The "Greats" & America's Infatuation with Technology
I find the discussion of the "great " leaders of WWII instructive as much for who is left out as for those who are included. In another thread, folks are discussing the apparent infatuation with technology that has produced a force woefully understrength for its missions. The names folks are tossing around on this thread happen to be associated with the "technology rich" batttlefields of WWII. Patton and the folks of Bradley's 12st Army Group tended to be loaded with the best in our technical arsenal--upgunned Sherman "Firefly" tanks, CAS support from the latest airframes, cutting edge SP artillery, etc, etc.
The WWII names that haven't gotten a mention happened to be doing yeoman service in the southern part of France, with the more traditional weapons of war--the largely all infrantry forces in Jacob Devers' 6th Army Group. like Patch's 7th Army and Lucian Truscott, Jr's VI Corps divisions (3rd ID, 36th ID, 45th ID), as well as the justly famous 442 RCT. These guys did something no other army in history had ever done before--mounted a successful offensive through the Vosges. I will only note the lack of discussion of actions on the Italian Peninsula by admitting that we had some really poor leadership in that theater that more than overbalanced the good guys like Truscott.
Maybe if we chose a different set of icons for our WWII heroes, we might find a better set of solutions for the current morass in which we find ourselves enmired.
I'll toss a few other names into the mix...
In no particular order and trying not to duplicate
GEN Arthur Currie
Heraclius
Basil II
George Maniaches
Alp Arslan
Alexios I Komnenos
Khosrau I
Phillip of Macedon
Vo Nguyen Giap
At the risk of thread derailing...
I tend to consider airborne operations as a more tactical/operational device, due more to limitations in what can be delivered and realistically supplied. In this role it can be outstanding and at times decisive. However, it does require a strong follow-on force if it's intended to have more than a tactical impact (unless of course it's a special or limited operation like some of those slapout mentioned).
And as an aside to WM's post, the Firefly was a British modification to the Sherman. It didn't feature in Patton's units.