Antony Beevor: WWII and Lessons from the Past - 'Arnhem: The Battle of the Bridges'

[@richardbaxter2057]

Back in ‘92 I used to run a Pub (a Bar to my US cousins). One of my early morning regulars was an elderly man, who’d soldiered with the Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry. During XXX Corps advance, the DCLI were left flank protection to it and the story, as related to me first hand, was one of taking a village, moving through it, being attacked from behind (as German Forces moved back into the village that you’d already cleared), fighting back into the village to retake it and then pushing on again. This he said, happened every time they went forward. When the DCLI finally arrived on the Rhine at Driel, they watched as the aerial supply drops attempted to resupply 1st Airborne, in the Oosterbeek Perimeter. His story was, as we know from other reports, one of great heroism, of planes running the gauntlet of intense flak, throwing out the supplies despite the flak and doing the job. He personally watched as one aircraft was hit and caught on fire. It hadn’t dropped all of its supply load and despite being on fire the Pilot went around again.....the plane came on, the supplies went out and just as the last pannier went out of the doorway, the wing that was on fire folded and the plane curved downwards, crashing in a huge explosion of roiling smoke and flame. As he uttered those last words, he burst into an uncontrollable flood of tears and he fled the Pub. What matters most is not who was right, or wrong, whether the plan was right, or wrong,,etc. What matters to me the most is, that forty seven years on from those events, individual men were still terribly traumatised by what they’d seen and done and yet there was no understanding of that and no professional help for them.

[@bigwoody4704]

Antony Beevor is an excellent historical author who sticks to the truth and not revision .So many of these comment sections are filled with slappies & hacks posing as legitimate sources.Thanx for posting this,AB pretty much says it all around 13:20 of this fine video *From A Magnificent Disaster,by David Bennett,page 198* Montgomery attributes the lack of full success to the fact that the II SS Panzer Corps was refitting in the area. *"We knew it was there.....we were wrong in supposing that it could not fight effectively."* Here,Montgomery was at the very least being economical with the truth. Monty should have stuck to the original plan of clearing out Antwerp - a deep water port.This would have provided resupply and reinforcement for any advance.

[@bigwoody4704]

Brereton didn't dictate shit to Montgomery - complaints go up,orders come down.On Sept 10th Monty informed SHAEF and IKE(for the 1st time) he was going for the bridges .It was a Montgomery production and failure. Antony Beevor has more WWII knowledge between his toes than your Family Tree has going back to King Arthur. Keegan,Kershaw,Bennet & Hastings come to the same conclusions.Cornhole - you are full of shit.The only thing that supersedes your ignorance is your willingness to express it

[@bigwoody4704]

For the 2nd time since you like to skip by the facts .Got everything he requested Slappy even bragged about it like a child - so i see why you like him *From A Magnificent Disaster,by David Bennett,page 196* Throughout September Montgomery had been most anxious to open the Channel ports to Allied supply,principally LaHavre,Boulogne and Calais.This he regarded as essential to his strategic plans..But he undertook Market Garden without these ports and with a supply line extending from his rear maintenance area around Bayeux directly to the divisions of second Army. *The inadequacy of this arrangement led him to ask for more supplies.When he got them,he rescinded the delay in the launch of Market Garden and to Gen.Harry Crerar he wrote that he had won a "great victory" at SHAEF* *Montgomery never requested more transport for his divisions..He got all the logistical support he requested with only minor delays* .The truth was that the operation was too ambitious .In launching it with a tenuous supply line,no reserve build up of supplies,a shortage of ground transport and both VIII & XII Corps not ready at the start,Montgomery's professionalism had deserted him

[@bigwoody4704]

SHAEF stopped 3rd Army for a week to help out Monty and he still fucked it up.And Reynolds is a hack.....much like yourself

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell wrote "From Monty and Patton:Two Paths to Victory by Michael Reynolds: "There is no doubt in my mind that Eisenhower always wanted to give priority to the northern thrust and to scale down the southern one. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This is total bullshit Ike like everyone else hated Monty's guts.This guy says there's no doubt in his mind.That is probably why no one but you quotes his work.Kershaw,Keegan,Hastings,Hart never offered such a dipshit opinion.IKE trusted Monty as far as he could throw his staff car .You picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell wrote The words are from MONTY you fool, not Reynolds. It was Monty who wrote; ----------------------------------------------------- For your case that's even worse Monty is a proven bullshitter.Deflecting blame that was his and credit that wasn't.Go look up why Churchill had to address Parliament in Jan 1945 - could have been February *From D-Day,The Battle for Normandy,by Antony Beevor,page 229* Monty liked to keep his objectives vague,often with metaphors,so with a break out he would claim credit for it.If the operation ran into the sand he would simply say he was tying down the Germans

[@whamtheman]

Beevor may not be the best historian, but his writing has been vastly more interestingly crafted and easy to consume than any other historian I've read. He manages to construct a mix of data, facts, anecdotes and first- and second hand accounts that make following the sequence of events a pleasant experience.

[@johnburns4017]

Not much good if it is inaccurate, as his tomes on Market Garden are.

[@bigwoody4704]

Get a life child no one believes anything you bark in the Governments care

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, how many people have you been this week?

[@bigwoody4704]

Ladies and gentlemen... I would like to give you Exhibit A of "why you don't do drugs when you're pregnant" because unfortunately you may spawn something like whatever it was that just responded to my comment

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 This really sad. Rambo is getting worse.

[@filipeamaral216]

Sir Antony walks in at 4:56

[@grumpyoldman8661]

Reply to Barry Martin: I do think there is something in your suggestion that Antony Beevor may (unconsciously?) have been influenced by the American book sales market when writing about the British conduct of the war in Europe, and specifically in his attacks on Montgomery - in itself sure to attract American readers of military history. Understandably, there can be nothing more satisfying to US consumers of military history than to find this great Commander being denigrated by... a British military historian. It justifies and supports the constant disparagement in American books and movies - e.g.: "A Bridge Too FAR" - of the British Army in general and Monty in particular. Fortunately, there seems to be something of a reaction against this now, and one must mention just one book: John Buckley's "Monty's Men" which sets out the war-making philosophy of the British in the Normandy Campaign based on the hard lessons learned in WWI. He shows how the Germans bled themselves white in their attacks on the British, making it that much easier for Gen.Bradley's Operation Cobra to succeed. At the time the American press was suggesting that the GI's were doing all the fighting and dying, unlike the British who were watching from the side-lines. Actually the Anglo-Canadians were bearing the brunt of the fighting as Bradley admitted, and this is no fault of the Americans, it was how Montgomery (as Land Force Commander) had planned. Buckley is too fine an historian not to criticize Montgomery, and does so where necessary. In respect of Market Garden there remains the nagging question over the failure of Gen. Gavin's 82nd Airborne to take the bridge at Nijmegen. Horrocks' XXX Corps had arrived on D-plus 2 just 8-miles from Arnhem, no distance at all, but, "unlike all the other bridges on the road to Arnhem, the Nijmegen bridge had not been taken on D-Day it was still firmly in German hands and fighting was raging in the town. Something had clearly gone wrong" (Robin Neillands: "The Battle for the Rhine 1944") [UK]

[@bigwoody4704]

Montgomery had burnt bridges with British Officers before he started in on the Yanks.Also very condescending to the Canadians and the Poles.Beevor is hardly the only one to touch base on this.Hastings,Bennet,Hart,Kergan,Kershaw.MajoR Brian Urquhart - who later became under secretary of the UN have all made Beevor's points(just to name a few).Probably because there is more than just a grain of truth there.He was definitely a raging narcissist read IKE & Monty - Generals at War.He tried to take credit for the Battle of the Bulge in which he was hardly engaged.He wasn't all that but the press made him a star and stoop to anything to keep it that way

[@grumpyoldman8661]

Well Big Woody, Monty certainly had more then his fair share of character deficiencies, but he wasn't alone in that, look at Patton. As his Chief of Intelligence Bill Williams commented 'No, he wasn't a nice man...(but) nice men don't win wars' (quoted in "The Lonely Leader: MONTY 1944-1945" by Alistair Horne).It is also true that he had his fair share of critics in SHAEF grouped around Tedder who was hardly an expert on land warfare, being an Air-Marshal. But then Ike's HQ was a hotbed of back-biting and vanity driven politicking, amongst both US and British personnel; it is always thus. I believe Arnhem was hastily implemented -its errors varied and complex - but brilliantly conceived. You raise the subject of the "Battle of the Bulge", and it is true, compared to the US forces the British contribution to the fighting was minor (but not insignificant tactically). Emphatically this does not apply to Montgomery's role who was delegated to the command of both British and American forces to halt the German advance in this sector: "Montgomery's contribution to restoring the situation was that he turned a series of isolated actions into a coherent battle fought according to a clear a definite plan. It was his refusal to engage in premature and piecemeal counter-attacks which enabled the Americans to gather their reserves and frustrate the German attempts to extend the breakthrough" [Gen.Hasso von Manteuffel (5th Panzer Army)] Undoubtedly, the press Conference after was an unmitigated disaster, and Monty should have kept his mouth zipped, but he was totally blind to the importance of diplomatic PR in a set-up where Britain was becoming the junior partner to the Americans - he just didn't 'get it'. As for the British press trumpeting Monty's triumphs to the British public, are you seriously suggesting that the American press didn't do the same over 'old blood-n-guts'? Turning to the Normandy Campaign: as Bedell-Smith admitted to Ike:"I don't think we could have done it without Monty. It was his sort of battle. Whatever they say about him, he got us there" (Horne "Lonely leader"); Montgomery was the master of the set-piece battle. Finally, if you read any of my comments dotted around U-tube on this subject, you will never see me disparaging the bravery and fighting skills of the US forces in WW2. Best wishes; Grumpy (UK).

[@bigwoody4704]

Good Post Grumpy - if you get a chance read IKE & Monty,Generals at War

[@grumpyoldman8661]

Thanks Big Woody, I know of the book and will get hold of a copy. At the moment I'm re-reading "The Russian Revolution" by Richard Pipes (A great American historian who passed away this year). Look after yourself; Grumpy.

[@donnied9432]

I just enjoy listening to his voice. I can hear it when I read his words.

[@MrBrett1963]

Wow, as an American who will most likely be put down for liking both Beevor and Hastings, I am surprised at how poorly both are received in the UK. I grew up in the 70's when Monty bashing was all the rage after the movie Patton came out, and I have never read Nigel Hamilton's biography, but actually, reading Beevor,. Hastings, and also D'Este and McManus from the US, I really had my opinion of him revised. This book in particular glossed over (probably for the better) the issues of command and supply facing the Alies after the dash across France and I feel like Montgomery wasn't really mentioned all that much. Browning always came across as such a non-entity militarily (did they really need to use 30+ gliders on D-Day for his corps HQ when they would have been better served going to the 1st or 82nd divisions?) I do agree that the blame for Market Garden should be placed at Eisenhower: he should have not allowed Montgomery to have his way and order him to clear the Schelde estuary and thereby allow Antwerp to be used as a port rather than go after a bridge across the Rhine. It was a flawed plan in that in depended on too many things going right. When you look at how Montgomery assured success on D-Day and how the overall battle of Normandy basically went according to plan (British holding o the left, Americans break out on the right) at least in the most basic sense, I can't understand why Monty himself, such a professional soldier, thought it was a sound military operation.

[@bigwoody4704]

RJ your right it was a flawed plan that damn near demanded perfection to be pulled off.Montgomery's success was a creation of the British Press needing a hero.Allied success in N.Africa strangling the Afrika Korp created the Monty myth.Britain had good soldiers BLM wasn't one of them

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, we have all told you about making things up. Now stop it.

[@bigwoody4704]

Get it together kid. Grow up. Get a life. Stop being a burden on society

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, A life in Alaska I do not want.

[@bigwoody4704]

I live in Ohio,I'm sure Geronimo could use you in Alaska as wolf,bear or wolverine bait .You squeal a lot and smell that would work

[@matshagglund3550]

"By writing "as soon as possible" General Gavin created an illusion that it had been the responsibility of the cautious Colonel Lindquist to decide when to send the troops to Waal Bridge. By doing so, General Gavin introduced the myth of "the misunderstanding" and an excuse for not having captured Waal Bridge in time for operation "Market Garden" to succeed." - Poulussen, Lost at Nijmegen

[@johnburns4017]

Mats Hagglund Yes, Gavin was passing the buck to a lower rank.

[@bigwoody4704]

Poullusen is a bigger rube than Burns if that's even attainable

[@michaelschmid9567]

@@bigwoody4704 But Gavin was the most incompetent general on the battlefield. Or are there any doubts on this?

[@bigwoody4704]

No he wasn't the 82nd had the most objectives and spread the furthest apart of the airborne units.Monty trying to shoehorn a whole column up a 70 mile elevated lane with no room for maneuver and winter closing in is the idea of an idiot that had no business leading a boy scout assembly. How come Model/Student were able to ferry tanks and troops across rivers/canals under the ever watchfull RAF,and Horrocks/Montgomery could NOT do the same?Not in September,not in October and not in November!!! Montgomery and to a lesser extent IKE own this debacle

[@bigwoody4704]

@@johnburns4017 Why do you slappies constantly make false statements about the war and then beg to be proven wrong ? are you squids still living in the shadow of National Shame for being ejected from the continent like a flea being flicked off a dogs ass ?

[@akgeronimo501]

Love his books, and could listen to him talk about history all day.

[@bigwoody4704]

Hello 501 I've admired some of your handy work straightening out the slappy - revisionists on the Market-Garden Boards/Videos.I've had a pretty good go at some of them myself.Can't believe some of them hold down jobs.Cornhole here being a case in point

[@bigwoody4704]

No,501 was taking you/Burns/Village Ass to task before I arrived.Revisionist Slappies such as yourselves & TIK need a good drubbing occasionally to keep you straight

[@bigwoody4704]

just because I agree with someone else that you are a lying twat does not indicate collusion - because you are .If your brains were TNT you couldn't blow your own hat off.The last time I locked horns with you,you stopped responding .You said something after I proved GI's were over the Rhine 2 days before Monty.Then you came back Monty was in Germany 1st,then I proved GI's crossed at Oppheim,Germany then you got scarce Now the sad fact is you/Burns/Village Ass just might be the same account.All of you trying to whitewash Monty's abominations and blaming it on the 82nd Airborne.Where was your hero anyway during OMG while the wheels were coming off all around?Playing with the 12 year old Swiss Boy would be my guess.

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell wrote I didn't stop posting to you. YOU DELETED YOUR OWN POSTS AND THREADS and I could not longer reply to DELETED POSTS AND THREAD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lying & stupidity are second nature to you.I've never deleted my posts,specially one that points out your overwhelming ignorance.If I search the archives and find it will you quit posting?Please say yes,I do so enjoy a good smackdown.And furthermore dumbass there were all sorts of German Armor - halftracks,Stugs,APC's,Panzers,mobile anti-aircraft units.Foot soldiers don't stand a chance against armor you fucktard.And nobdy cares who you blame because you are not a source to be taken seriously. How is it 1st Para went in with 11,000 troops and come out with around 2,100.Not because they weren't good troops,because Monty got them killed and you won't admit shit .Everyone Brooke,Tedder,Ramsey and even his own troops pointed right at Monty .Author Historians Kershaw,Hastings,D'Este,Keegan and Beevor all point out Montgomery shit the bed

[@bigwoody4704]

Oh,my Cornhole deleted his account - AGAIN.More than likely he got banned *From A Magnificent Disaster,by David Bennett,page 198* Montgomery attributes the lack of full success to the fact that the II SS Panzer Corps was refitting in the area. *"We knew it was there.....we were wrong in supposing that it could not fight effectively."* Here,Montgomery was at the very least being economical with the truth. He's talking about the armored units and Model was reinforcing Arnhem from Germany.MAJOR FAIL BY MONTGOMERY

[@harrybalszak7526]

Lecture starts @ 1:46:10

[@matshagglund3550]

"The misunderstanding argument has been used over and over again, and successfully downplayed the role of 82nd Airborne division in Operation Market Garden." - Poulussen, Lost at Nijmegen (much better study of Nijmegen that what Beevor has tried)

[@thevillaaston358]

Poultussen is a hack

[@bigwoody4704]

@@thevillaaston358 atta boy Vile I knew you had it in you 😁

[@alexis221092]

Wow i didn't know Robert de Niro was an historian too . Well done !

[@johnburns4017]

22:20 *what complete nonsense.* The US 101st failing to seize the Son bridge put XXX Corps 12 hours behind, not 36 hours. *XXX Corps made up the time and got to Nijmegen just ahead of schedule.* By the time XXX Corps seized the Nijmegen bridge because the 82nd failed to do so, which also was not their allocated task, they were 36 hours behind schedule.

[@bigwoody4704]

Hey puddles just because your Hero TIK twisted the truth and sullied a good man's rep doesn't mean you have to follow him into the abyss.And Johnny where the hell was Montgomery for 10 days - he sure as hell wasn't commanding.10 days,we knew where Guderian was in battle,We knew where Zhukov was in battle,we knew where Patton was in battle.Where was your abrasive little freak at?Hiding he knew his last big chance had just swirled the drain - he folded like a deck chair on the Titanic

[@bigwoody4704]

Quit lying your twisted little runt got everything he wanted and turned it into disaster.The so called field marshall got scarce as his masterpiece unfolded

[@bigwoody4704]

I already told you dipshit when I find people lying & slandering like you do about OMG.I don't feel the need to answer to a lying ignoranus such as yourself when my countrymen had to finish a war they didn't declare - your welcome.Ya know I almost wish Hitler had left Russia alone.Then you'd be singing the Beer Barrel Polka instead of God Save the Queen

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, what were the screaming voices telling you about the 82nd today?

[@bigwoody4704]

They wouldn't have needed to,the Luftwaffe could have stayed at home.Thus the V-rockets would have been produced in huge numbers.No men and material would have been wasted in the east

[@davemac1197]

To repeat the lie from a Hollywood film script at 22:20 that XXX Corps were "36 hours behind schedule" at Son is only the most blatant untruth in this video. XXX Corps were under orders not to advance armour at night per WW2 doctrine, and the bridge was constructed entirely during the hours of darkness on 18/19 September, so as John Sliz explains in his book, Bridging The Club Route - Guards Armoured Division’s Engineers During Operation Market Garden (2015, 2016), the delay at Son was effectively zero hours. What might have saved a whole day at this point in the advance was Browning's original intent to land paratroops on drop zones south of the Wilhelmina canal and Eindhoven in his 'airborne carpet' concept to help seize the bridges at Son and in Eindhoven, and also a small bridge over a stream called the Tongel reep (a tributary of the river Dommel) at Aalst, just 4 km beyond Valkenswaard. These drop zones for 101st Airborne were objected to by Paul Williams of US IX Troop Carrier Command because of the minimal Flak around Eindhoven (most of it had been evacuated) and the drop zones were removed from Browning and Montgomery's operation SIXTEEN outline for Brereton and Williams' final MARKET plan. It's odd that the phrase 'airborne carpet' remains in the film script (spoken by Dirk Bogarde as Browning in the Airborne Corps briefing scene), but the concept itself was deleted from the plan. Yes, MARKET was a flawed plan, but you should blame the authors of it Antony, not Browning and Montgomery. Since the Irish Guards stopped at Valkenswaard on 17 September with an hour of daylight left, they could have continued and made contact with US paratroops, if they had been at Aalst, before darkness fell and the tanks would have to be laagered behind an infantry line, but they could have done that anywhere in the territory secured by the 101st. As it was, the Guards were held up at Aalst by two 8.8cm Flak guns and a StuG assault gun, while alternative routes and a means of dealing with the guns was explored, wasting most of the day. Contact was made with the 101st in Eindhoven late on D+1 (18 September) and bridging equipment (already at Valkenswaard) brought up to Son between 1900-1930 hrs as darkness fell and the bridge replaced in just 10 hours and 15 minutes overnight. If contact had been made with the 101st at Aalst and bridging material brought up on the evening of D-Day (17 September), a whole 24 hours could have been shaved off the actual timeline. Beevor investigated none of this in his lamentable research, which only seemed to consist of following the pro-American bias of Cornelius Ryan's original work, which helped sell both their books in the largest English-language market. The rest of Beevor's egregious errors would take a whole book in two volumes to sort out, and I recommend acclaimed Swedish historian Christer Bergström's Arnhem 1944 - An Epic Battle Revisited vols 1 and 2 (2019, 2020). Revision is not only valid in historical research, it is essential, and the only people who object to revision are those with a vested interest in not getting to the truth.

[@bigwoody4704]

*British author Norman Dixon wrote* “Through inappropriate risk-taking, underestimation of the enemy, the neglect of unpalatable information and a failure of technology,military decisions by able brains, at high levels of command, brought down misery and chaos.”

[@akgeronimo501]

Big Woody, kzbin.info/www/bejne/mqayiqF_fM6pr9U, check it out. I quote "the problem with Monty's books is, to be blunt, a liar". Classic.

[@bigwoody4704]

Didn't see your comment I'm gonna watch both halves of that docu.I knew Monty was a full blown lying,self absorbed & promoting dolt but "Ike & Monty really brings it home.Most of their officers detested him for his boasting and ignoring those who did much more than he.And also really disrespecting those he thought under him - that was pretty much everyone

[@akgeronimo501]

What makes me laugh about all these people is hundreds of authors and historians see the same things. Yet they find the off hand book written years separated from event, with almost no first person sources and they run with them.

[@bigwoody4704]

After about 3 straight times of Monty badmouthing/lecturing IKE Freddie de Guingand was informed by IKE that Alexander would replace Monty.Monty apologizes,Sir Winston apologizes,then the pedant runt runs his mouth again.Monty bitched about the speed of allied advance yet he was with out exception the last one to pull up stakes because he was always "PLANNING",planning what was anyone's guess.About 4 months back I posted (from Hastings book)how Monty made such a big production of crossing the Rhine with the Press in tow.When Hodges,Patton,Bradley & a Div of Engineers crossed over days before the rube.

[@akgeronimo501]

Monty was what he was, a one trick pony. To quote LTG Smith (Ike's chief of staff), "he always plans a frontal assault and always bogs down".

[@johnburns4017]

All from the *US Official History:* The European Theater of Operations THE SIEGFRIED LINE CAMPAIGN by Charles B. MacDonald CENTER OF MILITARY HISTORY UNITED STATES ARMY WASHINGTON, D.C., 1993 Page 161: Colonel Lindquist's 508th Parachute Infantry and of Colonel Ekman's 505th Parachute Infantry had assembled within an hour after the D-Day drop. Page 162: General Gavin's understanding, as recalled later, was that Warren's battalion was to *move "without delay after landing."* On the other hand, Colonel Lindquist's understanding, also as recalled later, was that no battalion was to go for the bridge until the regiment had secured its other objectives, that is to say, not until he had established defenses protecting his assigned portion of the high ground and the northern part of the division glider landing zone. *Instead of moving immediately toward the Nijmegen bridge, Colonel Warren's battalion was to take an "assigned initial objective" in the vicinity of De Ploeg, a suburb of Nijmegen a mile and a quarter southeast of the city astride the Nijmegen-Groesbeek highway.* Page 163: Colonel Warren about *1830* sent into Nijmegen a patrol consisting of a rifle platoon and the battalion intelligence section. This patrol was to make an aggressive reconnaissance, investigate reports from Dutch civilians that only eighteen Germans guarded the big bridge, and, if possible, capture the south end of the bridge. Colonel Warren directed Companies A and B to rendezvous at a point just south of Nijmegen at *I900* As the scouts neared a traffic circle surrounding a landscaped circular park near the center of Nijmegen, the Keizer Karel Plein, from which a mall-like park led northeast toward the Nijmegen bridge, a burst of automatic weapons fire came from the circle. The time was about two hours before *midnight. (2200 hrs)* Page 164: *the chance for an easy, speedy capture of the Nijmegen bridge had passed.* This was all the more lamentable because in Nijmegen during the afternoon the Germans had had nothing more than the same kind of "mostly low quality" troops encountered at most other places on D Day. Page 185 For all the concern that must have existed about getting to Arnhem, only a small part of the British armor was freed late on D plus 4, 2 I September, to start the northward drive. As the attack began, British commanders saw every apprehension confirmed. The ground off the main roads was low-lying, soggy bottomland, denying employment of tanks. A few determined enemy bolstered with antitank guns might delay even a large force. Contrary to the information that had been received, Colonel Frost and his men had been driven away from the north end of the Arnhem bridge the afternoon before, so that since the preceding night the bridge had been open to German traffic. At the village of Ressen, less than three miles north of Nijmegen, the Germans had erected an effective screen composed of an SS battalion reinforced with I I tanks, another infantry battalion, 2 batteries of 88-mm. guns, 20 20-mm. antiaircraft guns, and survivors of earlier fighting at Nijmegen, all operating under General Bittrich's II SS Panzer Corps.20 Arnhem lay seven miles north of this screen. The British could not pass.

[@bigwoody4704]

*Tanks take 18-hour break 11 miles from Arnhem* The burning question of Market Garden though remains Captain Peter Carrington's and his great Grenadier Guards' tank break. Eyewitness 82nd Airborne Captain Moffatt T. Burriss recounts the words of General Horrocks, in charge of the tank reinforcements of XXX Corps, promising the collected Allied commanders, poised to take the penultimate Nijmegen bridge. “My tanks will be lined up in full force at the bridge, ready to go, hell-bent for Arnhem. Nothing will stop them.” Instead, once Burriss and his men had taken the bridge, Horrocks, now with a clear run to Arnhem, ordered his men to take an 18-hour break, by which time Frost’s men at Arnhem Bridge had been defeated, and the battle was lost. Historians and soldiers have argued, and will continue to argue, over why Horrocks’ depleted Corps of tanks, at least 100, failed to make that final 11-mile cruise to Arnhem on the evening of Wednesday 20th September, 1944. *Not enough ammunition, we are told. Well, one tank that did make the trip on its own through Lent and out the other side was described by its commander Sergeant Robinson pumping “round after round” into a lone German assault gun, then moving further up the road to do the same into Lent church from which unholy fireball a company of SS Panzer Grenadiers were observed to scatter in disarray.* Darkness, making it impossible for anti-tank guns to sight and range, might be the perfect cover for a tank advance and Lloyd Clark reveals in his 2008 book Arnhem, “Jumping the Rhein, 1944 and 1945,” that Horrocks “was a great advocate of the night tank attack.” Even Colonel Frost points out how vulnerable the German soldiers were at night. According to the maestro, “They had one major weakness in that they did not relish fighting by night… then was the time to advance on them, to bypass them, to do what one wanted.” Not enough infantry is another excuse given for the halting of the tanks, but Horrocks had the crisp 130th Brigade of the 43rd Infantry Division twiddling their thumbs just south of Nijmegen, which he appears to have forgotten about. Not only that, scores of 82nd Airborne paratroopers that had taken the Nijmegen bridge were leaping up onto, and on one occasion even into, British tanks, expecting to accompany them on the 20-minute ride to Arnhem. Parachutes are being dropped at Ginkel Heath in Ede, the Netherlands, on September 19, 2009. The activity is organised to mark the 65th anniversary of the Battle of Arnhem which was fought in and around the city of Arnhem from the 17-26 September 1944 (AFP Photo) Then there was the “boggy terrain” of the lowlands which meant the tanks would have to stick to the mostly elevated dyke roads. No problem, *according to German General Heinz Harmel, who insisted later that he had no forces to block the way and the British had made a big mistake staying put. “If they had carried on it, would have been all over for us,” he told the author of “It Never Snows In September: The German View of Market Garden,” former British Army Colonel Robert Kershaw.* Having taken the Nijmegen bridge, Captain Moffatt Burris was the first to arrive at Captain Carrington’s Sherman tank, parked triumphant but motionless by the north ramp. When urged to head north to relieve the British Airborne at Arnhem, Carrington refused to budge, saying his orders were to “stay here and wait for the infantry.” When I interviewed Moffatt Burriss, he testified: “I cocked my tommy gun, pointed it at his head and said, ‘Get down that blankety-blank road before I blow your blankety-blank head off." Carrington explained politely that Captain Burriss surely didn’t expect him to obey orders of a foreign officer, but then, Burriss says, Carrington “ducked into his tank and locked the hatch” so, as Burriss recalls, “I couldn’t get at him.” Over the subsequent hour-and-a-half in-between the Nijmegen bridge and the little town of Lent that evening, a succession of ever higher-ranking American Airborne officers turned up to have a word with Captain Carrington in his tank. “Why aren’t you going?” demanded Capt. Burriss’ CO, Major Cook. *Half an hour later 504 Parachute Infantry Regiment’s Colonel Tucker arrived, telling Carrington: “Your boys are hurting up there at Arnhem. You’d better go. It’s only 11 miles.” Just before dark, around 8pm, the top US officer, General Gavin himself, arrived and told Carrington: “If they were my men in Arnhem we would move tanks at night, we would move anything at night to get there.”*

[@bigwoody4704]

I'm copying my old replies to your similar previous bullshit.Just go sit in the corner adults are talking over here Just STFU I was reading your heresy and slander going back 3-4 years on another board .You are either a liar or ignorant or in your case a ignorant liar .No one needs to here your bullshit revision on why 43rd Wessex or XXX Corp were late and then sat.The objective was Arnhem Bridge which turned into the rescue of 1st Para.The 82nd Air Borne cleary wanted to carry the fight forward the others not so much.Burris/Cook/Tucker all the way up to Gavin told Carrington to move it.That the 82nd just lost 48 KIA&138 wounded too bad that couldn't have been you CORNHOLE then you'd understand what valor is And Montgomery was a bigger liar than you that was getting sued for libel by other British Officers on his memoirs initial print that had to be retracted and clarified.The 82nd made the bridge you lying twat waffle.They were drove off by armor - Frost & Gavin said it and Monty later admitted it.You'll stop at nothing to prop up your could have been hero.Just go back and read that that Sandhurst trained British Para who beat you like a dusty rug on TIK's board.That's recommended reading right there Sad really you pick fights on the internet just to have some one to talk to

[@bigwoody4704]

Again just for you,Johnny *kzbin.info/www/bejne/b5immJuoob9ora8* Here you go you Distorian - in their words by the BBC.I suppose they are full of it also.It's over Johnny we're all on to your barking babble .Watch the video I even put it at the exact time that you need to learn at.Even you can't screw it up - probably

[@bigwoody4704]

They never were you've confused them with the tankers that sat - this we know.Good thing we weren't at Dunkirk you'd spin your lying limpdick stories to fit that narrative also.Very grateful the Dutch people know the facts.Hey I have an idea let's go re-read that conversation between you and the British Para .You know the one who graduated from Sandhurst and blasted any illusions of credibility you ever had.Ya know I almost felt bad for you - almost and couldn't help but squirm while viewing that thrash

[@bigwoody4704]

Oh brilliant so either he is lying or Horrocks is,both obviously were incompetent as indeed was Montgomery.Pointing fingers while 1st Para was getting slaughtered as were the 82 - but at least those units bathed themselves in honor and valor.Unlike those who chose to sit it out.They really were drinking tea.Beevor is absolutely right the operation should have been cancelled as Freddie de Guingand told him

[@bigwoody4704]

Not really but had they done their jobs like the 82nd,maybe 48 GI's wouldn't have gotten killed 73 ago crossing the Waal.He had a nice long life unlike the hero's that really fought the war.The same guys that keyboard pounding pusiies like you and John Burns stab in the back.Hey why don't you enjoy a spot of tea - I know Carrington would approve.Oh and make sure you are sitting - he would approve of that also

[@RPGTherapist]

Terrifyingly prescient about Russia's invading neighbouring countries...

[@bigwoody4704]

Beevor's Arnhem is the single most exhaustive and best description and sourced of Operation Market Garden written.Kershaws "It Never Snows in September" covers the German perspective,both basically agree it it the so called Field Marshall Montgomery failed foreray.Unlike the revision of TIK and the rags he quotes. It is written with the benefits of an exhaustive research of the British, American, Dutch and German records, the book provides amazing detail to "The Bridge Too Far" in Arnhem, Nethlerlands. The whole plan suffered from the plain fact that it relied on a single road of attack by the British XXX Corps where going off the road was a near impossibility due to the wet, boggy polders, obvious to anyone who has spent any time in The Netherlands (they rarely use fences in pastures as a dug ditch will quickly fill with water creating a natural barrier). The failure to listen to Dutch military personnel about the geographical defeat of the plan was just another in a string of Montgomery ego led disasters. The utter evil -- absolutely barbaric and shocking to the conscious -- actions of the Nazi SS, the German commanders in The Netherlands, the Dutch SS and the average German soldier are properly detailed and the Dutch people would rightly demand a fuller accounting of the barbarous actions during those months. The author thoroughly explores the lack of planning by Montgomery and Browning, the willful self delusion of Montgomery borne from an ego that held little regard for the futility and needless death of British and American troops. Reluctantly and very mistakenly Eisenhower put American Divisions under the command of the British General Montgomery in what turned out to be the greatest loss of any American Airborne Division -- before or since. Montgomery should be a national disgrace to the British, that is clear. Eisenhower began acting as a politician in deferring to Monty's superhuman ego, and abdicated his role as general commanding in a war. The greatest suffering was then endured by the Dutch people. Epic in its tragedy. A lesson in failed leadership by the British and American commanding generals. A shock and outrage to the conscious in the inhumanity and pure evil of the German army. A story that needs to be retold -- and very well done. I would agree with the criticism that the battle maps were not helpful and could have been done better.

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, a quiz. Name the bridge the US 82nd *failed* to seize? 20 points for the correct answer.

[@bigwoody4704]

Name the so called failed marshmellow,err, i mean Field Marshall that didn't have the cajones to show up for his own plan - Operation Monty Garden?

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 *BZZZZZZZZZT!* Wrong answer. Rambo, the name of the bridge the US 82nd failed to seize was...the.... 🍾🎊🎈 *Nijmegen bridge* 🍾🎊🎈 Zero points Rambo. Zero. Better luck next time.

[@bigwoody4704]

Irving burns get that head wound looked you are realizing hallucinations again. Had your family of warblers held up their end of the bargain my family wouldn't have had to finish the scrum for you. Just like the last war Johhny - you're welcome

[@bigwoody4704]

Blisterhead burns, which country were The world leaders in strategic retreats? They couldn't cross the 21-30 mile ENGLISH Channel for 4 full yearsc-cafter getting driven into it. It's a tough one They had been "evacuated" from: Norway,Netherlands, Belgium and France,Dunkirk in 1940 -Greece, Crete,Hong Kong and Libya in 1941 -Tobruk and Dieppe,Singapore in 1942 there is more but that is too much typing Was shear display Military brilliance - just ask the French/Dutch/Poles who watched Brooke & Bernard take to the boats as they were taking bullets at Dunkerque

[@nitinkanals5087]

Wow Antony Beevor himself cool. 😃

[@bandwagon22]

Beevor got it wrong - once again. The number one reason why Market Garden failed was not Monty or Horrocks. The biggest blunder happened in Nijmegen were General Gavin of US Airborne troops were didn't capture Nijmegen bridges immeadiately. He gave Germans 36 hours time to organize their defense and counter attacks. Market Garden is fine example to proof how mediocre military historian Beevor really is.

[@oddballsok]

The theoretical biggest unit to get on the Nijmegen bridge on Sunday at 18:00hrs was maybe a 1/3 company. They might push the 20 ss guards of at 17:00 hrs , only to be met by GRAEBNERS halftracks from Arnhem (that Frost LET PASS THROUGH !!!!) at 17:30. Not much foxholes and defenses to be set up in a small hour. From then on MANY SS came from pannerden ferry over the night..and by morning of 18th the amercans wld have been PUSHED away from the south ramp. Easily. So never ever wld they be able to capture AND HOLD the bridge for 3 or 4 days. South ramp Nijmegen bridge is an OPEN SQUARE not like Frost's position at Arnhem north ramp which had houses CLOSE to the ramp. Gavin made asmall blunder, and he tried to cover it, yes..but it wld not have mattered. HORROCKS and his tank column on the other hand blundered ALL THE TIME incapable of KEEPING tempo and leave german incursions to the affected units. Tanks at the front were SENT BACK SEVERAL TIMES to help defeat the incursing germans .THAT WAS A HUGE BLUNDER and cost precious time. There was no sense of URGENCY with the english in the column, most notably when FINALLY 4 tanks went through 82nd LZ and REACHED the Nijmegen bridge ramp from the EAST;...NO OTHER TANKS OR INFANTRY WERE SENT AFTER THEM !?!?!? You see, the blunders by 30CRPS were MUCH SERIOUS in costing the window of opportunity to reach Arnhem in time.

[@bigwoody4704]

Kudos O.S.

[@johnburns4017]

ODDBALL SOK wrote: _"HORROCKS and his tank column on the other hand blundered ALL THE TIME incapable of KEEPING tempo"_ *Laughable.* XXX Corps got to Nijmegen *ahead* of schedule. Expecting to roll over Nijmegen bridge, they found the bridge in German hands. XXX Corps then had to seize it themselves.

[@bigwoody4704]

Burpsy they were 18 hrs late after the 82nd had already been there twice quit making shit up.Have your case worker at the half way house there read you some history.Monty didn't plan on Graebner and the 9th to be actually driving around in armor and of course Horrocks promised XXX Corps was coming over in force.Then he sends 4 tanks,then they sat,pretty pathetic actually,much like your posts

[@johnburns4017]

akgeronimo501/Big Woody, Rambo, XXX Corps reached Nijmegen *ahead of schedule* and found the bridge in German SS hands, which it had not been when the 82nd arrived. The 82nd never started to move to the bridge for *SIX* hours. XXX Corps then had to seize the bridge. By the time XXX Corps moved over the bridge they were 36 hours behind, after being ahead of schedule on entering Nijmegen.

[@johnmccaffrey5942]

Not sure about Beavor’s logic at 1:14 when he suggests the Americans would have got to Berlin long before the Russians, if the Americans hadn’t given the Russian troop transport vehicles. If the Russians were prevented from moving West the Germans would’ve been able to fortify their Western front.

[@pelontorjunta]

Has Beevor some agenda to not criticize American Airborne unit and their commander in Nijmegen (General Gavin) or is Beevor so mediocre that he can't read the plan and it's priorities?

[@bigwoody4704]

Because history has proven you and your hero to both be guilty rubes

[@bigwoody4704]

Again you filthy fuck - Go screw your self after all the shit you & Burns said about the 82nd -smearing their name when they had the balls to cross the river.And your boys sat,the objectives change to saving 1st Para and they didn't have the nuts to move there's your culprits and Monty of course

[@bigwoody4704]

Screw off you conveniently shifted blame onto the 82nd like they have to answer to a spin doctoring steaming pile like you.And unabated you shit on their honor for 3 years it's all there across all these comment sections.Monty was a mongoloid and even the British officers knew he was shit - like you.Go back and read that thrashing the para gave you - you polluted rube

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, it is clear the 82nd were a complete disgrace. They were responsible, alone, for the whole operstion not being a 100% success.

