Talk:Shock troops
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Names
An un-named contributor changed the link I had, to a dictionary definition of shock troops. That definition says it is a literal translation of the German stosstruppen. They changed the link to storm trooper. But storm trooper is a translation of sturmtruppen.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geo Swan (talk • contribs) 02:40, 31 January 2005 (UTC)
- This article seems to speak more of the history of Shock Troops and the development of elite forces rather than about what Shock Troops are and what role they serve in military warfare. I'll try and htink of ways to expand and edit this entry to make it more precise and usable.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beatdown (talk • contribs) 19:37, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Saying that "shock troops" is a translation of "stosstruppen" is definetely wrong, since "stoss" means "thrust", not "shock". I think it should be called an approximation, at best. --Kamagurka 06:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
I think that Stormtrooper should probably be merged in here and become a disambig page. Any comments? Grant65 | Talk 01:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I think this article and Stormtrooper should be merged either under the name of the latter or under Assualt troops which is the proper translation of the German name stosstruppen. Nik Sage • Talk Nik Sage 16:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
-
See Talk:Stormtrooper#Merge for more on this. --Philip Baird Shearer 09:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree. The two terms describe entirely different things, which merely share similar but distinct names. I see no advantage in merging the two articles merely because some readers are confused by the similar names. Geo Swan 23:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
The two terms stosstruppen and sturmtruppen seem to apply to different types of units who have the same job describtion; there were the sturm battalions held in reserve at Corps and the stosstruppen battalions held at Division. Both however do the same thing: breaking lines. I think a good case can be made that they particular specimens of the same species, both falling under the category of shock troops. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.225.72.157 (talk) 18:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Brusilov Offensive
Why doesn't the article mention anything of the Russian use of shock troops during the Brusilov Offensive? Since the offensive predates the use of Stormtroopers, it would definitely seem a relevant point. ASWilson 15:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What,, Only the Soviet Union?!
Surely in WW2 more than just the Sovit Union used shock troops. John 22:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- As far as I can tell they are the only army to use the term. But I think this article conflates two very different tactical ideas anyway. There's little connection between the Red Army shock army doctrine and WW1-type von hutier tactics. DMorpheus 15:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
-
Good call. I think the German Sturmpioneers deserves a place in a section about shock troops. They are elite troops who recieved special training and equipment for breaking an enemy fortified line. That IMHO fits the definition of Shock Troops perfectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.225.72.157 (talk) 17:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)