to EMC & 2) so short ranged that they were effectively helpless vs. American weapons of the same era. This is demonstrated by the effectiveness of Iraqi SAMs vs. UK/U.S. forces during the "no-fly" period. Those systems...
  18. Can England Win the HYW?

    Not really. England, as a country, and the English, as a people from that country, were already seen as the enemy & as outsiders well before the end of the HYW. Can't loot the countryside for the better part of the century, proclaiming yourself as being ENGLISH and speaking the foreign...
  19. Can England Win the HYW?

    Short answer is NO. One primary reason is the rise of national, as opposed to tribal (e.g. Saxon, Norman) identities. A second is the ending of the feudal system as the 15th century progressed.
Top