MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:  
Password:  
 
 General History
Page 44 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43    44    45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )
Message
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/15/2022 9:29:40 PM
Thanks George,

Economics was not my favorite social.studies class!?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/15/2022 9:31:48 PM
Quote:
Checking out 12-14 in history,

1503 Astrologer Nostradamus was born! He also was a Seer! What the hell is a Seer? Anyone??

1568 the Casket letters were found to be damaging to Mary Queen of Scots! Why did Elizabeth I have it in for Mary?? Cat fight! Cat fight!?? What say you??

1799 George Washington the father of the US dies at age 67! What made him rise to be such a great man?? Anyone??

1911 Ronald Amundsen is the 1st man at the South Pole, why did he succeed where Scott tragically failed?? What say you?? Also believe Kai said one of his relatives from back then was with Amundsen!? Not sure about that??

1936 George VI becomes King of England taking over for his scandalous brother Edward VIII, remember the movie "the Kings Speech" tells this story! What say you on why George VI was just what England needed at this time in history, & his brother, left wanting?? What's the story?

1960 the US, Canada, & much of Europe sign an economic treaty! How did this help their economies?? Comments anyone? Thank you, George for the response!

Some good topics!?
Regards,
MD

Anything new from 12-15, & 12-16? Anyone??


----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 9:24:19 AM
Events for December 15-16 in history, A few of them anyway!? Comments?

12-15,

37 ce, Nero was born, the Emporer of Rome, who burned the city down! Was he Rome's worst ruler? What say you??

1791 the Bill of rights of the US Constitution were adopted! To day they are under attack? Should they remain as the law of the land? Or are some outdated?? Comments anyone??

1890 Sitting Bull, Souix cheif, is killed after seeking aslilum in Canada! What happened??

2011 the Iraqi War ends! Was it a just war? Did the US, & Allies win?? Comments??

12-16,

1631 the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in Italy kills 3,000+ people! How come they couldn't escape? Seems like a lot, when magma movement isn't that fast, is it?? Anyone?

1653 Oliver Cromwell takes over in England! What's his place in English History?? Why was there a rebellion (English Civil War) anyway? What say you?

1773 the Boston Tea Party happens! Did the Indian disguise fool the Brits.? What's up with the British I've of tea? Having a tea time every day? Did this event piss of the king? Comments?

1838 3,000 Zulu were killed in S.Africa battle, by the Voortrekkers! Who were they? & What was this Blood River battle? Why was it so one sided? & it's effect on the Zulu wars!? Anyone??

1944 the Battle of the Bulge begins! How did the US escape, & win this overwhelming at favorable odds for the Germans, battle? Something about Gen. Patton?? What say you??

Other new or old topics, sites, or posts!?

Lots to discuss!?
Regards,
MD


----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1968
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 9:44:48 AM
The pyroclastic flow is hundreds of degree F. It moves very quickly. Common cause of death around volcanoes. (I've lived on or near seven volcanoes.)
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 10:44:28 AM
Quote:
1944 the Battle of the Bulge begins! How did the US escape, & win this overwhelming at favorable odds for the Germans, battle? Something about Gen. Patton?? What say you??


As unbearable as Gen. Montgomery was after the battle was over, he deserves a good deal of credit when he took command of all allied forces, US and British, on the north side of the bulge.

It may be interesting to discuss just what Monty did that influenced the battle. He was responsible for the reorganization and placement of troops I believe. And he brought up British troops to ensure that the Germans would not penetrate beyond the Meuse River.

How significant was Monty's work to influence the battle?

Also, is it true that Monty had warned Eisenhower in November that the part of the allied line that the Germans attacked was spread too thin?

Cheers,

George
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 10:51:13 AM
Quote:
1773 the Boston Tea Party happens! Did the Indian disguise fool the Brits.? What's up with the British I've of tea? Having a tea time every day? Did this event piss of the king? Comments?


It certainly pissed off the private business that owned the tea that the vandals dumped in the harbour. The British East India Company was not the British government. They were a business.

I was reading that the ships that were vandalized were actually owned by people in America. They weren't British war ships nor were they owned by people from Britain.

Were the Sons of Liberty who committed the acts of vandalism more upset that their smuggling operations to bring in cheap tea purchased from the Dutch were being compromised by British tactics?

Cheers,

George
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 11:30:06 AM
Quote:
Quote:
1944 the Battle of the Bulge begins! How did the US escape, & win this overwhelming at favorable odds for the Germans, battle? Something about Gen. Patton?? What say you??


As unbearable as Gen. Montgomery was after the battle was over, he deserves a good deal of credit when he took command of all allied forces, US and British, on the north side of the bulge.

It may be interesting to discuss just what Monty did that influenced the battle. He was responsible for the reorganization and placement of troops I believe. And he brought up British troops to ensure that the Germans would not penetrate beyond the Meuse River.

How significant was Monty's work to influence the battle?

Also, is it true that Monty had warned Eisenhower in November that the part of the allied line that the Germans attacked was spread too thin?

Cheers,

George


Monty : what a disagreeable little squirt !

An American general, or high ranking officer, likened his conduct to Christ coming to cleanse the Temple .

Let me try and answer the two questions you asked.

A quick trip to my bookshelves beckons.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 11:34:55 AM
On this day..

On December 16, 1944, the Germans launch the last major offensive of the war, Operation Autumn Mist, also known as the Ardennes Offensive and the Battle of the Bulge, an attempt to push the Allied front line west from northern France to northwestern Belgium. The Battle of the Bulge, so-called because the Germans created a “bulge” around the area of the Ardennes forest in pushing through the American defensive line, was the largest fought on the Western front.

The Germans threw 250,000 soldiers into the initial assault, 14 German infantry divisions guarded by five panzer divisions-against a mere 80,000 Americans. Their assault came in early morning at the weakest part of the Allied line, an 80-mile poorly protected stretch of hilly, woody forest (the Allies simply believed the Ardennes too difficult to traverse, and therefore an unlikely location for a German offensive). Between the vulnerability of the thin, isolated American units and the thick fog that prevented Allied air cover from discovering German movement, the Germans were able to push the Americans into retreat.

One particularly effective German trick was the use of English-speaking German commandos who infiltrated American lines and, using captured U.S. uniforms, trucks, and jeeps, impersonated U.S. military and sabotaged communications. The ploy caused widespread chaos and suspicion among the American troops as to the identity of fellow soldiers—even after the ruse was discovered. Even General Omar Bradley himself had to prove his identity three times–by answering questions about football and Betty Grable—before being allowed to pass a sentry point.



