Best Tank Killer of WW2 continued

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

tpikdave said:
I'm sorry, but I have always felt that those medals looked really stupid. I mean it looks like the guy got a medal for every time he took a pee. You would think that the wearer would have to put a broom up his bum or walk around bent over????
Click to expand...

The military worldwide seem to like doing that. I mean, I was struck by the fact that General Petreaus had a chest full of pretty ribbons on his uniform when in front of a Congressional Committee last week. But the guy first saw combat in 2003, when already a general. So what did he get all those awards for?
 
Its military law not custom, that dictates when in dress uniform an officer (maybe enlisted too dunno) must wear ALL medals. I think that should be up to the individual but its been this way for 2 centuries.
 
Tony Williams said:
Sure - but what did Petreaus do to earn them?
Click to expand...

I've heard a lot of guys railing on the general for this. First off, I'll point out that not all awards are combat related - there are many that are not. I recall the general rating a Bronze Star; but other than that, many acheivement awards. If you don't have any bonafide eyewitness accounts that indicate he was undeserving and does not legitimately rate any of his awards - then please let it go rather than demean the general.
 
My comment was not a criticism of General Petreus (I have no doubt that he was entitled to wear those ribbons) but concerned the military's habit of covering their chests with award ribbons. At one time, a medal meant that the recipient had at the very least participated in a campaign, and in some cases with great distinction. These days, they seem to hand them out like sweets.
 

Agreed mkloby but it is a proven fact that it has become a problem.

When I was in Iraq our BN gave out Bronze Stars to E-7 and aboves for achievement of just being in the combat zone. E-6 and below recieved ARCOMs. What a croc of ****. Same thing for W-3 and above recieved Bronze Stars and W-2 and below recieved ARCOMs. O-5 and above recieved Bronze Stars and O-4 and below recieved ARCOMs. 90 percent of the E-7 and above, O-4 and above never left the wire. It was the W-3's down to the E-4s that were flying outside of that wire and taking shots from the enemy.

Same with the Air Medal. I am proud of mine because I earned both of mine, but basically if you brought an aircraft to a hover a few days you got the damn medal! So ofcourse all the Staff Officers and QC NCOs came out and got there hour here and there in the traffic patern around the camp inside the wire and got there air medal!

It is bull mkloby and I pray that it is not this way in all units.
 
Der Crewchief

That(the great bronze star givaway) would seem to go along with my John Kerry Vietnam syndrome theory. Which is as follows: Any politically ambitious jackass that wants to advance his political career by enhancing it with a record of military prowess can set off an explosive device close enough to himself (of course not in doing so, endanger any of his own personnel) to give himself a shrapnel-rash and ensure himself of a spot on some ticket somewhere.

This was all made possibel by the legend of PT109, and boy was that a legend. If I had been Kennedy's CO I would have fired him. First on the grounds of putting his crew in jeopardy and second being run over by a large Japanese ship while asleep. DOH, but we made him president!!!!
 
In the Air Force, you get ribbons for all kinds of non combat related stuff.
Everything from Commendation Medals, Achievement medals, Outstanding Unit Awards, longevity, good conduct, long term deployment overseas and a host of other impressive regalia.
Just stay in long enough and keep your nose clean and you'll catch up to Audi Murphy!
You can look like a real war hero to the unlearned
 
There is nothing wrong with that either. There are awards given out like that in all services. They are given out for achievment. I recieved an Army Achievment Medal for my work in planning, taking apart and shipping an entire company of aircraft from Germany to the United States.

There is nothing wrong with Achievement an Comendation awards.

The problem is when higher awards are given out like candy.
 
I got 3 over 10year I for 6 years of undetected bad behaviour and 2 UN tour medals. I just counted the medals I got from my Uncle a grunt in ww2 he has 6 .3 for combat one for Normandy and one for North West Europe one for Italy . 3 for others things like volunteering
 
The Stuka started the war, the Sturmovik finished it.... but the Stuka operated in all theatres of operations and was used by more nations than any other aircraft, including the Russians, albeit in a research capacity... which, if ultimately not the best, certainly the most feared and loved tank killer..
 

When did the Russians use it? Was it before the treaty was broken by Hitler?

This is from wiki and I am not totally relying on it. This is what "they" say

Operators
Bulgaria
Bulgarian Air Force
Czechoslovakia
Czechoslovakian Air Force operated captured aircraft postwar.
Germany
Luftwaffe
Hungary
Hungarian Air Force
Italy
Regia Aeronautica
Japan
Imperial Japanese Army Air Force received Ju 87s for trials.
Romania
Romanian Air Force
Slovak Republic
Slovak Air Force
Yugoslavia
SFR Yugoslav Air Force operated captured aircraft postwar.
UK
Operated a few captured aircraft[38]
USA
Operated a few captured aircraft[39]
 
B-17engineer said:
Is wiki wrong here?
Click to expand...

According to Manfred Griehl's excellent Junkers JU87 Stuka (Airlife 2001) pg 154..
"At least one JU 87 A-1 was delivered, along with a few other combat aircraft, to the USSR in 1940 and served at the test centre, TsAGI, for a detailed investigation and performance testing"

I wondered why the Sturmovik was so similar in appearance to the Stuka....

Wiki sometimes needs an update eh?
 
You're welcome...
Trying to find some info on Horst Woltersforf's Dornier 215 partially recovered recently off the coast of the Netherlands.. recommend any threads?
I've been in touch with the recovery company but they only had a partial idenfication of the unit code G9+?M ... see, Wiki is also useful 8)
 
Stukazoo said:
I wondered why the Sturmovik was so similar in appearance to the Stuka....
Click to expand...
It isn't. About the only thing they have in common is that the engine is at the front, with the pilot behind it In other words, they are no more similar than the vast majority of WW2 single-engined combat planes.

The prototype Il-2 first flew in October 1939, before the Russians received a Ju-87.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
A
Was the Hispano-Suiza 12Y the worst ≥25L V-12 of WW2?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
ThomasP
T
G
Ditching qualities of WW2 Aircraft
Replies
14
Views
2K
ThomasP
T
German WW2 seaplane bases
Replies
1
Views
511
Dimlee
Best "general purpose" prop fighter also capable of best high altitude performance
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
PAT303
P
Menu
Log in
Register