jj3
1042 replies · 8322 views
^ Well, that kind of extra story, a parallel line, make the story better, more complex.
Oh no man, Theon story is horrible, and terrible ... 
What's terrible about it in your view?
I find the actor and the writing some of the very best of the series. Theon's motivations are quite true to life.
^ Well ... EVRYTHING 
I think Theon is an anti-hero.
Hmmph I think he may become an anti-hero. It is certainly set up that way. Like Rob Stark, he is a flawed character- a portrait of a young man- that really mirrors what I see in real life and what most of us have experienced somehow.
^ Really ? Oh well ...
His sister and the actress that plays her are so ugly. I like the father though.
And I also I don't get the sense that the Ironborne are the dominant sea-faring power. This arc is not as well funded as the Dragon girl story it seems.
The Euron Greyjoy character seems like of..weak..
10 minutes ago, Cult Icon said:
And I also I don't get the sense that the Ironborne are the dominant sea-faring power. This arc is not as well funded as the Dragon girl story it seems.
It's ok
I'm reading history of the 10th Panzer Division. it's an excellent book and has about 140 pages on the invasion of France. (Case Yellow/Case Red). This unit played a major role in in the breakthrough of the Sedan, and adds more detail to that in other books. There is a new book on Case Red coming out later this year.
Battle of France is so not well known, so not well known ... Every country tell its own view on it. And some legends on it are not true, simply. German or English ones.
Who wrote these books ?
What's your opinion on the 'myths'?
History of the 10th Pz division is an expensive book (not for general readers) that covers the action of one division- so it's rather narrow in scope. It's out of print. It's by albert schick and it's a rare gem. I got it in an ebay auction for quite a sum.
It's interesting that Case Red is co-incided with the release of Nolan's Dunkirk:
In the US, there is no deep, day to day tactical/operational coverage of Case Red so this book is groundbreaking. A deep series of books about the French perspective or about the French armies in 1940 is direly needed. The most detailed tactical/operational coverage is the english translation of Case yellow (called the Blitzkrieg Legend, which is authored by the German Army's historical section chief, Freiser). This book is detailed but narrow in scope as well- it focuses on the breakthrough at the Sedan and the tank battles between the French and BEF and mostly from the perspective of the german attackers.
We already talked about it in the past, and i already told my stand about that time.
Only, for remember, France came over the WW1 with a huge number of death. It has been a real sacrifice. The "Victory" has been for us and our allies. But in the end, that war has been a real suicide for the whole Europe.
So according me, the Battle of France goes along with the context of the WW1.
When Germans, Nazi, fanatized Germans, call them the way you want, decided to create that new conflict, France was not anymore at that. We were not ready.
Once that said, it was not a big stuff to defeat our army, since we were alone. That alliance with the UK was a joke.
Though, in Belgium, and North of France, French army resisted well, but was so badly leaded, that the good actions couldn't give a real counter attack, or productive movement.
We losed, and everybody know what happened after that. Soviets wons the war, with the very good help of the US army, and its allies.
Oh yes, and there are these two books about the French Army in 1940:
But in truth I don't see the French Army as noticeably worse than the BEF .
Did you know that the French/BEF outnumbered the Germans in every major category? They were largely inferior in the training and the doctrine of their armies. This is the core point of the books. The German general staff planned for a long war, taking several months. The key was success of Case Yellow/the sickle cut. Then the Wehrmacht defeated the UK/CW easily in the balkans. This was the failure of the allies to defend or at least inflict heavy losses on the Germans. Blitzkrieg was basically an accident.
The reason why a strong history of Case Red is needed is for people to understand how the regular german army divisions were able to push out the allies so quickly after Case Yellow succeeded. The second half of 10th Panzer is about how the unit attacked in Case Red- I haven't gotten there yet but I'm sure it'll be interesting.
When you say the Blitzkrieg was an accident, i agree. Blitzkrieg was like attacking by surprise someone in the street. I'm joking, but see what happened in the USSR, it was the same situation than on the Western Front during the first phasis of Barbarossa. Then, the Soviet territory has been the fatal weapon against the Nazis forces, like it was for Napoleon a century back.
