|
As far as strategy is concerned, a war can only be won by taking the offensive at some point and beating the enemy. This can be as direct as a ground offensive or as indirect as a prolonged naval blockade. Reacting to an enemy's moves may prolong a battle or prevent the enemy from destroying you, but unless there is some kind of counteroffensive the best you can hope to retain is the status quo. Taking the initiative is far more rewarding (look at the panic a handful of Gothas was able to cause over London for example). In this sense, the Allied strategy was a winner from the start, but the German strategy was doomed to fail.
As for "personal success", it is a lot less telegenic to be an infantryman than a tanker just as it is less telegenic to be a recce pilot than a fighter pilot. However, just because someone gives a government more propaganda material than another doesn't mean he is necessarily more useful. IMO I would contend that a two-seater crew in WWI that completed its mission successfully probably deserves more credit than a fighter pilot who shoots down a similar crew.
Besides, if I was in their place I would rate my own peronal success on the basis of: Am I back home and am I still breathing?
|