Why did Americans fight so badly in WW2? They literally zerg-rushed

This is also true for Britain desu

Fighting Italy was proper bant tho

>Why did Americans fight so badly in WW2?
They didn't.

ITT /int/ memes

>>1801502
They did, even Germans themselves wrote how Americans were inferior opponents compared to Soviets (but numerous and well supplied).
Now that I think of it only wars Americans ever won where either coalition efforts were they played a secondary role or when they fought outnumbered and inferior opponents.

This is bait but there is some truth to it.

The problem was mainly that they had very little combat veterans compared to every other fighting nation.

Also to be fair to the Germans war on the Western Front was what their military was built for. NO ONE would have had an easy time even with most of their resources and best committed to the East.

>>1801491
>They literally zerg-rushed the outnumbered and inexperienced reserve German troops yet it still took them almost a year

You think that's bad?
During the Napoleonic Wars, the British literally zerg-rushed the outnumbered and inexperienced reserve French troops in Spain yet it still took them six years to "win" (actually they didnt win shit, but Napoleon had been defeated by Russians and Germans who took Paris in 1814 so the war ended)

>>1801569
>yet another 'b-but britain in the napoleonic wars!'

why are americans so bitter everyone looks down on their military history

File: 1475719973384.jpg (45KB, 697x485px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 697x485px

>>1801569
Yeah, but we got a pretty fucking solid show from it.

>>1801579
>Americans beat the british
>beat spanish
>beat germany twice, liberated france in WW2
>beat soviet union
>strongest country in the world

>>1801491
>inexperienced
Hahaha, no. All the guys that fought on the Eastern front got rotated to the West.

>>1801590
what show

File: Greatest bloody show of all time.jpg (671KB, 1622x1610px) Image search: [Google]

671KB, 1622x1610px

>>1801618

>>1801517

>either coalition efforts were they played a secondary role or when they fought outnumbered and inferior opponents.

pretty natural for a nation that is large and rich that hasn't had a reason in 150 years to fight a war on it's own soil

>>1801491
they were fighting an enemy who is always on the defensive with their specific strategy being to fight a defensive warfare

>>1801517
>even Germans themselves wrote how Americans were inferior opponents compared to Soviets

Source? Every naziboo says this but is never able to provide an actual source, seems like a horseshit claim.

>>1801625
HERE'S FORTY SHILLINGS ON THE DRUM

>>1801590
fuck you hakeswill get out of my show rrrrrreeeeeeee

>>1801669
>We were used to an opponent the stature of the Russians; we were amazed at the contrast. During the war, I have never saw soldiers disperse head over heels even though virtually nothing was happening.
>Five Russians were more dangerous than Thirty Americans. We already noticed that in our few days in the western front.
>Again the pace of the war surprised me, the Russians would never have let us have so much time! The Americans took so long to close the pocket, especially given that nobody around wanted to fight anymore. A well organized German corps could have closed the pocket in a week.

From Otto Carius

>>1801604
>Americans beat the British
no. The Spanish and French did.
>beat spanish
every nation under the sun has beaten spain
>beat germany twice
AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA
>beat Soviet Union
what
>strongest country in the world
Only through nukes and economically

>>1801491
because America's real military power is its navy

>>1801674
FOR THOSE WHO VOLUNTEER TO COME

>>1801682
Except nothing there is relevant to what was originally stated.

Yea, Russians fought with more desperation, zeal, and hatred than the americans. The Western front was definitely slower.

That says nothing for actual troop or tactical quality.

>>1801682
>A well organized German corps could have closed the pocket in a week.

COULDA
WOULDA
SHOULDA
YEE HAW OTTO

>>1801682
>A well organized German corps could have closed the pocket in a week.

Yes I'm sure the military force that still relies on horses would be much quicker than the largest and most mechanized army on earth at the time. This dude is delusional and his anecdotal quote doesn't match reality.

>>1801690
>implyingamericans did nothing the revolutionary war
>implying didn't america saved europe from
germany
>we won the cold war
>implying our army isn't the biggest in the world

>>1801954
>implying america didn't save europe from Germany

80% of German casualties were on the Eastern Front.

3/5 of the armies landing at d-day were British commonwealth.

The only thing I'll give you credit for is Japan, but the brits fought a large chunk in Burma.

>>1801496
Fuck that, you wanna see banter? Take a look at a list of world war 2 flying aces. The soviet air force would just fly in formation and wouldn't bother evading attackers at all. The Germans just gunned their planes down in the hundreds effortlessly. You don't hear much about the German vs Russian air war, because it was so horribly one-sided.

>>1801969
>ignoring cash and carry

>>1801975
Maybe in 1941
By 1943, Soviets had air superiority and their planes were comparable to the german ones

>>1801695
No, it's their air force. Something like 13,000 jets, no other county comes close.

>>1801983
Well yeah when Germans were tucking their tails between their legs and running of course Russian planes could just go to town on retreating forces.

