Posted on Jul 3, 2018
The US's best tank in World War II rarely saw combat
3.87K
62
17
25
25
0
Armor
Tanks
WWII World War Two
Military History
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 10
7
7
0
Funny. I was commissioned Armor and that was the argument then, and now. Tanks support.... infantry. Armor thinks infantry exists to support Armor. That is was Blitzkrieg posited. And we took a lot of notes there. As a Major in CGSC I remember the Air Force dude in my small group said he learned one thing there.... that Tanks fight Tanks. You don’t need them if your adversary doesn’t have them.
(7)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
The Soviets tried employing tanks without infantry support, especially in attempting to quell insurrections in Hungary. That did not end well, especially in city fighting. Tanks provide shock on the battlefield, but they still need a grunt alongside to defend against the "small" attack
(2)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
Tanks without infantry are like tanks without air superiority targets , dangers targets but vulnerable one none the less.
(1)
(0)
SFC David Xanten
It’s called Combined Arms for a reason. All the Combat Forces, working together can defeat most any other force. Air cover is also required as the German’s found out in WWII. We shouldn’t be required to fight, even in a so call “unconventional Wars without the best and safest equipment as well as the best trained fighting force. WWII and Korea as well as RVN proved that as we lost way to many people as a result of crappy equipment in each of the conflicts.
(3)
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
Tanks and Infantry mutually support each other, and it just depends on the situation. Tanks are used if you want to attack and destroy enemy targets quickly, then we do a battle handover with the Infantry.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
4
4
0
Sometimes we miss the mark on new weaponry and its doctrine of how to use it.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google