From: ikonoqlast@gmail.com   
      
   On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 4:30:37 PM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote:   
      
      
   > By the way, one reason that US tanks in WWII were so poorly developed   
   > was that one Leslie J. McNair believed in a silly doctrine in which   
   > tanks supported infantry and when it was time to fight other tanks then   
   > heavily armed and lightly armored "tank destroyers" were the proper   
   > tool.   
      
      
      
   Uh, McNair was right.  The major problem US armor had to deal with wasn't   
   German tanks, but infantry, and the 75mm Shermans were better at that than the   
   76mm.  Tank destroyers were fine, so long as you didn't try to use them like   
   tanks.   
      
      
      
   > Note that a few M26 tanks did finally make it to the   
   > ETO despite resistance from the US ground forces commander, on whom   
   > somebody was good enough to drop a bomb in July 1944.   
      
      
   He didn't want them for a reason.  It isn't like tanks were a big problem, and   
   Shermans were more mobile, as good fighting infantry and could be transported   
   in greater number given limited shipping.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)