>>1801990
>Well yeah when Russians were tucking their tails between their legs and running of course German planes could just go to town on retreating forces.

>>1802008
Damn were the russians really on the retreat the second they started fighting the Germans?

cykas btfo

>>1801975
I genuinely cannot tell if this is bait or not.

They only detterances were

>italy
Airborne

>kessarine
Africa core

>bulge
Fog

They did well against reserves.

>>1802022
That's the account of the top German ace who fought against the soviets in the early years of the war, he didn't really seem to like bragging about it because it was apparently so easy.

>>1802019
They didn't actually expect an attack and Stalin even refused to believe the reports from the front.
By the time an actual defensive plan was made, it was already too late. Most of the soviet airforce was wiped out in the first hours.

>>1802024
The US army fought the best of the SS and wermacht. So i would say they did well against all the entire Germany military. The US airforce also had air superiority for the entire Western European campaign.

File: 1473028267546.jpg (21KB, 570x570px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 570x570px

>>1802047
>Most of the soviet airforce was wiped out in the first hours.

>>1802059
It's pretty impressive how much of a clusterfuck the entire soviet front was. No wonder Hitler became so confident that he could win.
Stalin was even prepared to parlay with Hitler in 1941 autumn about a ceasefire but either German envoy refused or he was talked out of it by Stavka. I can't really remember.

File: 7888786.jpg (32KB, 599x563px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 599x563px

>>1801491
>They fought starved and badly equipped Japanese and still suffered numerous reverses and it took them several years despite having massive superiority in every area.

kek literally the opposite is true though, the shifty Japs only had success when they initially launched their surprise invasions of the Philliphines and other pacific islands, where America had a token force, or didn't even have a presence, then basically got their shit pushed in progressively harder as the war went on

>>1801618

how are you on this board if you don't know? how are you even alive? because you haven't lived until you've seen it

>>1801707

TO 'LIST AND FIGHT THE FOE TODAY

>>1802078
I would hardly call the army stationed at Philippines a ''token force''.

>>1802088
OVER THE HILLS AND FAR AWAY

>>1801682

>probably said the same shit about the Soviets earlier on

this faggot, holy kek why did they BTFO you so hard then, Otto?

>>1802103

O'ER THE HILLS AND O'ER THE MAIN

>>1802125
THROUGH FLANDERS, PORTUGAL AND SPAIN

>>1802132
KING GEORGE COMMANDS
AND WE OBEYYYYYY

>>1802157
O'ER THE HILLS AND FAR AWAY

>>1802184

WHEN DUTY CALLS ME, I MUST GO

The Americans fought terribly but at least it they weren't as bad as the British

>>1802082
Oh fuck off. Sharpe tv series is fucking shit, they butchered the books and the production values were low. Catchy music was the only redeeming feature.

>>1802201
TO STAND AND FACE ANOTHER FOE

File: sharpe_silk1.jpg (22KB, 400x326px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x326px

>>1802230
>not liking sharpe
>being british
choose one berandowski

Americans were the only guys in WW2 who could match the Germans man-for-man. Pretty much every war with America in has had them absolutely crush superior numbers of the enemy
>inb4 "but all the shit german troops went to the western front"
>inb4 "but muh burned white house"
>inb4 "but vietnam"

>>1801981
saying 'muh lend lease' is like saying the gunshop that sold a school shooter guns has the blood of children on his hands

>>1802270
putting inb4 doesn't invalidate the point, bucko

>>1802317
are you saying cash and carry wasn't crucial to ally victory on the western front?

>>1802344
stop putting words in my mouth, i'm saying it doesn't mean america 'beat germany'. I ask you to recognize it was a combination of efforts between many countries.

>>1802344


Not even him, but Cash and Carry was nothing. A tiny drop, and most of that went to the British, not even the Soviets. Lend Lease was way, way more important than a program primarily designed to pretend to be neutral but in fact favor the British.

>>1802250
>not liking sharpe
I liked the books. Just not the tv series.

ITT: OP has opinion based on pure conjecture and is hiding an obvious agenda

Move along people, it's a bait thread

It's because Americans are inferior. Weakest escaped to colonies.

Zero experience, lots of confidence.

>>1801517
>They did, even Germans themselves wrote how Americans were inferior opponents compared to Soviets (but numerous and well supplied).

no, they didn't.

>>1802270
Americans took 2:1 casualties against germany on the western front

>>1803432

You're joking, right?

Please tell me you're joking and you're not just retarded.

>>1801491
Arracourt

>>1801491
Cobra

>>1801491
Bastonge

File: Monseur brannigan.jpg (70KB, 997x759px)

70KB, 997x759px

>>1801491
Bait thread.
>They literally zerg-rushed the outnumbered and inexperienced reserve German troops yet it still took them almost a year and they suffered several reverses in the process, getting humiliated many times by a numerically and qualitatively inferior enemy.

