• gullible@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not visible to you, but Kbin users can see who downvotes them. They were being sincere.

    • Aqarius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m well aware, on both accounts. They were sincere, and correct, and you have fallen for either Belton Cooper’s stories, or stories of people who have fallen for his stories. Shermans did have one of the best safety records of the war, and the laments of Sherman crews have been greatly, and I mean greatly exaggerated.

      • gullible@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Sherman was adequate for the task of defeating the thoroughly mismanaged Germans. It was created to defeat an enemy that had lost the ability to effectively engage in most forms of AA, reconnaissance, and coordination. It was effectively the same as a named boxer fighting nobodies to bolster their record. Was it a bad tank? No. Was it a good one? No. It was adequate. Numerous and adequate.

        I’m sincerely not sure what you’re referring to, I was joking about its design philosophy involving tailored solutions to exact specifications.