Military Power

What do you think of the use of bunkers, were they effective or not? Explain your reasoning please.

I think bunkers are effective in a limited sense, and really only when you fight a enemy that does not have the capability to put a 500 pound bomb through your air shaft.

Bunkers also have to be supported, and even then if the attacker is willing to pay the cost they can be taken out, look at Omaha Beach.

Bunkers are an anti-infantry structure that is good for holding a small area but not for projecting power. To do that you need mobile forces like armor supported by mech infantry.

I think they had their time, but I think it is over now.

Bunkers are only effective at long range. When infantry can get close enough the weapons from the bunker cannot fire at them, infantry can then easily get in with explosives and flamethrowers. Bunkers are just deathtraps at close range. Like CrazyCatman said, their time has past, but they were a force to be reckoned with in their prime.

CrazyCatman wrote:I think bunkers are effective in a limited sense, and really only when you fight a enemy that does not have the capability to put a 500 pound bomb through your air shaft.

Bunkers also have to be supported, and even then if the attacker is willing to pay the cost they can be taken out, look at Omaha Beach.

Bunkers are an anti-infantry structure that is good for holding a small area but not for projecting power. To do that you need mobile forces like armor supported by mech infantry.

I think they had their time, but I think it is over now.

Gone the way of the Dodo.........