Weekly Debrief

The american forces were actually the most influential

124»

Comments

  • BrowneManStrikes
    1046 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Couldn't be more wrong.
    brenda1001 wrote: »
    now there has been a lot of people saying that the Americans shouldn't be in the game because they joined the war later than anyone else, but what you must realize is it's not about how long the Americans were in the war it was the fact they pretty much ended WW1.

    The Central Powers were finished before the US even arrived in Europe. Anything they did after 1916 were just dangerous death throes.

    They accelerated the end, sure, although even that's debatable given the mutinies and revolutions taking place in Germany at the time of the armistice.
    brenda1001 wrote: »

    now if you are not understanding, the American forces in WW1 had some very smart people leading assaults. not only did the American forces have smart people, but they also had the energy advantage over any of the allies. this isn't mean to stir up anything it's just fact the Americans weren't worn out because they weren't in the war until the end.

    Smart people? The US Generals repeated the exact same mistakes the British and French had been making for the past three years. Inexperienced commanders led inexperienced troops.

    And let's not forget that said troops arrived in France with almost no equipment of their own whatsoever.
    brenda1001 wrote: »

    you may also not know, but the Argonne Offensive was very influential to the end of the war. the idea of pushing the Argonne forest was to break the german line and the plan did that pretty well.

    By itself? No, it wasn't really influential. As part of the 100 days offensive that took place along the entire front? Yes, but that wasn't a solely American effort, far from it.

    The Meuse-Argonne was also a total mess on the part of the Americans, and a testimony to what happens when you send thousands of inexperienced troops, led by inexperienced commanders, using untested and outdated strategies, against one of the most battle-hardened forces of the war.
  • Tansho
    176 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Good grief.
  • Khal_Fraggo
    494 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Tansho wrote: »
    I hate simplifications of complex historic situations like this. The allied nations, aside from the United States, sent an entire generation to disappear into the trenches from 1914 until the first U.S. forces were committed to the fight in the spring of 1918. They bled the central powers white. That can never be dismissed when considering the outcome of the Great War. The best way to answer the question would be to ask what would happen if the U.S. forces had not started to arrive in 1917 or enter offensive combat in 1918.

    All of the answers are hypothetical or lead to more questions... the Germans wouldn't have had to throw the dice so recklessly in their 1918 March offensive. They could have caught their breath and been more methodical. Would the French Army have recovered so quickly from the defeats and mutiny of 1917? What would have happened if French and British couldn't have withdrawn and refitted units or redeployed them from quiet sectors of the front occupied in late 1917 by Americans to more active areas? How much more of a difference would the 1 million plus Germans arriving from the Eastern front have made at that point?

    Each of those questions could be a debate by itself. In the end, you can not say the Americans made the largest contribution, but you can't completely marginalize it either. Without the Americans, I wouldn't forecast a German victory, but I'm not so sure I would forecast the German collapse of the Western Front in 1918 and the treaty that followed either.

    Yeah, consider a really even heavyweight boxing match that has gone 20 rounds and both contenders are pretty much dead on their feet.

    Then a random fan from the audience crawls in the ring to help one of the fighters. His opponent abandons his current strategy in favor of one big "all of nothing" flurry to try to beat both enemies, but the fan knocks him out cold with a folding chair.

    The fan most definitely "ended the fight", but it was mostly because he was so fresh and rested. Even if he was a big, tough guy, most observers would say his timing in entering the fight is what mattered most.

    And it's impossible to tell how the fight would have ended otherwise, but it probably would have been more even and narrowly get decided by a judges' call. But as it stands, one fighter is completely KO'ed and everyone is drawing embarrassing stuff on his face with Sharpie markers. One person says, "He might be pretty mad about this later." But everyone else assures him that it's the guy's fault for losing.
  • Masher8559
    212 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    If this is what Americans are learning in their history classes then it's no wonder the OP comes off as somebody who has no clue what he's talking about.

  • StalHamarr
    251 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited April 2017
    jjsf24 wrote: »

    Well if that were true, why did no one in the old world think of the mayan calender? Design temples like aztecs? No one started developing machine guns until gatling came around? Or was crazy enough to start flying until the wright brothers? The ideology of "someone else will eventually invent it is false" its a made up thing thats unproven true.

    And im not saying americams are magical, i just listed some of their achievememts the old world didnt qchieve. I also know france bailed out the united states during the war for independence and war of 1812. I also know americans had advanced european technology wen they came here because you know, most r from there.


    I didn't quote in my earlier reply, but I was referring to jjsf24. You replied while I was typing my reply, sorry about the misunderstanding.


    Anyway, we aren't talking about entirely different cultures wich have never been in contact.
    Early americans and europeans were literally the same people, with the same cultural background and the same scientific and technological levels. We aren't talking about centuries of cultural evolution in complete isolation, wich obviously leads to completely different cultures.

    That genius said americans invented the car. Guess who designed the first car powered by a combustion engine? A french. First gasoline-powered car? A german.
    Guess it's another thing they don't teach you in US history classes?

    I'm not even going into the WWI debate, because it's so wrong on so many different levels.

  • jjsf24
    314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    StalHamarr wrote: »
    jjsf24 wrote: »

    Well if that were true, why did no one in the old world think of the mayan calender? Design temples like aztecs? No one started developing machine guns until gatling came around? Or was crazy enough to start flying until the wright brothers? The ideology of "someone else will eventually invent it is false" its a made up thing thats unproven true.

    And im not saying americams are magical, i just listed some of their achievememts the old world didnt qchieve. I also know france bailed out the united states during the war for independence and war of 1812. I also know americans had advanced european technology wen they came here because you know, most r from there.


    I didn't quote in my earlier reply, but I was referring to jjsf24. You replied while I was typing my reply, sorry about the misunderstanding.


    Anyway, we aren't talking about entirely different cultures wich have never been in contact.
    Early americans and europeans were literally the same people, with the same cultural background and the same scientific and technological levels. We aren't talking about centuries of cultural evolution in complete evolution, wich obviously lead to completely different cultures.

    That genius said americans invented the car. Guess who designed the first car powered by a combustion engine? A french. First gasoline-powered car? A german.
    Guess it's another thing they don't teach you in US history classes?

    I'm not even going into the WWI debate, because it's so wrong on so many different levels.

    Well, history is written by the victor, the model t was far more successful than whatever the french or german guy invented or atleast people like it more. Same story with edison and tesla. Edison patented it first. And i know, i stated that america wasnt decisive in which side would win. if you would read what i write. I just stated america ended the war faster like they did WW2 with the atomic bomb (another american invention btw that we did kinda steal but hey! First):p

    What you got against americans? Lol
  • I_LET_ROUNDS_GO
    192 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    6eaae2198dd4a6f8d84a8c9144f39d2159ac4ede594c9fa854aec301e62c332e.jpg
    OP, pls, stop making us look bad.

    Thanks,
    The non-Merica Americans.
  • firechickenfan
    472 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 2017
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    lol this thread is a **** trainwreck waiting to happen.

    I mean, we already have Zozeberry in here spouting off his "DICE has a diversity agenda" spiel just because Americans are in the game. It's only a matter of time.

    I agree with this gentleman. This forum is not the place to debate alternate facts and fake news regarding which country contributed more to ending a war.
This discussion has been closed.