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, All from the *US Official History:* The European Theater of Operations THE SIEGFRIED LINE CAMPAIGN by Charles B. MacDonald CENTER OF MILITARY HISTORY UNITED STATES ARMY WASHINGTON, D.C., 1993 Page 161: _Colonel Lindquist's 508th Parachute Infantry and of Colonel Ekman's 505th Parachute Infantry had assembled within an hour after the D-Day drop._ Page 162: _General Gavin's understanding, as recalled later, was that Warren's battalion was to_ *_move "without delay after landing."_* _On the other hand, Colonel Lindquist's understanding, also as recalled later, was that no battalion was to go for the bridge until the regiment had secured its other objectives, that is to say, not until he had established defenses protecting his assigned portion of the high ground and the northern part of the division glider landing zone._ *_Instead of moving immediately toward the Nijmegen bridge, Colonel Warren's battalion was to take an "assigned initial objective" in the vicinity of De Ploeg, a suburb of Nijmegen a mile and a quarter southeast of the city astride the Nijmegen-Groesbeek highway._* Page 163: _Colonel Warren about_ *_1830_* _sent into Nijmegen a patrol consisting of a rifle platoon and the battalion intelligence section. This patrol was to make an aggressive reconnaissance, investigate reports from Dutch civilians that only eighteen Germans guarded the big bridge, and, if possible, capture the south end of the bridge._ _Colonel Warren directed Companies A and B to rendezvous at a point just south of Nijmegen at_ *_I900_* _As the scouts neared a traffic circle surrounding a landscaped circular park near the center of Nijmegen, the Keizer Karel Plein, from which a mall-like park led northeast toward the Nijmegen bridge, a burst of automatic weapons fire came from the circle. The time was about two hours before_ *_midnight. (2200 hrs)_* Page 164: *_the chance for an easy, speedy capture of the Nijmegen bridge had passed._* _This was all the more lamentable because in Nijmegen during the afternoon the Germans had had nothing more than the same kind of "mostly low quality" troops encountered at most other places on D Day._ - page 185 _For all the concern that must have existed about getting to Arnhem, only a small part of the British armor was freed late on D plus 4, 2 I September, to start the northward drive. As the attack began, British commanders saw every apprehension confirmed. The ground off the main roads was low-lying, soggy bottomland, denying employment of tanks. A few determined enemy bolstered with antitank guns might delay even a large force. Contrary to the information that had been received, Colonel Frost and his men had been driven away from the north end of the Arnhem bridge the afternoon before, so that since the preceding night the bridge had been open to German traffic. At the village of Ressen, less than three miles north of Nijmegen, the Germans had erected an effective screen composed of an SS battalion reinforced with I I tanks, another infantry battalion, 2 batteries of 88-mm. guns, 20 20-mm. antiaircraft guns, and survivors of earlier fighting at Nijmegen, all operating under General Bittrich's II SS Panzer Corps.20 Arnhem lay seven miles north of this screen. The British could not pass._

[@Paul-talk]

not "rivalry" but who gets the supplies, which plan would work.

[@nickhambly8610]

Beevor is just a level 1 historian. See A.C. Sutton. A true level 3 Historian on his 3 levels historians fall into. Beevor has talent in story telling. Not history. He should really be described as a historical novelist. Ala Bernard Cromwell. Giving him a knighthood just shows what a load of shite they are pumping giving a false narrative on most historical topics. Egyptologists being the most obvious.

[@bigwoody4704]

Montgomery was horrible the other British Officers could not stand him.Not out of professional jealousy either.If something went right he staked claim for the credit.If something went wrong the pedant would blame God,mother nature and anyone else in creation.A narcissist for sure

[@bigwoody4704]

sad really that you lie so proficiently,well frequently really because your not good at it Listen idiot i'll present it real easy like that even you can understand....maybe.Great Britain and France attacked Germany in May'40 .In June Germany threw GB & France off of the continent.Who do you think your bullshitting?The rest of the nations of Europe know that this happened.They also know that GB never crossed the Channel for exactly 4 years.But only after the GI's went in,hey thanx for any assistance but you weren't the straw that stirs the drink. If Montgomery was in the the U.S. Army he would have been dismissed or reassigned .In Germany or Russia he would have been shot.The African War was won by allied Air & Naval forces starving Rommel of food,fuel,men,material.And by UTRA reporting every move to your abrasive little freak.Monty couldn't have lost it on purpose but he tried.The Brits were starved for a hero so the Press made one out of Monty who was good corporal doing a shabby sargents job. Of course after Caen,Goodwood,Falaise Gap and OMG the Americans found out what the other British Officers already knew.That Montgomery was an empty barrel that made a lot of noise but no sense.Alan Brooke,Air Marsahall's Tedder & Conningham,Adm Ramsey knew he was all hat and no cattle as they say in Texas.And they all insisted to him to open up the Port of Anterp 1st.This way any success could have been sustained.But IKE playing politician instead of Officer caved into the yapping jackels request to go for the bridges.Which in reality was his shot at glory.The little phony didn't realize what a bad idea attacking on 1 lane over 64 miles with bad terrain & bogs on both sides really was. Even though Bedell-Smith himself warned Monty that ULTRA intercepted Wehrmacht radio dispatches about 9th & 10 th SS armor divisions in Arnhem .It slayed Johhny Frosts men from the start - he said so in his book.I've quoted British Paras who were there saying what a bad plan and idea it really was.But after Caen,Goodwood & the Falaise Gap it really should have come as no surprise .So save you distortions & fabrications Cornhole,Britain had good soldiers Monty wasn't one of them

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell wrote Monty was only disliked by those on his level and above because he was an arse to them as he considered most of them pen pushing desk jockeys. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Monty wasn't crap next to these guys who not only ranked him but gave him fair warning after his many disasters .By Ranking Officers who were there *From With Prejudice, by Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Lord Tedder, Deputy Supreme Commander AEF, Cassel & Co., 1st edition, copyright 1966 .Page 599* "Eisenhower assumed, as he and I had done all along, that whatever happened Montgomery would concentrate on opening up Antwerp. No one could say that we had not emphasized the point sufficiently by conversation and signal." *From Triumph in the West, by Arthur Bryant, Doubleday & Co., 1st American edition, copyright 1959. From the diary of Field Marshal Lord Alanbrooke, entry for 5 October 1944:Page 219* "...During the whole discussion one fact stood out clearly, that access to Antwerp must be captured with the least possible delay.I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault, Instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the first place. Ramsay brought this out well in the discussion and criticized Monty freely..." *Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45* The release of the files from German Signals by Bletchley Park conclusively showed that the 9th & 10th Panzer Divisions were re-fitting in the Arnhem area.With their Recon Battalions intact.Yet when Bedel-Smith(SHAEF) brought this to Monty's attention "he ridiculed the idea and waved my objections airly aside" *Air Marshall Tedder, With Prejudice, p.586* Eisenhower's firm commitment to the Anglo-American Alliance dominated his thinking. He handled Allied disagreements in Normandy, at the Falaise Gap and for Market-Garden the same way. Eisenhower was determined to protect the facade of Allied unity at the highest levels of the Allied command in spite of Montgomery's insubordination which was motivated by both personal and political objectives. Eisenhower's efforts to cover up Montgomery's lies in Normandy drew praise from his British second in command, Lord Tedder: "One of the most disturbing features of the campaign ... had been the uninhibited boosting at home (England) of the British Army at the expense of the Americans. I ... fear that this process was sowing the seeds of a grave split between the Allies. For the moment, the Americans were being extremely reticent and generous, largely on account of Eisenhower's fine attitude." *Carlo D'este,Decision in Normandy* .From the outset Market Garden was a prescription for trouble that was plagued by mistakes,over sights,false assertions and out right arrogance.It's success hinged on a slender thread attack & its execution would prove disastrously complex.British ground commander Miles Dempsey was sufficiently concerned that he recommended the drop be made near Wessel.Which would enable 1st Army to block a German counter attack.His proposal was never seriously considered or his concerns addressed. - *Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45* Freddie de Guingand Monty's Chief of Staff telephoned him saying the operation would be launched too late to exploit German disarray.That XXX Corps push to Arnhem would being made on a narrow front along one road,Monty ignored him.Montgomery & his colleagues threw away all that they had learned since 1939 about the speed & reaction of Hitlers Army..Its brilliance at improvisation,its dogged skill in defense,its readiness to punish allied mistakes.

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell wrote Monty was much loved and respected by most of those lower than his own level of command because he treated them with care, consideration and respect. His men greatly liked him. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again by men who were there *Arnhem,Jumping the Rhine in 1944 and 1945. By Lloyd Clark, page 333* Tom Hoare, who fought with the 3rd Para at Arnhem may be said to reflect a commonly held perception of OMG, (or Field Marshall Montgomery’s fiasco,as he calls it) when he writes:‘It is my opinion that Monty was a great soldier, but he had a even greater ego. When victory was in sight for the Allies, *he degenerated into nothing more than a glory seeker. With little regard for the welfare or indeed the lives of his men of the British 1st Airborne Division, he threw the division away in an insane attempt to go down in history as the greatest military leader of the Second World War.’* *From Armageddon - The Battle for Germany,1944-45 by Max Hastings,page 50* Jack Reynolds and his unit,the South Staffords,were locked into the long,messy,bloody battle.There was no continuous front,no coherent plan,merely a series of uncoordinated collisions between rival forces in woods,fields,gardens and streets . *That is when it got home to me.What a very bad operation this was.The scale dropped from my eyes when I realized just how far from our objective we've landed* We knew what even a handful of Germans could do - they were so damned efficient. As Bob Peatling of the 2 Para said *Marshall Montgomery dropped a clanger at Arnhem* *Maj. Freddie Hennessy the operations officer of the Guards Armoured Division* which was in the vanguard of the push up the road, compared advancing sixty-four miles on a narrow highway over several major water crossings to “threading seven needles with one piece of cotton, and we only have to miss one to be in trouble.”

[@carlbyronrodgers]

Dresden Commission of Historians for the Ascertainment of the Number of Victims of the Air Raids on the City of Dresden on 13/14 February 1945” has provisionally estimated the likely death-toll at around 18,000 and definitely no more than 25,000.

[@johnmccaffrey5942]

18000 an astonishingly low estimate. 48,000 killed at Hamburg but Dresden hit harder. Population of Dresden has swollen to 3 times it’s normal due to it being a “refugee city” thought to be safe from Allied bombing.

[@12345kismet]

tony tony at least u know where your market is...if u want to sell in the USA...never criticize america...ever... and then throw in a liberal amount of montgomery bashing and you'll make millions...do u write these books for historical reasons or commercial...can u do both

[@bigwoody4704]

Montgomery shit the bed at Market Garden - it's called History.It's not bashing if the truth is addressed in the face of vain glorying

[@bigwoody4704]

Bull crap this was Monty's baby and IKE let him run with it though he shouldn't have.Other High Ranking British Officers realized before him Montgomery was full of shit.Brooke,Tedder,Ramsey & IKE ALL thought the abrasive little jerk was clear on cleaning out Antwerp 1st.On September 10th Monty proposed his attack on the bridges to shorten the war and for whatever god fore saken reason IKE approved - dumb move,Monty's brain child however

[@bigwoody4704]

More bullshit from you Montgomery wanted to go ahead with this.Eisenhower didn't even know the particulars until September 10th.But since there were 3 airborne divisions available Monty thought he'd put them to use.Quit lying thru your teeth .You British accused IKE of being nothing more than an administrator and Monty of being this detailed general.Well see what happened when the little creep got his way - DISASTER

[@bigwoody4704]

Ike foolishly agreed to it but didn't know Monty was going for the Bridges until Sept 10.And Brereton dictated to no one.Monty's masterpiece - now for the 3rd time idgit try to stay on point - pretty simple really *From A Magnificent Disaster,by David Bennett,page 196* Throughout September Montgomery had been most anxious to open the Channel ports to Allied supply,principally LaHavre,Boulogne and Calais.This he regarded as essential to his strategic plans..But he undertook Market Garden without these ports and with a supply line extending from his rear maintenance area around Bayeux directly to the divisions of second Army. *The inadequacy of this arrangement led him to ask for more supplies.When he got them,he rescinded the delay in the launch of Market Garden and to Gen.Harry Crerar he wrote that he had won a "great victory" at SHAEF* Montgomery never requested more transport for his divisions. *He got all the logistical support he requested with only minor delays* .The truth was that the operation was too ambitious

[@bigwoody4704]

He didn't propose shit he blew off Antwerp and took a shot at glory and failed even his soldiers pointed it out .You can't defend the indefensible

[@ltjamescoopermason8685]

The 82nds general not prioritising the main bridge on day one I feel killed every chance of reaching the British. I was impressed by the author saying in fact browning was a self obsessed loser for first not standing up to Montgomery who hated patten immensely. I feel the movie which tried to say this is everything including the pole general saying "everybody dies" was a anti war quote dreamed up by the script writer. I enjoyed this video thanks for sharing,.

[@bigwoody4704]

Patton thought Monty a tired old woman and confirmed it by schooling him in Sicily.Monty only won in the desert because even he couldn't screw it up.He started believing he was something he was not - a Field Marshall

[@thevillaaston7811]

Lt James Coper Mason Where is there evidence that Montgomery hated Patton? Why would he? He was in a different Army, and after Sicily was always more senior to Patton.

[@bigwoody4704]

Monty was a propped up fraud and rode everyone else's accumulative hard work to a headline.Until the truth unraveled and it was obvious his command abilities were greatly exaggerated as IKE later figured out

[@johnburns4017]

Lt James Cooper Mason O no! He believes the film.

[@johnburns4017]

@@thevillaaston7811 he has seen that film, Patton.

[@Jeffybonbon]

THe Dutch guy spoils this

[@mikepjersey]

Area bombing wasn’t a war crime until after WWII.

[@andrewpendlebury1103]

Great Antony,read most of your books as well,...

His greatest book is Stalingrad. The others are somewhat disapppointing. But he can write beautiful terse English.

[@Paul-talk]

Yes, see 'Top Secret' by Ralph Ingersoll!

[@thomashoney817]

Antony Beevor is my favourite historical author, I have been reading his books since I was 14 years old and look forward to reading more great books like his. I would highly recommend his books.

[@thevillaaston7811]

So do I, they make good door stops.

[@bigwoody4704]

That would put you out of work so they refused the offer

[@MrLemonbaby]

During the Starvation Winter food supplies were air dropped, though hardly enough. Eisenhower proclaimed that if the Germans shot at these planes that they would not be treated as POWs when captured. I have seen a photo of white rocks spelling out the words, "Thanks boys," Dutch to the pilots of the allied plans dropping the supplies.

[@roodborstkalf9664]

Most of the help came from Sweden. Helped by the Swiss (Red Cross) they got permissions from the Germans to bring food into the North East (Delfzijl). Distribution of the food to the West was extremely difficult because English and American fighters shooting all transports too pieces. The air droppings at the end were more of a public relation stunt. Americans and English didn't really care about Dutch civilians.

[@MrDavid1863]

My dad flew some of those missions as a navigator on a Lancaster as part of the RCAF. He told me years ago how the Germans manning the AA guns would shake their fists at them as if the aircrews were lucky that they weren't being shot at. They obviously flew a low altitude when dropping food supplies and he could quite clearly see the German faces.

[@bigwoody4704]

Monty screwed the pooch when he disregarded both intercepted dispatches from ULTRA & Dutch Resistance reports regarding the 9th & 10th SS Panzer Divisions refitting at Arnhem.Nothing went right from the beginning.Too many objectives had to come off with out a hitch.Since perfection isn't a human attribute it was bound to fail at many points.The fact that it was also a single lane approach doomed it to failure.Underestimating the Germans resolve to wage war & improvisation also factored in.SHAEF & Monty absolutely deserved the blame

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell wrote ""they had armor and Frost said so himself""Armour that was NOT there on the 17th. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just shut up really,there was all sorts of armor.what is an APC,a Mobile Flak unit,Half tracks,Stugs,Stuhs.It's in "It Never Snows in September".So the the Germans confirmed what Frost knew and Montgomery later admitted just eat shit you juvenile asshole.Why don't you just dig Monty up and kiss his ass already and get it over with

[@thevillaaston7811]

Americans can pick up any Anthony Beevor book on the war with confidence. They will know that none of them will contain a single criticism of the USA.

[@thevillaaston358]

That’s too true (sarcasm)

[@bigwoody4704]

Talking to your self ? You've lied once and that has been continuosly.Truth hurts you troubled tart sitting over in TIKs hive of hallucination.Having to be reminded of the 34,000 surrendered at Tobruk,the 81,000 at Singapore or 200,000 skeedaddling at Dunkirk doesn't fall under the appearance of Military Juggernaut,LMAO.If you and TIK put your heads together you'd have a rockpile

[@johnburns4017]

That was 1 hr 46 minutes of my life I will never get back.

[@bigwoody4704]

Ring the nurses station it appears you need attention - AGAIN. Maybe they can walk you around the court yard for a spell and get you out from in front of the monitor

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo a quiz. Name the US 82nd commander who failed to seize the Nijmegen bridge? 20 points for the correct answer.

[@bigwoody4704]

An ill concieved plan by a damaged little man looking for attention and glory - just like you Burns. read *The Full Monty* ,John Burns is mentioned in it 🤣

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 *BZZZZZZZZZZZT!* Wrong answer. Rambo, the name the US 82nd commander who failed to seize the Nijmegen bridge...was. 🎈🎊🍾 *General Gavin* 🎈🎊🍾 Zero points Rambo, zero. Better luck next time.

[@bigwoody4704]

What weasel officer starred in the book *FULL MONTY* along with John Burns. Your distortions are ludicrous postmortem to absolve the abrasive egomaniac who in any other army would have been relieved. You should try telling your droopy delusions to the subservant saps in Trinidad or Tobago.Are you Lucien you wag - look that up

[@bthorn5035]

Jesus Christ, this dude asking the questions is just killing me.

[@johnburns4017]

I know. He should be scything into this turkey Beevor.

[@mikehiggins946]

He stammers for dramatic effect. He could ask his questions using 1/10th of the words. He's sure those people are there to see him.

[@bigwoody4704]

Well the guy asking the questions is from the Netherlands,which Monty ignored during Market Garden

[@gryphus64]

A canvass boat..................20 minute crossing. A large number of German's were not murderous in their fire at these boats. None would cross if they did not fire around the boats and not directly at them. So when they get killed surrendering one must feel some compassion. With the fire power they had at hand, unless they deliberately fired away, no canvass boat would cross. A psychology evaluation is that few really want to fire and kill other human beings even when they are dedicated Nazis. Firing squad has many executioners as they know, if you are not a psychopath you will not want to shoot people when they are like ducks in a barrel, even when they are the enemy.

[@venugopalravindran6846]

On a man for man basis, German ground soldiers consistently inflicted casualties at about a 50 percent higher rate than they incurred from the opposing British, American or Soviet troops under all circumstances (emphasis in original). This was true when they were attacking and when they were defending, when they had a local numerical superiority and when, as was usually the case, they were outnumbered, when they had air superiority and when they did not, when they won and when they lost." he inescapable truth is that Hitler's Wehrmacht was the outstanding fighting force of World War II, one of the greatest in history. For many years after 1945, this seemed painful to concede publicly, partly for nationalistic reasons, partly also because the Nazi legions were fighting for one of the most obnoxious regimes of all time.A spirit of military narcissism, nourished by such films as "The Longest Day," "A Bridge Too Far" and "The Battle of the Bulge," has perpetuated mythical images of the Allied and German armies. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of battlefield memoirs published in Britain and America concern, not surprisingly, Allied battlefield experience. They dwell upon fears, difficulties and triumphs of Allied soldiers as seen from Allied foxholes.We learned a great deal less -- indeed, nothing at all -- about how the German soldier maintained an effective defense in Europe for 11 months under constant and unchallenged air attack, bombarded daily by devastating artillery concentrations, facing heavy odds, sustained by a fraction of the supplies and firepower available to the Allied soldier. Germany's titanic struggle with the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1944, which killed more than 2 million German soldiers -- arguably, the best 2 million -- provided the western Allies with an extraordinary luxury for nations at war: time to train, to prepare, to plan to meet the enemy on the battlefield under conditions of their choosing, at a moment carefully selected by the warlords of America and Britain.From the battle of Normandy to the very end in Germany, the British army's performance was profoundly influenced by inability to withstand heavy casualties. Montgomery was repeatedly warned by his superiors in London about the scarcity of manpower. Within days of the landings in France, British battalions were being cannibalized to provide replacements. In 1945, whole divisions were broken up for the same reason

[@richardbaxter2057]

I’d just add here that the German Field Army in WW1, was never actually beaten. The German collapse there, came from within Germany itself.

