A Bridge Too Far - The Landing Zone Dilemma

[@James-nl6fu]

"Just making sure which side you're on." It has to be an ad-lib and a really good one by Gene Hackman.

[@PuppetierMaster]

On this day Oct. 31st, 2020 that we say farewell to the best Scot that ever danced on this mortal stage, Sir Sean Connery (1930-2020) Rest well sir.

[@johnrobinson1762]

Rest well? He's lucky, he got to drift off to sleep and away. That's a luxury that men portrayed here didn't get.

[@synthonaplinth5980]

Billy Connolly would like a word....

[@Rocky-xx2zg]

How the hell did Eisenhower approve Montgomery's plan? He knew Montgomery was a jerk.

[@dac5782]

1. Public demand to use British paras for _something_ 2. "Victory disease"; general euphoria over prior victories in France, and a belief that Germany was on it's last ropes and might surrender before Christmas.

[@yatsumleung8618]

Lack of transport: 1st Div sent to Arnhem in 3 lifts Flak around Arnhem: 1st div to land 8-11 km from Arnhem, losing the element of surprise Bad weather in England: Polish brigade drop cancelled twice and delayed by 2 days before sent to Arnhem. By the time the bridge party was overwhelmed and the Polish were forced to land in a different spot on the other side of the Rhine without any means of crossing and joining the 1st Div

[@jameshiller6204]

Yat Sum Leung Yes even the Germans couldn't initially believe the paras wanted Arnhem bridge because of where their landing zone was. Operation Market Garden failed right there. ...and also because Browning failed to make the capture of the Nijmegan bridge priority.

[@charlessaint7926]

"Just making sure whose side you're on"~General Sosabowski.

[@charlieccuboston]

I often think of that quote, bears consideration sometimes!

[@BradBrassman]

Aye. My old man did some of his National Service in Berlin in the 50's where the used to joke that Russian weapons came with a lable containing two instructions. 1. Retreat until winter, 2.Attack

[@jameshiller6204]

8 miles. ?? Just making sure whose side you're on.

[@al488j]

War films are no use for historical reference as they have an agenda and have to be entertaining. Good fun to watch but hardly accurate. Read any decent book on the subject will tell you that.

[@michaelancona1120]

True… but as war movies go, this one was pretty accurate to the events of Operation Market Garden. Many of the men involved in the campaign were still alive, and served as consultants during production. Several of them were actually coaching the actors who they were portraying.

[@tamer1773]

Hackman had the best lines in the whole movie. What was done to General Sosabowski by Montgomery was disgraceful. If Market Garden was fought today Montgomery would have been cashiered.

[@colinmcmahon3500]

Tamer 1 bollockschnitz.

[@jameshiller6204]

I think Gen Urquhart said it best to Browning when Browning said well you did a good job and he says "but did others do theirs. " ?? -Gen Browning. well as you know I always thought we were going a bridge too far ... in hindsight Gen Browning. ??

[@thevillaaston7811]

Tamer 1 Eisenhower was ultimately responsible for Market Garden. By then he was both Supreme Commander and Land Forces Commander. Taking responsibility for everything goes with job. Not just the best bits.

[@jameshiller6204]

TheVilla Aston I think Eisenhower approved the broad concept of Market Garden but Montgomery did not disclose to him the details and his motivation for launching it. As a Field Marshall Montgomery probably regarded himself at least Eisenhower equal and that was the problem.

[@thevillaaston7811]

@@jameshiller6204 Eisenhower never stated that detail had been kept from him. Bradley also saw the plan, his aide Chester Hansen spoke seeing the plan in an interview. Who can say that the motives for launching it were obscure?

[@JohnnyZenith]

Perhaps I should remind that this is a British made film. We do not shy from self criticism.

[@mapexblack]

@Timothy Verrinder funny that I'm British I know all about it. Its been discussed with my British friends. Like every other nations shady history. So a lie?? Not at all, quite a bigoted statement you made there buddy.

[@andym9571]

Obviously made for the American market

[@Wanderer628]

@Timothy Verrinder The only one acting like a snowflake here is you...

[@mapexblack]

@Timothy Verrinder you must just be a twat, you didn't state a fact did you. Therfore bigotry

[@ewantaylor4478]

with USA money

[@icytadbull]

and then Montgomery crucified Sosabowski by scapegoating him for the failure of Market Garden, pure decency indeed

[@agentmulder1019]

True, Montgomery was the truest of "ASSES!"

[@bluemarshall6180]

Agent Mulder Very.

[@jameshiller6204]

Tropical Magic yes well people who speak out against the top brass often cop the blame. ...He could see the Arnhem part of Market Garden was doomed from the start just like the intelligence officer who tried to warn Browning.

[@jameshiller6204]

John Cornell I do understand the point you are trying to make that Montgomery and Browning did not necessarily blame their subordinate for the failure of Market Garden. However they were responsible for the planning which was based on perfect weather during the Operation and faulty assumptions about German strength especially around Arhnem.

[@jonsmitt9769]

Monty was also a planner for the infamous Dieppe raid. Afterwards he went so far as to burn official documents that mentioned his involvement.

[@wcywing]

i love Gene Hackman, just making sure whose side you are on. classic. the drop zone was not even on the photo map?!

[@evilmoif]

Apparently he would have prefered to crash in the swamp and die there...

[@jaysonpida5379]

outnumbered to say the least, with an eight mile hike through enemy territory with no ground/air support.....I'd take my chances crash landing NEXT to the bridge.

[@Fordnan]

@@jaysonpida5379 A night operation, A smaller number of gliders landing on the road to the south, followed shortly after by parachutists, glider landings continuing on the road later in the morning. There would have been casualties, but probably not as many as there ended up being anyway. Also, how hard would it have been to put the airfield out of action at Driel? We were flying 1000 bomber missions, day and night.

[@JonPL]

@Wisey134 We're really happy someone accepts the history, Sosabowski deserves the memory. Cheers!

[@OnochieAfigbo]

Part of the problem of this Market Garden venture; Everyone seemed scared of telling Monty about their constraints.

[@kongwong77]

There were two problems with Market Garden. One, Monty. Two, Market Garden.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Eisenhower and Brereton green lit Market Garden. Montgomery had no jurisdiction to do so. He wasn't Supreme Commander or even C-in-C of all ground forces at the time and certainly had no jurisdiction over First Allied Airborne Army or the USAAF and RAF.

[@williama.walker2287]

A coup de main operation was proposed similar to Pegasus Bridge where an advanced force would land south of the bridge in the predawn hours and seize it before the main drop took place. This plan was rejected because of the potential casualties.

[@mariuszabramowski451]

Najlepsza scena w tym filmie

[@arturadamski71]

Gene Hackman as polish gen. Sosabowski - the best!

[@33VMUH]

I admit that airborne operations are not my speciality, but instead of landing the entire force eight miles from Arnhem Bridge as the RAF insisted, why couldn't they use the two closer areas General Urquhart asked about in the following manner: If the first area was too soft for glider landings, why not have all the parachute troops land there? It seems that parachuting down onto soft ground would be ideal for troops jumping out of airplanes. Next, could the second area General Urquhart mentioned be used for the glider landings? The transport aircraft could release the gliders well short of the anti-aircraft batteries at Deels before returning to England. I realize that this idea would cause the 1st Airborne Division to be divided in two, but both concentrations would be much closer to the bridge and not be strung-out eight miles between the objective (the bridge) and the supply and reinforcement areas (the landing zone the RAF demanded). Polite comments are gladly accepted.

[@zxbzxbzxb1]

Airbourne ops aren't my expertise either, but I'm wondering if the paras had dropped in one place and the gliders in another maybe it was feared that the para's who dropped might be pinned down or even overrun if they didn't have access to the support equipment in the gliders. Or maybe the troops in the gliders were only sufficient to defend the landing zones meaning they wouldn't be able to advance towards the paras who dropped closer in order to support them? Also the only point of landing closer to the bridge was to attack and take the bridge quickly, and defend it for 2-3 days which was perhaps thought to be to tough a job if they didn't have all their equipment or manpower concentrated together. Maybe the book by Cornelius Ryan explains that sort of tactical decision in more detail.