The battle raged for three weeks, resulting in a massive loss of American and civilian life. Nazi atrocities abounded, including the murder of 72 American soldiers by SS soldiers in the Ardennes town of Malmedy. Historian Stephen Ambrose estimated that by war’s end, “Of the 600,000 GIs involved, almost 20,000 were killed, another 20,000 were captured, and 40,000 were wounded.”

The United States also suffered its second-largest surrender of troops of the war: More than 7,500 members of the 106th Infantry Division capitulated at one time at Schnee Eifel. The devastating ferocity of the conflict also made desertion an issue for the American troops; General Eisenhower was forced to make an example of Private Eddie Slovik, the first American executed for desertion since the Civil War.

The battle would not end until better weather enabled American aircrafts to bomb and strafe German positions.
================================================== ================================================== ==========================================

Private Slovik was a scapegoat. He was unfit for military service as he was rated 4F initially.


NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 11:38:50 AM
On this day...

In Boston Harbor, a group of Massachusetts colonists disguised as Mohawk Indians board three British tea ships and dump 342 chests of tea into the harbor.

The midnight raid, popularly known as the “Boston Tea Party,” was in protest of the British Parliament’s Tea Act of 1773, a bill designed to save the faltering East India Company by greatly lowering its tea tax and granting it a virtual monopoly on the American tea trade. The low tax allowed the East India Company to undercut even tea smuggled into America by Dutch traders, and many colonists viewed the act as another example of taxation tyranny.

When three tea ships, the Dartmouth, the Eleanor, and the Beaver, arrived in Boston Harbor, the colonists demanded that the tea be returned to England. After Massachusetts Governor Thomas Hutchinson refused, Patriot leader Samuel Adams organized the “tea party” with about 60 members of the Sons of Liberty, his underground resistance group. The British tea dumped in Boston Harbor on the night of December 16 was valued at some $18,000.

Parliament, outraged by the blatant destruction of British property, enacted the Coercive Acts, also known as the Intolerable Acts, in 1774. The Coercive Acts closed Boston to merchant shipping, established formal British military rule in Massachusetts, made British officials immune to criminal prosecution in America, and required colonists to quarter British troops. The colonists subsequently called the first Continental Congress to consider a united American resistance to the British.
==============================================================================================================================================

The Tea Tax was nothing but a tax so that investors, including members of Parliament, could recoup what they had lost. Or, put another way, Government interference in free market capitalism.
vpatrick
MA MA USA
Posts: 2520
Joined: 2020
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 11:41:18 AM
Quote:
Quote:
1773 the Boston Tea Party happens! Did the Indian disguise fool the Brits.? What's up with the British I've of tea? Having a tea time every day? Did this event piss of the king? Comments?


It certainly pissed off the private business that owned the tea that the vandals dumped in the harbour. The British East India Company was not the British government. They were a business.

I was reading that the ships that were vandalized were actually owned by people in America. They weren't British war ships nor were they owned by people from Britain.

Were the Sons of Liberty who committed the acts of vandalism more upset that their smuggling operations to bring in cheap tea purchased from the Dutch were being compromised by British tactics?

Cheers,

George


Hi George,

That's an interesting take on the Boston tea party living about 6 miles from where it happened I would love to see the look on the Tea Party's tour guides face if you asked that question during a tour.

Im sure the British East India company made the loss up in India or had insurance, hard to feel bad for that horrific company. While no expert on the British East India Company I would guess they were just a legalized smuggling operation.

vpatrick
----------------------------------
nuts
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 11:41:33 AM
Quote:
On December 16, 1944, the Germans launch the last major offensive of the war, Operation Autumn Mist, also known as the Ardennes Offensive and the Battle of the Bulge, an attempt to push the Allied front line west from northern France to northwestern Belgium. The Battle of the Bulge, so-called because the Germans created a “bulge” around the area of the Ardennes forest in pushing through the American defensive line, was the largest fought on the Western front.


Largest what, NY? Largest bulge or largest battle?

BTW your go to site is almost exclusively US centric. Every day. That's why the analysis is incomplete. This was a complex battle and while it was fought by US troops, there were other troops involved in support and in the counter, in the aftermath. Monty played an important role.

Did Bradley mismanage the situation or would the surprise attack have confused any allied leader?

George
morris crumley
Dunwoody GA USA
Posts: 3309
Joined: 2007
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 12:20:43 PM
Funny, constant complaints about being too "US centric" from the biggest "Canada centric" person who posts here!

Yes, allies were involved.....but the bulk of the fighting, and cost paid were borne by US troops. Whats so damn wrong with that?

And MD...you would play hell getting the 101 airborne "battling Bastards of Bastogne " to agree that Patton saved anyone.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 12:21:52 PM
Quote:
Funny, constant complaints about being too "US centric" from the biggest "Canada centric" person who posts here!

Yes, allies were involved.....but the bulk of the fighting, and cost paid were borne by US troops. Whats so damn wrong with that?

And MD...you would play hell getting the 101 airborne "battling Bastards of Bastogne " to agree that Patton saved anyone.

Respects, Morris



1,000,000% I agree with Morris!
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 12:24:00 PM
Quote:
Quote:
1944 the Battle of the Bulge begins! How did the US escape, & win this overwhelming at favorable odds for the Germans, battle? Something about Gen. Patton?? What say you??


As unbearable as Gen. Montgomery was after the battle was over, he deserves a good deal of credit when he took command of all allied forces, US and British, on the north side of the bulge.

It may be interesting to discuss just what Monty did that influenced the battle. He was responsible for the reorganization and placement of troops I believe. And he brought up British troops to ensure that the Germans would not penetrate beyond the Meuse River.

How significant was Monty's work to influence the battle?

Also, is it true that Monty had warned Eisenhower in November that the part of the allied line that the Germans attacked was spread too thin?

Cheers,

George


Churchill summed up the British contribution in the Battle of the Bulge rather succinctly...

Winston Churchill called World War II's Battle of the Bulge "the greatest American battle of the war."
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 12:36:49 PM
Quote:
Quote:
On December 16, 1944, the Germans launch the last major offensive of the war, Operation Autumn Mist, also known as the Ardennes Offensive and the Battle of the Bulge, an attempt to push the Allied front line west from northern France to northwestern Belgium. The Battle of the Bulge, so-called because the Germans created a “bulge” around the area of the Ardennes forest in pushing through the American defensive line, was the largest fought on the Western front.


Largest what, NY? Largest bulge or largest battle?

