This ought to start a good discussion. Hopefully it won't disentigrate into a flame war.
The following is from "A Genuis For War, The German Army and General Staff, 1807-1945," by Colonel T.N. Dupuy.
"On a man for man basis, the German ground soldiers consistently inflicted casualties at about a 50 percent higher rate than they incurred from the opposing British and American troops under all circumstances. This was true when they were attacking and when they were defending, when they had a local numerical superiority and when, as was usually the case, they were outnumbered, when they had air superiority and when they did not, when they won and when they lost."
True or not?
It has been suggested, by some, that the average British and American soldiers were not so much superior soldiers as they were good machine operators; machine operators who, from rifleman to pilot, won by outnumbering the enemy and delivering a greater total tonnage of ordinance upon the enemy.
True or not?
The following is from "A Genuis For War, The German Army and General Staff, 1807-1945," by Colonel T.N. Dupuy.
"On a man for man basis, the German ground soldiers consistently inflicted casualties at about a 50 percent higher rate than they incurred from the opposing British and American troops under all circumstances. This was true when they were attacking and when they were defending, when they had a local numerical superiority and when, as was usually the case, they were outnumbered, when they had air superiority and when they did not, when they won and when they lost."
True or not?
It has been suggested, by some, that the average British and American soldiers were not so much superior soldiers as they were good machine operators; machine operators who, from rifleman to pilot, won by outnumbering the enemy and delivering a greater total tonnage of ordinance upon the enemy.
True or not?
Comment