Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hoa Hao who wrote (4658)	10/27/1999 7:28:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6418

all good points. My response would be that if those resources had been exclusively devoted to tactical aircraft, fighter bombers, and these resources were used to blanket the battlefiels with fighter sweeps it would have accomplished two things. First these massive fighter waves would have chewed up Luftwaffe fighters just as quickly if not more quickly. Second it would have dominated the battlefield and totally immobilized German formations. This way when Patton's Third Army breaks out of Normandy the Germans would not have been able to reorganize and they would have been surrounded and destroyed in detail. Fwiw this is the classic blitzkreig strategy. The German's lightening victories of 39 through 41 were accomplished with next to know strategic air campaign but with a massive tactical air effort that totally dominated the battlefield and denied mobility to the enemy. in retrospect it is a question that can never be firmly answered but an interesting one to debate. Henry