There's also when you think about it, the nature of what the nuclear targets are? Chico and I looked and discovered that they calculated that it took 5-6 5kt tactical devices to do acceptable damage to a single tank battalion. It takes a lot less, and does more long term damage if you go after the rear area services, so it may be a case of more warheads are being flung at the Pact and NATO rear areas. This has the effect of slowing down the Pact advance to a pace that NATO is somehow managing to retreat faster than the Pact can catch them. (though the fact that it still takes the Pact 2 MONTHS to relieve Warsaw does call that into question?).
Viewed in this lens, the NATO retreat makes a LOT of sense, as if you're losing your tactical/operational supply net in the field, it makes sense to retreat to where it's intact, Germany. And the pace of the Pact advance makes sense. Look at the pattern of Soviet advances in WWII, they'd advance for a bit, make great gains, and then peter out when they outran their supply infrastructure (Now yes, this doesn't account for nukes, modern smart munitions, and the fact they're advancing over an atrocious Polish road net that's been fought over twice and now nuked once?) Maybe it's just that simple, the road net is such a mess, it cannot support either army very well?
|