BTW your go to site is almost exclusively US centric. Every day. That's why the analysis is incomplete. This was a complex battle and while it was fought by US troops, there were other troops involved in support and in the counter, in the aftermath. Monty played an important role.

Did Bradley mismanage the situation or would the surprise attack have confused any allied leader?

George


Monty later exaggerated the British Army’s contributions to the Battle of the Bulge—only about 55,000 men from that army were involved compared to 600,000 Americans.




OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1968
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 2:25:55 PM
John S. D. Eisenhower's "Bitter Woods" covers Monty's famous "I saved the Americans" pomposity.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 2:41:57 PM
Let it be said that every account of the battle that I’ve just been consulting - and these are from British historians - exhibits excruciating embarrassment at Montgomery’s behaviour. He was chastised at the time - and still is now - for his conduct.

He seemed to display autistic traits.

The British involvement was trivial by comparison with that of the Americans. That’s incontestable.

As to whether Montgomery was right in some of his strategic assessments, and justified in his criticism of the American deployment, there is scope for discussion.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 3:39:49 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Funny, constant complaints about being too "US centric" from the biggest "Canada centric" person who posts here!

Yes, allies were involved.....but the bulk of the fighting, and cost paid were borne by US troops. Whats so damn wrong with that?

And MD...you would play hell getting the 101 airborne "battling Bastards of Bastogne " to agree that Patton saved anyone.

Respects, Morris



1,000,000% I agree with Morris!


The complaint is about the site that you choose to inflict upon us every morning. It seems to deal only with US events with a goal to cheerlead and to provide only an American perspective on the event.

Odd that Morris seems to have access to my posts. What happened Morris? Is someone feeding you?

George
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 3:57:20 PM
Quote:
Quote:
1773 the Boston Tea Party happens! Did the Indian disguise fool the Brits.? What's up with the British I've of tea? Having a tea time every day? Did this event piss of the king? Comments?


They were a business.


They were a failing business that used Parliament to change the laws.

Thank God for coffee.
Wazza
Sydney  Australia
Posts: 813
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 4:32:57 PM
Coffee as a heart starter but tea for business!
A brew during ops is the best thing in the world and something I'm afraid coffee just can't top. And I like my coffee.
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4806
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/16/2022 9:22:31 PM
Quote:
That's an interesting take on the Boston tea party living about 6 miles from where it happened I would love to see the look on the Tea Party's tour guides face if you asked that question during a tour.

Im sure the British East India company made the loss up in India or had insurance, hard to feel bad for that horrific company. While no expert on the British East India Company I would guess they were just a legalized smuggling operation.
VP, the looks on their faces would indeed be something to see!

But I might suggest the East India Company has to be considered – with all its warts – as slightly more than “just a legalized smuggling operation.” It was not unlike ventures of the time in northern Europe. The Dutch East India Company, e.g., founded in 1602, comes to mind. So does the Hudson’s Bay Company, established in 1660. In many ways during its 370+ years’ existence, it proved to be arrogant, challenging and badly run. There weren’t sufficient financial regulations in existence at the time to suggest these corporations – typically called “joint-stock” companies – were identical in charters, financing or governance. But they had certain things in common: some sort of financial agreement between adventurers and Crowns; some backing of ventures by force; (perhaps) some ability to manipulate certain legalities.

I’ve not studied such companies in any detail whatsoever. So I can’t explain the logic or history of “joint-venturism”, or explain why the Dutch East India Company, formed some 14 months after the creation of the (English) East India Company, is considered the first “joint-venture” company.

Is there anyone in MHO (Steve Clemens? others?) who could make some sense of the economic structuring behind this 500 year-old approach?

That the East India Company (EIC) played a strong part in the creation of the British Empire goes without doubt. That they grew far beyond their initial mandate is apparent from the area their trade covered. That they abused their support and their authority, at least at some time, is pretty clear; just look at the negative aspects of their rule of India. That many of their governors were utterly incapable of any economic sense appears from to time, including around the time of the American Revolution.

I first got involved with the EIC through the trial of Warren Hastings, who was the first (EIC) Governor-General of Bengal. He was brought to trial for misconduct, mismanagement and personal corruption. His trial ran from 1787-95, finally ending in a clear acquittal.

The lead prosecutor was Edmond Burke, a supporter (a decade earlier) of the American Colonists. In fact, this comment (from Wiki, The Impeachment of Warren Hastings) is worth quoting:

Quote:
The impeachment of Warren Hastings, the first governor-general of Bengal, was attempted between 1787 and 1795 in the Parliament of Great Britain. Hastings was accused of misconduct during his time in Calcutta, particularly relating to mismanagement and personal corruption. The impeachment prosecution was led by Edmund Burke and became a wider debate about the role of the East India Company and the expanding empire in India. According to historian Mithi Mukherjee, the impeachment trial became the site of a debate between two radically opposed visions of empire—one represented by Hastings, based on ideas of absolute power and conquest in pursuit of the exclusive national interests of the colonizer, versus one represented by Burke, of sovereignty based on a recognition of the rights of the colonized.


Finally, at this particular time the EIC was in huge financial trouble, and was trying to get the House to bail it out.

That doesn’t necessarily explain why the British were placing a tax on tea shipped to the American colonies. There are at least other reasons offered for such levies, including American colonial willful forgetfulness of British sanctions on trade in the Caribbean basin during the war preceding the ARW.

I get that the Tea Party remains a major issue in US history. I get that you laud it as an act of honour and a first profession on nationhood. I’m just trying to suggest that the bookmarks that have made the Tea Party sacrosanct are read differently by others.

Cheers
Brian G.
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 6:58:55 AM
On December 17, 1777, the French foreign minister, Charles Gravier, count of Vergennes, officially acknowledges the United States as an independent nation. News of the Continental Army’s overwhelming victory against the British General John Burgoyne at Saratoga gave Benjamin Franklin new leverage in his efforts to rally French support for the American rebels. Although the victory occurred in October, news did not reach France until December 4th.​

Franklin had quickly mustered French support upon his arrival in December 1776. France’s humiliating loss of North America to the British in the Seven Years’ War made the French eager to see an American victory. However, the French king was reluctant to back the rebels openly. Instead, in May 1776, Louis XVI sent unofficial aid to the Continental forces and the playwright Pierre-Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais helped Franklin organize private assistance for the American cause.

Franklin, who often wore a fur cap, captured the imagination of Parisians as an American man of nature and his well-known social charms stirred French passions for all things American. He was the toast of Parisian society, enchanting salons with his wide-ranging knowledge, social graces and witty repartee. Nevertheless, he was not allowed to appear at court.

