Re: RP Trees was Re: [OT] Sea Leopard

I stand corrected.  Sorry to all, especially Mr. Gill.

3B^2

>From: Mark Reindl <mreindl@pacbell.net>
>Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>Subject: Re: RP Trees was Re: [OT] Sea Leopard
>Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 21:12:37 -0700
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:04:24 -0700 "Brian Bilderback"
> > <bbilderback@hotmail.com> writes:
> > <snip>
> > >Let's see.  My blanket statement was that MOST terrain in the
pacific
> > >wasn't
> > >suited for LARGE-SCALE tank combat.  Other than exceptions like
Korea
> > >and
> > >Manchuria, most of the pacific WAS pretty jungle-clad, no?  Or
maybe
> > >I'm
> > >hallucinating all those trees in places like the Phillipines....
> > >
> > >3B^2
> > >
>
>Here I go again.......
>
>There were actually more places suited for tank combat in the Pacific
than
>you might think.  True, places like Guadalcanal and the interior of the
>Philippines were ill-suited for tank use, but tanks saw plenty of use
(and 
>to
>a greater or lesser extent, success) on islands such as Iwo Jima (great

>place
>for flame tanks), Saipan, Pelileu, and Okinawa.  IIRC, even Tarawa
(Betio)
>saw limited use of tanks.  They were necessarily used in a great battle
of
>maneuver and speed as they were in Europe, but were ideally suited for
>blasting Japanese bunkers and strongpoints that couldn't be knocked out

>with
>aerial bombs or the arcing fire the battlewagons and cruisers.
>
>Mark
>

_________________________________________________________________