But i won't even try to deny that the German plan during the Battle of France has been an awesome poker chips... It worked, that's the proof.
The soviets had this ability to churn out combat formations to replace the ones that have been destroyed or captured. This is because their population was very militarized. The Axis would destroy the Soviet front, and then the Soviets would deploy a new front. With each successive front, the Axis grew weaker and weaker. Germany's ability to replace worn down forces was comparably limited. That was the soviet war machine at work. By 1944 however, the Soviet blitzkrieg emerged.
Modern Russia still has elements of old soviet institutions, albeit in other names.
The thing with strategic maneuver is that it only works when the whole front or at least large portions are capable of maneuver.
With Case Red, there is some controversy about Dunkirk. Some have claimed that there was a "Halt order" on the Axis side, while other claim that logistics stopped the advance. The new Nolan movie seems to focus on the evacuation from the British perspective.
I think Hitler stoped the movement on Dunkerque to let the BEF evacuate from there. I think he wanted to convince UK to make the peace after France will be taken.
Of course modern Russia is full of Soviet traditions and legacy. Even from the Tsar era. That Autocracy is the best exemple lol
For many the Battle of Kursk is the hottest moment of the eastern front and surely of the WW2 simply. It's probably the biggest battle of the History. By the number of the forces, and their modernity. It's a tactic and strategic victory from Joukov. Rarely a battle reunit that two qualities.
From 1802 to 1814 Napoleon attempted to find such decisive battle. He thought that Austerlitz, or Eylau was that, or even the Berezina, but nope. Leipzig (1813) or Waterloo has been that only
I don't think the citizen of the USSR were militarized ... WAY less than the german one. Have you heard what French thought about the Prussian population ? lol It summe up that whole definition of militarized population concept.
The only way to defeat Russia, is to phisically destroy its whole population. It's impossible to defeat them. I mean by a conventional war.
My book is more interesting than I anticipated; the 10th Panzer not only played a major role in the breakthrough in the Sedan; it also fought French armor at Stonne and then spearheaded the attack towards Dunkirk in "Case Red".
From my notes I made over the weekend:
Spoiler
So the 10th Pz is re-structured as such:
1 rifle brigade of 2 mot. Inf regiments (1 company on SPW, 2 companies on motorcycles)
and additional infantry regiment (IR-GD) attached. A further Assault engineer battalion was attached to IR-GD itself, with special expertise in destroying bunkers. The IR-GD was considered the strongest infantry regiment under the command of 10.Pz and it was slated to be deployed for the most critical efforts.
1 pz brigade of 2 Pz regiments
1 art regiment (2 light, 1 heavy)
1 Pz pio battalion equipped with a dozen special tanks Pz I/II (also, 1 company on Pio SPW). these special tanks were designed to deploy large explosive charges on bridges, barricades, and other obstacles. K-bridging column.
PzJ- Lehr battalion
upgraded signals units, 1 signal battalion
Lehr Flak battalion plus additional flak company.
Luftwaffe tactical recon squadron (organic). 10 aircraft (9 HS 126, 1 Storch) for air recon and artillery spotting. This was 300 LW personnel, the majority being ground personnel (technical, photographic, AA, Medical, Signals)
Training for "Case Yellow" began in Nov. Map exercises and courses for staff officers. Demolitions operations for pioneers against road and border barricades in Luxembourg. Commando training with boats and map exercises. The first forces of the 10.Pz would be these commandos, supported by the LW CAS. (900 aircraft).
By Feb 1940, Unit had 44 Pz I, 106 Pz II, 88 Pz III/IV, 30 command tanks. Reinforced with Sturmbatterie 640 (Stugs) and Heavy infantry gun company 706 (SP Inf guns)
By March, 10.Pz attached to Pzgruppe von Kleist
Formation had over 300 tanks and AG.
10.Pz itself had over 14,000 men. IR-GD had 3,900. With additional attachments, the formation had perhaps 20,000 men.