It took the impressive and long-awaited victory at Saratoga to convince Louis that the American rebels had some hope of defeating the British empire. His enthusiasm for the victory paired with the foreign minister’s concern that the loss of Philadelphia to the British would lead Congress to surrender, gave Franklin two influential allies with two powerful—if opposing—reasons for officially backing the American cause. A formal treaty of alliance followed on February 6, 1778.
==================================================================================================================================================

If you ever walk the battlefield, you will see that the Polish Military engineer, Kosciusczko adroitly placed field fortifications in such places that stopped the British and forced them to travel cross country.

George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 7:12:49 AM
NY, we are all aware that the fighting was done by US forces but, as in all historical events, we could delve further into other issues surrounding this battle. And that would include the influence of Montgomery. However, the US perspective delivered on History.com doesn't allow for in depth discussion. Nor does it mention much of anything other than the terrible losses and bold counter by US forces.

I did mention that Monty cautioned Bradley that the area that was eventually attacked was weakly defended by "resting" troops and that he was concerned. I asked for a confirmation on that.


The US view of Monty with respect to the Battle of the Bulge seems to be that a vainglorious and pompous little man tried to claim credit for an exclusively American victory. The assessment of Monty's personality may have been accurate but I was curious as to how important Monty was to the response to the German attack. Why was he given control of all troops on the north side of the bulge? What did he do when he had that control? Monty's role doesn't begin and and with his ill considered post battle speech.

Was the movement ordered by Monty of British XXX Corps to the Meuse River important at all or just an opportunity to claim credit for British forces?

Is it true that the freezing US paras refused assistance from British and Canadian troops? If so, why? I don't know that answer BTW but it seems that I recall reading it somewhere.

How important were British tanks and the RAF to stopping the German advance? I understand that RAF 2nd Tactical AF placed all of its fighter-bombers at US disposal.

Just some of the questions and things that interest me. You may have others.

So much more to discuss than the obvious, that US forces defeat German forces.



Cheers,


George
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 7:23:16 AM
Quote:
On December 17, 1777, the French foreign minister, Charles Gravier, count of Vergennes, officially acknowledges the United States as an independent nation. News of the Continental Army’s overwhelming victory against the British General John Burgoyne at Saratoga gave Benjamin Franklin new leverage in his efforts to rally French support for the American rebels. Although the victory occurred in October, news did not reach France until December 4th.​

Franklin had quickly mustered French support upon his arrival in December 1776. France’s humiliating loss of North America to the British in the Seven Years’ War made the French eager to see an American victory. However, the French king was reluctant to back the rebels openly. Instead, in May 1776, Louis XVI sent unofficial aid to the Continental forces and the playwright Pierre-Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais helped Franklin organize private assistance for the American cause.

Franklin, who often wore a fur cap, captured the imagination of Parisians as an American man of nature and his well-known social charms stirred French passions for all things American. He was the toast of Parisian society, enchanting salons with his wide-ranging knowledge, social graces and witty repartee. Nevertheless, he was not allowed to appear at court.

It took the impressive and long-awaited victory at Saratoga to convince Louis that the American rebels had some hope of defeating the British empire. His enthusiasm for the victory paired with the foreign minister’s concern that the loss of Philadelphia to the British would lead Congress to surrender, gave Franklin two influential allies with two powerful—if opposing—reasons for officially backing the American cause. A formal treaty of alliance followed on February 6, 1778.
==================================================================================================================================================

If you ever walk the battlefield, you will see that the Polish Military engineer, Kosciusczko adroitly placed field fortifications in such places that stopped the British and forced them to travel cross country.



Ah, the French. Seeking retribution for their loss.

These were the same French who, along with their First Nations' allies, had plagued the British colonists and their desire to expand to the Ohio Valley. These were the French that the colonists implored their British soldiers to do more to protect them. These were the French who were soundly defeated by British forces who did indeed protect their fellow British subjects in the 13 colonies and in doing so removed the French as a threat only to be betrayed by those same colonists, what, not 15 years later when they decided to hop into bed with a former enemy.

Of note, despite the defeat later at Yorktown at the hands of the French navy, the RN would later defeat the French Navy in a battle in the Caribbean called the Battle of the Saints thus eliminating France's attempt to re-establish itself in North America.

George

NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 7:49:49 AM
Last I knew, Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of Allied troops on Europe, and not Montgomery.

Recall the maxim of Frederick the Great...He who defends everything, defends nothing. Ike concentrated the main Allied effort where the terrain was best suited for the advance..North and South of the Ardennes. And such a concentration of troops could only be done by placing smaller number of troops in the Ardennes. Logistics dictated this approach Perhaps if Monty had cleared the banks of the Schelde Estuary in addition to taking the port of Antwerp, the logistical problems of supplying the troops would have been abated.

All this is covered in A Time for Trumpets, by MacDonald.

Also, from my reading, the way to control a breakthrough like the battle of the Bulge, is to secure the flanks, and allow the enemy to penetrate and then counter-attack and seal the bulge. This the Americans learned in WW I. This was employed by the Allies during the Normandy break-out when German troops counter-attacked from Mortain towards Avranches to cut off the American breakthrough at its narrowest point. Operation ‘Lüttich’ began in the early hours of 7 August and involved five panzer divisions. The Allies had originally planned a ‘long envelopment’ of the Germans, trapping them against the Seine, but the Mortain counterattack provided the opportunity for a more compact encirclement. The Americans would push north to Alençon and Argentan while the Canadian First Army struck south towards Falaise. The British Second Army would push east to complete the encirclement. In the end, the Polish 1st Armored Corps sealed the Falaise Gap, fighting to secure the Gap on one side and fighting to prevent the Germans from re-opening the Gap on the other side. The museum at MontOrmel details this fighting.

The same tactics played out in the Ardennes. By denying the Germans access to the roads at the Elsenborn Ridge, the Americans sealed off the northern shoulder of the German advance, forcing the Germans to move further west. This was the decisive battle.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 8:08:45 AM
Quote:
That's an interesting take on the Boston tea party living about 6 miles from where it happened I would love to see the look on the Tea Party's tour guides face if you asked that question during a tour.
Im sure the British East India company made the loss up in India or had insurance, hard to feel bad for that horrific company. While no expert on the British East India Company I would guess they were just a legalized smuggling operation.

vpatrick


Hi Vin, I already responded to your post once but it doesn't seem to be here. I think that sometimes I type a response and then forget to post it.