[@baddriversofmoosejaw8681]

More like the second area Urquhart suggested would've been fine, but you heard the man: ''When we bank for our return, we run into whole flak of rubbish at this Jerry airfield up here at Deel. I would've answered: ''Wait you haven't heard, there's a new invention. It's called....a bomber. Put simply send squads of Halifaxs and Lancasters to bomb that airfield. We're going to lose aircraft like it or not, but we'll lose fewer if we bomb that airfield and other anti-aircraft defences. Who promoted you? Honestly.''

[@mikeblank7526]

I like your idea. 8 miles was futile. It made the job pretty much impossible.

[@MrBandholm]

That and why drop in the day? If they had bombed the airfield/anti-defense zone, they could most likely have masked the airdrop initially by placing a big wave of bombers...

[@JPH1138]

I read that US airborne at least wrote off night drops as a viable strategy after the Normandy landings where there was quite serious disruption from how long it took units to regroup after their jumps in the darkness.

[@ellisjames7192]

How does it take to march eight miles with a a bunch of troops? The element of surprise was long gone.

[@timbunker4529]

A current para hour and 50 minutes.

[@JammyDodger45]

@@timbunker4529 - don't be silly, they weren't doing it around Catterick Garrison Training Area, they'd be Patrolling it not running it (which perfectly proves what bollocks it is when people say TAB is a Tactical Advance to Battle).

[@fishingthelist4017]

@@timbunker4529 current Paras did not have to deal with throngs of ecstatic Dutch civilians crowding the streets until the German snipers opened up. Frost's battalion made it, but the other two battalions marching for the bridge ran into much stiffer resistance and were virtually wiped out in the streets of Arnhem.

[@michael.prescott4016]

The look on the XOs face is priceless.

[@lonzo61]

Hackman was a great actor, but that he was cast for this role was a mistake. Even as a sixteen year old watching this movie in the theaters back in '77, I was disappointed. His Polish "accent" was not convincing at all. They couldn't find anyone else to play Sosabowski? C'mon.

[@U2QuoZepplin]

Just making sure whose side you're on is kind of the best bit of this scene. General Sosobowski had some pretty dry wit but the point was pretty serious as demonstrated by General Urquart saying the landing sight could be ten miles away.

[@Avignon_Pope]

@goldyn123 British officers trusted Montogomery blindly after his campaign in North Africa. Notabene: after fail of Market Garden, they all blamed one persone: general Sosabowski "for his pesimism". That was rude.

[@manictiger]

Wasn't Montgomery the guy that marched a bunch of shitty ass early-war British tanks against Flak37s not just once, but REPEATEDLY?

[@ellisjames7192]

His pessimism was well founded.

[@thereisnospoon277]

Oosterbeek. But whether the landing was far or near, the bigger problem would be that unforeseen II SS Panzer Corp.

[@kazoora_bike_shop_service]

Gene, U did it right... I mean U act in this movie... like the Pole :DDD

[@LandersWorkshop]

You say my mind. He sums up the Slavic attitude of telling it like it is! No messing no niceties! Raw and simple.

[@luisre7202]

Sasabowski ; tipo de pocas pulgas pero con un gran sentido común!!!! Jajaja!!! Quería saber de qué lado está usted!!!!! Jajaja!!!!

[@airborneSGT]

Is that how they originated the 10 mile tab for the Paras?

