Do u agree with me?
2006-12-15 06:38:49 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Yes, for sure.
The Panzer (Panther, Tiger I and II) were, in 1 to 1 or 1 to 2 superior to the Allied tanks (Sherman and Churchill), the MG-42 (machine gun) was very efficient, even the fighters were 1st class, specially the fighter Me262, or the bomber Arado Ar-234 (those two were equiped with reactors). Only the atomic and radar reseach wasn't as advanced as the research of UK and USA. Even the "Kriegsmarine" was as good as the Royal Navy and the US Navy (but, as always, the German units were not many enough).
The weaknesses of Germany were :
- the lack of oil and fuel (without those resource, the German army couldn't have as many halftrack and motorized divisions as the Allied)
- Hitler's recommandations, with changing some of the projects (he wanted first the Me 262 to be a strategic bomber)
- the German quality was may be too perfect, so every engine needed always supplies, on the contrary of the Russian ones.
- more than that, the German were always outnumbered (they fought 1 against 3 in Russia, 1 against 7 in North Africa).
To sum up, it was the fight of quality against quantity.
2006-12-15 15:56:44 · answer #1 · answered by Nico Einherjar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no question that the technology that the German's possessed in WW2 was superior. That is where the problem begins in one of the reasons they lost the war. The attention to detail and complex machinery left them with mulitple service problems on the battlefield. The intricate designs of everything from pistols to tanks and directing funds to technologies that were way ahead of their time proved to be a logistical nightmare once the bombing of Germany began. The V2 rockets and Me262 developement absorbed such a huge resource they were left guiding artillery with horses.
2006-12-15 06:46:01 · answer #2 · answered by Wayne H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, and had they actually been left in the hands of the comanders, the Germans would have won. Hitler's micromanagement ruined everything for the Germans.
Had he not been obsessed with the Kzs, (Concentration/Death camps) the resources could have been redirected to fighting on the Western Front.
It was all Hitler's fault....
But, the German technology was far better than anything the Allies had...
2006-12-15 06:51:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only in certain areas.
The US had better regular front line fighters and bombers. The German jets, while better, were used as bombers until it was too late to make a difference.
Also, many US front line units had supperior rifles (Thompson and BAR) mixed in with the M-1 Garand, a great rifle. The Germans did posses superior rifles, but they handed them to only a few elite units (like Paratroopers).
Basically, the Germans had better weapons but couldn't make enough to make up for the difference. The US (and British) units were second rate, but they had more.
2006-12-15 08:34:19 · answer #4 · answered by adphllps 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No . the german soldier was one of the best in story of mankind.
If they had a correspondant technology they had won the war
2006-12-15 06:46:47 · answer #5 · answered by maussy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
With the exception of radar and the atomic bomb, yes.
2006-12-15 06:41:06 · answer #6 · answered by feanor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obviously not. Otherwise we would be speaking German and goose stepping.
2006-12-15 06:51:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
2nd to none
2006-12-15 06:40:35 · answer #8 · answered by steve 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