Anyway, I wanted to mention that when the English crown decided to colonize, it didn't have the money to finance these operations and came up with the idea to allow individual investors to take a risk to finance colonization, hoping for a return. So stocks were sold to a number of investors in what was called a joint-stock investment. These were like the precursors to large corporations.

I think that your state began the as self governing Massachusetts Bay Colony, I think.

The economic system that developed was British mercantilism that regulated the way that the colonies could trade. Goods had to be shipped to Britain where they could be taxed. It also meant that the colonies relied upon British imports for many of its needs. The British wanted the colonies to do well and that also protected the investment of the joint-stock groups that founded them. In some cases, if the colony was failing, the crown assumed governance of the colony. I think that that happened to Massachusetts Bay at one time.

The East India Company was important to the British because it governed the important colony in India. And when it began to fail, the British looked for ways to ensure solvency and figured that a tax on tea would be acceptable to the British colonists in North America. Now the EIC already had a monopoly on tea.

But smuggling by the 13 colonists had become a bit of a game. Many people did it and the British knew about it but had calculated that to stop the smuggling of cheaper goods into the 13 colonies would have been too costly. Many colonists were charged but many were acquitted too. And so regular runs to the Caribbean were made by expert smugglers in the colonies. They would pick up items like tea and molasses from the Dutch, sail home and off load on a deserted coastline.

Now I understand that the famous John Hancock was an outstanding smuggler of Dutch tea and molasses but he became most upset because the East India Company had found a way to undercut Hancock's originally lower priced Dutch tea. I understand that the Boston Tea Party is lauded as one of the first acts of defiance of British rule but I don't think that we should dismiss that the businessmen/smugglers among the Sons of Liberty were also upset that their sales of smuggled tea were disappearing.

And so they dumped the product of their rival, the EIC, into the sea. So was it taxation that was the egregious act or the fact that the smugglers could not sell their product?

The EIC is no candidate for sainthood. It obtained a lot of tea in China and smuggled in opium to pay for it. It used slave labour in India I believe. But it could govern a colony like India even if it had to ally with local rulers. That meant that the crown wasn't fully on the hook.


BTW Vin, I visited Boston when I was a young teenager and have not been back unfortunately. It was a great visit and I enjoyed the city. My relatives lived in Chelmsford. I do recall that the guides on all the tourist stops seemed to be college kids. They would give their presentations and then always reminded the audience that they were struggling college students and if we appreciated their work would we be so kind as to drop something into the box which was right beside the presenter. I remember asking my Dad whether they were working for free and relied on tips but he didn't know the answer. I don't think that the kids doing that sort of work up here would have been so bold. Perhaps times have changed. There was so much to see and do on the waterfront and other places in Massachusetts, but my memory has faded on most of it.

Cheers,

George

George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 8:49:43 AM
Quote:
Last I knew, Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of Allied troops on Europe, and not Montgomery.

Recall the maxim of Frederick the Great...He who defends everything, defends nothing. Ike concentrated the main Allied effort where the terrain was best suited for the advance..North and South of the Ardennes. And such a concentration of troops could only be done by placing smaller number of troops in the Ardennes. Logistics dictated this approach Perhaps if Monty had cleared the banks of the Schelde Estuary in addition to taking the port of Antwerp, the logistical problems of supplying the troops would have been abated.

All this is covered in A Time for Trumpets, by MacDonald.

Also, from my reading, the way to control a breakthrough like the battle of the Bulge, is to secure the flanks, and allow the enemy to penetrate and then counter-attack and seal the bulge. This the Americans learned in WW I. This was employed by the Allies during the Normandy break-out when German troops counter-attacked from Mortain towards Avranches to cut off the American breakthrough at its narrowest point. Operation ‘Lüttich’ began in the early hours of 7 August and involved five panzer divisions. The Allies had originally planned a ‘long envelopment’ of the Germans, trapping them against the Seine, but the Mortain counterattack provided the opportunity for a more compact encirclement. The Americans would push north to Alençon and Argentan while the Canadian First Army struck south towards Falaise. The British Second Army would push east to complete the encirclement. In the end, the Polish 1st Armored Corps sealed the Falaise Gap, fighting to secure the Gap on one side and fighting to prevent the Germans from re-opening the Gap on the other side. The museum at MontOrmel details this fighting.

The same tactics played out in the Ardennes. By denying the Germans access to the roads at the Elsenborn Ridge, the Americans sealed off the northern shoulder of the German advance, forcing the Germans to move further west. This was the decisive battle.



I'm not sure how this rambling post relates to most of what I had asked about the Battle of the Bulge.

The Port of Antwerp saw its first vessel to dock at port on Nov. 28, 1944. I am familiar with the Battle of the Scheldt as the 1st Canadian Army was tasked with clearing the long approach to the port and it was a miserable and costly affair. The Battle of the Bulge began on Dec. 16. Had Antwerp been opened long enough to mitigate allied supply problems in the area in which the Battle of the Bulge was fought?

In hindsight, it is easy to blame Monty for not clearing the Scheldt Estuary after seizing the port itself in September. But Monty wasn't the only allied general who saw the bold strike at Market Garden as a means to shorten the war. Had it succeeded we would would have been lauding Monty for his brilliance.

I presume that your citation of the Falaise Gap battle is an example of how to reduce a bulge. Yes? Now we know that thousands of Germans were killed in that corridor and tons of equipment was destroyed but it is also true that there were insufficient numbers of troops at the cork end of the gap to effectively and quickly put the cork in the bottle. The Poles were part of the Canadian Army and their armoured division did the best that they could though aggressively attacked front and rear by German SS troops. And so thousands of German troops slipped past as the Canadians and Americans closed the pincer claw.

Meanwhile, why the failure to address Monty's role in the Battle of the Bulge? He was placed in charge in the north. And Ike asked him to take on that role. What did Monty do and how did it mitigate the disaster that had befallen the US troops who had been attacked? Or would the result have been the same had Monty not deployed the US troops effectively and brought in reserves. Was the deployment of RAF tactical squadrons important? Was the deployment of British armour important? Did Monty do what Bradley should have done or was it just that Bradley could not know what was happening on the north side of the bulge and needed Monty's eyes at that point?

Lots to discuss so long as you don't get stuck on the "US did this alone" narrative. And I am the first to acknowledge that it was the loss of American boys that stopped the Germans and great respect for anyone who fought there. But there are other aspects of the battle that should interest us.

