|
Post by Swampy on Sept 24, 2018 2:15:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Sept 25, 2018 13:12:07 GMT -5
Given the number of French troops involved I would call it much more an "Allied" victory than an American one.
Like in the Pacific in WW2, an American commander (Big Mac) always used the term "Allied" when an Australian victory was achieved, but it was "American" when it was a combined operation.
And the German Army was a beaten Army in Round 15, in late 1918.
SJ
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Sept 25, 2018 14:03:02 GMT -5
Given the number of French troops involved I would call it much more an "Allied" victory than an American one. Like in the Pacific in WW2, an American commander (Big Mac) always used the term "Allied" when an Australian victory was achieved, but it was "American" when it was a combined operation. And the German Army was a beaten Army in Round 15, in late 1918. SJ Agreed that it was an Allied victory, as opposed to being solely an American one. But the German army was not a spent force; in fact, having knocked out Russia, they had over a million troops freed from the eastern front, to be unleashed on the Anglo-French forces.
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Sept 25, 2018 21:53:20 GMT -5
Disagree!
It was their last gasp!
SJ
|
|