Does the US use blitzkrieg tactics?
The term was never used by the Wehrmacht, command of the German army in WWII, to describe the maneuver warfare tactics the utilized in seizing most of Europe and parts of Africa. However, the idea using combined arms utilizing a swiftly moving motorized and mechanized mobile force to bypass many inconsequential targets and to attack the key objectives that will speed victory is still used. The “shock and awe” campaign used in Iraq is an example of this.The Germans perfected the use of Blitzkrieg during WWII, although it was nothing new in terms of military strategy, how they did it and the equipment they utilized was. Militaries around the world still look to this period in history as a revolution in military affairs. The Marine Corps lauds itself as an expeditionary Force in readiness, ready to fight tonight, and propositioned globally. The warfighting philosophy we utilize is one of maneuver warfare, using combined arms to quickly put the enemy on the horns of a dilemma of encountering an overwhelming force capable of out cycling them.If you would like to know more about Maneuver Warfare, and it’s birth, I would recommend you study any history of the Von Schlieffin plan, or perhaps some key maneuver warfare historical figures such as Rommel or Hand Von Luck from WWII, or even more modern figures such as Norman Schwarzkopf, James Mattis, or just the key doctrinal publications of the military that are not FOUO.
Was Blitzkrieg ever used after WW2?
First things first – Germans didn't invent blitzkrieg. In its core, the concept of armoured spearheads supported by heavy air attacks was nothing more than another form of maneuver warfare – something that has been around since first cavalry units were formed in ancient times. Germans were just best in combining the concept with modern technology. The term blitzkrieg was never used as a name of some official doctrine – it was rather a propaganda word used to refer about German swift victories in 1940 and early 1941.By knowing that, we can easily determine that many modern armies are using (or used) the same concept as their standard tactical doctrine. For example, look at Soviet "Deep Battle" doctrine, which was standardized in 1936, years before Germans used the term blitzkrieg for the first time, and subsequently developed during the Cold War. Cue the Wiki: "Deep battle envisaged the breaking of the enemy's forward defenses, or tactical zones, through combined arms assaults, which would be followed up by fresh uncommitted mobile operational reserves sent to exploit the strategic depth of an enemy front." Sounds incredibly similar to a so-called "blitzkrieg tactics" doesn't it? In terms of practical use, maybe the most triumphant application of this doctrine was Operation Bagration in the summer of 1944. Some WW2 battles even proved you don't need tanks to stage a good maneuver battle – during the Winter War in 1939 at Suomussalmi, a whole Soviet 44th Motor-rifle division was outmaneuvered, surrounded, divided into several pockets and then destroyed by Finnish troops using only skis.From more modern times, we can mention large armoured thrusts during the 1965 Kashmir War or Israeli campaign during the Six-Day War. Probably the most famous exploit of blitzkrieg-ish tactics was then the Desert Storm 1991.
How good would blitzkrieg as a warfare tactic for taking over a country?
In modern warfare, Blitkrieg is effective but ultimately outdated if you were trying to take over aka conquer another nation.Blitzkrieg is good at what it does, using overwhelming force and avoiding strong enemy positions to confuse and defeat your enemy quick and fast to the point where they lose all morale.Like every other tactic in warfare, Blitzkrieg is only a means to an end strategy/goal. Congratulations, you’ve defeated the enemy nation, now you must hold onto your winnings!Blitzkrieg is 3rd generation warfare; with your victory through 3rd generation warfare, this is when 4th generation warfare comes into play… The Battle for the hearts and minds of the average civilian.After conquering a nation, now you must consolidate your power as the civilians form a resistance group against you. If you massacre populations to teach them a lesson, you motivate the citizens to resist you further.
What is your opinion of the Blitzkrieg and was the blitzkrieg tactic first used in WW2?
Berserker tactics relied on a small but select group of warriors psyching themselves up - usually by taking fly agaric, a funghi that made them uncontrollable. They would use these warriors as suicide troops - running into an opponent's lines or shield wall to force a gap that the rest could exploit. The chances are that they would get killed or wounded, but the chaos they caused was severely disruptive. Blitzkrieg does share some similarities in that in aimed to cause disruption and meant that the defenders were having to deal with an enemy that had breached its lines and was causing chaos. It also relied on speed - the intention was to move quickly and in a coordinated fashion airstrikes would be followed up by fast tank attacks with the bulk of the infantry having to move in quickly to secure a position and exploit the disruption. Blitzkrieg worked when it was a new tactic - but like all new battlefield strategies a way to combat it was developed and if the various elements could be separated or if lines of communication and supply could be broken then it became easy to nullify. Although there are similarities I wouldn't overstretch the point.