Dare I say it. even Canadian paras were rushed to the area from England. They deployed near Rochefort. Why?

Let's not narrow our perspective or scope of discussion so much.

George

vpatrick
MA MA USA
Posts: 2520
Joined: 2020
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 10:55:30 AM
Quote:
Quote:
That's an interesting take on the Boston tea party living about 6 miles from where it happened I would love to see the look on the Tea Party's tour guides face if you asked that question during a tour.
Im sure the British East India company made the loss up in India or had insurance, hard to feel bad for that horrific company. While no expert on the British East India Company I would guess they were just a legalized smuggling operation.

vpatrick


Hi Vin, I already responded to your post once but it doesn't seem to be here. I think that sometimes I type a response and then forget to post it.

Anyway, I wanted to mention that when the English crown decided to colonize, it didn't have the money to finance these operations and came up with the idea to allow individual investors to take a risk to finance colonization, hoping for a return. So stocks were sold to a number of investors in what was called a joint-stock investment. These were like the precursors to large corporations.

I think that your state began the as self governing Massachusetts Bay Colony, I think.

The economic system that developed was British mercantilism that regulated the way that the colonies could trade. Goods had to be shipped to Britain where they could be taxed. It also meant that the colonies relied upon British imports for many of its needs. The British wanted the colonies to do well and that also protected the investment of the joint-stock groups that founded them. In some cases, if the colony was failing, the crown assumed governance of the colony. I think that that happened to Massachusetts Bay at one time.

The East India Company was important to the British because it governed the important colony in India. And when it began to fail, the British looked for ways to ensure solvency and figured that a tax on tea would be acceptable to the British colonists in North America. Now the EIC already had a monopoly on tea.

But smuggling by the 13 colonists had become a bit of a game. Many people did it and the British knew about it but had calculated that to stop the smuggling of cheaper goods into the 13 colonies would have been too costly. Many colonists were charged but many were acquitted too. And so regular runs to the Caribbean were made by expert smugglers in the colonies. They would pick up items like tea and molasses from the Dutch, sail home and off load on a deserted coastline.

Now I understand that the famous John Hancock was an outstanding smuggler of Dutch tea and molasses but he became most upset because the East India Company had found a way to undercut Hancock's originally lower priced Dutch tea. I understand that the Boston Tea Party is lauded as one of the first acts of defiance of British rule but I don't think that we should dismiss that the businessmen/smugglers among the Sons of Liberty were also upset that their sales of smuggled tea were disappearing.

And so they dumped the product of their rival, the EIC, into the sea. So was it taxation that was the egregious act or the fact that the smugglers could not sell their product?

The EIC is no candidate for sainthood. It obtained a lot of tea in China and smuggled in opium to pay for it. It used slave labour in India I believe. But it could govern a colony like India even if it had to ally with local rulers. That meant that the crown wasn't fully on the hook.


BTW Vin, I visited Boston when I was a young teenager and have not been back unfortunately. It was a great visit and I enjoyed the city. My relatives lived in Chelmsford. I do recall that the guides on all the tourist stops seemed to be college kids. They would give their presentations and then always reminded the audience that they were struggling college students and if we appreciated their work would we be so kind as to drop something into the box which was right beside the presenter. I remember asking my Dad whether they were working for free and relied on tips but he didn't know the answer. I don't think that the kids doing that sort of work up here would have been so bold. Perhaps times have changed. There was so much to see and do on the waterfront and other places in Massachusetts, but my memory has faded on most of it.

Cheers,

George




Hi Brian,

Let me just preface my comments by saying I welcome different views concerning the American Revolution I find them interesting, its always nice to get both sides of the story and just because I live in Boston does not mean Im still angry, my decedents were in Ireland at the time getting a hard time from the British in different ways, tea was the least of their concerns. Smuggling is a nefarious term, today it usually has something to do with drugs or guns, I would gather there are very few tea smugglers today. By todays terms someone who was trying procure a product and sell it cheaper than his competition would be considered a good businessman or even an entrepreneur. The British were enforcing a monopoly on its colonists there was no such thing as free trade in those days and it just wasn't tea, I can remember reading somewhere one of the things that stoked George Washington's revolutionary zeal was the fact he was forced to buy all of his mercantile goods from Britain and anything that could not be produced in the colonies and the goods were usually overpriced and of inferior quality. So I would just wonder is Smuggler or Smuggling to strong a term especially when living under unfair monopolistic trade practices?

Britain was clearly trying to enrich itself off of its colonies there was no altruistic intent for its expansion into India, China and the Americas. In fact the British plundered India and China using the British East India Company as one of its arms to do it. I would think they went a little easier on the 13 American colonies because they were British people living in them for the most part and I think Britain was shocked by the revolution because of this especially after fighting the French and Indian wars. British backers of the American Revolution like to point out that the greedy colonists(pot calling the Kettle?) owed them one by supporting the colonies during the French and Indian wars and should have been ok with paying higher taxes. I would just say that Britain was fighting that war not just to protect its colonists but further expand its empire they did enrich themselves by getting Canada and knocking the French out of North America, again I don't see any altruistic intent. I often wonder as I am fascinated with the Great estates in Great Britain where the homes of British aristocracy reside (some to this day) as to what proportion of wealth was plundered from India, China and its other colonies was used to build such great wealth and homes, was it entrepreneurial zeal or was it maniacal greed that raped ancient countries in disarray like China and India of its wealth and bounty? I would gather the answer is complex and somewhere in the middle. While my views are unsophisticated and that of a layman I wonder if they did give the American colonies representation in Parliament and treated them as British citizens if the revolution would have ever happened? Then the colonists would have been more content and equal partners in crime.

The colonization by the British and other European countries is a sad chapter in history it led to slavery and blind greed and even the US tried its hand at colonization after defeating the Spanish in the Spanish American war, taking over the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Cuba, even the country that didn't like colonization colonized.

Here is a little tour video I hope might refresh your memory Brian, and Im familiar with Chelmsford many of my coworkers live there.

[Read More]

vpatrick






----------------------------------
nuts
RichTO90
Bremerton WA USA
Posts: 712
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 11:01:12 AM
Quote:

Private Slovik was a scapegoat. He was unfit for military service as he was rated 4F initially.



A "scapegoat" is a "person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes, or faults of others, especially for reasons of expediency." Slovik was the only one of 49 American soldiers who were convicted of desertion and who were sentenced to death not to receive clemency. He was not a "scapegoat", he was an example "pour encourager les autres".

