Monday, November 29, 2010

2 Different Wars?

During the second world war, the U.S. was practically fighting in two different places against two different enemies. The Pacific war and the European war. And really these two places couldnt be much more different. The Pacific consisted of mostly sea and air battles with some close range fire fights on islands. There was not much heavy duty armory, but there was alot of infantry and bombings. On the other hand the European war was totally different. It consisted of the whole continent so there was much more room which consisted of much more fighting. The germans had tanks, armor, bombs, battleships, and fighter planes. This side of the war i think consisted of much more tactical strategys that played a future role in the war, where in the Pacific there wasnt much else you could do then to just try and sink the enemies battleships and try to take islands. Both had important battles that were crucial to U.S. success, but they were so totallly different that soldiers fought completely different battles. How do you think these two different war scenes were alike and how do you think the soldiers could compare with each other what happened?

1 comment:

  1. I think this is a good point you are making. It kind of reminds me of WWI when Germany had two different borders to defend but this is completely different. The US had to travel to both different wars (with the exception of Pearl Harbor) which is a lot more difficult than having the home field advantage. I think one reason the Pacific is different is because the battles and the war itself is more personal. The fighting and the war is directly between America and Japan. The war in Europe however, the US is going to jump into the already started war against the Nazis.

    ReplyDelete