Objectively wrong. American troops performed well given the terrain they had to fight in.
The biggest hinderance to a fast and decisive obliteration of germany on the western front were overstretched supply lines, cautious commanders and the big fat fuck up called Hürtgen Forest.
While Market Garden and Monty got all the spotlight for giving Ivan too much of Europe, nobody ever bothers to look at Omar Bradley and his ingenuity in fucking up.
He basically ran several divisions against a hard to navigate terrain and wasted lots of materiél, troops and time in cracking a pointless defensive line.
What did he got out of it. Motherfucking Aachen.
So if you look for the guy to blame for many american casualties in the european theater, go to Omar 'Let's wast some men' Bradley.

>The germans? A trifle. It was simply a matter of outsmarting them.
>"You see, germans have a have only limited ammuniton. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them until they reached their limit and surrendered. Ike, show them the medal I won."

>>1801969
And the brits and Canadians had the easier landings beaches too

We didnt. We annihilated the germans, check out the falaise pocket. And how did we do badly against the japs? They wouldnt surrender, every inch of ground had to be fought for, and yet casualty ratios were still in our favor. Butthurt eurocucks need to spend less time rewriting history and more time removing kebab.

>>1802243
WHEN DUTY CALLS ME I MUST GO

>>1803543
Damn it, I mean

BUT IN MY HEART ILL ALWAYS STRAY

>>1803435
not an argument

>>1801491

They tended to fight badly the first time they saw action, and improved from there on as they gained exp.. Late war US had good tactics.

The Germans and Japs pretty much saw continuous combat throughout the war so by the time they met had more xp and better levels.

File: Citadel.webm (3MB, 1000x562px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1000x562px

Max Hasting's Armageddon: The Battle for Germany, 1944-1945 sums it up the best

Soviets: Experienced from 3 years of fighting the Germans, locked in a ideological death spiral war.

British: A talented soldiering army led by piss poor command that was doing the opposite of ww1 this time around. Indecisive, very unwilling to take risks, and when they did make gambles, they blamed their allies for failiures

Americans: Gifted Amateurs prone to making basic battlefield mistakes, but between total air superiority and untouched manufacturing base, made up for field errors. Leadership was hampered by having to play politics with the British.

Germans: Tenacious fighters, extremely talented and shockingly high morale-wise even into the last weeks of the war, commanded by talented generals with a weakness to obey their oath to and increasingly delusional Hitler (No I am not spouting off the tired HITLER WAS A CORPORAL meme. He literally made Himmler an Army Group Commander) and placed under extreme war making pressures by the Anglo-American air superiority.

>>1801491
>They literally zerg-rushed
Gamer kid unlikely to listen to people who know things.
Command of resources is a huge thing. Japanese didn't grow fast enough to command enough resources, Germany mismanaged everything. The japanese were pushed by sanctions into a war they knew they wouldn't win and performed well down to the section level.
Hitler made himself the top five levels of the chain of command, not a good move.

The most important things in mid-20th century warfare were logistics, mechanization air superiority and artillery, all of which the US forces had in spades. Having the most l33t soldiers and the best machine gun or whatever doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

>>1803728

You don't use an argument to reject a false claim of fact, Stefbot.

File: 1421417284537.png (89KB, 500x500px)

89KB, 500x500px

>>1801502
>>1801502
Look up the battle of the hürtgen forest moron

>>1801502
/thread

The US managed a positive kill ratio despite being the invaders and attacking across well prepared defenses.

>>1803494
Juno was at least as heavily defended as Omaha and probably

>>1801491
cause america's strength has always been it's numbers and superior material. the union army was a joke compared to the confederate, but had an industrial economy of scale to fight until the South exhausted.

>>1801690
the best way to win is to not fight at all. get someone else to do the fighting for you. Do you not understand that has been the English speaking world's strategy for the last 300 years? Why do you think they are on top? Cause they didn't kill off all their fighting men in wars. The tricked everyone else into doing that.

File: Americans attacked Hurtgen those absolute madmen!.jpg (34KB, 557x765px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 557x765px

>mfw Bradley decides to casually march an army into the same forests that Varus marched into 2000 years prior.

>>1804062
Same sort of forests*

Mostly because they had to fight side by side with the British. Shame really.

File: nov25missionaryridge1.png (762KB, 1233x826px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 1233x826px

>>1803963
>the union army was a joke compared to the confederate

apologize.

>>1804136
It was t.bh

>>1804136
The union lost almost every battle but won the war because of

1. Superior production

2. Endless supply of immigrants

>>1803814
>>1803846
>german generals did nothing wrong, it was all hitler's fault
t. german general

>>1804207

>The union lost almost every battle

But that's wrong.

>>1804253

http://iss.schoolwires.com/cms/lib4/NC01000579/Centricity/Domain/3240/Civil%20War%20Battles%20Chart.pdf

Read the battle results. A majority end in southern favor.

The south could have won all the battles, but 7 million southerners vs 21 million northerners with endless supply of irish immigrants and industry could never win.