Slovik was fit for military service when he was drafted. He was 4F initially only because of his criminal record, which excluded him under the stringent medical and moral requirements for service that existed until mid-1942. Then the drying up of eligible manpower for the Army resulted in a relaxing of those stringent standards.
RichTO90
Bremerton WA USA
Posts: 712
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 11:05:36 AM
Quote:
BTW your go to site is almost exclusively US centric.


Worse than that it is the Internet arm of the Mythtry Channel, which is preoccupied by the historical intervention of little grey aliens on this planet and the doings of pawn shop operators in Las Vegas. Any site quoting the historical "analysis" of Stephen Ambrose needs to be used with great caution.
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 12:05:43 PM
Quote:
Quote:

Private Slovik was a scapegoat. He was unfit for military service as he was rated 4F initially.



A "scapegoat" is a "person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes, or faults of others, especially for reasons of expediency." Slovik was the only one of 49 American soldiers who were convicted of desertion and who were sentenced to death not to receive clemency. He was not a "scapegoat", he was an example "pour encourager les autres".

Slovik was fit for military service when he was drafted. He was 4F initially only because of his criminal record, which excluded him under the stringent medical and moral requirements for service that existed until mid-1942. Then the drying up of eligible manpower for the Army resulted in a relaxing of those stringent standards.


Since he was the only one of 49 Americans to receive the death penalty, he was undoubtedly a scapegoat. The death penalty was rarely imposed, and usually only for cases involving rape or murder. 102 US servicemen were executed for rape or murder. Slovik was the only soldier executed who had been convicted of a "purely military" offense.

Slovik's criminal record made him classified as morally unfit for duty in the U.S. military (4-F). He should have never been drafted. Slovik's execution was an injustice in light of all the circumstances, and was an example of disparate treatment from a flawed process.

Slovak struggled in school, possibly due to instability at home and malnourishment. Malnutrition was a major reason for disqualifying young men for service before WW II.

For instance, he wasn't even represented by a military lawyer. He was denied due process. He was denied rights guaranteed to any defendant. In other words, he never received a fair trial.

Every one deserves at least, a fair trial.

Since January 31, 1945, no other American deserter has faced a firing squad.
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 12:23:50 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Last I knew, Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of Allied troops on Europe, and not Montgomery.

Recall the maxim of Frederick the Great...He who defends everything, defends nothing. Ike concentrated the main Allied effort where the terrain was best suited for the advance..North and South of the Ardennes. And such a concentration of troops could only be done by placing smaller number of troops in the Ardennes. Logistics dictated this approach Perhaps if Monty had cleared the banks of the Schelde Estuary in addition to taking the port of Antwerp, the logistical problems of supplying the troops would have been abated.

All this is covered in A Time for Trumpets, by MacDonald.

Also, from my reading, the way to control a breakthrough like the battle of the Bulge, is to secure the flanks, and allow the enemy to penetrate and then counter-attack and seal the bulge. This the Americans learned in WW I. This was employed by the Allies during the Normandy break-out when German troops counter-attacked from Mortain towards Avranches to cut off the American breakthrough at its narrowest point. Operation ‘Lüttich’ began in the early hours of 7 August and involved five panzer divisions. The Allies had originally planned a ‘long envelopment’ of the Germans, trapping them against the Seine, but the Mortain counterattack provided the opportunity for a more compact encirclement. The Americans would push north to Alençon and Argentan while the Canadian First Army struck south towards Falaise. The British Second Army would push east to complete the encirclement. In the end, the Polish 1st Armored Corps sealed the Falaise Gap, fighting to secure the Gap on one side and fighting to prevent the Germans from re-opening the Gap on the other side. The museum at MontOrmel details this fighting.

The same tactics played out in the Ardennes. By denying the Germans access to the roads at the Elsenborn Ridge, the Americans sealed off the northern shoulder of the German advance, forcing the Germans to move further west. This was the decisive battle.



I'm not sure how this rambling post relates to most of what I had asked about the Battle of the Bulge.

The Port of Antwerp saw its first vessel to dock at port on Nov. 28, 1944. I am familiar with the Battle of the Scheldt as the 1st Canadian Army was tasked with clearing the long approach to the port and it was a miserable and costly affair. The Battle of the Bulge began on Dec. 16. Had Antwerp been opened long enough to mitigate allied supply problems in the area in which the Battle of the Bulge was fought?

In hindsight, it is easy to blame Monty for not clearing the Scheldt Estuary after seizing the port itself in September. But Monty wasn't the only allied general who saw the bold strike at Market Garden as a means to shorten the war. Had it succeeded we would would have been lauding Monty for his brilliance.

I presume that your citation of the Falaise Gap battle is an example of how to reduce a bulge. Yes? Now we know that thousands of Germans were killed in that corridor and tons of equipment was destroyed but it is also true that there were insufficient numbers of troops at the cork end of the gap to effectively and quickly put the cork in the bottle. The Poles were part of the Canadian Army and their armoured division did the best that they could though aggressively attacked front and rear by German SS troops. And so thousands of German troops slipped past as the Canadians and Americans closed the pincer claw.

Meanwhile, why the failure to address Monty's role in the Battle of the Bulge? He was placed in charge in the north. And Ike asked him to take on that role. What did Monty do and how did it mitigate the disaster that had befallen the US troops who had been attacked? Or would the result have been the same had Monty not deployed the US troops effectively and brought in reserves. Was the deployment of RAF tactical squadrons important? Was the deployment of British armour important? Did Monty do what Bradley should have done or was it just that Bradley could not know what was happening on the north side of the bulge and needed Monty's eyes at that point?

Lots to discuss so long as you don't get stuck on the "US did this alone" narrative. And I am the first to acknowledge that it was the loss of American boys that stopped the Germans and great respect for anyone who fought there. But there are other aspects of the battle that should interest us.

Dare I say it. even Canadian paras were rushed to the area from England. They deployed near Rochefort. Why?

Let's not narrow our perspective or scope of discussion so much.

George



Evidently you haven't studied logistics.

An Army marches on its stomach.

George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 12:56:28 PM
Quote:
Evidently you haven't studied logistics.


That's your response, NY? Noticeable that when you don't wish to respond to any queries or perhaps do not have an answer, you default to condescension.

So why don't you try to explain your original rambling post featuring Frederick the Great, the Battle of the Scheldt, the closing of the Falaise pocket and whatever else. I'm sure that there must have been something pithy in there that I missed but perhaps you would honour me with an explanation.