^ Detailed notes ! Interesting 
On 1/21/2017 at 5:38 PM, jj3 said:I think Hitler stoped the movement on Dunkerque to let the BEF evacuate from there. I think he wanted to convince UK to make the peace after France will be taken.
Of course modern Russia is full of Soviet traditions and legacy. Even from the Tsar era. That Autocracy is the best exemple lol
For many the Battle of Kursk is the hottest moment of the eastern front and surely of the WW2 simply. It's probably the biggest battle of the History. By the number of the forces, and their modernity. It's a tactic and strategic victory from Joukov. Rarely a battle reunit that two qualities.
From 1802 to 1814 Napoleon attempted to find such decisive battle. He thought that Austerlitz, or Eylau was that, or even the Berezina, but nope. Leipzig (1813) or Waterloo has been that only
I don't think the citizen of the USSR were militarized ... WAY less than the german one. Have you heard what French thought about the Prussian population ? lol It summe up that whole definition of militarized population concept.
The only way to defeat Russia, is to phisically destroy its whole population. It's impossible to defeat them. I mean by a conventional war.
What is the French description of Prussian militarism?
The Soviet Union had a massive reservist pool of millions; this was the key to their survival during Barbarossa. Once the Axis broke through the front, the STAVKA just used their infrastructure in the rear to build a new Red army and deployed this to the front. The key is Soviet totalitarian ruthlessness and speed; they could produce a new combat formation in just 1 month, and in some cases just 2 weeks.
The French Army essentially only deployed one wave; the Soviets deployed several waves in 1941. This is why the Battle of Smolensk is considered by modern scholars to be the end of the Axis in WW2; A new wave emerged and contained the Axis in the center for about 6 weeks. (July-August 1941)
The battle of Kursk is decisive in the way that it was the beginning of near "permanent" defensive actions by the Axis. It was tipping point
TBH I don't really believe in the concept of "decisive battle". It doesn't make sense to me. I think, optimally, all continental operations should have blitzkrieg like characteristics and they should be a large as possible. The decisive battle is in a sense, earned; when the balance of power becomes so disproportionate that the enemy no longer has any change of final victory even if they deploy their forces in the most optimal manner.
Modern Russia still has this gigantic reservist pool (in the millions) and security state. I strongly suspect that this defense state is maintained by an endless stream of russian nationalist propaganda from their state-owned media.
Basically, Mirabeau summed up the idea in saying : « La Prusse n'est pas un État qui possède une armée, c'est une armée ayant conquis la nation ».
On the rest, i agree, nothing to add.
Only, about the decisive battle concept, i think it was more relevant in the past, 18 and 19th century. Now, industrialized wars changed that.
Here is an excerpt from a new book "Instrument of war: German Army 1914-1918"
QuoteThis work seeks to integrate the spectrum of approaches to tell the story of the German Army of 1914–1918 as an institution: an instrument of war that, in the developing context of a total war, found itself overextended from before the war’s beginning. It displayed less a genius for war than a gift for improvisation: meeting unexpected challenges with limited resources, making the best tactically and operationally of questionable strategies and policies until the machine broke down and the men had nothing more to give. In that sense this is less a history than a story—an elegy, perhaps, for an institution that, however dubious might have been its cause, gave the last full measure to attain it
In truth this statement could apply to the Wehrmacht as well.
The odd aspect, after studying WW2 for two decades, is how tough the German combat formations were from the beginning to the end of the war. I have "Sword Behind the Shield" and they are still attacking in 1945. I attribute this toughness largely to the high quality german officer and nco corps; they consistently punched above their resources.
A close reading of the West front 1944/1945 would show that the western Allies (US, UK/CW) far underperformed their resources. The Soviet Blitzkrieg of 44/45 was amazing but took too many losses in the breakthrough phase (typically soviet operations suffered 2/3rds of their losses in the first 3 days). They never fully addressed this problem until after the war.
CJ Dick has already two volumes out discussing this thesis.