"Peter Skelton" wrote in message
...
On 4 Jan 2004 14:59:24 -0800,
(Alejandro Magno) wrote:

"Schelkunchik" wrote
It sounds to me you either believe in Santa Claus or LSD.

I am not American.

Either way, Russian hardware has never performed up to expectations in
real
battle.

Kursk ?

The best tanks of WW2 were Soviet and German. Even the French had
better tanks than America.

Nonesense. The predominant requirement was for something that
could be punched out like confetti. The US understood that better
than anyone else. That was true for several otehr weapon stystems
too.

Peter Skelton

Yep. The US actually cut back on Sherman production well before the war was
over. Tankers liked it because it was so reliable though. The Pershing was
just being introduced as the war ended but it did very well in the few
battles it fought.

The Panther hardly ever ran reliably. Both the Tigers and Panthers were too
few in number to make a real difference anyway. There was no gasoline to run
them as well.

WWII was Russian armor's sunset. Other than running over a few Hungarians,
Czechs and Lithuanians, Russian armor never fared very well. Check out the
big armor battles in the first Gulf War. Tank-on-tank, Russian armor was
obliterated.