Comments by "TheVilla Aston" (@thevillaaston7811) on "What new book 'Light of Battle' reveals about Eisenhower and D-Day" video.

  1. Its a pile of rubbish. There is no evidence of British Imperial ambitions in the Mediterranean during the war. British was concerned about the Germans being 21 miles from the British homeland, protecting is lines of communication, and its financial situation. Imperial matters were headed up about the future of India. The only interest in the Mediterranean, aside from defeating the Axis powers was to try to keep Ruusia as far out of the Balkans as possible.
    1
  2.  @ericsniper9843  Fraid not. The Wehrmacht already had 25 divisions in France, to take on 9.5 allied divisions.
    1
  3.  @ericsniper9843  Fraid not. Germany had kept a million troops in the West since 1940. That amounted 40 divisions, of which, 25 were actually in France. WINSTON S CHURCHILL. THE SECOND WORLD WAR. CASSELL & CO LTD VOLUME IV THE HINGE OF FATE 1951. P391 Former Naval Person to President 8 July 42 ‘No responsible British general, admiral, or air marshal is prepared to recommend “Sledgehammer” as a practical operation in 1942. The Chiefs of Staff have reported “The conditions which would make “Sledgehammer” a sound, sensible enterprise are very unlikely to occur. They are now sending their paper to your Chiefs of Staff.’ CRUSADE IN EUROPE DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER WILLIAM HEINEMANN LIMITED 1948 P 79 ‘Later developments have convinced me that those who held the Sledgehammer operation to be unwise at the moment were correct in their evaluation of the problem.’
    1
  4.  @ericsniper9843  Its a definite no. The bulk of German forces had been in place since the Summer of 1940. JUBILEE gave a clear indication of how quickly the Germans could react to a landing in France at that time. Beside the lack of troops at that time, the allies only had landing craft to carry 5,000 men.
    1
  5. Yep.
    1
  6. Lyndon. I have this book. Its a pile of rubbish, in the Stephen Ambrose genre. You know, where everything that goes right is down to the Americans, everything that goes wrong is down to the British. The British are all elitists with an imperial agenda, the Americans are all straight up and down good guys. He even included the nonsense about the Germans supposedly being afraid of Patton. I have not yet seen the bit where the British always stopped for tea at 4pm, but that may be later in the book. Its about as demanding a read as a Ladybird book.
    1
  7. Yep, its a pile of rubbish.
    1
  8. But this Michel Paradis has only got respect for the Americans.
    1
  9.  @AlbertMark-nb9zo  'One of the main targets after the D-Day invasion was the port of Rotterdam.' Really?..
    1
  10.  @AlbertMark-nb9zo  But Rotterdam is 400 miles from the D-Day beaches. The allied plan only envisaged the allies advance reaching the Seine by D+90. Far closer are Cherbourg, the Britany ports, and the Channel Ports.
    1
  11. The only bit that this Michel Paradis has left out seems to the bit where the British always stopped for tea.
    1
  12. What? And the Australians, British, Canadians, Chinese, French, Indians, New Zealanders, Polish, Russians, South Africans, and were not a brave generation that saved the world?..
    1
  13. Spot on.
    1
  14. Me too.
    1
  15. Agree with all of this. People should also look at the contemporary documents Churchill's history of the war. What can't speak can't lie.
    1
  16. 'General George Marshall's name should be included in any discussion of this historic day.' What? And Alanbrooke's name should be excluded?
    1
  17. This is an insult to Britain. The evidence is clear, Churchill was never opposed to an invasion of Europe.
    1
  18. Its a pile of rubbish.
    1