The title almost says it all. Do you think Eisenhower made the right call? Or do you think Monty or Bradley was right?
For those of you who want a recap, Eisenhower as the Supreme Commander of European Theater of Operations mandated that the final assault on Germany was to be made by armies of equivalently equal strength over a wide front. His generals, Bradley and Montgonmery, objected vigorously.
Eisenhower's plan was roughly as follows. The 21st Army Group was to take the main effort throught the Flanders. The 12th Army Group was split into two forces: the Ninth and First US Armies deploy north of the Ardennes and attack via the Aachen Gap; to its right, the Third US Army attack via the Kaiserslautern Gap, with the possibility of turning north near Frankfurt-am-Main (I think) to strike at hearland Germany. Ike did not want all of his eggs in one basket; he wanted each attack to be strong enough so that if anyone failed, the rest could continue to advance on its own.
Montgonmery wanted the 21st Army to be given command over the Ninth US Army. He would make this attack with forty divisions kept in a solid mass in one power drive. 6th Army Group and the Third US Army were to be relegated to a static role. He was given much less and the result was Market Garden. Bradley for his part proposed to concentrate First and Third US Armies, punch through the West Wall, and pivot north. He did not get his wish either. As it actually happened, the First and Third Armies made their seperate assualts and both fluttered out.
Critics speculated that had either Montgonmery or Bradley's proposal been followed, the Allies could have made a decisive breakthrough between September-October 44 and obviate the Bulge and six months of war. Others pointed out that logistically, a concentrated power drive by either 21st or 12th Army Group would leave the other immobalized and vulnerable to German counterattack, while the narrow front attack itself could invite defeat by not having sufficient frontage and contained.
What do you think?
For those of you who want a recap, Eisenhower as the Supreme Commander of European Theater of Operations mandated that the final assault on Germany was to be made by armies of equivalently equal strength over a wide front. His generals, Bradley and Montgonmery, objected vigorously.
Eisenhower's plan was roughly as follows. The 21st Army Group was to take the main effort throught the Flanders. The 12th Army Group was split into two forces: the Ninth and First US Armies deploy north of the Ardennes and attack via the Aachen Gap; to its right, the Third US Army attack via the Kaiserslautern Gap, with the possibility of turning north near Frankfurt-am-Main (I think) to strike at hearland Germany. Ike did not want all of his eggs in one basket; he wanted each attack to be strong enough so that if anyone failed, the rest could continue to advance on its own.
Montgonmery wanted the 21st Army to be given command over the Ninth US Army. He would make this attack with forty divisions kept in a solid mass in one power drive. 6th Army Group and the Third US Army were to be relegated to a static role. He was given much less and the result was Market Garden. Bradley for his part proposed to concentrate First and Third US Armies, punch through the West Wall, and pivot north. He did not get his wish either. As it actually happened, the First and Third Armies made their seperate assualts and both fluttered out.
Critics speculated that had either Montgonmery or Bradley's proposal been followed, the Allies could have made a decisive breakthrough between September-October 44 and obviate the Bulge and six months of war. Others pointed out that logistically, a concentrated power drive by either 21st or 12th Army Group would leave the other immobalized and vulnerable to German counterattack, while the narrow front attack itself could invite defeat by not having sufficient frontage and contained.
What do you think?
Comment