World War Two was one of the bloodiest wars. Even if you have all the guns and men you still won't win a war you need to have tactics and strategies to win. World War Two was a fascinating war it was one with almost the best strategies known. The most common strategy known is the blitzkrieg. Any many others that's what this paper is about, about strategies or tactics used in WW2. With a tactical doctrine based largely upon outdated weapons and concepts, the American Army was perhaps more profoundly impressed by the success of the German blitzkrieg of 1940 than they should have been. As we have already seen, this led to an immediate call for 50 to 60 armoured divisions and the formation of the ‘Armored Force’. For a time the exponents of separate all conquering armoured forces held the stage. However, …show more content…
McNair, who firmly believed that armour on its own could only be successfully used for exploitation, after more conventionally balanced forces had done the job of fixing the enemy, manoeuvring to strike them in the flank or the rear, while maintaining a reserve to exploit any advantage gained, or, if things went wrong, to cover a withdrawal. These tasks called for the traditional infantry and artillery team, but now well supported by tanks and close support aircraft. McNair was also vigorously against all types of specialised units designed to carry out only one particular type of mission. Instead, he preached flexibility and the need for the balanced team of all arms. This doctrine became the basis of American tactics once they got into their stride and it was used to great effect. However, to be fair to the exponents of the swift armoured thrust, such as Gen George S. Patton Jr, tying tanks down to a more slow moving type of battle did lead to some great ‘lost opportunities’. The actual detailed use of the doctrine of course varied with the terrain and