Is it true that American troops were perceived as cowardly during WW2?
>>18511358anglos and slavs are cowards riddled with fear.The Orc's only strenght is it's number.
>>18511358I don't know about cowardly but they were sadistic rapists. Imagine something like the Soviets in Berlin. But at least the Soviets actually had to fight fair.
>>18511358no.post your source.
>>18511358Well, The German critique of American operational slowness stems from the U.S. doctrine of Methodical Battle and Broad Front Strategy. Germans often noticed how the Americans were operatinally slow due their overly reliance on artillery and airstrikes. The U.S. military consciously chose to trade steel for blood. If an American infantry advance hit a German machine-gun nest or a fortified village, the standard operating procedure wasn't to launch a costly frontal assault; it was to halt, dig in, and call down a devastating barrage of artillery or a strike from P-47 Thunderbolts.General Dwight D. Eisenhower favored a broad front advance to ensure all armies were securely supplied and protected against flank counterattacks. To the Germans, who favored high-risk, deep-penetration maneuvers (Bewegungskrieg), this looked timid and slow.Unlike the Americans, Soviet operational art was built around massive, high-speed strategic offensives designed to rupture an enemy's front and drive hundreds of kilometers into the rear without stopping to clear every pocket of resistance.If the Red Army had landed at Normandy with their 1944 doctrine, they likely would have taken immense casualties breaking out, but they wouldn't have halted at the Seine to rebuild their supply lines like the Allies did. They would have bypassed major German strongpoints, leaving secondary forces to besiege them, while their tank armies raced for the German border to force a total collapse of the theater.On the other hand...The Western Allies were fighting on an island-to-continent logistical tether. Every single bullet, gallon of fuel, and C-ration had to come across the beaches or through highly damaged ports like Cherbourg.What frustrated them about the Americans was that the U.S. refused to play that game. The Americans simply used their unimaginable industrial wealth to blast a path forward, prioritizing the preservation of their own manpower over the speed of the map lines
>>18511358They were less cowardly than fucking Britbongs for sure. During the Battle of the Bulge you had like 50 guys with MGs holding off thousands of Krauts, basically dooming their offensive. Meanwhile Bongs pussied out like bitches at Dunkirk
sage
>>18511601>Calls Brits cowards>By citing the Bulge
>>18511358>Is it trueYes, they didnt have boots on the ground until 1942, even then, they were only fighting the french
>>18511560>I don't know about cowardly but they were sadistic rapists. Imagine something like the Soviets in Berlin. But at least the Soviets actually had to fight fair.Just like most negative stereotypes about America, this story is chiefly about Blacks
>>18511358Weren't the British the ones who fled from France at the first sign of trouble and never returned to Europe until America showed up to do most of the fighting for them?
>>18511878You stupid fucker.
>>18511358Germoids thought Americans were cowardly because they used actual battle strategy and had access to near unlimited resources. Compare this to Germany, who had to use literal cattle move planes around.
>>18511592Do you have an analysis/thoughts regarding British strategy? Really interesting post. I know Montgomery was risk averse, how does that square with Market Garden?
