Prev: Re: Gravity Next: Re: Retrograde skirmishers

Re: Retrograde skirmishers

From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@q...>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:53:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Retrograde skirmishers

>> See the Pacific campaign, starring US subs vs Japanese
>> Even in N Atlantic, it's not that "raiders can't destroy
>> you"--the lesson was that convoys with air support can work.
>Ooooooo, mommy mommy, I just caught myself a REALLY BIG FISH!
>Okay, here's the difference between the Atlantic and the
Pacific, in simple
>The German U-Boat scare, while formidable in the early stages
of the war, was
>all but useless by the end phases.  Why?  Because they had no
other recourse
>other than the U-Boats... which meant that once the Allies
figured out how
>to sink them effectively, they were horribly ineffective.

What did the Allies sink them with--battleships? I'd say that
DD's, and even more so land-based air, would qualify as

Even had it been BB's, though, the Allies didn't win just by
figuring out how to sink them, they won by committing the
resource required.  Resources that would otherwise have gone to
the ground war.

Prev: Re: Gravity Next: Re: Retrograde skirmishers