[@donmckeoun7990]

Oh yes sir we do plan on dropping you somewhere you see there are 2 ss panzer divisions in the area we were planning on dropping you right on top of them Montgomery is so excited

[@MyLateralThawts]

Operationally, you must plan to seize the objective within the hour of landing, as the enemy will have recovered from the initial surprise and would begin implementing their own counter strategies. Unopposed, you can expect paras to march 8 miles in 2 hours after hitting the ground. Interestingly, the Allied Airborne Forces could have used a couple of tricks the Germans used in 1940. One was to use 100 Fiesler Storch light aircraft to ferry 200 men to take one bridge. The other was to use older seaplanes to land troops right on the river, close to the objective, which was another bridge. I would have expected the Germans to still attempt to engage the aircraft, but they would most likely have been overwhelmed. To me, the greatest drawback of the original plan was lack of anti-tank resources and any contingency in the event of a communications failure. As an aside, when Kurt Student lost communication with his troops on Crete, he sent his personal pilot and plane to land on the primary objective with instructions to radio him a sitrep. He subsequently won the battle.

[@jimomaha7809]

I was practice for the Germans to have anti aircraft guns up and near bridges of importance. On the south side of the Rhine there were several. When the British units west of Arnhem tried to brak through, those units using the lower road were under fire from these guns. The so called pillbox at the Arnhem bridge was actually an anti aircraft tower, its crew, underneath, used a machine gun to stop the British.

[@MyLateralThawts]

@@jimomaha7809 The advantage to the Allies in this respect, is the location of all AAA assets the Germans had in the area should have already been known. In one of the books I read, it was mentioned that there was no air activity the day before the operation. A mistake in my opinion. A similar strategy employed prior to D-Day was to implement massive air bombardments throughout the potential landing zones, with most sorties being carried out outside of Normandy as part of a deception plan. I believe something similar should have been done for Market-Garden.

[@jimomaha7809]

@@MyLateralThawts I have seen an original British map of the Arnhem area with many known AA location marked. It was one of the reasons given not to fly over Arnhem. Commander Gliderpilot regiment Chatterton proposed a similar operation as Deadstick. Fly a couple of gliders to the bridge and land upon the road. Some parachute commanders were willing to drop on the town. These proposals were rejected.Chatterton remembers he was called a murderer. There was no reason for air activity on the 16th. What would be the advantage of that? The British landings went perfect. The 1st and 3rd battalion should have gone for the bridge and not stop for the night. C-company 3rd battalion managed to get to the bridge during the night.What was a huge problem half of the airlanding units that arrived had to guard the drop and landingzones.A second lift that day , blocked by US commander Brereton,

[@MyLateralThawts]

@@jimomaha7809 Besides reducing the AAA in the area prior to the operation, hitting known barracks, supply depots, marshalling yards, railheads and 3C locations would have helped the operation considerably.

[@jimomaha7809]

@@MyLateralThawts That was actually done. There were attacks on all German airfields within fighter range of Arnhem, asylum of Wolfheze was bombed, the 750 Germans billited were targetted but nearly all had left the day before.save for about 28 guns, 34 mosquitos attacked several German barracks in Arnhem. Also barracks at Ede were attacked. SS barracks at Velp were attacked. Also before the operation Dutch railway personal was asked to strike /hide. So the Germans would have difficulty to use railway transport. All known heavy AA sites onroute were attacked. And just as in Normandy paradummies (Ruperts) were dropped. And although some barracks were totaly destroyed it had not much effect. Many German units were billited in schools, farms, hotels, (like the recently stationed SS NCO training unit near the drop/landingszones Bilderberg.)

[@simongee8928]

Although this is a film portrayal, it does make one wonder if the RAF really were that condescending when they were dealing with non RAF personnel.

[@Muhammad-uu3nu]

Thes scene alone worth 1000x today's craps

[@Larkham99]

Short as it was, Gene Hackman nailed this role.

[@cisium1184]

I disagree. Hackman's a great actor but his accent is dreadful here. And the character written for him is awful: one-dimensional and relentlessly negative.

[@ianmiles7916]

Deelen was abandoned before the operation, after it was bombed?

[@camselle]

this flick had more Oscar winners than any i can remember...

[@leftcoaster67]

You are planning to drop us off somewhere?

