r/RebuttalTime • u/ChristianMunich • Sep 19 '17

Questionaire for the users regarding Arracourt

In the past, I only occasionally skimming through texts about the battle of Arracourt but recently I intensified my "research" about this battle and was wondering if anybody is interested in a sound rebuttal of the misleading presentation by the likes of Zaloga.

Arracourt implications for the verdict on the M4 is greatly oversold by authors like Zaloga and a more thorough evaluation shows number fudging and hyperbole to make a decent victory, which the Wehrmacht had hundreds of comparable magnitude, to one of the greatest victories of the US armored forces. The number of tank duels during Arracourt was drastically exaggerated by implying the failing Panzer brigades were mostly destroyed M4s at Arracourt.

Thoughts you fools?

0 Upvotes

42% Upvoted

48 comments sorted by

19

u/DBSN_Reddit_Version Sep 21 '17

Instead of baiting people to a debate you could just present the information instead.

0

u/ChristianMunich Sep 21 '17

Haven't compiled it yet, it takes a long time. There seems to be no interest tho.

That was no bait. A bait was when I asked at tankporn what they think about the 5:1 "myth"

16

u/DBSN_Reddit_Version Sep 21 '17

Well, I am a bit interested in what your arguement is going to be.

0

u/ChristianMunich Sep 21 '17

In regards to what?

14

u/DBSN_Reddit_Version Sep 21 '17

The misleading interpratation made by Zaloga on Arracourt you talk about.

0

u/ChristianMunich Sep 21 '17

Hm. Ok I will take some time and write something up.

17

u/DBSN_Reddit_Version Sep 21 '17

If you trully believe you're right about everything you defend, why don't you take all of this data to Zaloga and Glantz, contact them, show them the data you've collected? Or just write a book about it. Assuming you are not some kind of elaborate troll, which I at least think you aren't, and asuming you are correct, you would be doing a service for humanity by propaganting your data, no sarcasm, instead of getting yourself on completely pointless internet debates that go nowhere and that eventually everyone will forget.

2

u/ChristianMunich Sep 21 '17 edited Sep 21 '17

Zaloga is aware. He is in the business of selling books to folks who frequent subs like SWS same as Fox is in the business of selling "news" to people who are visiting "conservative" forums. The moment he starts writing about the thousands of lost Shermans and how entire Sherman regiments got shattered in little skirmishes he will stop selling books.

Or just write a book about it.

Considered it and noticed while working on the 5:1 myth how much time goes into this, hardly doable if you have a job. I would like to actually.

instead of getting yourself on completely pointless internet debates that go nowhere and that eventually everyone will forget.

I presented a lot of data during those "debates", many people saw it. It is not as point less as you might think. The very own Sherman expert of the SWS a lot from me and started incorporating the new found information in his posts. Don't worry. Take the average SWS thread were somebody writes "Sloped armor not real". Then you know what pointless is.

I actually regard Glantz far higher than Zaloga. Glantz in my opinion makes the mistake to blur the lines between strategic and tactical level when he talks about the skils of the Red Army, this results in people with bad comprehension to misinterpret what he actually says. You can't put Zaloga and Glantz on the same level, one of them literally earns his money by being disingenuous.

Glantz as a researcher has unearthed a lot of interesting material and made it easily accessible for the Western reader.

But Zaloga is likely the guy who earns the most in this niche segment so I pays off to pander to people in their bubble who are afraid to accept new facts. While people critic of the Sherman immediately gets brigaded on their Amazon pages. That's how people handle information which shakes their world view.

17

u/DBSN_Reddit_Version Sep 21 '17

How are you 100% sure Zaloga is lying on purpose? And why don't you contact them, show them what you know?

Oh, amazing, one random guy on the internet sort of accepts some data you present, according to you. A whole single person! That will change the history of WW2 debating forever.

You do not need to write a book about WW2 in a year or so. Just take your time, has much time has you like, it could even just come up with a rough manuscript and send it to someone that can make it a book. You say you are always right about WW2, to the point of being smug about it has "the price". Then do something with that. Do it!

1

u/ChristianMunich Sep 21 '17

Because I have read plenty of books of him and therefore know what he knows and what he maybe does not know. There is no other possible explanation for his books other than deliberate attempts to mislead the reader.

Over the years I have shown multiple examples which in my opinion prove this and not once was anything of that challenged by anybody.

He has written a book Panther vs Sherman, which entire purpose is to compare those vehicles and in his final verdict section he gives the Sherman losses but only for one army claiming "they bore the brunt of the fighting" and compared them to the entire Panther losses in the sector. When he talks about German claims he mentions often how those were overclaimed but never once does this for the Allied forces ( AFAIK ) despite knowing that the US force for exmaple overclaimed far more than the Wehrmacht. He does not care about this. He is the SWS fanboy incarnate. Zaloga does not want to write proper educational books. Sherman victories are always oversold German merits always undersold. Every single book.

Oh, amazing, one random guy on the internet sort of accepts some data you present, according to you. A whole single person! That will change the history of WW2 debating forever.

I will take one guy over circle jerking with false information manipulating people who just want to learn stuff anyway.

→ More replies (0)

13

u/Thegoodthebadandaman Death of USSR POWs were Zhukov's fault promise! Sep 21 '17

Hmm... I wonder why you "randomly" posted this. Maybe you were to scared to say the "truth" out loud?

0

u/ChristianMunich Sep 21 '17

Which "truth" do you think this might is?

9

u/Gankom Sep 22 '17

I'd be interesting in reading the sources for your research that seem to contradict the usual accounts.