[@bigwoody4704]

*From Arnhem Jim Blog* In no way should this analysis be misconstrued as impugning either the bravery or demonstrated competent combat leadership of Lieutenant-General Browning in conventional infantry combat. He had demonstrated that as a relatively junior officer in World War I, justifiably having earned the Distinguished Service Order. No small feat, usually for a junior officer of that day just short of being recommended for the Victoria Cross. That being said, the fact remains that in an entirely new form of warfare, Airborne Warfare, he had absolutely no real operational experience. None other than MajGen James M. Gavin, commanding the 82nd Airborne Division, during Operation Market-Garden, was extremely critical of Browning, writing in his diary on 6 September 1944, (prior to the operation), that he "...unquestionably lacks the standing, influence and judgement that comes from a proper troop (read airborne combat) experience.... his staff was superficial... (Editorial note: With the obvious exception of Maj Brian Urquhart) Why the British units fumble along... becomes more and more apparent. Their tops lack the know-how, never do they get down into the dirt and learn the hard way". Further, the acclaimed British author of military history, Max Hastings, states the following in his recent book, The SECRET WAR, Spies, Ciphers, and Guerrillas 1939 -1945; referring to Field Marshal Montgomery on page 495; “The little British field-marshal’s neglect of crystal-clear intelligence, and of an important strategic opportunity, became a major cause of the Western Allied failure to break into the heart of Germany in 1944.The same overconfidence was responsible for the launch of the doomed airborne assault in Holland on 17 September, despite Ultra’s flagging of the presence near the drop zone of the 9th and 10th SS Panzer Divisions, together with Field-Marshal Walter Model’s headquarters at Oosterbeek. Had ‘victory fever’ not blinded Allied commanders, common sense dictated that even drastically depleted SS panzers posed a mortal threat to lightly armed and mostly inexperienced British airborne units. Ultra on 14-15 September also showed the Germans alert to the danger of an airborne landing in Holland It was obvious that it would be a very hard to drive the British relief force eighty miles up a single Dutch road, with the surrounding countryside impassable for armour, unless the Germans failed to offer resistance. The decision to launch Operation ‘Market Garden’ against this background was recklessly irresponsible, and the defeat remains a deserved blot on Montgomery’s reputation.”

[@bigwoody4704]

*www.marketgarden.com/2010/UK/statistics/statis9.html#9ss*

[@bigwoody4704]

Do you exist to try to change history and deflect blame from Montgomery It was there you delusional dipshit it's what mauled 1st Para why don't you watch video after video mostly British on what happened.British Officers advised against OMG and British soldiers "Marshall Montgomery dropped a clanger at Arnhem".And your link shows pictures of guns that either were not there or didn't make a difference.So a bunch of young boys and old men defeated 1st para at Arnhem is that what you are saying dumbshit?

[@bigwoody4704]

All these officers are full of crap but you are to be taken seriously.Asshole Tedder/Ramsey/Alan Brooke/ all senior officers,all told Monty to clear out the Scheldt,they were there.Monty smelled glory and went for it.He cancelled that other mission and rolled into OMG.His subordinates didn't dictate shit to him.Hell he ignored his superiors ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From With Prejudice, by Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Lord Tedder, Deputy Supreme Commander AEF, Cassel & Co., 1st edition, copyright 1966,page599* "Eisenhower assumed, as he and I had done all along, that whatever happened Montgomery would concentrate on opening up Antwerp. No one could say that we had not emphasized the point sufficiently by conversation and signal." *From Ardennes 1944,By Sir Antony Beevor,page 14* Admiral Sir Bertram Ramsey ,Allied Naval commander-in-chief had told SHAEF and Monty that the Germans could block the Scheldt Estuary with ease.The mistake lay with Monty,who was not interested in the estuary and thought the Canadians could clear it later. From page 19 ,Admiral Ramsey was livid that SHAEF,and especially Monty,had ignored his warnings to secure the Scheldt estuary and the approaches to Antwerp *From Triumph in the West, by Arthur Bryant, Doubleday & Co., 1st American edition, copyright 1959. From the diary of Field Marshal Lord Alanbrooke entry for 5 October 1944:Page 219* "...During the whole discussion one fact stood out clearly, that access to Antwerp must be captured with the least possible delay.I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault, Instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the first place. Ramsay brought this out well in the discussion and criticized Monty freely..." *Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45* The release of the files from German Signals by Bletchley Park conclusively showed that the 9th & 10thPanzer Divisions were re-fitting in the Arnhem area.With their Recon Battalions intact.Yet when Bedel-Smith(SHAEF) brought this to Monty's attention "he ridiculed the idea and waved my objections airly aside" So Tedder,Ramsey,Brooke,Bedel-Smith,Hastings and Beevor all lying about the same guy?But you who weren't there and are ignorant is going to set them straight?BWA-A-A- HA-A-A.Why is it you can't simply tell the truth as if lying props up Monty or your status. You run with this rag written by a misguided skragg Margry 70 + years later .You are pathetic

[@bigwoody4704]

Did you play with an air hammer growing up, eh?You know what, don't answer that, just shut the $#@! up. *You have your head so far up Monty's ass you can tell us what he had for lunch.* you continually throw shit against the wall hoping something will stick .You either don't know crap or it's too painful for you to admit but thankfully history has been documented and not by the likes of you -All Senior Allied Officers -All discussed Strategic & Tactical operations at meetings with in Allied HQ.Along with Eisenhower these are the men the abrasive little runt had to answer to.Tedder even wanted IKE to sack the shit - which he should have done.They discussed numerous times opening up Antwerp these were the men there & in the know.Not Neilands,Poulussen,TIK Field Marshall Alan Brooke answered only to Churchill what a polluted rube

[@KMN-bg3yu]

I always found irony in that the one time during the war that Monty truly showed boldness and audacity, it was a disaster

[@victornewman9904]

The tragedy was due to Gavin's 48 hours of not taking the Bridge for 30 Corps.

[@KMN-bg3yu]

@@victornewman9904 there were multitude of tragedies and that was only one

[@johnburns4017]

The idea in Market Garden was that Browning and Brereton of the First Allied Airborne Army stay back in England and allow the 'lesser' para generals in _direct_ command at the front execute the airborne plan. Browning went along being the gung-ho sort who wanted to see it happen. Him being around, arriving later than General Gavin of the 82nd, does not mean he was in _direct_ command of all vital field operations on the ground. He was not and could not be as there was too many vital bridges to seize. Browning rightly left that to the trusted generals on the ground. When Browning saw that Gavin had not moved towards the bridge he told him to do so, as he should. So far Browning was doing what he should do, get the men focusing on the vital targets if they lost focus. *Browning had no say or involvement in the 82nd failing to seize the Nijmegen bridge* *_immediately_* *in the vital first few hours.* That was were the failure of the operation was with all that down to *General Gavin.* De-prioritising Nijmegen bridge was Gavin's idea who convinced Browning there was 1,000 tanks in the forest to the east - after Gavin failed to seize the bridge being too late in his feeble repulsed attack, then pulling his men completely out of Nijmegen. Even then Browning told Gavin to have the bridge before XXX Corps arrived. There were no tanks at all in the forest. *1,000 tanks?* When XXX Corps arrived in Nijmegen, ahead of schedule, seeing the bridge still in German hands, control of the First Allied Airborne Army fell to XXX Corps, who decided they would prioritise the bridge and seize it, with the US paras assisting them where they could. The US paras way of assisting, a face saving move by Gavin, was that ridiculous crossing of the Waal in broad daylight. Gavin sacrificed his own men to save face. BTW, 20% of the men in the 82nds boats were British Sappers. They also rowed them back for the 2nd wave. They suffered higher casualties than the 82nd relating to their numbers.

[@bigwoody4704]

The idea of Monty in charge of an operation filled the Allies with unspeakable terror.And the Krauts with incredible Joy. *As Bob Peatling of the 2 Para said "Marshall Montgomery dropped a clanger at Arnhem"*

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, the 82nd dropped the clanger. They made camp at DePloeg, when they should have been moving to the bridge. Shocking indeed.

[@bigwoody4704]

Did you watch the BBC Documentary confirming my points?Or were you too tired reaching for another beer?

[@bigwoody4704]

Johnny I'm concerned for you have your handler get you into neurologist .In the mean time double up on the Prozac and try one capsule of vitamin D-3

[@bigwoody4704]

Too bad mechanized armor already got over the Arnhem bridge.Montgomery as the BBC documentaries pointed out Monty & Horrocks culpabiity.Those tanks did indeed sit - shame they didn't fight as hard as the 82nd bothe the BBC & Max Hastings amongst others agree on that.

[@bigwoody4704]

*The Montgomery Myth,by R.W.Thompson,* Given British grievous disappointments in the Eastern Mediterranean and the fragile nature of any military alliance,General Montgomery was an extremely poor choice to command an Allied Army *Road to Victory,Winston Churchill 1941-45,by Martin Gilbert* A British War cabinet memo suggested that the appointment of Monty was from the point of view of it's reception by public opinion.Apparently that clinched the War Cabinet's vote for Montgomery;based strictly on military accomplishments,the case for monty was very weak

[@bigwoody4704]

*From Bradley,A Generals Life,Page 299* Gen Bradley wrote "the news of the German escape from the Falaise Gap was a shattering disappointment - one of my greatest of the war.a golden opportunity had truly been lost.I boiled inside,blaming Monty for the blunder". *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 320* The poor performance of the British 2nd Army in Normandy had tied Monty's hands.He did not expect the Germans to be that good.But when the Americans broke the German lines at St Lo instead of turning the Americans loose on the open German flank,Montgomery stopped the Americans at Argentan and sent them North east to Paris-orleans gap.There were simply too many bitter pills on Montgomery's desk.He could not allow the Americans,especially George Patton to take Falaise away from his 2nd British Army regardless of the cost *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 319* *Montgomery's irrational behavior at the Falaise Gap was also influenced by what Canadian General Henry Crerar called ".... the Englishman's traditional belief in the superiority of the Englishman..."* *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 318* *Eisenhower* thought Montgomery was a psychopath suffering from an inferiority complex *Montgomery,Making of a General,by Nigel Hamilton,page 278* *Montgomery's stepson John Carver* talked about his "....schizoid tendencies engendered by his upbringing..."

[@bigwoody4704]

*Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 317* Montgomery got along with neither the Americans nor the Canadians.After Dunkirk the French absolutely refused to serve under a British commander. *The Eisenhower Papers,volume IV,by Edward Chandler* By early September Montgomery and other Allied leaders thought the Wehrmacht was finished .It was this understanding that led Monty to insist on the Market-Garden Operation over the more mundane task of opening the port of Antwerp. He ignored Eisenhower's letter of Sept 4 assigning Antwerp as the primary mission for the Northern Group of Armies

[@bigwoody4704]

*From the Battle of Arnhem,by Antony Beevor,page 292* Despite Montgomery's message to IKE that he thought there was still a "sporting chance" of taking the bridge at Arnhem he must have sensed by then that a terrible disaster was taking place,which would considerably damage his reputation.After all his demands for priority which he received in the north to get across the Rhine,he could not have wanted to face IKE,Patton,Bradley and SHAEFF in Versailles.And could not have been keen to encounter General Bedell-Smith or Strong ,whose fears about German strength in the southern Netherlands Monty had ridiculed.The very next day Monty wrote in his diary "I am very doubtful now if 1st airborne will be able to hold out and we may have to withdraw them".And the fact he never visited Horrocks during the entire battle confirms the impression that he was keeping his distance,a rare event for the "Master" *From the Battle of Arnhem,by Antony Beevor,page 293* The other architect for the fatal plan,LT.GNL.Boy Browning was far more loath to admit the reality of the situation.When Gen Hakewill-Smith offered to send a complete force in gliders to aid the Red Devils.Brownings message was as follows "Thanks for your message but offer not,repeat not,required as situation better than you think".It is hard to imagine how Browning could have convinced himself that things "were better than you think" *From the Battle of Arnhem,by Antony Beevor,page 321-322* Montgomery's official biographer remarked that Monty's bid for the Ruhr via Arnhem had proved nothing less than foolhardy.Staff officers at his tactical HQ had never seen "the Master" look so quiet and withdrawn.The sacrifice of the 1st airborne had been enough .Market Garden had all used up the striking power of the 2nd Army and lead it into a blind alley where it could do nothing.Even Field Marshall Brooke has concluded that his strategy had been at fault."Instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the 1st place",he wrote in his diary.The failure to secure the Scheldt estuary leading to that vital port now stood out as a glaring lapse of judgement.

[@bigwoody4704]

*From the Battle of Arnhem,by Antony Beevor,page 365-66* In fact the fundamental concept of Operation Market Garden defied military logic because it made no allowance for anything to go wrong,nor for the enemy's likely reaction .In short the whole operation ignored the old rule that no plan survives 1st contact with the enemy.Montgomery even blamed the weather not the plan,even asserting the plan was 90% successful because they got 9/10ths of the way to Arnhem General Oberst Student pointed out the strength of the flak batteries were grossly exaggerate .As a result the British lost "surprise",the strongest weapon of airborne troops .At Arnhem Oberstgruppenfuhrer Wilhelm Bittrich who has great respect for Montgomery's generalship up until then changed his opinion after *From the Battle of Arnhem,by Antony Beevor,page 370* German Generals thought Montgomery was wrong to to demand the main concentration of forces under his command in the north .Like Patton the reasoned the series of canals and great rivers the Maas,The Waal,the Neder Rijn - made it the easiest region for them to defend."With obstacles in the form of water traversing it from east to west" wrote General von Zagen,"the terrain offers good possibilities to hold on to positions".General Eberbach whom the British had captured,was recorded telling other generals in captivity:"the whole of their main effort is wrong.The traditional gateway is through the Saar" *The Saar is where Montgomery had demanded that Patton's 3rd Army be halted*

[@bigwoody4704]

*Szun Zu - The Art of War* "the worst mistake for a general is to underestimate its enemy...!" *From With Prejudice, by Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Lord Tedder, Deputy Supreme Commander AEF, Cassel & Co., 1st edition, copyright 1966.* ---Page 599-"Eisenhower assumed, as he and I had done all along, that whatever happened Montgomery would concentrate on opening up Antwerp. No one could say that we had not emphasized the point sufficiently by conversation and signal." *From Triumph in the West, by Arthur Bryant, Doubleday & Co., 1st American edition, copyright 1959. From the diary of Field Marshal Lord Alanbrooke, entry for 5 October 1944* ---Page 219-"...During the whole discussion one fact stood out clearly, that access to Antwerp must be captured with the least possible delay I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault, Instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the first place. Ramsay brought this out well in the discussion and criticized Monty freely..." *WWII data base* Montgomery’s own staff was opposed to the plan, as was his own chief of staff. With the principal organizations scattered in far-flung locations they never met to coordinate and resolve Market Garden’s obvious flaws or question its contradictions - *Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45* Montgomery & his colleagues threw away all that they had learned since 1939 about the speed & reaction of Hitlers Army..Its brilliance at improvisation,its dogged skill in defense,its readiness to punish allied mistakes. - *Carlo D'este* From the outset Market Garden was a prescription for trouble that was plagued by mistakes,over sights,false assertions and out right arrogance.It's success hinged on a slender thread attack & its execution would prove disastrously complex.British ground commander Miles Dempsey was sufficiently concerned that he recommended the drop be made near Wessel.Which would enable 1st Army to block a German counter attack.His proposal was never seriously considered or his concerns addressed. - *Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45* The release of the files from German Signals by Bletchley Park conclusively showed that the 9th & 10thPanzer Divisions were re-fitting in the Arnhem area.With their Recon Battalions intact.Yet when Bedel-Smith(SHAEF) brought this to Monty's attention "he ridiculed the idea and waved my objections airly aside" - *Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45* Freddie de Guingand Monty's Chief of Staff telephoned him saying the operation would be launched too late to exploit German disarray.That XXX Corps push to Arnhem would being made on a narrow front along one road,Monty ignored him - *History of War .org* Reports by Dutch resistance & aerial photos indicated armored formations.Maj.Brian Urquhart Chief of Intel.British 1st Airborne Corp commented - "There,in the photos,I could clearly see tanks,if not on the very Arnhem landing & drop zones then certainly close to them".He became convinced that the plan was critically flawed, and attempted to persuade his superiors to modify or abort their plans in light of crucial information obtained from aerial reconnaissance and the resistance.Major Urquhart was visited by a Medical officer whom suggested he take some sick leave. Montgomery proclaimed the mission 90% success.Bernard,Prince of the Netherlands said later "My country can never again afford the luxury of another Montgomery success"

[@T.S.Birkby]

Looks like the familiar people have been busy the comment section, hello gents

[@johnburns4017]

Greetings.

[@bigwoody4704]

or in your pathetic case Burns - Beatings

[@T.S.Birkby]

Let's call a truce and be nice

[@johnburns4017]

@@T.S.Birkby the likes of Rambo have to be attacked full frontal. It is the only way to get some sense into the half wit.

[@bigwoody4704]

that would put me at the head of your class

From the comments below I surmise we have among us a lot of armchair strategists (including Beevor) and a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking.