You have somehow absolved Ike and Bradley I presume for the thin defences where the bulge began so why don't you start there. Perhaps you could tell me whether Monty actually warned Bradley and Ike that he was concerned that the four US divisions near Ardennes were positioned in a 100 mile gap and did so on Nov. 28, coincidentally the first day that ships docked in Antwerp.

Did Monty recommend moving Patton north to cover the area that he felt was sparsely defended?

You may want to tie all of this into some treatise on logistics. Had the opening of the Port of Antwerp eased supply problems sufficiently to assure sufficient delivery of supplies to the US forces? Or was there still great reliance on truck transport from southern France?
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 1:15:30 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Evidently you haven't studied logistics.


That's your response, NY? Noticeable that when you don't wish to respond to any queries or perhaps do not have an answer, you default to condescension.

So why don't you try to explain your original rambling post featuring Frederick the Great, the Battle of the Scheldt, the closing of the Falaise pocket and whatever else. I'm sure that there must have been something pithy in there that I missed but perhaps you would honour me with an explanation.

You have somehow absolved Ike and Bradley I presume for the thin defences where the bulge began so why don't you start there. Perhaps you could tell me whether Monty actually warned Bradley and Ike that he was concerned that the four US divisions near Ardennes were positioned in a 100 mile gap and did so on Nov. 28, coincidentally the first day that ships docked in Antwerp.

Did Monty recommend moving Patton north to cover the area that he felt was sparsely defended?

You may want to tie all of this into some treatise on logistics. Had the opening of the Port of Antwerp eased supply problems sufficiently to assure sufficient delivery of supplies to the US forces? Or was there still great reliance on truck transport from southern France?


I've given you a subject and a reference which will answer your questions.

Happy reading!!
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 1:20:47 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Evidently you haven't studied logistics.


That's your response, NY? Noticeable that when you don't wish to respond to any queries or perhaps do not have an answer, you default to condescension.

So why don't you try to explain your original rambling post featuring Frederick the Great, the Battle of the Scheldt, the closing of the Falaise pocket and whatever else. I'm sure that there must have been something pithy in there that I missed but perhaps you would honour me with an explanation.

You have somehow absolved Ike and Bradley I presume for the thin defences where the bulge began so why don't you start there. Perhaps you could tell me whether Monty actually warned Bradley and Ike that he was concerned that the four US divisions near Ardennes were positioned in a 100 mile gap and did so on Nov. 28, coincidentally the first day that ships docked in Antwerp.

Did Monty recommend moving Patton north to cover the area that he felt was sparsely defended?

You may want to tie all of this into some treatise on logistics. Had the opening of the Port of Antwerp eased supply problems sufficiently to assure sufficient delivery of supplies to the US forces? Or was there still great reliance on truck transport from southern France?


I've given you a subject and a reference which will answer your questions.

Happy reading!!



It's a discussion forum, NY. This is the type of answer given by a fraud. We're here to learn and share, not to play librarian.
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 1:33:07 PM
Actually, it's the response of schoolteachers....the student who reads is the student who succeeds.


But I'll meet you part way.

Monty didn't tell Patton anything. Patton's intelligence chief had more concerns regarding the Ardennes and warned Patton of the Germans perhaps launching a diversionary attack in the Ardennes. Patton asked that a plan be made just in case to meet any threat of enemy action in the Ardennes.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 3:17:47 PM
Quote:
Actually, it's the response of schoolteachers....the student who reads is the student who succeeds.


But I'll meet you part way.

Monty didn't tell Patton anything. Patton's intelligence chief had more concerns regarding the Ardennes and warned Patton of the Germans perhaps launching a diversionary attack in the Ardennes. Patton asked that a plan be made just in case to meet any threat of enemy action in the Ardennes.


Since your arrival here you have made the assumption that you are the only person on this forum that reads. I have never been impressed with people who have to continually spout about how well read and well travelled they are. Are you able to communicate what you have read and learned?

But if your response to questions is simply, "Read this book", then engagement with you has no purpose. If you have read the book, then share your knowledge.

BTW, I never said anything about Monty telling Patton anything. Read my posts more carefully. What I did say is that I have read that Monty suggested to Ike and Bradley that Patton should be moved farther north because US forces were spread too thin near the Ardennes. That may not have been possible given that Patton was complaining about fuel shortages.
vpatrick
MA MA USA
Posts: 2520
Joined: 2020
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 3:28:21 PM
Hello wall here's my head once again, Wall answers "Ha! gotcha again you realize Im just a wall right but thanks best fun Ive had all day, lets do this tomorrow" Head: "never again!.......what time tomorrow?"

----------------------------------
nuts
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 3:34:40 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Actually, it's the response of schoolteachers....the student who reads is the student who succeeds.


But I'll meet you part way.

Monty didn't tell Patton anything. Patton's intelligence chief had more concerns regarding the Ardennes and warned Patton of the Germans perhaps launching a diversionary attack in the Ardennes. Patton asked that a plan be made just in case to meet any threat of enemy action in the Ardennes.


Since your arrival here you have made the assumption that you are the only person on this forum that reads.

But if your response to questions is simply, "Read this book", then engagement with you has no purpose.

BTW, I never said anything about Monty telling Patton anything. Read my posts more carefully. What I did say is that I have read that Monty suggested to Ike and Bradley that Patton should be moved farther north because US forces were spread too thin near the Ardennes. That may not have been possible given that Patton was complaining about fuel shortages.


Actually I learned in geometry never to assume anything. And I always prefer to read for myself.

The defensive lines established by Monty on the Meuse river never encountered any Germans—they ran out of gas before reaching the Meuse. The only British contact during the German advance was when an armored unit advanced beyond the defensive lines and encountered a German advance unit, knocking out 2 tanks.

Montgomery absolutely helped. But Montgomery didn’t “turn the tide” and didn’t play a “critical” role in stopping the Germans.



George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/17/2022 8:15:55 PM
Good for you, NY. I would say that we are all readers here and I am just guessing but I think that we all read for ourselves. But we do read different books and articles and we may not all have read the same books. That is why that it is informative to share different views without attempting to diminish anyone hoping to partipate in discussion. That is also what schoolteachers tell their students. Perhaps you didn't listen to that lesson on respect.

If Monty had not taken charge would the American forces have made the adjustments needed? We cannot answer that but we do know that Monty made the correct moves and brought up reserves while the US forces at places like St. Vith or Elsenborn Ridge resisted mightily.

Note that I have repeatedly acknowledged that most of the fighting, nearly all, was by American forces.
Page 44 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43    44    45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )

© 2024 - MilitaryHistoryOnline.com LLC