[@MAJK30]

@JohnnyZenith Respect? respect and apologies are due for the Poles that they were betrayed by the British and the Yankees in Teheran and Yalta. Before you start to pay attention to me, teach the history, but not written by Montgomery, who contributed to its inadequacy to the death of many soldiers during the battles in Normandy and Holland. Operation Market Garden could have been saved and reap the benefits, but "Lord of Alamein," ruled that the failure

[@edwardhogan1877]

Was any thought ever given to capturing the German Airfield near Arnhem instead? I think the German Airborne invasion of Crete in 1941 only succeeded because they eventually captured an airfield which allowed them to fly troops directly to the battlefield..

[@servicekid7453]

Much must be risked in war…..

[@jopump9907]

MOntgomery was always mediocre at best. No imagination.

[@andym9571]

@John Cornell no imagination. Obviously these people know nothing about his other campaigns.

[@andym9571]

@John Cornell as you know John , the detail and imagination he went into and had in the planning of Alemein was quite incredible.

[@HenryvKeiper]

I agree with that.

[@JonPL]

@Trashcansam123 Sounds like sarcasm and a funny one too; But what Seedgroup was trying to say, afterwards British leaders decided to treat Sosabowski like shit, famous and great Polish general ended up in factory, with workers saluting him when he was entering. And that's simply "not cool" and these are facts. I also heard (dunno if its true) that Brits wanted us to pay for fuel we used to defend British skies against Nazis in Battle Of Britain. (our famous 303 flying division)

[@kawo666]

JonPL Man, fuel? The whole planes were being paid for with Polish reserves gold smuggled to Britain. The remainders of which, and I mean tones, are still there.

[@andym9571]

There seems to be a lot of strange and totally wrong rumours circulating in Poland. The British ( those that have any interest in history that is ) know the brilliant part some Poles played in the war. No one criticized the Poles for anything. Only praise. The Polish General got criticised...maybe rightly. Dont forget the reason Britain and France went to war was because of Poland.

[@JonPL]

​@@andym9571 lol, because of Poland? Bro, they threw us to the wolves and ONLY then when they realized the wolf(es) are still hungry and sharpening their claws to take care of them next (ekhu ekhu, France? Netherlands?), they decided to react. Because their very asses were at stake. Before that? Bruh... And no, most loved Sosabowski and historicians - and thus people who know history - do praise the guy. Thing is, at some point in history, some assholes in British Government decided to strip him off his military achievements, medals and basically screw him. So maybe people do know now - that's great, really - but it won't help Sosabowski properly live his well-earned retirement, as he's sadly a bit too dead for it now. AFAIR Montgomery just needed a scapegoat, Sosabowski was an easy target because he was a foreigner and he was in conflict with Monty, who had strong backing in the MoD and government in general. So what are these "rumours" you've mentioned?

[@gruntforever7437]

@@andym9571 Then they stood by and did nothing to help Poland. Remember that? Remember that it was all a British plan that was idiotic- remember that?

[@bobpage6597]

0:30......nice little detail. The RAF officer's first ribbon on his chest.....DFC or Distinguished Flying Cross! A very high level decoration, awarded for " exemplary gallantry during active operations against the enemy in the air." - wonder what the character would have done to earn that haha!!

[@JammyDodger45]

He's also wearing the ribbons for the King George VI Coronation Medal (issued in 37) and the General Service Medal (1918). During the inter war years the RAF saw service in Somaliland, Iraq and Afghanistan so he could have earned the DFC there or, of course, earlier in WW2.

[@widmo05]

@GrappendeGrapjas Gene Hackman played role of general Stanislaw Sosabowski

[@PORRRIDGE_GUN]

...badly

[@cjonam]

Just checking..whoose side you are on lol

[@yyzxxz2003]

No doubt Montgomery was incompetent. And don't feed me that crap about how he defeated Rommel in North Africa. If you or I outnumbered Rommel in men, tanks and artillery like Montgomery did, we too could have defeated Rommel in battle. Montgomery's bigger screw up however occured when he failed to capture the port of Antwerp in the first week of September which necessitated a very difficult and costly campaign by the First Canadian Army to subdue the Scheldt estuary and secure the port.