[@bigwoody4704]

Including YOU,Beevor is well read,graduated from Sandhurst where John Keegan taught him,lectured at Cambridge

@@bigwoody4704 I adore Beevor who was a tank commander in Germany, and I misspoke, but he only fought the battle "in theory"

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell wrote Actually Monty was very well liked by those under his command ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Arnhem.Jumping the Rhine in 1944 and 1945. By Lloyd Clark, page 333.* Tom Hoare, who fought with the 3rd Para at Arnhem may be said to reflect a commonly held perception of OMG, (or Field Marshall Montgomery’s fiasco,as he calls it) when he writes:'It is my opinion that Monty was a great soldier, but he had a even greater ego. When victory was in sight for the Allies, he degenerated into nothing more than a glory seeker. With little regard for the welfare or indeed the lives of his men of the British 1st Airborne Division, *he threw the division away in an insane attempt to go down in history as the greatest military leader of the Second World War.’* *From Armageddon - The Battle for Germany,1944-45 by Max Hastings,page 50* Jack Reynolds and his unit,the South Staffords,were locked into the long,messy,bloody battle.There was no continuous front,no coherent plan,merely a series of uncoordinated collisions between rival forces in woods,fields,gardens and streets. *That is when it got home to me.What a very bad operation this was* The scale dropped from my eyes when I realized just how far from our objective we've landed.We knew what even a handful of Germans could do - they were so damned efficient. As Bob Peatling of the 2 Para said *"Marshall Montgomery dropped a clanger at Arnhem"*

[@bigwoody4704]

Beevor is absolutely right - everything that could go wrong did.And if Model had blown up the Nijmegan Bridge like he should have - the jig was up and early.The whole area was a bog and the tanks started sinking off road - bad plan,single road approach was disaster

[@bigwoody4704]

Jack ass you & Burns (who are one in the same) joined in smearing the good name of the 82nd Airborne going back 3 - 4 years.When clearly the whole plan jumped track and Monty got scarce when it did .The 82nd ran straight into armor you steaming pile.And had to return to the LZ's when they were under attack .You,Burns , TIK and others ignore historical fact to prop up a lying braggart.The Other British officers hated Monty also and not out of envy.BTW TIK had to take one of his boards down criticizing Beevor- for libel's sake.That's what he gets for listening to likes of you DISTORIANS.Oh and this board is about OMG

[@bigwoody4704]

Look you British got your asses handed to you shoved into the Channel and you didn't cross the damn thing until the GI's showed up - that is a fact .Then tried to explain it away as a strategic withdrawal after declaring war on them then getting your shit shoved in.The GI's got stuck fighting a war Britain couldn't finish fucktardThe USA literally picked up whole Armies and dropped them on your door step. Your parents and grandparents were grateful because of American involvement.They didn't hide behind their monitor pissing on the honor of dead GI's.Monty dissappeared while those entrusted to his so called leadership got slaughtered.That's a fact.XXX Corp in fact pussied out while Frost was just 8 miles away.Too bad it couldn't have been your father then we wouldn't have to listen to your puss & ooze bubbling out of your skull.Again go re-read that British Para that shredded you in your stupidity and ignorance I almost cringed reading it.Not one poster came to your rescue or agreed with you because your nothing more than a lying little pimp soliciting attention & approval. Montgomery was a liar a braggart and a coward - so I can see why you idolize him.Shove it up your ass Montgomery owns the Market Garden defeat.If he was such a great General why didn't he relieve Bastogne when the Wehrmacht sent 250,000 troops against 80,000 GI's.Because he only operated when the Allies gave him an over whelming advantage

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell lied No they didn't. Not on the 17th and 18th and 19th. There was only German armour attacking Nijmegen on the 20th and these tanks came from Germany ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Listen you lying little hack .John Frost in his book said he wished he had brought more anti-tank guns and less mortars.Monty got those men killed and he was nothing more than a side show the rest of the war.He ignored Bedell-Smith and ULTRA.Fuck you and your loser hero who frolicked with a little Swiss Boy - explain that one you special needs project

[@bigwoody4704]

Even if the radios worked,they couldn't stop AFV's & APC's with mounted 20mm cannon or Stugs & Stuh's - IDIOT

[@FairladyS130]

Big Woody So American bazookas etc were not good enough to stop even light armour? Or didn't your heroes even try. It's one or the other

[@johnburns4017]

Grim reading, the 82nd delay in attacking the Nijmegen bridge. From landing it took them 8.5 hours to launch a feeble attack. lostatnijmegen.pre-jump.nl/extract.html Lost at Nijmegen by Poulussen

[@bigwoody4704]

Poulussen is a Titanic bullshit artist pandering to the like of you & TIK.Look on Amazon a whole 2.5 stars one polluted view .No Academies or Institutions source that idjit.He asked readers to identify a rifle - it was an M-1 Garrand,the most prolific rifle of the Western Allies and that simple slappie couldn't identify it. Like you his credibilty swirled the bowl a long time ago 😆

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, A review by American Phil Nordyke, author of: _"All American all the way: A Combat History of the 82nd Airborne Division in World War II"_ and _"Put us down in hell: The Combat History of the 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment in World War II":_ _"The author [Poulussen] has done an outstanding job of researching the critical first twenty-four hours after the 82nd Airborne Division landed in Holland and its capture of key bridges and high ground near Nijmegen, Holland on September 17, 1944. The author uncovers a number of little known details about the operation which will provide a basis of information for historians and authors in the future. A very well researched and thought provoking book."_ - Phil Nordyke

[@bigwoody4704]

Ya well it has 2.5 stars on amazon so John Burnhole you found one other idiot besides TIK who likes it.Most recognize it for the Monty Apologist that it is.Obviously you didn't finish reading my quotes from the Center of Military History ,The United States Army - the 82nd had the most objectives over a longer line while getting attacked at both ends.Hey fatty why don't you throw a 50 cal.machine Gun over your shoulder and Carry it from the Heights,thru the woods,fields,streets,town to the Nijmegen Bridge.Then back up all the way when the landing zones come under attack.Geronimo was right - you haven't done a military thing in your life

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo American historian Phil Nordyke wrote: ♦ "All American all the way: A Combat History of the 82nd Airborne Division in World War II" ♦ "Put us down in hell: The Combat History of the 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment in World War II" ♦ "More Than Courage: The Combat History of the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment in World War II" ♦ "All American's in World War II: From Sicily to Normandy (Look Back in Time)" Rambo, those are books you would stroke and kiss then put under your pillow every night. Nordyke thinks Poulussen is superb.

[@bigwoody4704]

John Burns wrote Rambo, those are books you would stroke and kiss then put under your pillow every night. Nordyke thinks Poulussen is superb. -------------------------------------------------------------------- You've only cracked open an Ales never books .You would have been quoting out of them instead of just reading the reviews - don't lie.Then you'd cherry pick skipping over the condemning parts.Which in Monty's case were most of them

[@westnash]

Great presentation but too much time taken up by host's questions and not enough time for audience questions which are usually much better.

[@bigwoody4704]

From Market Garden Reconsidered(WWII Magazine) - There are many factors that can be cited for the failure of Operation Market Garden, all deserving of consideration: The report by OB West blamed the decision to spread the airborne drop over more than one day as the main reason for the failure. The Luftwaffe agreed and added that the airborne landings had been spread too thinly and too far from the Allied frontline. General Student thought the airborne landings were a great success and blamed the failure on the slow progress of XXX Corps. In this respect, Generalfeldmarschall Model deserves credit for the skill with which he used the sparse resources available to him, particularly given the state Fifteenth Army was in at the time, and for recognising the importance of the Nijmegen bridges. Lt General Brereton reported to Washington that Market had been a brilliant success but had been let down by Garden, with which Bradley in part agreed, blaming Montgomery and the slow advance by the British between Nijmegen and Arnhem. Major General Urquhart blamed the fact that the drop zones for 1st Airborne were too far from the bridge and rather unfairly, his own actions on the first day. Lt General Browning's report blamed XXX Corps' underestimation of the strength of the German forces in the area, the slowness with which it moved up the highway, the weather, his own communications staff and 2nd Tactical Air Force for failing to provide adequate air support. He also managed to get General Sosabowski dismissed from his command for his increasingly hostile attitude. Field Marshal Montgomery blamed the slowness of XXX Corps in general and O'Connor in particular. Later, he partially blamed himself, but laid a large proportion of the blame on Eisenhower. ". . . if the operation had been properly backed from its inception, and given the aircraft, ground forces, and administrative resources necessary for the job - it would have succeeded in spite of my mistakes, or the adverse weather, or the presence of 2nd SS Panzer Corps in the Arnhem area." There is also the matter of allowing the German Fifteenth Army to escape into northern Holland where it could defend the approaches to Arnhem by not clearing the Scheldt estuary, the nature of the highway along which XXX Corps had to advance (a two tank front), the failure to appreciate the unpredictability of the British weather in September, the critical requirement of good communications, which at that point in history was unlikely given the level of technology available and the blatant ignoring of intelligence (from both the Dutch resistance and reconnaissance flights) that armoured units had moved into the Arnhem area Sosabowski in particular feared a flexible, speedy, and strong response, saying, “The British are not only grossly underestimating German strength in the Arnhem area, but they seem ignorant of the significance Arnhem has for the Fatherland.” The 82nd Airborne had been asked to achieve too much with too little. Its commander, General Gavin, had wanted to storm across the wide Waal River in strength on the opening day, but with other objectives pressing, his one “spare” battalion instead conducted the abortive attack. “I was deeply troubled by the possibility of failing to accomplish some of my objectives,” Gavin later admitted. “The perimeter of our endeavors would extend beyond twenty-five miles with the likelihood of major battles being fought at several different points simultaneously.”

[@bigwoody4704]

Monty was nowhere to found spin doctor.His very bad plan came apart at the seams almost immediately.The Tankers were late then sat - probably under direct orders by Monty

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, you have been told many times that the Yanks planned the operation. Even this tool Beevor says that. Generals do not lead the troops running and screaming at the front. Now you know.

[@bigwoody4704]

You and Montgomery are proof you can take a turd and shine it up - but you still have a turd

[@T.S.Birkby]

​@John Cornell Honest question, how do to think a battalion could have held the North and South ends of Nijmegen bridge until XXX Corps arrived on the 19th against attacks from the front and infiltration via the railway bridge into the Nijmegen parks, then also expect the 82nd to hold its rear and flanks, reinforce and remain a line of communications to the Nijmegen bridgehead. Plus since the Germans had established frontline at the North of the bridge in this theory, how long would it take for XXX Corps to organise and effect a breakout against said frontline over a single bridge and a city still full of Germans. Then advance via Elst to Arnhem over difficult terrain, with a build-up of German forces on the Island if they hadn't be sent into Nijmegen. How would Bittich re-act to the capture of Nijmegen bridge and how could he conduct operations to deny the Island to the Allies?

[@T.S.Birkby]

@John Cornell Fair enough, cheers

[@bigwoody4704]

*Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 351-52* By early September Montgomery and other Allied leaders thought the Wehrmacht was finished .It was this understanding that led Monty to insist on the Market-Garden Operation over the more mundane task of opening the port of Antwerp. *He ignored Eisenhower's letter of Sept 4 assigning Antwerp as the primary mission for the Northern Group of Armies*

[@johnburns4017]

"A more perceptive analysis comes from Major-General John Frost, commander of the 2nd Parachute Battalion at the Arnhem bridge: *_The worst mistake of the Arnhem plan was the failure to give priority to capturing the Nijmegen bridge. The capture would have been a walkover on D-Day, yet the 82nd Division could spare only one battalion as they must at all costs secure the Groesbeek heights where the Corps HQ was to be sited._* These numerous attempts to divert attention from this failure, and pass the blame to a captain in the Guards Armoured Division, have been shameful... and highly successful. The myths surrounding the Nijmegen bridge have persisted and been engraved on the public mind by the media and the cinema. Given the US commanders’ chronic tendency to pass the buck and blame their British allies at every opportunity, it certainly might have been better if some effort had been made to get elements of the Guards Division on the move to Arnhem that night. That, however, is the romantic view, bolstered by hindsight. In practical terms it takes time to assemble an entire armoured division from a battlefield in the dark streets of a town, issue fresh orders and prepare it for another advance." - Neillands, Robin. The Battle for the Rhine 1944

[@bigwoody4704]

Oh is that right the Montgomery left him and the 1st on the vine to die.Too bad the 9th SS Panzers already made it over the Bridge in armor.Ya know the bridge unfortunately 1st para couldn't capture - because the caustic little runt left them there to get thrashed .Well I guess you could blame Horrocks & XXX Corp....Tea Time and all

[@bigwoody4704]

Sorry I'll take John Frosts word for it he was there - lying little bitch.Oh and here is Monty in his own words - trying to apologize really *From A Magnificent Disaster,by David Bennett,page 198* Montgomery attributes the lack of full success to the fact that the II SS Panzer Corps was refitting in the area. *"We knew it was there.....we were wrong in supposing that it could not fight effectively."* Here,Montgomery was at the very least being economical with the truth.

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, that is total lies. Sad but true

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo is quoting A Magnificent Disaster by David Bennett. This is regarded as the most poorly written infactual book on Market Garden ever written.

[@bigwoody4704]

Retreat to the Reich from Stackpole Military History Series and gives an account of how many Panther Tanks both the 9th and 10th SS had just before Market-Garden: 7 Sept,1944 Page 243 The 9th SS Panzer Division Hohenstaufen, which was commanded by 31 year old Lieutenant Colonel Walter Harzer, had 3,500 men, five tanks plus assualt guns The 10th SS Panzer Division Frundsberg, which was led by 38 year old SS Brigadefuehrer Heinz Harmel, had 6,000 men,20 Panther Tanks, 40 armored personal carriers, and several guns (both flak and howitzers) That's 25 tanks and 40 APC with 20mms mounted with Flak & Howitzers on Sept 7th before the steady reinforcements came in, John Frost was right as Hastings/Bennett/Beevor conclusively proved .That's also the same Heinz Harmel that reconnoitered the road from Arnhem. Piats & bazooka's were very seldom effective except by the rear - what were the paras going to fight with?Wave their wankers like you. Might as well have slingshots..MONTY SHIT THE BED

[@johnburns4017]

The state of play on the 17th, d-day, was that the road from Eindhoven to Arnhem was clear. There was concentrated German forces on the Dutch/Belgian border facing the British on the front line - naturally. There were around 600 non-combat troops in Nijmegen. Then a few scattered about along the road. There was no armour in Arnhem. That was it. If the bridges are secured by paras forming an airborne _carpet_ then just a cruise up the road. XXX Corps moved off on H hour on d-day meeting stiffer resistance than they expected. The US official history states they made _remarkable_ progress. The US 101st took 3-4 hours to move about 3 km to the Zon bridge with little opposition. The Germans blew the bridge. If they had done a coup de main or moved faster to the bridge, the 101st would have secured the bridge. XXX Corps heard that the bridge ahead was blown so slowed up, getting the Bailey bridge ready. Urgency had gone out of the advance until a bridge was erected. XXX Corps were delayed *10-12 hours* at Zon while they themselves ran over a Bailey bridge. In this gift of a time window the Germans were running armour into Arnhem, and the road, which would make matters worse. XXX Corps moved out of Zon on D-day plus 2 first light. It took them 2hrs 45 mins to travel 26 miles on that road. It was clear except for some Germans on the road in the gap between the southern 82nd perimeter and the northern 101st's perimeter. The two airborne units were to lay a continuous _carpet_ for XXX Corps to power up. They never met up. *The road was still clear from Zon to Arnhem 40 hours after the first jump.* XXX Corps reached Nijmegen about 0820hrs on d-day plus 2, at the planned _expected time,_ making up the delay at Zon. They reached Nijmegen seeing the Germans still on the bridge when arriving. A bridge the 82nd were supposed to have secured for them to speed over. If the 101st and 82nd had seized their bridges immediately, XXX Corps would have been at the Arnhem bridge on d-day plus one in the evening. Game, set, and match. On arriving at Nijmegen XXX Corps took control, then immediately worked to seize the bridge themselves. This delayed them another *36 hours.* This was now a total delay of nearly *two days.* In this massive and unexpected gift of a time window, the Germans ran armour into Arnhem from Germany overpowering the British paras at Arnhem. XXX Corps could, who were not slow, only reach the southern end of Arnhem bridge on the Rhine, only yards away from their objective. A bridgehead was precluded because two US airborne units failed to seize their bridges - easy to seize bridges at that, if they had bothered to move with any speed.

[@bigwoody4704]

you are realizing hallucinations again,has Montgomery been getting rough with you in the tub again? Ring the nurses station and report this!!!

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, a quiz. Name the general of the US 101st who failed to seize the Zon bridge? 20 points for the correct answer.

[@bigwoody4704]

Monty didn't show up for his own operation and you inbreds refer to him as a *Field Marshall* And Carrington stops at Lent going no further and you refer to him as *LORD* . This is why you got kicked out of countries and off of the continent believing these fairy tales and after reading the *Full Monty* they are fairy tales.🤣 So the Big Boys gathered themselves yet again and sail 3,500 miles to get it sorted - you're welcome. *A General's Life,by Omar Bradley and Clay Blair,p.329* On September 14,ULTRA reported that Walter Model commanding Army Group B had established his HQ at Oosterbeek,on the outskirts of Arnhem. An ULTRA report of Sept 16 placed the 9th SS and "probably" the 10th SS Panzer Divisions in Arnhem itself. These reports proved to be absolutely accurate. *(ULTRA in the West,p,153,Bennet)* *A General's Life,by Omar Bradley and Clay Blair,p.331* While conferring with Monty, Bedell-Smith called attention to the ULTRA dispatches indicating the 9th & 10th Panzer Divisions were now located in Arnhem. Owing to this danger, Smith urged Monty to shift an additional airborne division to drop near Arnhem. But Smith recalled "Montgomery ridiculed the idea and waved my objections airily away" *(The Siegfried Line campaign : U.S. Army in World War II,by Charles B.MacDonald,p.122)*

[@johnburns4017]

Model did not blow the Nijmegen bridge because they thought they could keep it. The Nijmegen bridge was charged up, Royal Engineers under fire removed the charges. The idea of Market Garden was to take the bridges with speed, fast enough to stop the Germans blowing the bridges. That was the case except for Nijmegen and the small Son bridge. Son was blown by the Germans. If the 82nd had moved to the Nijmegen bridge immediately the Germans would never have had a chance to blow it. They never blew it anyhow thinking they could take it back.

[@bigwoody4704]

Once again waterhead the plan came apart pretty much everywhere and quickly too.Where was your warrior chief during the biggest debacle of his life,that or Dunkirk.10 days where was the magpie?Writing his victory speech?Perhaps phoning the Burns family on how he should proceed next

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, you have the battles mixed up. The plan only came apart with the US 82nd.

[@bigwoody4704]

Butt plug the 43 wessex and the Irish Guards are still south of Eindhoven somewhere.Why don't you tell them it's OK - all is forgiven,that's the kind of guys we are

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, now stop babbling.

[@akgeronimo501]

Define immediately? LOL Another one who has never jumped assembled and moved 10 kilometers then conducted an attack. LOL You do know the Germans held both ends of the Waal River bridge right.

[@johnburns4017]

Eisenhower prioritized the northern thrust over other fronts: _On 4 September, the day Antwerp fell, Eisenhower issued another directive, ordering the forces north-west of the Ardennes - 21st Army Group and two corps of the US First Army - to take Antwerp, reach the Rhine and seize the Ruhr_ - Robin Neillands, _The Battle for the Rhine 1944_ Eisenhower did not know Antwerp had fallen when he issued the directive. Montgomery also wanted a thrust up and over the Rhine prior to Eisenhower's directive. He devised Operation Comet to be launched on 2 September 1944. It was cancelled due to German resistance and poor weather. Eisenhower's directive of 4 September incorporating divisions of the US 1st Army, incorporated Montgomery's view of a thrust taking multiple bridges on the Rhine from Arnhem to Wesel. To do this the British 2nd Army, some divisions of Hodges' US 1st army and the First Allied Airborne Army (which Monty controlled anyhow) would clearly be needed. Hodges' would protect the right flank. The Canadians would be on the coast of Belgium and Holland protecting the left flank from the German 15th army. The idea was to chase a disorganized retreating enemy, preventing them from manning the German West Wall, gaining a footing over the Rhine, consolidating and then clearing the Scheldt to open up the port of Antwerp. A sound concept which even the German generals agreed would have worked. Neillands on this point... _"the evidence also suggests that certain necessary objectives on the road to Berlin, crossing the Rhine and perhaps even taking the Ruhr, were possible with the existing logistical set-up, provided the right strategy to do so was set in place. Montgomery’s popular and astute Chief of Staff, Freddie de Guingand, certainly thought so: 'If Eisenhower had not taken the steps he did to link up at an early date with Anvil and had held back Patton, and had he diverted the resources so released to the north, I think it possible we might have obtained a bridgehead over the Rhine before the winter - but not more.' "_ - Robin Neillands, _The Battle for the Rhine 1944_ _"Perhaps not more then, but that much alone would have been very useful - and much more than was actually achieved. This view was confirmed after the war in interviews with the senior surviving German commanders, von Rundstedt, Student, Blumentritt and Rommel’s former chief of staff, General Speidel. They were unanimous in declaring that a full-blooded thrust from Belgium in September would have succeeded in crossing the Rhine and might have ended the war in 1944, since they had no means of stopping such a thrust reaching the Ruhr. In the event, largely due to the faulty command set-up [by Eisenhower] and lack of grip, even a bridgehead over the Rhine before the winter was still a dream in 1944._ - Robin Neillands, _The Battle for the Rhine 1944_ Bradley was starving Hodges' First Army of supplies, against Eisenhower's orders, giving them to Patton who was running off into unimportant territory - again. This northern thrust over the Rhine obviously would not work with the resources starved First Army, so a lesser operation was devised by Montgomery, Market Garden, eliminating the resource starved divisions of US First Army, with only _one_ crossing of the Rhine. Market Garden would also eliminate V rocket launching sites, of which London wanted eliminating ASAP, and give a 60 mile long salient buffer between German forces and the important port of Antwerp. This would only have *one* corps above Eindhoven. This was a disgrace considering the forces in Europe at the time. Eisenhower had no grasp of the situation as it was and no strong strategy to advance. Montgomery, although not liking Eisenhower's broad front strategy, making that clear continuously since the Normandy breakout, being a professional soldier he always obeyed Eisenhower's orders keeping to the laid down strategy, unlike Bradley who also allowed Patton to disobey his own orders. Montgomery after fixing the operations objectives with Eisenhower to what forces were available, *gave Market Garden planning to others,* mainly Brereton, an American, of the First Allied Airborne Army. *Montgomery had no involvement whatsoever in its execution.* Montgomery was an army group commander, in charge of armies. The details were left to competent subordinates.

[@bigwoody4704]

Here's one readers view on Neilands book I am a former military officer and love military history. I read everything I can on military history. I understand that the exploits of certain American Generals (e.g. Patton) are sometimes overstated, and Montgomery may have been overly criticized. But wow, I've never read anything like this before. Neillands goes way over the top in trying to revise history. Essentially, Neillands turns Montgomery into an almost super human specimen, clearly the greatest military leader to ever don a uniform. The only flaw that Neillands briefly acknowledges is that Montgomery had a sometimes abrasive personality. On the other hand, he savages every American general as amateurish, inept, and in over his head, Patton, Bradley, and Gavin (among others) were all incompetent buffoons. He grudgingly admits Eisenhower had some organizational skills, before proceeding to tear him down for having no field combat ability. Then he goes on to say that Eisenhower's organizational skills were not good enough, and led to disaster at Market Garden. Presumably, only Montgomery, who could could have saved the day, as Montgomery was faster than a speeding bullet. More powerful than a locomotive. Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound...It's Super Montgomery! *Just a ridiculously one-sided account of the war. I doubt that even those living in the UK will find it enlightening, it's that bad.* *I'm just happy I didn't buy this book, I got it from the library.* *Though I am a bit upset that the library wasted tax dollars on this rubbish...* Please explain how Hastings & Beevor have both been Knighted.Neilands reputation is about as good as the rippers

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, you were never an officer, you were a grunt in the 82nd. We know this. You are making things up again. Now stop it.

[@bigwoody4704]

Do you roll up the windows and smell your own farts - I was never in the Military but would have been proud to be part of the 82nd.You're thinking of Geronimo,who also routinely curb stomps you.It's like fighting a one legged man in an ass-kicking contest - you might want to find your fake posse Johnny.When you're in a hole stop digging

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, you were/are a grunt.

[@bigwoody4704]

I'm not saying you're stupid,I'm just saying you have bad luck thinking

[@xyz0240]

Beevor is interesting. Market-Garden was another amateurish British operation that ended in disaster, like Dieppe. Thank goodness the Soviet Union and the Red Army bore the brunt of the land war against Germany.

[@desydukuk291]

Gavin screwed up, he failed to take the bridge at Nijmegen, seeing it as a secondary matter to protecting his Eastern flank from a phantom German tank army! Read Robin Neillands book The Battle for the Rhine 1944: Arnhem and the Ardennes, the Campaign in Europe. This history book is not a Hollywood film version of Arnhem. It is not a marketing effort by the author/historian to put lipstick on American bungling to seduce the largest English-speaking readership market in the world to buy his book, unlike Antony Beevor's book which blows smoke up 'merican rears. Neillands book will make you uncomfortable; Gavin's poor choices warts and all, different chains of command back to Washington, lack of strategic vision by Eisenhower, duplicity of Ike's subordinate commanders and the huge level of American corruption in supplying its Armies in Europe.

[@bigwoody4704]

Ah another of Monty's apologists pokes his head out of Monty's backside to explain why Monty was not responsible for the failure of Monty's plan. This is what happens when a world power goes 3,500 miles to help an Island that claimed to be an Empire advance across a 30 mile channel - disaster.

[@alanmoffat4454]

THEN WHAT DO THESE PEOPLE REMEMBER ABOUT THERE OCCUPATION BY THE GERMANS JUST WHAT .

[@bigwoody4704]

Montgomery's failure to secure the port of Antwerp and closing the Falaise Gap allowing God knows how many Heer Troops to fight during Market Garden really got soldiers slain in the Northern Thrust.The British army, at this point in time, was not capable of fighting a mobile offensive war as they were desperately short of manpower, and they were poorly led by General Montgomery who was busy fighting with set piece tactics from WWI; Montgomery never learned the tactics of high speed mobile warfare. As he was appointed the overall ground commander (A very bad choice), the fact that Montgomery was largely tactically incompetent did not stop him from trying to get Eisenhower to supply his 2nd British army with troops from Generals Patton and Hodges (US 3rd Army and 1st Army commanders) with many divisions from their armies. For the sake of allied political unity Ike acquiesced... Incredible mistake. In trying to trap the German Army in Normandy between Falaise and Argentan, Montgomery had the Us Armies of Patton and Hodges stop just north of Argentan because he wanted the northern part of the trap made up of soldiers from the 2nd British Army to come down from Falaise to close the gap and trap the Germans. This was a tactical maneuver that they were never able to completely accomplish and most of the Germans escaped to fight in the future Battle of the Bulge and subsequently killed many Americans and caused the war to last longer than it would have otherwise. Montgomery would rather have lost the chance to trap 100,000 Germans than permit the Americans take credit for the entrapment. *If the halt order had not been given, the Americans could easily have entrapped the whole German Army in Normandy and very possibly won the war right there and then (Aug 12 -23)* Unfortunately, Bradley and Eisenhower acquiesced to Montgomery's demand for the sake of Allied unity. Montgomery, in concert with Churchill and Chief of the Imperial General Staff Field Marshal Alan Brooke, pushed British Empire political interests ahead of allied military successes. The British national command authority was fearful that ever worsening British manpower shortages would compromise the perceived (and self-appointed) British role as an equal (if not superior) allied military partner, especially as U.S. Army numbers in Europe continued to grow as the war progressed. Moreover, he was determined to not to let the Americans be seen as achieving more battlefield successes than British forces. Montgomery was certainly a flawed general whose skills and abilities were grossly inflated by the British press and political leadership. However, Ike was his boss and responsible for the Allied Expeditionary Forces. He should have removed Montgomery at the first sign of incompetence and/or insubordination. Other British generals were sacked for much less. Therefore, Ike deserves a fair share of the responsibility for the fiasco at Falaise.Ike knowingly did this in order to keep the Brits in the alliance so that American soldiers would not have to shoulder the entire casualty burden on the Western Front.

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got to stop posting disjointed clap-tap from Beevor's inaccurate over-opinionated book.

[@bigwoody4704]

1st off that was my opinion and information gathered,now back to AB he know history not hysterics like Burns *From the Battle of Arnhem,by Antony Beevor,page 321-322* Montgomery's official biographer remarked that Monty's bid for the Ruhr via Arnhem had proved nothing less than foolhardy.Staff officers at his tactical HQ had never seen "the Master" look so quiet and withdrawn.The sacrifice of the 1st airborne had been enough .Market Garden had als used up the striking power of the 2nd Army and lead it into a blind alley where it could do nothing. *Even Field Marshall Brooke has concluded that his strategy had been at fault."Instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the 1st place",he wrote in his diary* .The failure to secure the Scheldt estuary leading to that vital port now stood out as a glaring lapse of judgement. General Oberst Student pointed out the strength of the flak batteries were grossly exaggerate .As a result the British lost "surprise",the strongest weapon of airborne troops .At Arnhem *Oberstgruppenfuhrer Wilhelm Bittrich who has great respect for Montgomery's generalship up until then changed his opinion after* Answer the question waterhead,if I dig up those quotes will you quit posting - simple Question.Bedell-Smith,Adm.Ramsey,Air Marshall Tedder,Field Marshall Alan Brooke all Sr Officers in the know not like you the monkey in the mango tree swinging from limb to limb.They squarely rest the responsibility where it belongs - on the rancid runts shoulders

[@johnburns4017]

@John Cornell Patton was supposed to swing west from Falaise giving the long hook stopping the Germans retreating at the Seine. The idiot never, taking his army to Paris on a triumphal parade. Montgomery could have made a big sink over that. He never as the allied troops were in high morale after the route of the Germans.

[@johnburns4017]

@John Cornell It was not a race to Messina, well not in Monty's mind, as he suggested Patton get there first as he slogged it out with the hard part of the German army.

[@bigwoody4704]

Brooke, who had been a field grade artillery officer in World War I, and whose service included planning the fire support for the horrifically disastrous 1916 Battle of the Somme, had little personal combat experience in World War II. And what Brooke and Monty did have consisted principally of presiding over a series of early war disasters inflicted by the Germans - notably, his corps’ hasty May 1940 retreat to Dunkirk and humiliating evacuations from France/Europe in the wake of that retreat And it's not Brownings fault the mongrel Monty hid away while everyone else fought. Even Carrington,oh excuse me *LORD* Carrington tried it for a minute or two. During Operation Market Garden one would say Montgomery appeared helpless but the sad fact is he never appeared at all.

[@roodborstkalf9664]

Beevor is not even aware of the battle of The Hague in may 1940.

[@bigwoody4704]

*From A Magnificent Disaster,by David Bennett,page 11* *Montgomery first proposed MARKET GARDEN to Eisenhower on September 10th* Communications between SHAEF and 21st Army Group had been scandalously poor.Eisenhower seemed to accept Montgomery's plan casually,on the nod.Eisenhower did not query the fact that Market Garden was to take place within a couple of weeks,which was unusual for an operation of such scale

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, _"Market Garden was to take place within a couple of weeks"_ A lot of the work that was done in Operation Comet was transferred to Market Garden. The American were assigned Arnhem, but as area was assessed by British paras for Comet they got Arnhem.

[@bigwoody4704]

Montgomery said he'd be in Berlin,enough of this polite bullshit .As big as a backward inbred that you are even you could have whipped up anything better than the yapping jackel in the beret

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, Arnhem is not near Berlin.

[@bigwoody4704]

The ruhr was right around the corner .Look at a map you fool before popping off.The supply lines almost finished the operation in 9 days - couldn't get re-inforcements .It only would get worse with rails in the near by Reich.Maybe you should try the history of darts

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, Berlin is not near the Ruhr. Darts is a good game Rambo.

[@bigwoody4704]

*Page 439 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* One of Monty's biographers an admirer said he retained a malicious desire to deride,diminish,downgrade the achievements of others and his conceit remained undiluted Even those who thought highly of Monty were astonished at his shabby treatment of Gen De Guingand.Monty had said he "could not possibly have handled the gigantic task" with out his highly efficient,over worked Chief of Staff."Freddie " had served him loyally & capably in the desert and Europe.He had saved Montgomery from disgrace when Eisenhower was about to have him relieved of command after the Battle of the Bulge.On several occasions he erased friction between the field marshall and SHAEF .It therefore seemed strange for no apparent reason he barred DeGuingand from the surrender signing ceremony toward which they had strove together ever since Alam Halfa.Then Monty failed to make provision for him to be on the reviewing platform for the victory parade in London when arrangements had been made to others *Page 440 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* De Guingand had been in fragile health but after the war Monty urged him to return to duty.Monty wanted him to become Director of Military Intelligence when Monty became Chief of Imperial General Staff.The position included a tremendous jump to Lt General.However when Monty became CIGS he told DeGuingand he had changed his mind and that another general was to be his deputy. DeGuingand then left the Army but not only did the influential Montgomery offer him no assistance in finding him suitable work to earn a living.He made no effort to have Freddie's temporary generals rank made permanent.Instead DeGuingands was to be reduced to his permanent rank of colonel a matter affecting both his status and pension.The War Office permitted him to retain rank of Major General only after the outraged Eisenhower and Bedell-Smith intervened on his behalf,apparently a matter that Montgomery viewed with total indifference.Still later he humiliated DeGuingand by failing to invite him to the 25th Anniversary commemoration of the Battle at Alamein in which Freddie played a key role I'm sure of it I hate him

[@bigwoody4704]

*Page 428 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* Martin Blumenson said nothing he achieved in Sicily or Italy testified to Montgomery's genius on the battlefield *Page 430 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* Monty explained he expected British Officers to support him in his arguments with "the Yanks".One british officer protested "true we were anti-monty at SHAEF but he created the situation .No one could get at him....we were appalled by his actions.He used everyone he could against someone else."

[@bigwoody4704]

*Page 169 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* The battle of Alamein turned into a battle of attrition rather than tactical genius.Rommel said he showed "lack of resolute decision to attack separately ,instead of throwing in the 900 or more tanks that the British could have safely committed on the Northern front with minimum of effort & casualties".Montgomery had won at Alamein because of his much greater resources permitted him to keep feeding tanks & troops into the bloody fray.While the Afrika Corp were steadiy worn down to near exhaustion. *Page 187 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* In the desert the BBC crowed that Monty was about to close his pincers around Rommel.They had the demon on the run and they reveled in the chase.But the fact remained Rommel despite being humbled and unable to provide very little cover for the withdrawal of his troops,was permitted to slip back toward Tunisia with a battered but still estimable fighting force.He was much relieved that Montgomery showed himself to be "overcautious" *Page 239 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* For Montgomery the Sicily Campaign had been a letdown.Instead of the easy triumph he had forecast his proud 8th Army had bogged down and had been obliged to leave the main prize in the campaign to the American generals whose abilities he previously had disdained.He blamed the haphazard was the conquest of Sicily ha been planned and executed *ignoring the roll he played in both* *Page 247 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* In the Italian campaign to the irritation of the Americans the British press was fed embellished reports by the ministry of information in London never the less kept Monty on the highest pedestal. The BBC continued to report his progress as if the 8th Army were galloping forward when in fact it remained a struggle for his troops to make any significant headway.He repeatedly halted his movement for the purpose of "winding up his tail" Even when stalled Monty gave the impression that everything was proceeding exactly as planned .It had become his habit almost a compulsion,to claim a tactical success when there was none.Forced by ground conditions to delay a major offensive planned for late November at the Sangro River line he declared"the Germans ....are in the very condition in which we want them.We will now hit them with a colossal crack".It looked good in the newspapers at home though less was said when the Germans rallied and the drive fizzled out

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got to stop posting disjointed clap-trap.

[@bigwoody4704]

@@johnburns4017 crawl back into your hole,troll

[@killercd7682]

It is quite clear that the failure of Market Garden was the result of the actions of the 82nd Airborne. For more information see the TIK review of Beevor's book.

[@12345kismet]

this guy is a bit strange but who cares...i'm neither american nor birtish, but it seems to me, the 82nd lost a great opportunity to cover themselves in glory. imagine the headlines. 82nd seize and hold the bridge at nijmegen...the hero's of nijmegen...the books...the medals...the movies...street names..baby names....american hero's...americans own...but no, not to be, which i think is a real shame because the 82nd were a good outfit

[@johnburns4017]

The 82nd were not good enough failing abysmally at a critical point. They failed to seize the Nijmegen bridge with XXX Corps having to seize it.

[@bigwoody4704]

Took the mongrel Monty 6 months to cross the Rhine after 1st trying - and that was with the US 9th Army

[@thevillaaston358]

Drivel, pot bellied drivel

[@bigwoody4704]

little villa when you pull your 3 chins off the keyboard and dry the drool try have some one type in WWII history for you. Bernard blasted his last chance to be relevant.Took 6 months - 6 months for the Rube to cross the Rhine after his 1st attempt - just like the channel but that took 4 years.Guess that's military accomplishment in London - no where else.

[@bigwoody4704]

*From Triumph and Tragedy:The Second World War,, by Winston Churchill* Winston S Churchill to General Montgomery:"For my own secret information,I should like to know whether the attacks you spoke of to me,or variants of them,are going to come off .It certainly seems important to the British Army to strike hard and win through otherwise there will grow comparisons between the two armies that which will lead to dangerous recrimination *Triumph in the West,by Arthur Bryant, Diaries of Field Marshall Alanbrooke,page 245* In a letter to Montgomery:".....as a result of the..... actual situation on your front I Feel personally quite certain that Dempsey must attack at the earliest possible moment on a large scale.We must not allow German forces to move from his front to Bradley's front or we shall give more cause for criticism.I shall watch this end and keep you informed,but do not neglect this point" *From My Three Years with EisenHower,By Harry C.Butcher* "Lack of progress on the British front at Caen has produced BBC coverage that is almost exclusively American.The British Public has become so annoyed at the coverage of events in France that our British hostess switched off the radio while her American Officer guests were listening to the late news" *From My Three Years with EisenHower,By Harry C.Butcher* "At the SHAEF forward War Room last evening,I learned that the Allies had captured some 78,000 Germans,of which the British captured 14,000.The remainder falling into American hands.This information was reported on August 1st.Since which we have captured 4,000 a day" *Eisenhower Volume I: Soldier, General, President,by Stephen Ambrose* Meeting at PM Churchill's residence,Eisenhower and Churchill have a bitter meeting over Operation Dragoon;The invasion of Southern France scheduled to take place August 15.Churchill wants it cancelled and Eisenhower is equally determined that it must go forward as planned.Churchill's motives for arguing Eisenhower nearly to death are clearly suspect .No British Soldiers were involved in the operation *From Intelligence at the Top,by Sir Kenneth Strong* Montgomery was letting Bradley's Army lead the way out of Normandy because the Americans could replace their casualties and the British could not .PM Churchill also talked to Eisenhower about the problem the British were having. *Churchill called Eisenhower on the telephone and asked him ".....if it was possible Eisenhower to avoid too many British casualties"* Now isn't that rich the drunk Winnie and his wonderboy Montgomery declare they are gonna basically cut bait than fish long after the ship has sailed.Oh hey thank you so very much for that magnificent bit of information.Probably should have thought of that before rattling sabres Why would Mr good guy Brooke not simply share that information with Ike or Bradley,perhaps he didn't want the yanks grabbing more headlines.Real good ally right there. But I do understand it's his last shot at the Big Boy table.

[@johnburns4017]

British soldiers were involved in Dragoon. The operation was a waste of resources. Even Yankee general Clarke agreed with Churchill.

[@bigwoody4704]

They weren't involved in shit.He pissed and moaned because the operation was a success .You wouldn't know what that means being a Monty Fan

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, Dragoon was a waste of effort. The troops there just melted into the ridiculous Eisenhower broad-front having no real punch.

[@bigwoody4704]

Again,The pinhead blasted his last chance to be relevant.Took 6 months - 6 months for the Rube to cross a river after his 1st attempt - just like the channel but that took 4 years.Guess that's military accomplishment in London - no where else.IKE kept propping his sorry ass up to give the Russians a look of solidarity,but they already knew he was a fart in a windstorm and brushed aside rather easily.Dragoon initial attacks forced a counter attack by the Germans who were hit so suddenly that confusion was created. They were forced to withdraw and move further inland. The continued onslaught liberated both Toulon and Marseille. On August, 29th the Allies forced the Germans out of Montelimar and into further retreat thus freeing France from German occupation. The Germans finally left by retreating through the Vosges Mountains.Obviously success without having to deal with a politically connected mongoloid named Monty

[@bigwoody4704]

*Eisenhower Volume I: Soldier, General, President,by Stephen AmbroseMeeting* at PM Churchill's residence,Eisenhower and Churchill have a bitter meeting over Operation Dragoon;The invasion of Southern France scheduled to take place August 15. *Churchill wants it cancelled and Eisenhower is equally determined that it must go forward as planned.Churchill's motives for arguing Eisenhower nearly to death are clearly suspect .No British Soldiers were involved in the operation*

[@outdoorlifemaine6691]

a ahhhh ahhh

[@johnburns4017]

"The 1st Battalion, 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment, commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Shields Warren, was charged with taking the road bridge over the Waal *at Nijmegen: a prime task of Operation Market was being entrusted here to just one battalion from an entire division.* According to the US Official History, there was some dispute over exactly when the 1st Battalion should go for the bridge. General Gavin was to claim later that the battalion was to ‘go for the bridge without delay’. However, Colonel Lindquist, the 508th Regimental commander, understood that *Warren’s battalion was not to go for the bridge until the other regimental objectives - securing the Groesbeek Ridge and the nearby glider LZs, had been achieved: General Gavin’s operational orders confirm Warren’s version.* Warren’s initial objective was ground near De Ploeg, a suburb of Nijmegen, which he was to take and organise for defence: only then was he to ‘prepare to go into Nijmegen later’ and these initial tasks took Lieutenant Colonel Warren most of the day. It was not until *1830hrs* that he was able to send a force into Nijmegen. This force was somewhat small, just one rifle platoon and an intelligence section with a radio - say *forty men."* - Neillands, Robin. The Battle for the Rhine 1944 This was all on D-Day. The landing zones were clear by 3.00 pm, with troops ready to roll. *Forty men out of 3,000?* A disgrace. Browning was expecting the bridge to have been taken immediately. So, Browning was guilty of believing Gavin about the 1,000 tanks in the forest to the east, but not in failing to seize the bridge _immediately_ on the 1st day, as he was setting up the HQ and unable communicate with three generals on the ground in the operation. That vital error was all down to General Gavin and only Gavin.

