Comments by "Bullet-Tooth Tony" (@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-) on "The REAL Operation Market Garden | BATTLESTORM Documentary | All Episodes" video.

  1. 6
  2. 5
  3. 5
  4. 5
  5. 5
  6. 5
  7. 5
  8. 4
  9. 4
  10. 4
  11. 4
  12. 4
  13. 4
  14. 4
  15. 4
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. 4
  19. 4
  20. 4
  21. 4
  22. 4
  23. 4
  24. 4
  25. 4
  26. 4
  27. 4
  28. 4
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. ​ @bigwoody4704  I wonder if Carlo d'Este read the following: Excerpted from "Appreciation on Possible Development of Operations to Secure a Lodgement Area", produced by 21st Army Group Planning, May 7, 1944 (one month before D-Day). This was forwarded to First US Army Group, among others, on 18 May under a covering letter which reads in part, "With regard to the outline of action at Part IV, this represents the Commander-In-Chief's [Montgomery's] intentions as far as they can be formulated at this stage." IV. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS "The type of country immediately South of the initial bridgehead does not favour a rapid advance. The Allied build-up relative to the estimated German build-up indicates that a period may supervene round about D+14, when there will be a grave risk of operations stabilising on a line which gives the Germans advantages in defence. The greatest energy and initiative will be required at this period to ensure the enemy is not allowed to stabilise his defence." "Once through the difficult bocage country, greater possibilities for manoeuvre and for the use of armour begin to appear. Our aim during this period should be to contain the maximum enemy forces facing the Eastern flank of the bridgehead, and to thrust rapidly toward Rennes. " "On reaching Rennes our main thrust should be towards Vannes; but diversionary thrusts with the maximum use of deception should be employed to persuade the enemy that our object is Nantes." " If, at this time, the enemy weakens his Eastern force to oppose us North of Redon, a strong attack should be launched toward the Seine. " Part IV of the Appreciation continues, advocating alternating attacks on the East and West flanks of the bridgehead in reaction to German reinforcement moves, in order to bring German reinforcements sent to the American front back to the British front. Thus it is fairly clear that Montgomery intended before ever landing to hold in the East and strike in the West, unless an opportunity presented itself for a favourable attack in the East. Certainly there is NO indication of anyone contemplating a breakout on D+2. I feel d'Este got that bit wrong.
    3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. 3
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42.  @johnlucas8479  What you have to remember also is that on day 1, Gavin decided to take an artillery regiment rather than another infantry unit. The logic behind this decision was that he wanted to guard his flank against the 1,000 tanks in the Reichswald, and bringing artillery to blindly pound the forest was the best way to protect that front. When he realised there wasn't anything of note in the Reichswald, he then decided to send a unit to Nijmegen. The reality is that he could have taken an extra infantry unit and sent it to Nijmegen on day 1. He didn't do that. Or, he could have sent a unit to Nijmegen anyway since nothing came out the Reichswald until day 2, and what did emerge was easily beaten back when the second lift came in, the 82nd counter-attacked the 406th Division and inflicted 1,000 losses on the Germans, for the casualties of just 11 American paratroopers. If the bridge had been secured, the 10th SS wouldn't have been able to dig in at Nijmegen and therefore Thirty Corps wouldn't have been engaged in house-to-house fighting in a city and could have advanced. Thirty Corps had advanced from Son to Nijmegen in two hours. They could have advanced from Nijmegen to Arnhem if the bridge at Nijmegen had been taken and the route clear. Assuming Nijmegen bridge was taken and held, on day 3 Horrocks would have had to battle the 10th SS north of Nijmegen. That's an easier battle than fighting in the streets of Nijmegen which the SS had 3 days to fortify. Instead, they had to battle 10th SS at Nijmegen, and then the 9th SS too because Frost was finally overwhelmed once they crossed Nijmegen.
    3
  43. 3
  44.  @bigwoody4704  Yes but unlike Arnhem, Plunder and Varsity were successful, Within a week of the start of Plunder, the Allies had taken 30,000 German prisoners of war north of the Ruhr. General Eisenhower called it "the most successful airborne operation carried out to date", and an observer later wrote that the operation showed "the highest state of development attained by troop-carrier and airborne units".[54] In the official summary of the operation, Major General Ridgeway wrote that the operation had been flawless, and that the two airborne divisions involved had destroyed enemy defences that might otherwise have taken days to reduce, ensuring the operation was successful.[55] Several modern historians have also praised the operation and the improvements that were made for Varsity. G. G. Norton argued that the operation benefited from the lessons learned from previous operations,[56] and Brian Jewell agrees, arguing that the lessons of Market Garden had been learned as the airborne forces were concentrated and quickly dropped, giving the defenders little time to recover.[19] Norton also argues that improvements were made for supporting the airborne troops; he notes that a large number of artillery pieces were available to cover the landings and that observers were dropped with the airborne forces, thus augmenting the firepower and flexibility of the airborne troops. He also highlights the development of a technique that allowed entire brigades to be landed in tactical groups, giving them greater flexibility.[57] Dropping the airborne forces after the ground forces had breached the Rhine also ensured that the airborne troops would not have to fight for long before being relieved, a major improvement on the manner in which the previous large-scale airborne operation, Market Garden, had been conducted.[58] Historian Peter Allen states that while the airborne forces took heavy casualties, Varsity diverted German attention from the Rhine crossing onto themselves. Thus, the troops fighting to create a bridgehead, across the Rhine, suffered relatively few casualties, and were able to "break out from the Rhine in hours rather than days"
    3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50.  @georgesenda1952  That's a myth. Patton was already at a standstill long before the planning for Market Garden had even started. Don't buy into what you've heard in Hollywood films like the 1970 film Patton because it's not historically accurate. Quote Patton finally began receiving adequate supplies on September 4, (two weeks before MG) after a week’s excruciating pause” - Harry Yeide, Patton the German View Market Garden only had priority in extra supply transport laid on. It didn’t take away any actual supplies from any US army. Nor did Market Garden stop all operations on the western front. Patton’s 3rd Army was still trying to take Metz and US 1st Army began its Hurtgen Forest campaign on September 19th, 2 days after Market Garden began. The US 1st Army offensive in the Hurtgen Forest and Aachen in October 1944 used FOUR TIMES as many men and supplies as the ground element of Market Garden, which wasn’t even a full 2nd British Army offensive which only involved a single corps. Quote “ It was commonly believed at Third Army H.Q. that Montgomery's advance through Belgium was largely maintained by supplies diverted from Patton. (See Butcher, op. cit., p. 667.) This is not true. The amount delivered by the ' air-lift ' was sufficient to maintain only one division. No road transport was diverted to aid Montgomery until September 16th. On the other hand, three British transport companies, lent to the Americans on August 6th " for eight days," were not returned until September 4th.'“ Chester Wilmott, The struggle for Europe 1954.
    3
  51. 3
  52. 3
  53. 3
  54. 3
  55. 3
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. 2
  75. 2
  76. 2
  77. 2
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85. 2
  86. 2
  87. 2
  88. 2
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. ​ @randylucas2458  You know it's funny you say that, as British forces fought in every single major theatre from start to finish. Not only was the war on our doorstep, we remained standing as the ONLY European nation taking on Germany and in fine fashion. Read some of the German accounts of the RAF bombings of major German cities, namely Hamburg and Cologne who were the first in history to endure a 1,000 bomber raid in a single night, those bombings happened every single night, year after year with the likes of Speer and Hitler himself commenting on their effectiveness. Not only that but the RAF were hitting Germany hard in the skies too, such as during the Battle of Britain in which the security of Britain for the remainder of the war was ensured before the US had even entered the war and plans for a British invasion were abandoned by Hitler and he focused on Russia. Which now gets me on to what we did to make sure they were also coping on the Eastern front, such as all the aid supplied to them for FREE. 3,000+ Hurricanes, 4,000+ other aircraft, 27 naval vessels, 5,218 tanks (including 1,380 Valentines from Canada), 5,000+ anti-tank guns, 4,020 ambulances and trucks, 323 machinery trucks, 1,212 Universal Carriers and Loyd Carriers (with another 1,348 from Canada ), 1,721 motorcycles, £1.15bn worth of aircraft engines, 1,474 radar sets, 4,338 radio sets, 600 naval radar and sonar sets, hundreds of naval guns and 15 million pairs of boots. In total 4 million tonnes of war material including food and medical supplies were delivered. The munitions totaled £308m (not including naval munitions supplied), the food and raw materials totalled £120m in 1946 index. If that wasn't enough, the British ships returning from Russia were carrying gold to pay the *US*. Campaigns in Africa and India were failures? Ah give it a rest you muppet, Montgomery alone sought the removal of Rommel from North Africa following El Alamein and Bill Slim did the same with the Japanese at Kohima and Imphal. "the only people you've ever been able to beat were the French the world's losers at war you could not beat Germany but we did." Nope, In the final 100 days of the Great War the BEF engaged, and defeated, 99 of the 197 German Divisions in the West. ♦The Battle of Amiens, 8 August 1918 ('the black day of the German Army'); ♦The Battle of Albert, 21 August (the day on which Haig told Churchill 'we ought to do our utmost to get a decision this autumn'); ♦The Battle of the Scarpe, 26 August; ♦The Battles of Havrincourt and Epehy, 12 September (the approaches to the HindenburgLine); ♦The Breaking of the Hindenburg Line, 27 September - 5 October (35,000 prisoners & 380 guns taken, the British Army's greatest feat of arms in all its history); ♦The Battle of Flanders, 28 September; ♦The Second Battle of Le Cateau, 6 October; ♦The Battle of the Selle, 17 October; ♦The Battle of the Sambre, 1-11 November. These were Haig's victories, handsomely acknowledged by French Marshal Foch: |*Never at any time in history has the British army* achieved greater results in attack than in this unbroken offensive The victory was indeed complete, thanks to the Commanders of Armies, Corps and Divisions, thanks above all to the unselfishness, to the wise, loyal and energetic policy of their Commander-in-Chief, who made easy a great combination and sanctioned a prolonged and gigantic effort And furthermore look how many German forces surrendered to Montgomery in 1945 in the Netherlands, northwest Germany including all islands, and Denmark. Overall in WW2, it was the Russians who tore the guts out of the German army, they annihilated over 200 German divisions.
    1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1