Is a blitzkrieg a good military tactic in war?
I know the Nazi army in WW2 used it a couple times, but they lost in the war. Then again, they could've won if Hitler hadn't done some certain mistakes in his strategy.
In WW2, why didn't Hitler's blitzkrieg tactics work on Britain?
There was the small matter of the English channel and Royal Navy standing in the way of any Blitzkrieg. He tried to bomb Britain into submission but he underestimated the quality of the RAF pilots and fighters like the Spitfire and Hurricane. He also failed to grasp that the British had never backed down from any threat in the past and were unlikely to do so in 1940. The crucial turning point however was due to an accidental bombing of London which Hitler had expressly forbidden in the hope of striking a deal with the British. It resulted in a retaliation raid on Berlin by the RAF. From then on the Luftwaffe focused on bombing cities and towns rather than airfields so the RAF had time to recover its strength. Edit- The word Blitz is only applied to the bombing of Britain's cities. The air assault on the UK was part of operation Sealion, the proposed invasion of Britain by the Nazis.
Blitzkrieg????
hey guys im doing a research paper on blitzkrieg in world war 2 and i know that Germany used Blitzkrieg but do you guys know if there were any countries that used Blitzkrieg as a war tactic? and if so, could you tell me the country or countries that they used the blitz on. please thank you<3
What were the military strategies of Blitzkrieg, island hopping, psychological warfare and the scorched and...
Blitzkrieg was a strategy first made famous by the Nazi's during WW II. It was basically a quick bombardment, followed by an all out, "lightning fast" attack on an objective that would leave them little time to mount an effective military defense. The tactic of a fast attack has been used for centuries, but its modern definition can really only be achieved with modern technology (i.e. vehicles and airplanes). Part of the reasoning behind it was to help eliminate the stalemates that had occurred during the first World War with trench warfare. Island Hopping is a term popularized during WW II which commonly referred to the Allied strategy of retaking the Japanese islands. Given that there were hundreds of them, and the war had been dragging on long enough, it was decided that the allies would only attack vital and strategic islands. The others would be isolated by the Navy and Army Air Corps to prevent escape and/or reinforcements. This allowed the allies to save lives and valuable resources that would otherwise be needed. Psychological Warfare is not a new term at all. It has been around since man began fighting, granted the tactics have changed. In regards to WW II, it was used by nearly every country and ranged from simple propaganda to dropping leaflets from the air telling and encouraging the enemy on how to surrender. Radio was also a popular method of the day. Nearly every radio station in Europe, both allied and axis, broadcast some kind of propaganda. Much of it was designed to discourage servicemen on both sides into thinking that they could not win the war. The tactic of Scorched Earth has also been around for a long time. It's earliest known use dates back to the Greek and Persian era, and has even been used as recently as the first Gulf War when the Iraqi army set fires to the Kuwaiti oil wells as they retreated. In WW II, this was most famously used by the Russians as they retreated from Hitler's advance. The Russian people knew that their winters were harsh and that in order to slow the enemy's advance, they would need to deny them shelter and supplies. As the Russian army retreated into the heart of Russia, they literally burned and destroyed every village, town, and city that they abandoned. They left almost nothing of use. Ironically, this same strategy was used by Germany late in the war when the Soviet Union began invading the German homeland.
Describe hitlers blitzkrieg tactics? worl history 10th grade?
The Blitzkrieg (Lightning War) was the first use of combined arms tactics. It used air power to attack targets behind the lines, rapidly moving armored units attacking on the lines, rapid deployment of infantry to go places where the tanks couldn't go. If they'd had helicopters, they would have been used as well. Following each campaign, the tanks would be repaired, infantry resupplied, railroads would have been built or repaired allowing munitions to come up to the front lines, airfields would be built allowing the aircraft to be advanced closer to the front. Each campaign would last approximately one month. Poland, Greece, France, Bri... well, maybe not them, Crete, Ukraine, Norway. Each one took just a few weeks. Only the Soviet Union had the landpower to accept the lightning and fight on. Had the Wehrmacht tried taking the Soviet Union in smaller bites, they might have done better. Do not confuse the Blitzkrieg with "the Blitz". "The Blitz" was just an air campaign to reduce the threat of Britain.