Help support TMP

"WWII & the G.I." Topic

5 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Return to the WWII & the G.I. Poll

Areas of Interest


74 hits since 6 Dec 2018
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

ScottWashburn Sponsoring Member of TMP06 Dec 2018 5:05 a.m. PST

And this is true for all the armies, not just the US GI.

farnox06 Dec 2018 12:34 p.m. PST

Armor gets all the glory but it was the grunts that did most of the fighting.

Personal logo Mserafin Supporting Member of TMP06 Dec 2018 4:25 p.m. PST

"You can keep your planes, your tanks, your atom bombs. You'll still have to have some little guy with a rifle weasel the other bastard out of his foxhole and get him to sign the peace treaty"

Attributed to Patton, but I'm not sure the wording is exactly right.

Personal logo Narratio Supporting Member of TMP08 Dec 2018 6:42 a.m. PST

RAH wrote something similar. You shell it, fly over and bomb it, launch rockets at it but you won't own it until you stand a skinny 19 year old with a rifle on top of it.

Personal logo Sgt Slag Supporting Member of TMP10 Dec 2018 11:09 a.m. PST

Air power, and armor, shorten the war. If it were entirely infantrymen fighting…

Nuclear weapons have the potential to end the war, remotely -- God save us from ourselves… The nuclear winter would likely kill 90% of the "victor's" population, so it would be a pyrrhic victory, at best.

Launch enough surgically precise drones, and you might be able to solicit surrender prior to sending in the skinny 19-year-old Infantryman, to stand atop the hill, with a rifle.

The poll seems too simplistic, to me. I voted, "Other".

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.