[@bigwoody4704]

Neilands is the biggest hack of all he made up absurd things and printed them as fact.I can see why you like him

[@johnburns4017]

You must stop making things up. Neillands is referring to the *US Official History.*

[@bigwoody4704]

No he isn't I told you before there is no official US History douche nozzle.I've read the archives of the United States Army and they've printed no bullshit like Neilands has because A)he's not legit and B)He lies - like you

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, you are a one. Here is the *US Official History:* All from the *US Official History:* The European Theater of Operations THE SIEGFRIED LINE CAMPAIGN by Charles B. MacDonald CENTER OF MILITARY HISTORY UNITED STATES ARMY WASHINGTON, D.C., 1993 Page 161: Colonel Lindquist's 508th Parachute Infantry and of Colonel Ekman's 505th Parachute Infantry had assembled within an hour after the D-Day drop. Page 162: General Gavin's understanding, as recalled later, was that Warren's battalion was to *move "without delay after landing."* On the other hand, Colonel Lindquist's understanding, also as recalled later, was that no battalion was to go for the bridge until the regiment had secured its other objectives, that is to say, not until he had established defenses protecting his assigned portion of the high ground and the northern part of the division glider landing zone. *Instead of moving immediately toward the Nijmegen bridge, Colonel Warren's battalion was to take an "assigned initial objective" in the vicinity of De Ploeg, a suburb of Nijmegen a mile and a quarter southeast of the city astride the Nijmegen-Groesbeek highway.* Page 163: Colonel Warren about *1830* sent into Nijmegen a patrol consisting of a rifle platoon and the battalion intelligence section. This patrol was to make an aggressive reconnaissance, investigate reports from Dutch civilians that only eighteen Germans guarded the big bridge, and, if possible, capture the south end of the bridge. Colonel Warren directed Companies A and B to rendezvous at a point just south of Nijmegen at *I900* As the scouts neared a traffic circle surrounding a landscaped circular park near the center of Nijmegen, the Keizer Karel Plein, from which a mall-like park led northeast toward the Nijmegen bridge, a burst of automatic weapons fire came from the circle. The time was about two hours before *midnight. (2200 hrs)* Page 164: *the chance for an easy, speedy capture of the Nijmegen bridge had passed.* This was all the more lamentable because in Nijmegen during the afternoon the Germans had had nothing more than the same kind of "mostly low quality" troops encountered at most other places on D Day. Page 185 For all the concern that must have existed about getting to Arnhem, only a small part of the British armor was freed late on D plus 4, 2 I September, to start the northward drive. As the attack began, British commanders saw every apprehension confirmed. The ground off the main roads was low-lying, soggy bottomland, denying employment of tanks. A few determined enemy bolstered with antitank guns might delay even a large force. Contrary to the information that had been received, Colonel Frost and his men had been driven away from the north end of the Arnhem bridge the afternoon before, so that since the preceding night the bridge had been open to German traffic. At the village of Ressen, less than three miles north of Nijmegen, the Germans had erected an effective screen composed of an SS battalion reinforced with I I tanks, another infantry battalion, 2 batteries of 88-mm. guns, 20 20-mm. antiaircraft guns, and survivors of earlier fighting at Nijmegen, all operating under General Bittrich's II SS Panzer Corps.20 Arnhem lay seven miles north of this screen. The British could not pass.

[@bigwoody4704]

Johnny if I fetch the actual content of those pages and embarrass you again will you stop

[@Pookleberry]

I love listening to you speak, but there are simply too many 'umms' and 'ahhs'. Almost makes it unlistenable. Just sayin'.

[@roodborstkalf9664]

I just read this book. The British troops in Arnhem fought extremely brave, but I was shocked how incompetent many of the British (Montgomery, Browning, Horrocks and Urquhart) and some of American commanders (Gavin) turned out to be. Also the planning for Market Garden was a total disgrace. I was also wondering why on earth the British were not able to provide their troops in Arnhem with working radios.

[@roodborstkalf9664]

@@bigwoody4704 : the British were also not able to solve their radio problems in the following days. I find this very strange. I read that Montgomery proposed to land parachutists in Walcheren on the 7th/8th of September. The American Commander Brereton is however supposed to have found this too dangerous. He was afraid that many men would have drowned. This from the same man who is supposed to have proposed a paratroop landing near Cologne behind the Siegfried line on the 5th of September. If this is true and not simple British propaganda, this Brereton guy was another overpromoted incompetent. Strangely enough the Allied armies did nothing to secure the Oosterschelde estuary after they got the undamaged port of Antwerp in their hands around the 4th of September. The boggy terrain you mention was not much of a problem in mid september. In winter the boggy terrain also applies to only a small portion of the 64 miles of road. I think it was used as an excuse for failure.

[@bigwoody4704]

I've read everything from the batteries had not been properly charged on the units,to the terrain,to types of metals in the ground.I did see a demonstrations by communication engineers in Arnhem using the very same units or duplicates and they also had the same problems on a nice day.hard to say what the problem was.A lot of Holland/Netherlands is low and the Gerries did flood huge areas

[@bigwoody4704]

That's what an ignoranus you are .In the highly unlikelyhood the most backward battle plan ever contrived had worked at Market Garden where were the supplies coming from?You idiot half the time they couldn't fly them over the chanel because of weather and they weren't going to be able to drag everything up from Cherbourg.Did Monty not know that the Reich was right around the corner filled with the same Germans that just blasted holes all over his 64 mile pipe dream.

[@johnburns4017]

The planning of Market Garden was primarily by Brereton and Williams of the USAAF. Montgomery had no part in the planning or execution. The operation failed by a whisker despite some failings. The failure point was Gavin of the US 82nd.

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 The radio were only short range which they knew before the jumps.

[@pfcsantiago8852]

He called it ..Russia 2022.

[@ДмитрийДепутатов]

Taylor Donna Taylor Anthony Wilson Daniel

Another Dutch speaking double Dutch......

[@JoriMikke78]

When one compares A. Beevor to say... Stephen Ambrose, it is clear that which one of these really cares about the real history, instead of glorifying the allies. Amboreses books are unreadable, and it is sad that HBO and others base their tv-series on his books, instead of Beevor.

[@bigwoody4704]

Monty was a fine defensive fighter up to a certain point. But Monty's basic trouble was that he was a set-piece fighter, in contrast to George S. Patton. This was epitomized in the crossing of the Rhine. Monty was always waiting, waiting until he got everything in line. He wanted a great deal of artillery, American artillery mostly--American tanks, also. Then, when he got everything all set, he would pounce. *But he always waited until he had "tidied up the battlefield"--his expression--which was his excuse for not doing anything* Monty was a good general, I've always said, but never a great one. Too cautious, entirely. *Gen.L.JoeCollins*

[@bigwoody4704]

*From Arnhem Jim Blog* In no way should this analysis be misconstrued as impugning either the bravery or demonstrated competent combat leadership of Lieutenant-General Browning in conventional infantry combat. He had demonstrated that as a relatively junior officer in World War I, justifiably having earned the Distinguished Service Order. No small feat, usually for a junior officer of that day just short of being recommended for the Victoria Cross. That being said, the fact remains that in an entirely new form of warfare, Airborne Warfare, he had absolutely no real operational experience. None other than MajGen James M. Gavin, commanding the 82nd Airborne Division, during Operation Market-Garden, was extremely critical of Browning, writing in his diary on 6 September 1944, (prior to the operation), that he "...unquestionably lacks the standing, influence and judgement that comes from a proper troop (read airborne combat) experience.... his staff was superficial... (Editorial note: With the obvious exception of Maj Brian Urquhart) Why the British units fumble along... becomes more and more apparent. Their tops lack the know-how, never do they get down into the dirt and learn the hard way". Further, the acclaimed British author of military history, Max Hastings, states the following in his recent book, The SECRET WAR, Spies, Ciphers, and Guerrillas 1939 -1945; referring to Field Marshal Montgomery on page 495; “The little British field-marshal’s neglect of crystal-clear intelligence, and of an important strategic opportunity, became a major cause of the Western Allied failure to break into the heart of Germany in 1944.The same overconfidence was responsible for the launch of the doomed airborne assault in Holland on 17 September, despite Ultra’s flagging of the presence near the drop zone of the 9th and 10th SS Panzer Divisions, together with Field-Marshal Walter Model’s headquarters at Oosterbeek. Had ‘victory fever’ not blinded Allied commanders, *common sense dictated that even drastically depleted SS panzers posed a mortal threat to lightly armed and mostly inexperienced British airborne units. Ultra on 14-15 September also showed the Germans alert to the danger of an airborne landing in Holland* It was obvious that it would be a very hard to drive the British relief force eighty miles up a single Dutch road, with the surrounding countryside impassable for armour, unless the Germans failed to offer resistance. The decision to launch Operation ‘Market Garden’ against this background was recklessly irresponsible, and the defeat remains a deserved blot on Montgomery’s reputation.” From some one who lives there,studies & knows their History nothing like you

[@bigwoody4704]

Margry or Jean Paul belong in the comics section - best book on OMG I'm LMFAO why because their distortions are as twisted as yours.Jean Paul should stick to why Degaulle didn't do shit and why we saved their arses in 2 wars .How many literary awards have they won,universities have they taught at or best sellers do they have - YOU SLAPPIE.And WA Taylor's wasn't privy to Montgomery's UlTRA accessability.Maj.Brian Urquhart ranked him and warned division about the 2 SS Divisions.And Monty was warned as late as the 16th by Beddell Smith and Freddie De Guingand,why did all world Margry leave that out of his notes - some Historian.Or maybe he didn't and you're conveniently leaving those facts out which is probably the case

[@bigwoody4704]

*www.marketgarden.com/2010/UK/statistics/statis9.html#9ss* here you go spam-brain I suppose Market-Garden.com is full of crap too.Look at the amount of armor the 9 & 10 ss Panzers had.If John Frost was alive he'd bitch slap you silly even though you're already there

[@bigwoody4704]

Jack Ass you're in reform school so our paths have never crossed.Graebners men on the 17th got to the north side of Nijmegen-WAAL bridge in APC,Half tracks and mobile flak units.They blew right past 1st para who were unfortunately on foot also.You just don't get - the biggest thing you ever carried is your wanker in your hand.Try carrying a 50 Cal. field machne gun on your shoulder down from the heights thru,wooded hills across canals thru streets to a bridge then have to turn around and go back because the Z is under attack - all this the 82nd had to do - even your hero TIK admits this in one of his comment sections.All the while a fatty like you sits there 73 years later spewing lies and badmouthing them to prop up Montgomery - *who was no where around*

[@bigwoody4704]

Dipshit they did to,they had mobile flak units,APC's,stugs .How the hell did 1st get shredded - piss poor planning by Montgomery - it was his plan and he proposed it to IKE & SHAEF on Sept 10.Are they full of shit to - the only thing that supersedes your ignorance is you willingness to express it.And those Piats were shit they might get lucky and take out a track.Again dumbshit by those who live there *www.marketgarden.com/2010/UK/statistics/statis9.html#9ss* .When you are in a whole quit digging Market Garden failed because of assumptions and poor planning .It was Monty's funeral

The interviewer is appallingly bad .

[@stevenreed4075]

M

[@bigwoody4704]

*Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 307* Bradley later wrote about their August 13 meeting "with our forces poised to close the trap at Falaise-Argentan and Monty's forces falling down on the job,Monty couldn't have chosen a more inappropriate time to unveil his plan" *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 315* Montgomery's failure to close the trap on the Germans between Falaise and Argentan left nearly 200,000 Germans fleeing .Montgomery's confusion and tactical mishandling of Allied Forces during the battle of the Falaise Gap were clear indications that it was an error for Eisenhower to have left Monty in charge after August 1st.Russell Weigley wrote the fumbled closing of the Falaise Gap indicated the urgency of Eisenhower's taking over as ground commander'Martin Blumenson wrote *"in August Montgomery changed his instructions on who was to take it no less than 5 times"* *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 316* After the American break out at St Lo the battle became mobile.Monty seemed to be overwhelmed by events.He seemed paralyzed by the Americans speed

[@bigwoody4704]

​ *John CornellJack Ass only a waterhead such as yourself could ignore *the fact your very own Crown signed an agreement with Hitler,then attacked his forces then get thrown COMPLETELY off the continent in 20 days* Then the polluted rube that you are gleefully ignore that 1st and 9th US Armies were supporting the slippery weasel Monty when the biggest Nazi Offensive in the ETO is launched.While the USA eventually brought 600,000 to that fight and the Wehrmacht brought 500,000.The mutt Monty could only muster 55,000(with said US Armies) - you call that being either an Empire or an ally? Foisting the butchers bill onto the allies when there are no more colonials to kill. Appears to the world and anyone with a clue that you started a fight you weren't prepared to finish.The Americans and Russians lost more men because they were doing all the fighting.They were henceforth referred to as Super Powers Monty is strangely absent from that conversation.Then in your alternate reality you strut around on these media backwaters boasting of farts in the wind evidently.Well you have at it precious I'm tired of lancing the boil named monty - you are a tremendous waste of time and so are any other special needs students that might agree with you.But you can keep on discussing the subject with the other names on your account Village Ass and John Burns - sure sign of mental illness right there .Now why don't you just pick up were I found you - Badmouthing Dead GI's

[@bigwoody4704]

And again you distortionist were did the USA lose 200,000 soldiers? - you really are a filthy fuck.I went directly to the Archives of the United States Army .Do readers of the comment sections a favor - next time you're pulling numbers and opinions out of your ass,get your head out of there 1st

[@bigwoody4704]

Seriously you got your shit shoved in the world knows this.Monty had 15 British/Canadian Divisions and 16 US Divisions.Tell me why is that?Why would an Empire that the sun never sets on have it's Prime Minister grovel at the feet of a former colony.With all of your supposed prowess why were we fighting in a war that you inbreds declared?Churchill insisted to IKE that the BEF be used sparingly evidently your hero got enough of your boys hurt and sent them home.But it was ok to send the Yanks in.All this because of the looming Russian threat.The western Allies had to give the look that the UK was solid,viable and ready at arms.Of course that was bluster,smoke and mirrors

[@giovannipierre5309]

Big Woody From Monty Master Of The Battlefield 1942-1944 (Nigel Hamilton): Therefore when Patton had phoned him shortly before midnight on 12 August to ask if he might continue towards Falaise, Bradley had responded with hesitation: ‘Nothing doing. You’re not to go beyond Argetan. Just stop where you are and build up on that shoulder………’ ….On the evidence in front of him- air reconnaissance, Ultra, Phantom and operational reports- Bradley had had no hesitation in stopping Haislip’s corps from over-extending itself: ‘I much preferred a solid shoulder ar Argetan to the possibility of a broken [American] neck at Falaise,’ he afterwards mused…… …..In fact Patton’s new order to halt Haislip only reached the 15US Corps Commander at 11am; He had not actually captured Argetan and, with a thirty-kilometre gap between himself and a First US Army on his left, cohesion was at this moment vital. To suggest that Monty was to blame was silly. Bradley willingly shouldered responsibility for the decision: In halting Patton at Argetan, however, I did not consult with Montgomery. The decision to Stop Patton was mine alone.’ In fact Patton never even took Argetan (which was to elude the Americans fo another seven critical days), let alone strike north to Falaise. To say therefore that, without the interdiction of Bradley or Montgomery, Patton would simply have bottled up the Falaise pocket on 13 August is ridiculous- for his forces could not even secure Argetan, which was within their allotted sector, or the next village village eastwards Gace, got a further week, the protestations of conspiracy to deprive Americans an troops of prestige or glory ring thin’

[@bigwoody4704]

Giovanni John Burns Freddie and ET williams heard the berk give the stop order.IKE did nothing because he thought Monty might move.So to save face for Britain which was getting harder and harder to do as long as Monty was involved he covered it up.When he should have been dismissed as he turned around and fumbled it all away again in Holland - IKE was livid

[@bigwoody4704]

*Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 301* *Dr Forrest C.Pogue,interviews,US Army Military Institute,1947* On the evening of August 12 Gen.Bradley called Gen. Montgomery's HQ requesting to send Gen Haislips XV Corps north to the boundary at Argentan toward Falaise.Bradley's request was denied'Montgomery's staff officer Brigadier E.T.Williams said he was in Freddie DeGuingand's truck near Bayreaux when Bradley's call went through;"Monty said tell Bradley they ought to get back.Bradley was indignant.We were indignant on Bradley's behalf...Monty missed closing the sack.Bradley,Deguingand and Williams argued in favor of the Americans moving north to Argentan to close the gap,but Monty would not change his mind *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 302* Bradley later wrote "Falaise was a long sought British objective and for them a matter of immense prestige" Montgomery could not allow the Americans especially George Patton to embarrass the British Army by driving through Argentan to take Falaise

[@giovannipierre5309]

Big Woody From Monty Master Of The Battlefield 1942-1944 (Nigel Hamilton): Therefore when Patton had phoned him shortly before midnight on 12 August to ask if he might continue towards Falaise, Bradley had responded with hesitation: ‘Nothing doing. You’re not to go beyond Argetan. Just stop where you are and build up on that shoulder………’ ….On the evidence in front of him- air reconnaissance, Ultra, Phantom and operational reports- Bradley had had no hesitation in stopping Haislip’s corps from over-extending itself: ‘I much preferred a solid shoulder ar Argetan to the possibility of a broken [American] neck at Falaise,’ he afterwards mused…… …..In fact Patton’s new order to halt Haislip only reached the 15US Corps Commander at 11am; He had not actually captured Argetan and, with a thirty-kilometre gap between himself and a First US Army on his left, cohesion was at this moment vital. To suggest that Monty was to blame was silly. Bradley willingly shouldered responsibility for the decision: In halting Patton at Argetan, however, I did not consult with Montgomery. The decision to Stop Patton was mine alone.’ In fact Patton never even took Argetan (which was to elude the Americans fo another seven critical days), let alone strike north to Falaise. To say therefore that, without the interdiction of Bradley or Montgomery, Patton would simply have bottled up the Falaise pocket on 13 August is ridiculous- for his forces could not even secure Argetan, which was within their allotted sector, or the next village village eastwards Gace, got a further week, the protestations of conspiracy to deprive Americans an troops of prestige or glory ring thin’

[@bigwoody4704]

Giovanni John Burns Freddie and ET williams heard the berk give the stop order.IKE did nothing because he thought Monty might move.So to save face for Britain which was getting harder and harder to do as long as Monty was involved he covered it up.When he should have been dismissed as he turned around and fumbled it all away again in Holland - IKE was livid

[@bigwoody4704]

*From September Hope,by John C.McManus,page 4* "When Eisenhower strayed from his Broad Front Advance and gave Montgomery permission to launch Market-Garden,he made his worst decision of the war .Market Garden was a bad idea because it took the focus off of Antwerp - and Antwerp mattered the most.Without the necessary supplies,the Allies had no chance of sustaining a victorious push into Germany. In essence Market Garden was based on Hope.Hope that Nazi-Germany was just about finished,hope that the weather would hold,hope that all bridges would be captured intact,hope that all the equipment would work properly.Hope that most of the German opposition would be over-aged invalids

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got to stop posting disjointed clap-trap.

[@bigwoody4704]

McManus graduated from the University of Missouri with a Master of Arts degree in American History . Soon after, he completed his Ph.D in American and Military history at the University of Tennessee. While working on his Ph.D, McManus participated in the University's Normandy Scholars program where he studied the Normandy battlefields firsthand. McManus currently serves on the editorial advisory board for World War II magazine and World War II quarterly. He is also the official historian of the 7th Infantry Regiment Association.[ see you rube everyone I source is educated,well read and insightful.And you are a shoe lace vendor and mop out adult theaters for a living

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, he is one lousy historian.

[@bigwoody4704]

@@johnburns4017 when your done washing his floors and emptying the waste basket you can gas up his car and wash that too.Oh and he gets 4-5 *s not like the wankers you quote

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, Beevor is one lousy historian

[@bigwoody4704]

*From September Hope,by John C.McManus,pages 63* General Browning cautioned General Gavin "Although every effort should be made to effect the capture of the Grave and Nijmegen Bridges,it is essential that you capture the Groesbeek ridge and hold it."

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got stop posting disjointed clap-tap from discredited authors.

[@bigwoody4704]

When danger reared its ugly head He bravely turned his tail and fled Yes, brave Sir Monty turned about And gallantly he chickened out Come on Johhny sing along you know how it goes

[@bigwoody4704]

*From Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45* Montgomery & his colleagues threw away all that they had learned since 1939 about the speed & reaction of Hitlers Army..Its brilliance at improvisation,its dogged skill in defense,its readiness to punish allied mistakes. *Carlo D'este* From the outset Market Garden was a prescription for trouble that was plagued by mistakes,over sights,false assertions and out right arrogance.It's success hinged on a slender thread attack & its execution would prove disastrously complex.British ground commander Miles Dempsey was sufficiently concerned that he recommended the drop be made near Wessel.Which would enable 1st Army to block a German counter attack.His proposal was never seriously considered or his concerns addressed. Carlo D'este

[@akgeronimo501]

I loved Hastings book, Armageddon. I am in the middle of Beevor's "Second World War" now.

[@bigwoody4704]

Ardennes 1944 was excellent.About a month ago I finished A Magnificent Disaster,by David Bennett.Great insight not like the distorians Poulussen or Neilands.I think you're probably right they deliberately lie to sell books

[@johnburns4017]

akgeronimo501 and Big Woody are the same person. Now Rambo, you have been told to stop talking to yourself.

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, everyone knows that _A Magnificent Disaster_ by David Bennett is the most poorly written and inaccurate book on Market Garden. Read the comments on Amazon. I would advise you to burn it now as it will be useful in creating heat in cold Alaska where you are.

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, Carlo D'este was right in that Monty and Dempsey wanted a crossing at Wessel, however they were overruled by Brereton and American of the First Allied Airborne Army. Monty after said that enough resources were not put into the operation. America armies were not involved. Monty wanted divisions of the US First Army on the right flank. Bradley and Patton had _deliberately_ taken supplies destined for the US First Army _against the orders of Eisenhower._ They should have been fired. This compromised the thrust to the north. It appears deliberately so for spite.

[@bigwoody4704]

*From September Hope,by John C.McManus,page 167* It probably would have been difficult for warren of the 82nd to hold both ends of the Nijmegen Bridge against the combined might of Kampfgruppe Henke,the SS recon.battalion and other reinforcements from the 10th SS panzer Division .In that sense his mission was somewhat unreasonable,it reflected the unrelenting problem the 82nd AB faced in Market Garden namely how it was to hold the Groesbeek heights while at the same time capturing the Nijmegen bridges,especially with only part of the division on the ground.This was the great flaw in the OMG Design and Warren's soldiers paid the price for it.The sad reality was the push for the bridge had failed and was almost preordained to do so. *From September Hope,by John C.McManus,page 331-332* Because the Allied route of advance was so constricted and slender any German counter attack was disruptive,no matter how strong or weak.Truck drivers were spending as much time taking cover in the ditches as driving their vehicles,instead of roaring north to Arnhem,tankers & infantrymen were absorbed into pushing the Germans away from the vital road .As a result of all these problems,ammunition,food and gasoline were running dangerously low for Horrock's frontline units as well as the 82nd AB. *The amiable Horrocks realized he was actually fighting 3 distinct battles:one to keep the corridor open,one to hold the Groesbeek Heights and one to make it to Arnhem.Obviously this is too much,and it was a direct result of market garden's overly ambitious nature,not to mention everything had to go right for the operation to succeed*

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got stop posting disjointed clap-tap from Beevor's inaccurate book.

[@bigwoody4704]

@@johnburns4017 I knew you had dyslexia that's John Mcmanus another authentic historian.The kind you nutthugging,nationalistic nimrods avoid like the plague. When danger reared its ugly head He bravely turned his tail and fled Yes, brave Sir Monty turned about And gallantly he chickened out Come on Johhny sing along you know how it goes

[@bigwoody4704]

*Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 317* Montgomery got along with neither the Americans nor the Canadians.After Dunkirk the French absolutely refused to serve under a British commander.Such widespread mistrust of the little British General did not bode well for future Allied operations in which Monty played a role. *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 319* Montgomery's irrational behavior at the Falaise Gap was also influenced by what *Canadian General Henry Crerar* called ".... the Englishman's traditional belief in the superiority of the Englishman..." For a host of reasons Montgomery's usefulness came to an end in Normandy,probably with in a few weeks of the invasion.Any other british general could have done as well as Montgomery did at Caen;and very few would have handled the Battle of the Falaise Gap so incompetently *Ike and Monty:Generals at War,by Norman Gelb,page 329* Monty's egocentric nature made it impossible for him to respond to complex situation in which he found himself by insisting he had not been mistaken about anything. *Eisenhower & Montgomery at the Falaise Gap,by William Weidner,page 318* Eisenhower thought Montgomery was a psychopath suffering from an inferiority complex *Monte,Making of a General,by Nigel Hamilton,page 278* Montgomery's stepson John Carver talked about his "....schizoid tendencies engendered by his upbringing...."

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, the British and Canadians invented the armoured personnel carrier, losing far fewer men than the Americans. They had more punch with *far fewer* men.

[@bigwoody4704]

you started a fight you couldn't finish and thanx for holding our jocks whilst we did.But you had a hell of an Olymic swim team after May 1940.To bad you yokels ran away into the desert - another bright move

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, you have been told that the Axis were on the run by the time the Yanks had boots on the ground. When they did get involved the British kept saving their arses.

[@bigwoody4704]

With every other Army in Europe the BEF ended up in the Channel.who refitted,resupplied and reinforced the Crown after being Dunkirked and carried the fight forward .You know 30 miles off your shores - the desrt wasn't SHIT,how many times does that have to be explained you ignorant shit.Billions of dollars in military hardware were left in Normandy during Monty's mad dash Your precious Crown signed the Munich Agreement - giving The Czech Republic to the Reich.Were any of their representatives present during that heinous act? SHAEF finally realized giving good troops to Monty was making Russian generals look like humanitarians.Your distortions are ludicrous postmortem to absolve the abrasive egomaniac.The pinhead blasted his last chance to be relevant.Took 6 months - 6 months for the Rube to cross a river after his 1st attempt - just like the channel but that took 4 years.Guess that's military accomplishment in London - no where else.

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 More drivel by Rambo. A shame? Of course. Rambo, the US 82nd were a total disgrace at Nijmegen.

[@bigwoody4704]

*Page 331 Ike & Monty by Norman Gelb* Apparently the Russians shared the doubts others had about Montgomery in Normandy.Their advancing troops were reported to have put up a roadsign near Minsk saying - 1,924 kilometers to Caen

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got to stop posting disjointed clap-trap.

[@bigwoody4704]

Stop playing with air hammers you prat

[@giovannipierre5309]

Big Woody “By holding on the left and breaking out on the right, Montgomery had produced a triumph” Ike & Monty: Generals at War.Norman Gelb 1994

[@bigwoody4704]

Strange burns disappears and you show up,um no I read the book,what page sunshine?

[@bigwoody4704]

*Page 409 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* There were many reasons why Montgomery was being effectively downgraded once more'.Eisenhower had no doubt any longer that his reputation as a battle-winning commander was greatly inflated.The experience at Caen,Antwerp,Arnhem and delays in following up the Ardennes assault and the excessively thorough build up for the Rhine crossing provided sufficient evidence for that.General Whitely .IKE's British deputy chief of operations,said the feeling at Allied HQs "was that if anything was to be done quickly,don't give it to Monty.Monty was the last person that would be chosen to drive on Berlin - he would have needed 6 months to prepare"

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got stop posting disjointed clap-trap.

[@bigwoody4704]

@@johnburns4017 roll down the windows and stop smelling your farts

[@bigwoody4704]

*The Eisenhower Papers,volume IV,by Edward Chandler* By early September Montgomery and other Allied leaders thought the Wehrmacht was finished .It was this understanding that led Monty to insist on the Market-Garden Operation over the more mundane task of opening the port of Antwerp. *He ignored Eisenhower's letter of Sept 4 assigning Antwerp as the primary mission for the Northern Group of Armies*

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, that was total nonsense.

[@bigwoody4704]

This one's barking - references were given Puddles,you have the memory span of a newt

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, *this is 100% wrong:* _"He ignored Eisenhower's letter of Sept 4 assigning Antwerp as the primary mission for the Northern Group of Armies"_

[@bigwoody4704]

You have again displayed your extraordinary capacity to not think You have your head so far up Monty's ass you can tell us what he had for lunch.Are you his little swiss boy? *From Eisenhower's Armies,by Dr Niall Barr,page 415* After the failure of Market-Garden,Eisenhower held a conference on 5 October 1944 that not only provided a post mortem on the operation but in which he reiterated his strategy for the campaign.Alan Brooke was present as an observer,noted that IKE's strategy continued to focus on the clearance of the Scheldt Estuary,followed by an advance on the Rhine,the capture of the Ruhr and a subsequent advance on Berlin.After a full and frank discussion in which Admiral Ramsey criticised Montgomery freely, *Brooke was moved to write,"I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault,instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the 1st place....IKE nobly took all the blame on himself as he had approved Monty's suggestion to operate on Arnhem"*

[@T.S.Birkby]

Big Woody you know TIK, that hypocrite, has recently blocked and hidden my comments on the Market Garden video

[@OldWolflad]

I'm sorry but I find this posh-British boy's accent really nauseating, and I'm British. Its the Queen's English, but I never meet anyone who speaks like that. Judging from this speech and his identical one in USA, I think he panders to an American audience, it is not really very analytical, and doesn't properly answer those questions that are of great debate? Why did 82nd not take Nijmegen Bridge, were 30 Corps too slow etc. What cannot be questioned is the bravery of the British and American paratroopers, the Poles too, and the Dutch resistance. There are far better books out there. But the pluses are the recognition of the suffering of the Dutch civilian population

[@thevillaaston7811]

'he panders to an American audience,' - 100% correct!

[@bigwoody4704]

you chronic bed wetter little villa imagine what this Failed Marshmellow Montgomery would say about IKE if he had lost say 200,000 @ Dunkirk or 81,000 @ Singapore or 25-30,000 @ Tobruk but who the hell has losses like that ?

[@thevillaaston7811]

nicholas Moss From Big Woody (aka Para Dave) 'Montgomery would say about IKE if he had lost say 200,000 @ Dunkirk or 81,000 @ Singapore or 25-30,000 @ Tobruk' Any idea what Montgomery had to do with decision making at Dunkirk, Singapore, and Tobruk? Any idea where the a figure of '200,000 @ Dunkirk' came from?

[@bigwoody4704]

He was there if he was all that he wouldn't have gotten driven at Dunkirk. That's 198,000 Tommies - not that historical accuracy is your thing.There were roughly 140,000 French,Belgian,Dutch troops also. Are you Lucien,is that why you defend him? or is it because you are both lampshades

[@thevillaaston7811]

nicholas Moss 'He was there if he was all that he wouldn't have gotten driven at Dunkirk. That's 198,000 Tommies - not that historical accuracy is your thing.There were roughly 140,000 French,Belgian,Dutch troops also. Are you Lucien,is that why you defend him? or is it because you are both lampshades' Para Dave. 'why you defend him?' Para Dave does of course mean Montgomery. The idea that a single division commander (Montgomery) was resposible for decisions regarding the BEF as a whole, in Northern France in May, and June 1940 is absurd.

[@thevillaaston7811]

The talk is a tragic waste of 1hr and 46mins of a person's time. The books are a tragic waste of trees.

[@bigwoody4704]

You're a tragic waste of human flesh.Go sit with Monty - it's what he did best

[@bigwoody4704]

hey asshole unabated you threw the GI's under the Bus,When Monty' many foibles and obvious faffing was pointed out by the weight of evidence,Historians and other posters you try flipping the script.The tanks sat below Arnhem - that is a fact,call it what you may.Carrington let Frost and his men go with out a fight unlike the 82nd .You seem to think as long as your chin is on the curb your not in the gutter

[@johnburns4017]

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, the US 82nd were a total disgrace.

[@bigwoody4704]

Who were never driven from the continent like Monty. And unlike Monty they showed up to fight in Holland while he conveniently hid

[@johnburns4017]

The British were the single biggest agents in the defeat of Nazi Germany. They were there from day one until the end. The so-called "invincible" Germans army tried and failed, with their allies, for two years in WW2 to defeat the British army in North Africa. The finest army in the world from mid 1942 onwards was the British. From El Alemein it moved right up into Denmark, through nine countries, and not once suffered a reverse taking all in its path. Over 90% of German armour in the west was destroyed by the British. Montgomery had to give the US armies an infantry role as they were not equipped or experienced enough to engage massed German SS armour. Montgomery stopped the Germans in every event they attacked him: ♦ August 1942 - Alem el Halfa ♦ October 1942 - El Alamein ♦ March 1943 - Medenine ♦ June 1944 - Normandy ♦ Sept/Oct 1944 - The Netherlands ♦ December 1944 - Battle of the Bulge Not on one occasion were Monty's ground armies pushed back into a retreat by the Germans. The US Army were struggling in 1944/45 retreating in the Ardennes. The Americans didn't perform well at all east of Aachen, then the Hurtgen Forest defeat with 33,000 casualties and Patton's Lorraine crawl of 10 miles in three months with over 50,000 casualties. The Battle of the Bulge, with 100,000 US casualties, took all the US effort, and vital help from Montgomery and the British 21st Army Group, just to get back to the start line. The Germans took 20,000 US POWs in the Battle of The Bulge in Dec 1944. No other allied country had that many prisoners taken in the 1944-45 timeframe. The USA retreat at the Bulge, again, the only allied army to be pushed back into a retreat in the 1944-45 timeframe. Montgomery was effectively in charge of the Bulge having to take control of the US First and Ninth armies. Parts of the USAAF was put under RAF control. The Ninth stayed under his control until the end of the war just about. Normandy was planned and commanded by the British with Montgomery leading, which was a great success coming in ahead of schedule and with less casualties than predicted. The German armour in the west was wiped out by primarily the British - the US forces were impotent against the panzers. Monty assessed the US armies (he was in charge of them) and had to give them a supporting infantry role, as they were just not equipped to fight tank v tank battles. On 3 Sept 1944 when Eisenhower took over overall allied command of ground forces everything went at a snail's pace. The fastest advance of any western army in Autumn/early 1945 was the 60 mile thrust by the British XXX Corps to the Rhine at Arnhem.

[@bigwoody4704]

Puddles for 4 FULL years they didn't even come across the Channel.They wouldn't move with out the colonists .Do you have dementia you keep forgetting this.Monty didn't do shit in Normandy that's why IKE took over all charge in Sept.Should have been canned after Goodwood but SHAEF left him for political purposes only.Once the Yanks were on the same side of the Channel - the Huns days were numbered.We even let the abrasive little freak tag along - you're welcome

[@agentmulder1019]

Wow, stop waving those pom poms so much! Montgomery couldn't advance any faster than a snail and worried more about losing a battle than he did winning one! Caen was a excellent example of prime Montgomery DITHER allowing large numbers of Germans to escape. Monty was ALL about the SHOW. As for British oversight of American forces in some operations, NO news there!

[@agentmulder1019]

John Burns Johnny, i am ALL about UNFETTERED and UNBIASED truth, and am not impressed with your nationalistic pride and bravado. Lying on a beach in the south of France", are you?? That is probably a good place for you. Don't stay in the sun too long though. It tends to warp your brain.

[@johnburns4017]

George Lyons You never read a word I wrote did you?

[@johnburns4017]

George Lyons _One problem that has bedevilled any objective study of Anglo-US military history in the post-war decades is the tendency of some US commanders and many US historians to play the ‘British’ or ‘Montgomery’ card in order to conceal some glaring American blunder. Omar Bradley’s disastrous failure to provide adequate armoured support for the US divisions landing on Omaha on D-Day, with the terrible losses thus caused to the infantry companies of the 1st and 29th Divisions, have been largely expunged from the public mind - at least in the United States - by constant harping about the British or ‘Montgomery’s failure to take Caen on D-Day - a failure that turned out to have no strategic significance whatsoever._ _Nor is Omaha the only example. As we have seen in earlier chapters, harping on about the ‘slowness’ of XXX Corps or the ‘flawed’ plan of General Urquhart at Arnhem, has successfully diverted critical minds from the cock-up in command that prevented the 82nd Division from either taking the Nijmegen bridge on the first day of the attack or avoiding a frontal attack across the Waal in borrowed boats three days later._ _It appears that all that was necessary to avoid critical press comment in the USA and any unwelcome Congressional interest in the competence of any American commander, was to murmur ‘the British’ or - better still - ‘Montgomery’, and critical comment in the USA either subsided or went unvoiced._ - Neillands, Robin. The Battle for the Rhine 1944 The fact is, that XXX Corps were not slow, reaching Nijmegen *ahead of schedule.* Urquart's paras took one end of the Arnhem bridge preventing its use by the Germans. If the US 82nd had taken the Nijmegen bridge immediately XXX Corps would have been in Arnhem on time relieving the paras and fully securing the bridge. Caen was a nice to have objective, but Monty saw no need to tie up vital resources on a strategically unimportant target. As Neillands stated it was of _"no strategic significance whatsoever."_ Neillands highlights the glaring unthruths of the US press and historians.

[@bigwoody4704]

*Page 438 from Ike & Monty ,Generals at War by Norman Gelb* Montgomery had served the Allied cause well during the Battle of the Bulge.But his egotism and irrepressible tactlessness did neither himself or Allied unity any good at a critical moment when important decisions affecting both him and it were about to be made.Even in Britain where his popularity remained undiminished among the populace,some began to think less of him.The military attache' at the American Embassy in London reported back to Washington "I have the strong impression that most British Officers,including many in the influential War Office are much less enthusiastic over Montgomery than is the British Public..Lord Ismay in the House of Commons expressed the wish that someone would "muzzle" or better still chloroform Monty. *"I have come to the conclusion that his love of publicity is a disease,like alcoholism or taking drugs and that it sends him equally mad."*

[@johnburns4017]

Rambo, You have got to stop posting disjointed clap-trap.

[@bigwoody4704]

Have your special education instructor read some history to you. You can navigate KZbin I'll give you that - baby steps

[@bigwoody4704]

John Cornell Please tell us all what advantages in men and supplies Monty had over Rommel ------------------------------------------------------------ Pretty much every book ever written on the subject.I'm tired of digging up facts and figures from Historians,historical Societies,Institutes,Libraries or Academies while you pretty much post bullshit pulled from your arse.But you can start with *The Rommel Papers by B.H.Liddell Hart,The Desert Generals by Correlli Barnett,Auchinlek by Philip Warner and The Churchill and Montgomery Myth by RW Thompson,pretty much anything written by John Keegan,Max Hastings or Antony Beevor* All good British Author/Historians - with the papers to proof it,so they are the polar opposite of you. By all means you can relieve me of furthering your education by using the address bar in front of your face,but you'll probably have to wipe the drool off the Keyboard 1st

[@bigwoody4704]

Nice try you poor trampled cabbage leaf - shitting on the GI's for years finally caught up to you.The 82nd lost many men crossing the Waal the cock Carrington didn't even try unlike 1st Para or the 82nd - that is a fact