This is an apolitical forum for discussions on the Axis nations, as well as the First and Second World Wars in general hosted by Marcus Wendel's Axis History Factbook in cooperation with Michael Miller's Axis Biographical Research and Christoph Awender's WW2 day by day.
monk2002uk wrote:Thank you, Moulded
I think this information also reinforces the notion that I have been toying with, that there were stormtroopers and there were stormtroopers. The archetypal image is portrayed by Ernst Junger. But Renn's description of his training as a stormtrooper illustrates that he learned some of the mechanics but not much of the tactical overview. So there degrees of 'stormtrooper'. The automatic assumption is that units who had received specialist training would be crack units but I am not sure this was always the case. The real answer lies in how they actually performed on the battlefield.
You are right to raise the issue of morale. The numbers of Germans who surrendered may have been consistent with this. But it also raises the question of whether they were as competent in the first instance.
gewehrdork wrote:There is an excellent book out there by Bruce Gudmundsson "Stormtroop Tactics". An excellent read for sure.
monk2002uk wrote:It is a good book but there are some limitations in detail. There are some inaccuracies in it as well. I think these are inevitable, given that the book takes a high-level look at the Ottoman Army throughout the entire war. I tried to get hold of Eriksson but have failed to do so. He clearly had access to a wide range of Turkish source material in Ankara. Personally, I have not attached great significance to the lack of mention of Turkish stormtroopers.
Abdul Hadi Pasha wrote:What are the inaccuracies to which you are referring?
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest