![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Young Winston, That Model was liked by Hitler makes me suspect his abilities as a commander. The Fuhrer prized loyalty above all other things, including competence. Model did help large amounts of troops escape the Falaise pocket when he took over from General Kluge. But his reaction to the British Paras at Arnhem could be described as unconciously comedic. Maybe better choices of German comanders would be Von Manstein, Rommel, Guderian and even some SS commanders such as Paul Hausser, Felix Steiner, Wilhelm Bittrich and Sylvester Stadler.
LeEnfield. Most every piece of history I have read on Montgomery and Market Garden suggests Montgomery knew very well there were two panzer divisions resting and refitting in the Arnhem area. I should expect someone with as much of an emperor complex that he had, would not tolerate information being kept from him. And I also believe there wasn't too many junior officers around who would have with-held such important information from some one of Montgomery's prestige. They might find themselves posted to Burma or Labrador with no explanation of why. |
![]() |
||
![]() |
Quote:
You may wish to read an excellent book called "Overlord" by Max Hastings. It details the Caen battles in detail, going into Monty's short comings and his strengths. The New Zealanders were not in Normandy. Monty didn't shield British divisions. If Monty was well supplied, equiped and prepared, he did well. Monty was not well prepared for MarketGarden, he rushed it and took some bad risks. It was not characteristic of his usual approach. His miltary reaction at the Battle of the Bulge was brilliant but he spoilt it all afterwards by shooting his mouth off to the press. Model had great experience on the Ostfront (but he was accused of war crimes) with some success. He was a ruthless general and a tough nut for the Allies to crack. |
![]() |
||
|
errol, I believe Model's expertise was his ability in rebuilding mauled and broken units and shoring up fronts which where near cracking. If I'm not mistaken he brought stability to the Eastern Front in May and June of 1944. But it appears he was of the school of no retreat. His un-elastic approach to defensive warfare would inevitably lead to more waste, ala Stalingrad. It appears to be an unrealistic position he shared with his Fuhrer. But I have only read of model's escapades quite a while ago. Would you suggest further reading.
What is meant by the term Blitzkrieg? A trans-literation from the German means lightning war. This German expression is used to describe the movement of massed armour with fighter and tactical bomber support, shored up by motorized and / or mechanized infantry. When first introduced in 1939 in Poland and spring of 1940 in the Low Countries and France, it was novel, brilliant and completely de-moralized the enemy. When you suggest that not every operation of striking fast is neccesarily blitzkrieg warfare, I agree. I could be totally wrong here but I believe certain elements had to exist within the kampfgruppe to produce Blitzkrieg. In all cases of successfull lightning war the armour and aircraft were on their way even before the artillery was employed to shorten the pause between artillery and follow up massed armour with fighter and dive-bomber suport. The motorized or mechanized infantry would be hot on the heels of the armour to support against enemy infantry and anti-tank elements usually bypassed. Most armies in Europe at the time thought militarily in 1st World War terms, viz: tanks were parcelled out to infantry units as a supporting arm of the infantry. And except for the Germans and the Brits, most aircraft was obsolete. And yes, Guderian, Rommel, Manstein and other German commanders aquired inspiration from British armour thinkers such as Liddell-Hart and J.F.C. Fuller. The irony here is that the British military establishment did not. Quote:
Also, unless someone is a skinhead fruitcake full of ethnocentric and racist nonesense or a nazi-phile who believes all of that MeinKampf refuse we can all agree that the nazi regime was reprehensible. But if we close our eyes to the incredible strides the German military took in military doctrine and weapon's design we are not doing ourselves any favors. That the Nazi regime was a blight on all civilized nations at that time is certainly true. But let us not let over zealous propaganda blind and / or prejudice our thinking. |
![]() |