[@baddriversofmoosejaw8681]

Actually Antwerp was captured and secure before Market Garden. The allies had failed to take Dunkirk until the following May and also they didn't listen to Canadian Lt. General Guy Simonds who wanted to move up the Belgium coast to the Scheldt estuary, then turn east and capture the south shore all the way to Antwerp. He and General Brian Horrocks of British 30 Corps could've then moved west and taken the north shore while the Germans were retreating. This would've trapped 80,000 German troops in Belgium who instead escaped across the estuary and reinforced Nimjegan and Arnhem. It also gave the Germans the time they needed to set up defenses on the estuary and forced the Canadian army to spend a month capturing it.

[@Scottx125Productions]

All easy to criticise in hindsight. Everyone makes mistakes, especially in war. Even Patton had his cock ups. Yes this mission didn't go to plan, It was extremely ambitious and had flaws. Could it have worked? Sure, if everything went right. For example, if the American troops at Eindhoven decided to attack the town and take the bridge, instead of sitting on their hill for 3 days before attacking delaying the British advance for another 2 days.

[@paulchandler9646]

patton bradley and eisenhower were jerking off in paris when Montgomery discovered the germans were going to come through the ardenne.They ignored him when they were told which could of cost the war or prolonged it by years so basically if anyone was incompetent it was them.

[@agentmulder1019]

grz heck. EXACTLY!

[@agentmulder1019]

Scottx125 Productions. "If, If, If!" This plan was doomed from the beginning! Even IF the 82nd had been able to take Nijmegen bridge on the first day, the path to Arnhem bridge was a raised road due to the low flood plains giving the enemy optimum defense conditions. Just ONE knocked out tank would effectively block the advance. And the Germans reacted quickly as well. Like it or not, the British XXX Corps were not the "blitzkrieg" "hell for leather" type either.

[@colinbaldwin8769]

Thing is this is just a film. For all that a fantastic film but film makers are experts in making things dramatic. It isn’t and can never be an exact reconstruction of actual events.

[@colinbaldwin8769]

John Cornell I think we have to resign ourselves to the fact that no film will ever be really accurate. If only because we are looking at past events through today’s eyes. I saw the film about Churchill and thought the business in the House of Commons with Chamberlain didn’t seem right. Heard afterwards that it was only put in for ‘dramatic effect’ Ridiculous because people now will think it’s true!

[@colinbaldwin8769]

John Cornell I don’t think film makers realise the responsibility they bear. Montgomery was also unfairly given short shrift. Let’s get together and make the best film ever!

[@colinbaldwin8769]

John Cornell Read his memoirs a few years ago. Fascinating.

[@ellisjames7192]

Yes, we know that. What's your point?

[@Dimitrovski3007]

at the wide part they could advance further too arnhem germans made ditches along side the road when the lead tank was hit it was over and that happend they could not advance more further for half an hour

[@nhmooytis7058]

Sir Sean and Jeremy Kemp!

[@cjonam]

Just checking whoose side you are on..lol

[@JagMan78]

@GrappendeGrapjas Jeremy Kemp

[@eppewillem]

What a great scene this is.

[@yyzxxz2003]

Montgomery was over rated as a general. Montgomery could only win battles so long as he held the advantage in men and material as in North Africa. When he had to fight a force that was as strong as his own he always lost or fought to a stalemate. Another thing about him was that he was not able to adapt to battle situations as they occurred. As an example he kept pounding his head against Caen for a month and he couldn't crack it until the American breakout around the end of July @ St. Lo.

[@ewantaylor4478]

The Americans broke out during Cobra with relative ease because the majority of the Germans were facing Monty in the east

[@johngal56]

As the opening titles said, Monty and Patten were rivals and disliked each other intensely. The reason Monty got his way for this hair-brained operation was that Patton was an embarassment to Eisenhower after the GI 'slapping' incident in North Africa. Patton later proved his metal by brilliantly coming to the rescue of besieged Allied units following the German's attack in the Ardennes during the Battle of the Bulge.

[@aethelrickthedark7012]

johngal56 if you're referring to the paratroopers that were in bastogne. I don't think any of them would say they needed "saving"

[@JohnP538]

@@aethelrickthedark7012 When Creighton Abrams bulldozed his way into Bastogne the beleaguered defenders may not have described themselves as "saved", but I'm sure they were exceedingly happy to see him.

[@Slazerable]

2:00 "Just remember what your're working for." kzbin.info/www/bejne/fIfVfHqiaL2fn5o

[@MAJK30]

@JohnnyZenith I am glad that you acknowledge the criticism of English generals, especially General Browning and field marshal Montgomery

[@hailhydra7959]

Gavin also deserves criticism but it’s a war, people will screw up.

[@runningfree212]

Who Dares Wins

[@Dimitrovski3007]

at the wide part they could advance further too arnhem germans made ditches along side the road when the lead tank was hit it was over and that happend they could not advance more further for half an hour

[@JohnnyZenith]

@MAJK30 Who do you think you are? We were one of the major reasons the war against Germany was won. Have some respect. Everybody makes mistakes. The Americans did too, do not be fooled.

[@JohnnyZenith]

@quest8899 We still are thanks.

[@maisonraider4593]

On of the critical factors that doomed this operation was that German anti aircraft strength in the area was overestimated and german ground forces were underestimated

[@bobpage6597]

That, and dropping the British 1st Airborne on top of two SS Panzer Divisions was always going to end quite badly. 'As you can imagine its hard to stop tanks with rifles and machine guns.' - Nowadays if you had every second or third soldier equipped with an NLAW it would be a very different story aha. Infantry then become a fucking hazard for tanks!!

[@maisonraider4593]

@@bobpage6597 By 1944 both sides had acknowledged the essential need for tanks to have infantry support and adequate reconnaissance to engage enemy hand held anti tank weapons before they could hit the tanks. Of course that doesn’t always work according to plan. For example it is confirmed that during the battle of Berlin almost 2000 soviet tanks were lost, most to panzerfausts.

[@frankvandergoes298]

@@bobpage6597 There were not two SS Panzer divisions at Arnhem, a collection of ad hoc Kampfgruppen, mostly logistics personell with only 16 tanks. 1st British Airborne had 32 anti tank guns, plus the support of the Artillery battalion with 24 75mm pack howitzer. They were not lightly armed, one of the greatest myths of WWII.

[@ChrisCrossClash]

@@frankvandergoes298 So what you saying? That the British forces were rubbish at fighting?

[@frankvandergoes298]

@@ChrisCrossClash Where in my comment did it say that??.

[@joshuagrover795]

Apparently before Operation Market Garden was launched, Montgomery went to see Eisenhower at his HQ in Brussels, Belgium interrupted a meeting and demanded Ike's Chief of Staff leave the room but he kept his in the room, he then rip up the messages from Eisenhower to Montgomery, had an argument then as Ike and Montgomery were sitting down tapped him on the knee and said "Steady Monty!, You can't talk to me like that. I'm your boss!"

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Eisenhowers HQ wasn't in Brussels. Eisenhowers HQ was safely 600 miles away from the front in Granville, near Cherbourg. Montgomery simply couldn't have done what you claim.

[@HenryvKeiper]

I guess so.

[@BrettLloyd-z5x]

Jeremy kemp

[@yaqppl]

Huh, I love Patton :D But I Think that soviets were been stronger than him, and whole allied army. You should thank god that someone has invented A-bomb, beacouse JS wanted much more than middle europe...

[@schizoidboy]

@GrappendeGrapjas I think he is Jeremy Kemp.

[@matt2house]

not all british generals are incompetent, the reason why monty was put in command is because he won a succesful victory at el alamein against rommel. market garden was just an extent of his own ego since the yanks were pounding the shit outta the jerries.

[@williamvalentino2895]

If you gave me 5 to 1 odds I could of beat rommel to

[@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-]

@@williamvalentino2895 Rommel was beaten at Alam Halfa where he had 6 divisions against Montys 4.

[@robdean704]

Imagine my surprise at the crabs from the RAF been shit birds. Well the brass were, give the pilots a risky op and they'll pull through as shown by countless crazy operations

[@andrewstackpool4911]

RAF brass concerned no five star hotels ivo Arnhem

[@JammyDodger45]

It is of course ironic that you would say that since almost all of the RAF 'Top Brass' at the outbreak of WW2 had initially been in the Army or Navy until the RAF was founded in 1919 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@robdean704]

@@JammyDodger45 is is ironic? I think it's hilarious they're the best taxi drivers in the world

[@JammyDodger45]

@@robdean704- don't worry, less intelligent people often struggle to understand irony. if you'd ever been on the FEBA you'd know they're a lot more than taxi drivers.

[@robdean704]

@@JammyDodger45 yeah they're good delivery drivers especially when Helmand seemed to have as many mines and IEDs as poppys.

[@JPH1138]

Lots of Montgomery bashing here - which is understandable what with this being a film covering the biggest screw-up of any Allied generals which was all on him. But he did more than beat Rommel in North Africa - he was one of the chief architects of D-Day for crying out loud! I can't agree with writing him off entirely, no matter how bad an idea MG was..

[@gruntforever7437]

Personally I thin Montgomery's greatest accomplishment was his contributions on Overlord. He beat Rommel by outnumbering him and having control of the air.

[@TheTibmeister]

Jared Hansohn. Montgomery was supposed to take Caen on D-Day. It took over two weeks and cost hundreds of French and British lives

[@strzaloslaw]

@John Cornell But Soviet Red Army was supposed to take Berlin in July 1941 without major losses. Actual Soviet losses can be only roughly estimated.

[@andym9571]

No he wasn't. That is false The whole idea was to draw the German armour to that area to allow the Americans to circle around from the west. It succeeded.

[@gruntforever7437]

@@andym9571 wow you are so full of it. Monty said he would take Caen on D-Day and when he didn't came up with that excuse that you and a lot of idiots bought.

[@JammyDodger45]

Montgomery was tasked with getting to Caen on D-Day, not with taking it. His mission in doing so was to provide a block to prevent German reinforcements getting stuck into the later landing phases on the beach and to provide space for those newly arrived forces to spread into to prepare for the subsequent break out. He successfully achieved this aim.

[@tomservo5347]

Sosabowski was trained at the Warsaw Academy and seemed to be one of the few openly alarmed at the problems he foresaw. He was a tragic character, dying in relative obscurity after being blamed for the failure and washing dishes in what must have been bitter being under Soviet control. You fight so hard to free your country from occupation just to exchange one set for another thanks to a US President in poor mental health taken advantage of by Stalin.

[@alexbowman7582]

There was seemingly a double agent in the Dutch resistance who told the Germans most of the plan, two tank armies were awaiting for them.

[@frankvandergoes298]

There weren't two tank armies waiting for them, total rubbish, one of the greatest myths of WWII.

[@stevekaczynski3793]

@@frankvandergoes298 Elements of two panzer divisions, refitting after heavy losses. Many of the Germans in the area were from scratch formations, but they were certainly more formidable than anticipated.

[@ibashcommunists6847]

Montgomery has always been overrated.

[@JammyDodger45]

Not by his 8th Army colleagues, they lauded him.

[@ibashcommunists6847]

@@JammyDodger45 it is because of monty that the war got extended. A prima donna who vastly overrated himself.

[@JammyDodger45]

@@ibashcommunists6847 - you're just being silly. He was never the Supreme Commander so he clearly had the backing of others senior to him.

[@ibashcommunists6847]

@@JammyDodger45 he had overwhelming numbers in MG and still lost. The success of which would have ended the war in 44.

[@JammyDodger45]

@@ibashcommunists6847 - the Allies had circa 40k versus 100k Germans! 1/2 of the Allied force was comprised of lightly armed airborne troops. If you really have that little idea about the operation maybe you should refrain from commenting.