What If We Used Paratroops To Take Schweinfurt and Regensburg in '43?

Because wimpy men like you are just like wimpy countries that have never invented anything, never discovered anything, and always been the sidekick, or, in your case, the maid of honor.

 

"Shooterike" was another poster who didn't know how to accept criticism without an emotional meltdown.

I know your type well too.

They fight, sure, and lose. Everyone. Without accomplishing squat. At least the bombing raids reduced production from the five Schweinfurt factories by about 34% for a while.

Really? Where? Which post? Were they American? British? Soviet?

Post #90, you stated "The men who landed on open beaches should have attacked north or south beach bunkers to open the other beaches instead of moving inland." If the beaches were "open" didn't you mean they were undefended? Or did you have another meaning of "open" in mind?

You followed that with Post #100 stating "The Normandy invasion plan followed acceptable doctrine? Acceptable to who? Not to the soldier who had to land at Omaha when the other beaches were completely open." If the beaches were "open" didn't you mean they were undefended? Or did you have another meaning of "open" in mind?

Yes, lost, as in they did not come back and neither did the crews, which was the critical element. You know, just like none of your 600 paratroopers would be coming back.

 

If only Bradley had obeyed the signs on Omaha:



It is a FACT that Utah was properly marked as an "Open Beach", which of course means it is suitable for swimming, water polo, and drunken beach parties.

 

To be specific, in Post #35 you stated "And the allies used paratroops in Market Garden and in Berlin in '45." Then in Post #42 you stated "We took Berlin in '45 with paratroops." In #73 you stated "The paratroopers landed at Normandy, they landed in Market Garden, they landed around Berlin." And finally in Post #100 you said "When did we drop paratroops into Berlin? We didn't. I was wrong." That was at 2304 my time, so I missed it until you mentioned you said in #140 you already had told me. My fault, I apologize.

Meanwhile, what about those "open" Normandy beaches that should have been landed on?

 

Actually, Dork, if you go back and actually read the beginning of the thread, you will see it is you that started insulting people, and not their ideas. Your no.1 major failing is not understanding the difference between attacking an idea, and attacking the person. But by all means, continue to behave in such a juvenile manner, it seems to be what you excel at.

 

The problem is something very similar did happen nearly a year prior to your proposed date...and failed miserably. The results soured the Army on deep-penetration strategic airborne operations by battalion-size forces. It was tried once more as an emergency measure around the same time as your proposed date (oddly enough with the same unit)...and failed miserably again. That was the last time and the Army instead decided on ending the "para-raider" aspect of airborne operations in favor of division-size ops.

 

Shooterike was another poster? Yeah, someone you disagreed with and so you're tiny group of inbred wanna be soldiers ran him away and now your little redneck band thinks it's superior when all it proves is that you have no imagination or vision. You live in history because it's unchanging, you never have to take any risks.

You know my type well? You mean you've been given orders by people like me your whole life and you criticize them behind their back because you don't want to get fired? I don't doubt it one bit.

The paratroopers would fight and lose in Schweinfurt? As much as you think you understand war, you don't get it. It's not about only fighting when you can win. It's also about numbers and equipment. The allies lost 847 men in the first strike on Schweinfurt and deemed it so important that they went back again and lost another 650 aircrewmen. That's 1,497 men and you're worried about losing 600 paratroops who MIGHT have to surrender after destroying much of the factory.

Where did I explain which paratroops jumped into Berlin? Page 5, post #100.

If the beaches were open didn't I mean they were undefended? No. The beaches were all defended but some were taken much earlier than others. That made them "open". Bradley threw away thousands of troops at Omaha when the other beaches had been taken already.

None of my 600 paratroops would be coming back? If the mission is to keep everyone safe at home then the allies would never have sent any bombers into Germany. Not a single one. You're very afraid, you must be French. I bet you own one of the two million French WW2 rifles, only dropped once.

 

A Shooterike is a what?

 

What was the mission you are talking about?

 

Oh goodness, first you insult the Canadians, and now the French? Really?

.

 

Yes, really. They're French, they're used to being insulted.

 

I'm extremely pissed!!! You guys decide to hold a train wreck and don't send me an invite.
It's just as well, I'll go hang out with the real, manly men. But I'm confused. In post #77 Dook said, "No, I would never do that. Tanks are for real men, not wanna be's."
Now Alan/George Patton is the only guy I know that actually owns a tank (a Sherman), so he'd be the obvious choice to hang out with, but unfortunately he's Canadian and I wouldn't want to be accused of being some little twinkle toed, pink wearing, Canadian lover. (No offense meant George)

 

At least he ain't one of them French Canadians, cuz that would be double-jeopardy!

.

 

Speaking as a Administrator Dook, we have more information on you than you might think. Anonymity on a internet forum site is more illusion than reality.

Having said that, everyone's intent initially was to help you understand why your proposal would not and could not be undertaken. Our hope was to educate both you and any other beginner in the why's and how's of WWII military operations because we see education as just as important as spirited debate.

As you repeatedly return to the 'injustice' of lost aircrews in these raids (as opposed to other bomber attacks) would lead one to conclude that some relative of yours may have been lost on one of these raids. If this is correct, then you have my condolences as i'm sure of those who participated in this discussion.

A equally likely possibility is that you are simply a internet troll who periodically pop up to stir up a community thinking they can win some dubious victory. If this is correct then you should know no one here will remember this topic in a month from now. Any one reading this in the future will only conclude that our veteran contributors really know of which they speak and that despite your crude insults, we are in fact the place to come to for intelligent and accurate information on the history of WWII.

You would not be the first or the last troll to climb out of their mothers basement dreaming of digital fame in my 7 years here as a contributor. If you truly understood military history you would knew those who hold the battlefield after the battle ends is generally considered to have won that battle.

I do not think we can educate our friend Dook for those who are unwilling to learn can not and those who talk nonsense should be ignored. Do with that what you will my friends.

 

I have my moments, but at this age I can't always recall where I left them.

 

Ahhh, threats from the very slowwww MOD. You hack me, I will hack you back. I know more than a few tricks. Let's see how good you are. When can we start?

Everyone's intent was to help me understand? Bullshit. Everyone's intent was to enforce their supposed superiority over me because I'm new. You expect new people to come in here and kiss all of your asses for a while before they can post anything on their own. Well, I don't kiss up to wanna be's.

I return to the "injustice" of the lost aircrews? I never said "injustice". It was war. Justice comes after the war is over.

Here's what gets me, you think because you are a mod on a WW2 forum that you know more about war than I do but you don't know shit. You read a few books on it while sitting in your recliner chair.

I may have lost some relatives in the air war? Nope, the ones who were military age somehow weasled their way out of it. One was the only male to carry on the name so that's how he got out of it. I don't know the facts of how the others avoided it, but I didn't avoid it.

It's likely I'm an internet troll? You're the troll in this thread. I posted a serious thread. Your fat bald boys didn't like it because it wasn't their idea. People without imagination don't like it when others have ideas they can't have.

You've been here for 7 years? Gotta get a real life man. Maybe if you put that you are a moderator on an non-growing WW2 forum on your next resume you can get some work that pays better than a taxi driver? Probably not.

Those who hold the battlefield after the battle ends are considered to have won? Most of the planet has been won and lost many times. Today's winner might be tomorrow's loser.

 

You threaten to hack me but you have your born on date on your profile? And some of you are using your real names and starting shit with people on the internet. You people are so fuckin' dumb.

Oh man, let's go.

 

Hey dude, you were lured here by second-hand information from my reverse paratrooper thread in the FFZ. That's sort of an invite of sorts. I think.

 

You are in error on so many levels.

It was you who stated we know nothing about you, I merely corrected that misconception. I did not threaten to 'hack' you and have no intention to do so, I have a much simpler solution available in closing the thread and banning your account.

Your initial post was as a 'what-if' so to expect universal agreement and acclaim is at best unrealistic. They also provided detailed information on actual forces deployed and available to both the bomber raids and your proposed paratroop raid, you have not.

On more than one post you ask 'but why is it OK to send bomber crews to their death and not Para's?'. There is in fact very little justice in or after a war. At best there is only retribution.

I make no claim to being a expert, but I have read more than a 'few books' on WWII. In point of fact I have more than 250 books on WWII in my personal collection, a greater number on military and political history from different era's. Even so I am in awe of the knowledge that many of our contributors. We have actual authors, bloggers, documentation's, archivists, historians and actual veterans. I joined 7 years ago to add to my understanding and find myself learning something new here, sometimes daily.

I believe this is my third post in this thread, hardly troll like. Have you posted in any other thread than this? Who first and repeatedly threw out homophobic insults? Who lumped all his critics as 'fat, bald mamma's boys'?

As for my imagination, it is just fine. Hazel does my cleaning, Rachel Ray cooks my dinner and Jessica Alba keeps my bed warm.

I am here because I love the forum. As for being paid for my participation, never have, never will. If being here is such a lame endeavor how do you explain your presence?

I regret you find my efforts at Administration slow and ineffectual. I did give you 8 pages to try and prove your point and you could not convince a single rogue here. To show you that I can learn a new thing or two I will allow you to seek greener pastures elsewhere and find a more accepting audience.

Consider yourself banned.*

* see I told you I had easier options