+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6
Results 76 to 81 of 81

Thread: Broad Front versus Narrow Front: Who was Right?

  1. #76
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    9,269
    Country: United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Also, Z, I like to emphasized something else here. 28 days. That was how long the British expected the war to last ... and if you look further, that ain't too far from the truth from all sides. The Japanese expected the war to last less than 6 months. They had thought the war was over after Pearl and Midway was the final clincher never expecting the US to fight on even if Midway was lost.

    Win or lose, HK was never the deciding battle. It was just a measure who negotiates with what when the shooting stopped.

    The only thing that threw this nonsense out the window was that the US was p!ssed off.
    Sir, if the British High Command was planning for 28 days, it was planning for defeat. With no real naval presence in the East, no (not really) air force and the most poorly equipped land units there was no way to win or even end in a position of strength. The one palce the British might have made a stand was Singapore, but Hong Kong was doomed.

    Where did the idea of 28 days come from? Japan had already demonstrated that it could fight for years. The aircraft it was using in China were the equal of what the British sent to the East before the war, and thanks to the Washington Naval Treaty the admiratly had a rough idea of how many capitol ships the IJN had. Likewise they should have known that the IJN modeled after the RN as it was and having smashed the Russians was a thouroughly proffesional force organized and led along British lines.

    Even 6 battalions of the Black Watch or Coldstream Guards could not have held out and prevented the fall. Let alone 6 battalions of poorly or half trained, poorly equipped mostly Commonwealth and colonial troops.

  2. #77
    Senior Contributor Triple C's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Apr 06
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,686
    Country: Taiwan
    To steer the conversation back to Europe--

    I have a creeping suspicion that Ike was right because there was no way the Allies could concentrate enough to overpower German defenses at single point. The Wehrmacht remained a formidable adversary. Logistics did not permit the building of a sufficiently massive force to roll over the Germans at any sector. The way to go was to deliver as much combat power as possible by taking advantage of a wide front, lest the Germans isolate a spearhead and choke it to death.

    That the Germans did collapse in 1945 under the narrow front assault of the 12th Army Group was the result of the success of the attritional strategy at bleeding the German Army white during 1944, not a vindication of the narrow front proposal.
    All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
    -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

  3. #78
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    9,269
    Country: United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Triple C View Post
    To steer the conversation back to Europe--

    I have a creeping suspicion that Ike was right because there was no way the Allies could concentrate enough to overpower German defenses at single point. The Wehrmacht remained a formidable adversary. Logistics did not permit the building of a sufficiently massive force to roll over the Germans at any sector. The way to go was to deliver as much combat power as possible by taking advantage of a wide front, lest the Germans isolate a spearhead and choke it to death.

    That the Germans did collapse in 1945 under the narrow front assault of the 12th Army Group was the result of the success of the attritional strategy at bleeding the German Army white during 1944, not a vindication of the narrow front proposal.
    I am going to disagree. The Germans tried to match strength on strength in Normandy when the allies where hedged in, but the allied material superiority and air support doomed that effort. Those same conditions were going to exist everywhere. Market garden failed because it was a natural bottleneck. Once the allies force a crossing of the Rhine, its Katy bar the doors across Germany as across France. The Rhine is a barrier, but when the allies have complete air and artillery dominance its not much of a barrier.

    The German collapse in early 45 was due to a combination of factors. More and more Germans soldiers gave up and either surrendered, deserted or simply stopped the fanatical resistance in the west, it became about surviving the war not winning it. Russian pressure- the summer-fall of 44 was the death of the German army. Between defeats like the destruction of AGC and the stupid festung policy the Ger,many army was shedding troops and equipment faster than it could be replaced. Germany's last hope for an extended defense was the carefully collected armored reserve that got thrown away at the Bulge.

  4. #79
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    2,502
    Country: Romania
    Quote Originally Posted by Triple C View Post
    To steer the conversation back to Europe--

    I have a creeping suspicion that Ike was right because there was no way the Allies could concentrate enough to overpower German defenses at single point. The Wehrmacht remained a formidable adversary. Logistics did not permit the building of a sufficiently massive force to roll over the Germans at any sector. The way to go was to deliver as much combat power as possible by taking advantage of a wide front, lest the Germans isolate a spearhead and choke it to death.

    That the Germans did collapse in 1945 under the narrow front assault of the 12th Army Group was the result of the success of the attritional strategy at bleeding the German Army white during 1944, not a vindication of the narrow front proposal.
    Von Rundstedt's chief of staff,Gen. Blumentritt said that after Normandy all the Allies had to do was to send an armored spearhead,wherever they chose to.The Allies had the bad luck of executing poorly Market Garden.It was the surprisingly poor planning in the sector of the 1st Abn. as well as the unjustified delay of the Guards Div that doomed the effort.
    Those who know don't speak

  5. #80
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    21,433
    Country: Canada
    Gang shot a doe and a fawn in the afternoon hunt. I'll split the discussion after we finish cleaning and hanging the animals. 22 thus far this year. Just loved that nusianace tag.
    Chimo

  6. #81
    Senior Contributor Triple C's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Apr 06
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,686
    Country: Taiwan
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    I am going to disagree. The Germans tried to match strength on strength in Normandy when the allies where hedged in, but the allied material superiority and air support doomed that effort. Those same conditions were going to exist everywhere. Market garden failed because it was a natural bottleneck.
    But by the time the Allies stormed the West Wall, wide-spread fuel and shell shortages as well as bad weather had severely degraded the Allied advantage in firepower and mobility. If the First Army hit the Wall a day or two earlier they would have hit it when it was still unmanned, but that's not what happened.

    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    The German collapse in early 45 was due to a combination of factors. More and more Germans soldiers gave up and either surrendered, deserted or simply stopped the fanatical resistance in the west, it became about surviving the war not winning it. Russian pressure- the summer-fall of 44 was the death of the German army. Between defeats like the destruction of AGC and the stupid festung policy the Ger,many army was shedding troops and equipment faster than it could be replaced. Germany's last hope for an extended defense was the carefully collected armored reserve that got thrown away at the Bulge.
    I think the Bulge and Vistula-Oder were prerequisites for that collapse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    Von Rundstedt's chief of staff,Gen. Blumentritt said that after Normandy all the Allies had to do was to send an armored spearhead,wherever they chose to.The Allies had the bad luck of executing poorly Market Garden.It was the surprisingly poor planning in the sector of the 1st Abn. as well as the unjustified delay of the Guards Div that doomed the effort.
    That is interesting. I wonder, however; both Patton and Hodge were pushing armored spearheads as hard as they could and they did not break the Sigfried like shit through goose. By September deliberate assault was the name of the game.
    All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
    -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Could Germany have won WWII
    By Recon_sgt in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 2893
    Last Post: 05 Dec 11,, 21:26
  2. NATO vs. Warsaw Pact
    By Metak in forum Warfare in the Modern Age
    Replies: 349
    Last Post: 28 Oct 08,, 22:06
  3. qestions for anti-CCPs
    By Fiona Shrot in forum International Politics
    Replies: 156
    Last Post: 28 Apr 08,, 15:17
  4. Red Storm Rising - Tom Clancy
    By brak in forum Warfare in the Modern Age
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 27 Mar 08,, 16:17

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts