A Bridge Too Far: 66 Years Ago

https://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y1...jaeger/mg2.jpg

As a continuation of the Case White thread, I thought I would recognize the anniversary of Operation Market Garden, the failed Allied effort to outflank the Siegfried Line and invade industrial Northern Germany through the Netherlands that began today in 1944.

Market, the largest airborne operation in history, was designed to seize critical bridges over the Maas and Rhine Rivers. It involved some of the most famous Allied units of the war, including the American 101st and 82nd Airborne Divisions and the British 1st Airborne Division. Garden, a heavily armored ground force, was to break through German lines and travel Highway 69, what became known as ‘Hell’s Highway’, to relieve the paratroopers.

In the face of this onslaught sat two vastly under strength SS divisions, several ad-hoc Wehrmacht formations, and the brilliant tactical mind of one of my favorite military commanders: Walter Model.

Through poor Allied leadership and quick German reactions, Garden was stopped before it could reach its last objective – fiercely held by the British 1st – the bridge at Arnhem. The British paratroopers were soon encircled and destroyed, with the survivors being evacuated across the Rhine in Operation Berlin.

While the operation was to be a demonstration of how far Allied forces had come (co-opting what was once a German specialty on a massive scale), it actually highlighted their limitations. While such an operation required quick, decisive action, Allied command and control was plodding at best. In contrast, Market Garden is a great example of late-war German Kampfgruppe tactics. Under Model’s watch, ad-hoc German units from the Wehrmacht, SS, and Fallschirmjäger were created, combined, and broken up in quick succession according to battlefield assessments and leaders were chosen based on skill, all without regard for the traditional branch competitiveness and hierarchies that accompanied most military bureaucracies of the time. This allowed the Germans to overcome material disadvantages and react quicker and more potently to Allied moves.

Apart from the German leadership and tactics, blame for the failure of the operation has been argued over for decades. Many point to supposed leadership inadequacies in the British officer class, from Monty down to Frederick Browning, the airborne operational commander, who used 38 critical transports to move his entire corps headquarters into Nijmegen on the first day of the operation – only to remain completely out of contact with the troops under his command for most of the operation. General Gavin, commander of the 82nd, stated in his diary that he "...unquestionably lacks the standing, influence and judgment that comes from a proper troop experience....his staff was superficial...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." The British, in turn, blamed the whole thing on the Polish, which created an acrimonious environment to say the least.

Others have blamed the plan itself. They argue that the paratroops should have been landed right on or much closer to the bridges, so as not to have to launch painful attacks against an enemy that had time to prepare defenses. ‘Groupthink’ has also been blamed, as Allied intelligence uncovered tanks and other heavy equipment that would certainly become a problem for lightly armed paratroops, but ignored their findings as the plan had already been approved and was in the works.

In any event, Operation Market Garden was an ambitious plan that, despite the best efforts of Allied and German leadership, almost succeeded based on the bravery and fighting prowess of Allied Airborne forces. Both sides fought with a level of tenacity that befitted their unit’s reputations. This chapter in WW2 history should not be forgotten.

I've always considered Market Garden an excellent example of an ambitious, impressive and unorthodox plan which had only one flaw - it utterly sucked, it was a complete waste of time and effort.

Those resources would be more useful to clear the access to Antwerp, might even result in a destruction of one German division or two, but no somebody had to use all those pretty paratroopers in the Netherlands to form a long, thin sleeve leading to nowhere.

Market Garden is the best example of guys with balls, excuse my expression. To be so daring, to have such courage to pull off a thing like that and to even make it somewhat successful, is just astonishing. I don't think we will ever see such ambition in history.

I consider it somewhat successful, despite the huge number of casualties. It opened up Netherlands. Surely, it didn't open as well as they liked, but history is history now.

The novel and movie were excellent.

The book (or at least the one I'm familiar with) wasn't a novel. I'm going to have to dig it up again, it was one of the first serious military history books I read (inspired by playing Close Combat: A Bridge Too Far). I'm also going to have to find my copy of It Never Snows In September, which is the battle from a mostly German perspective. It also has a great name.

For me it was rather defeat. Allied forces captured nothing. With full respect for Dutchmen - nothing that could help them defeat Germany faster. Anglo-American divisions and polish brigade were simply wasted. Germans predicted defense on Rhine and did it.
Then polish general Sosabowski (in my opinion one of the best polish field commanders into that time) was blamed for defeat.

And we still won the war!

USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA
USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA

USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA
USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA

USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA
USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

And we still happened to be on the side that won the war!

---

Fixed. ~;)

Strike could you tell me something? Are you typical Frenchmen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

Strike could you tell me something? Are you typical Frenchmen?

---

He's Frexan!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

Strike could you tell me something? Are you typical Frenchmen?

---

No I'm not. Are you the typical Kielbasa? Because I love me some.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

Strike could you tell me something? Are you typical Frenchmen?

---

Are you a typical European?

“Are you typical Frenchmen?” I bet your definition is not mine…:laugh4::laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

Strike could you tell me something? Are you typical Frenchmen?

---

You mean, does he like fine wine and smelly cheese, uses a copious amount of perfume and goes around all day saying: ""Ooh la la""?

Now I'm just a Texan and all - so what do I know - but I must say that indeed Strike strikes me as being particularly French.
That natural superiority, his ease of conversation, combatively opinionated, supremely knowledgable in a wide range of subjects, about which he can adress his lessers with an aloofness so sublimely natural it turns into elegance.

:book:

Yep yep and his intelligence is lighting around the world spreading democracy, cheese and frogs.
Definitely my Lords.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

lighting the world

Definitely my Lords.

---

Lords....masters....overlords...any of these will do, yes. For I am afraid, my dear Krook, that we must acknowledge Strike our superior.


Behold the gods among men enlightening the world from the centre of the universe - be it physical illumination or by the light of their studies:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Dusk slowly turning into nightfall:


https://img7.imageshack.us/img7/3864...parisfranc.jpg







https://img801.imageshack.us/img801/...demarspeti.jpg



https://img706.imageshack.us/img706/...814b67d6do.jpg

You guys are mean...

Lords....masters....overlords...: "French" will do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

Yep yep and his intelligence is lighting around the world spreading democracy, cheese and frogs.
Definitely my Lords.

---

I am glad you have been enlightened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Lords....masters....overlords...any of these, yes. For I am afraid, my dear Krook, that we must acknowledge Strike our superior.


Behold the gods among men enlightening the world from the centre of the universe - be it physical illumination or the light of their studies:

---

Ya know, perhaps Americans are looking at this WW II thing all wrong. Instead of the French rolling over maybe they were presenting us with an opportunity to reach our full potential. Their last and greatest gift to America. :bow:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Back to topic please!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Ya know, perhaps Americans are looking at this WW II thing all wrong. Instead of the French rolling over maybe they were presenting us with an opportunity to reach our full potential. Their last and greatest gift to America. :bow:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Back to topic please!!!

---

All roads in history lead to France

Yep - definitely.
Starting from Caesar, then Attila,, Englishmen, Russians, Prussians/Germans to whole Africa. Yep my Lord - you are end of all the roads.
And your cooking is something unique in the world.
I think living in France is interesting experience for typical European.

I still think Monty was an awful commander for that operation. Had Patton been in charge, I think things would be very different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

I still think Monty was an awful commander for that operation. Had Patton been in charge, I think things would be very different.

---

Absolutely. Patton would have doubled the casualties on both sides while achieving the same result.


Not enough airlift capacity. Too many points of failure (infrastructure restrictions especially). Logistical problems on a macro level. etc.


The Allies really needed to accept an operational pause along the whole line. Yes the Germans would have shifted out of panic mode and solidified a line, but Eisenhower should have been able to gauge that a pause was coming regardless of whether or not he liked it -- we'd simply swallowed too much territory and hadn't rebuilt the logistics enough.

Patton AND Monty should have been told to work "locally" while resources caught up. Patton would have done no better in the Saar had he been allowed to try and Monty told to wait. Monty would have done the war a good bit more good by sealing up the gap through which the Antwerp garrison escaped.

Yeah, letting the 15th Army escape contributed to the already critical intelligence failure. Not only did the Allies overlook the German units already in the area but the underestimated how quickly the Germans could put together new units based off of what was lying around. It was a logistical miracle (compounded by the Allies' ignorance and over-extension).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Absolutely. Patton would have doubled the casualties on both sides while achieving the same result.


Not enough airlift capacity. Too many points of failure (infrastructure restrictions especially). Logistical problems on a macro level. etc.

---

Ehh..... Considering Patton cut huge swaths in France while Monty hobbled along, I think Patton would have found a way around the obstacles that held Monty up, or bashed his way through it. Either way, I dont think it would have been as much of a disaster as it was.

Market Garden was Monty's baby - a wholly uneccesary and ego driven endevor. Patton would not have concieved of such a delicate operation. He understood that the Allied forces had vast numerical advantages and was content to grind his way to Berlin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

Market Garden was Monty's baby - a wholly uneccesary and ego driven endevor. Patton would not have concieved of such a delicate operation. He understood that the Allied forces had vast numerical advantages and was content to grind his way to Berlin.

---

So: Patton=U.S. Grant?

Not a great general but one who exploits a manpower advantage?

Quote:

---

Patton would not have concieved of such a delicate operation. He understood that the Allied forces had vast numerical advantages and was content to grind his way to Berlin.

---

I'm not sure what PJ meant with this statement, but anyone who has studied Patton's campaign's in NA, Sicily, and France surely could not characterize his tactics as 'indelicate' grind. The end-around to Palermo....the Lorraine Campaign......the relief of Bastogne........

“I'm not sure what PJ meant with this statement, but anyone who has studied Patton's campaign's in NA, Sicily, and France surely could not characterize his tactics as 'indelicate' grind. The end-around to Palermo....the Lorraine Campaign......the relief of Bastogne........” The Crossing of the Rhine that is fact was a complete strategic mistake.
If Market Garden had succeeded it would have opened the road to Berlin to the Western Allies.
Patton move just distract material and men to a useless front where the Allies were stacked.

I'm a little puzzled how the 'broad front' vs the 'narrow front' strategy relates to how Patton conducted 3d Army tactics:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

So: Patton=U.S. Grant?

Not a great general but one who exploits a manpower advantage?

---

Hardly. You would have to look to the Japanese or possibly early Barbarossa Russian leadership to find the level of wonton disregard for the lives of the frontline troops in WW2 that Grant demonstrated in the ACW. Patton actually instituted many unpopular safety measures for the troops under his command, such as mandatory use of steel helmets even for support troops and medical staff.

What I meant was that Patton would not have planned such a high risk operation at this stage in the war, as his numerical advantages were so large. He was far more pragmatic than Monty, who was trying to regain his reputation after Normandy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reluctant Samurai

I'm not sure what PJ meant with this statement, but anyone who has studied Patton's campaign's in NA, Sicily, and France surely could not characterize his tactics as 'indelicate' grind. The end-around to Palermo....the Lorraine Campaign......the relief of Bastogne........

---

I meant that at this stage in the war Patton was content to push his way through the Siegfried Line using brute force and numerical superiority as opposed to undertaking a risky flanking effort, which he did after the failure of Market Garden and then the closing of the Ardennes bulge.

As for Patton's campaigns, I have studied them extensively in an unsuccessful effort to understand the legend behind the man. He deserves much credit for being able to motivate and drive his men to perform consistently better than comparable Allied formations. He also had an understanding of armored warfare and close air support that went beyond most of his Allied contemporaries, who were still operating under pre-war attritional doctrines. However, his actual battlefield performance usually consisted of blunt frontal assaults using massive numerical advantage.* Off the top of my head I can think of a dozen German generals and half a dozen Russian ones who were more innovative tacticians.

His performance in North Africa was competent (especially in comparison to the man he replaced), but nothing that any competent general with those advantages couldn't accomplish. In Sicily, he repeatedly failed to pin down the 29th Panzergrenadier Division and the rather amateurish Allied effort, of which he was a part, allowed the vast majority of the Germans and a great number of Italians to escape. The Lorraine campaign was essentially an unopposed drive through France until Metz, which consisted of bloody frontal assault after bloody frontal assault. His actions during the Battle of the Bulge were certainly his finest hour, but the laudation he receives borders on the absurd. Rapid disengagement and re-engagement of armies was standard fare on the Eastern Front.

*I do not mean this as a criticism of Patton. I have a lot of respect for his him, 'take no prisoners' rhetoric and all. After being pushed out of Europe, the Allies had the luxury of picking and choosing when and where to fight. They wisely chose times and places where they enjoyed massive advantages, as any good strategy dictates. Patton simply did not need to utilize elaborate operations to accomplish his goals.

“unsuccessful effort to understand the legend behind the man”: I have the same problem. I see nothing in his plans or battles worth of this aura.
He had a good sense for sentences and PR but his personal problem with Montgomery (or Alexander) always went against the Allies plans, in Africa, Sicily or later.
As his campaign in North Africa, he succeeded to rally the US army badly mauled by Kasserine, but his own attacks were not so much successful…

Quote:

---

I see nothing in his plans or battles worth of this aura.

---

A cursory study of his campaigns would tell a different story, IMHO.....but that would be a topic for a separate thread, I'm sure.

Quote:

---

but his own attacks were not so much successful…

---

Patton's exploitation of the Cobra breakout, and the subsequent Lorraine campaign is what unhinged the German Army's position in the West and allowed for the remainder of the Allied forces to finally be free of the initial Overlord lodgement positions. But that discussion would be hijacking this one.............

@ PJ

Probably a reasonable assessment. Not so sure about finding a dozen German generals and a half dozen Soviet generals who were better tacticians, but that discussion also belongs in another thread................

Well, I`d raise PJ two dozen/two dozen. I think the case with Patton legend is something akin to the old saying: In the land of blind, one-eyed man is a king. He had a different personality and different tactics compared to his fellow commanders, it is only natural for him to stand out...

There is a reason I have a whole page of his quotes on my wall.

On Market-Garden:

Any number of factors led to this attempt that fell short including: victory disease on the part of the allies, the airborne's fears that they would be held out of combat with no chance to show their mettle again, weakened logistics (port capacity/re-opening had not caught up yet), and Monty's rivalry with Patton.

Patton's tactics were pretty simple. Go hard and fast, pin strongpoints with infantry and artillery fire, flow around and keep moving with everyone else. Not particulary novel -- that was stosstroopen 101 from the 1918 effort by the 2R -- but they were effective.

Grant gets a lot of grief for his tactics, but a closer look at his campaigns and writings do not show him endlessly repeating Marye's Heights until the Rebs ran out of bullets. He did make a few mistakes -- Cold Harbor for example -- but was not as much of a butcher as some would make him out to be. He WAS a lot more willing to accept casualties than was Little Mac, and the Army of the Potomac never really grew to like him as it did their founder McClellan. Greatest U.S. general? Nope. He wasn't a Burnside or a Fredendall either though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Grant gets a lot of grief for his tactics, but a closer look at his campaigns and writings do not show him endlessly repeating Marye's Heights until the Rebs ran out of bullets. He did make a few mistakes -- Cold Harbor for example -- but was not as much of a butcher as some would make him out to be. He WAS a lot more willing to accept casualties than was Little Mac, and the Army of the Potomac never really grew to like him as it did their founder McClellan. Greatest U.S. general? Nope. He wasn't a Burnside or a Fredendall either though.

---

Very interesting. I will have to take a closer look at his tactics. Thanks for the correction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

There is a reason I have a whole page of his quotes on my wall.

---

...because your family can't afford wallpaper?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

Starting from Caesar, then Attila,, Englishmen, Russians, Prussians/Germans to whole Africa. Yep my Lord - you are end of all the roads.

---

:laugh4: I think Krook got you there.

I have no idea about the tactics used by all those generals as here in Germany we don't discuss such evil things anymore, but it's always interesting to see this discussed, but it still seems somewhat predictable going by the persons' Backroom positions.
I'm of the opinion though that just because everybody quotes you, you aren't great and just because a quote sounds nice, it isn't necessarily true. I could plaster my walls with quotes of myself but I doubt that would make me a great general. ~;)

Market Garden was a gross waste of resources and good soldiers. It's sole purpose was to restore Monty's damaged reputation. Even had it succeeded, the Allied logistical problems were so severe that they would not have been able to exploit the success.

“I think Krook got you there.”
Cheap and inexact:

Attila failed in Le Mans, the English were expelled, last time they fought against the French it took them a 23 years alliance with all the others European Powers to finally succeed to defeat an army half of their size at Waterloo, Prussians and Germans were defeated more often than victorious (even if having some initial successes) and the last time the Arabs tried some invasion it was ended in 752 at Poitiers.
According History, the French invaded Arabs in the last centuries, and some others countries in others continents.
So, yes, Caesar is in fact the last successful invaders, and that if you considered that the Gaul are the French Ancestors and not the Franks, which due to the name, gives you a hint of what the answer is.

However, as the European Continent start or end, depending from where you start, at the French Atlantic Coast, we are at the end of all. And the start of all.
France is at the end of all roads, the Ultimate Gate, the light that attracted and attracts the Souls drunken of liberty from the Dark European Countries.
France is the Alpha and the Omega, the Unity of all the sums.
At the beginning it was France.:wink3:

Well Attila basically annihilated the Western Roman Army and it's allies while only losing his own allies.
And the Arabs didn't really invade France in the 8th century, that campaign was more an extensive scouting trip, they just turned back before the battle was decided.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

...because your family can't afford wallpaper?

---

Har. Har. Har.

"Well Attila basically annihilated the Western Roman Army and it's allies while only losing his own allies.
And the Arabs didn't really invade France in the 8th century, that campaign was more an extensive scouting trip, they just turned back before the battle was decided. " Could be, but they both never come back....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

Could be, but they both never come back....

---

So? That's not really the point is it?
Attila went after the jackpot of Italy the next year and the Arabs held on to southern French cities for quite some time.
It's like the Mongols who attacked Hungary, only to return because Ghengis died. Nobody can claim to've beaten them.

“Attila went after the jackpot of Italy the next year and the Arabs held on to southern French cities for quite some time.”
So it can be said that Attila never dare to come back and went for softer targets. :beam:
Then what towns do you have in mind exactly? In 721, the Arabs failed to take Toulouse. Narbonne was retaken in 759. So, what is the quite of time?
In 752 they were pushed back to the south of the Aube River (20 years after Poitiers) and in 778, Charlemagne started an expedition in Spain and even took Gerona. They will still conduct some razzia, but Poitiers (732) was the highest point they Arabs did reach. And it is quite deep in the Frank Kingdom.:sweatdrop:

'No true Scotsman'.

'France always loses to invaders'
'The Hun and the Arabs were repelled, defeated and driven out by the 'French''
'Ah, then Atilla and the Arabs were thus not really trying to invade France'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

“Attila went after the jackpot of Italy the next year and the Arabs held on to southern French cities for quite some time.”
So it can be said that Attila never dare to come back and went for softer targets. :beam:
Then what towns do you have in mind exactly? In 721, the Arabs failed to take Toulouse. Narbonne was retaken in 759. So, what is the quite of time?
In 752 they were pushed back to the south of the Aube River (20 years after Poitiers) and in 778, Charlemagne started an expedition in Spain and even took Gerona. They will still conduct some razzia, but Poitiers (732) was the highest point they Arabs did reach. And it is quite deep in the Frank Kingdom.:sweatdrop:

---

Let's just say that Italy was still a richer target than Gaul in the 5th century AD :p.
And 38 years is quite long, not? An entire generation.

“And 38 years is quite long, not? An entire generation.” Yeap, but they were still expelled.

All in all Market Garden was bad option in my opinion. Montgomery simply lost respect to German commanders.
In the end elite division was destroyed, polish brigade lost hundreds of soldiers (as I wrote) without any reason
and Germans were given some weeks to prepare battle of bulge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

“And 38 years is quite long, not? An entire generation.” Yeap, but they were still expelled.

---

Of course, there's no arguing that.Though they're coming back now :)

One town. Same for the English. Succeeded to keep one town then out.
And they as well are coming back. Arabs for work, English for nice life after a hard life of work and bad weather…
Just a proof the French are indeed resilient but always succeed and France is THE final destination where even old enemies want to live….
:-D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

One town. Same for the English. Succeeded to keep one town then out.
And they as well are coming back. Arabs for work, English for nice life after a hard life of work and bad weather…
Just a proof the French are indeed resilient but always succeed and France is THE final destination where even old enemies want to live….
:-D

---

Still, you let French soil be spoiled for an entire generation. Not that great ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

One town. Same for the English. Succeeded to keep one town then out.
And they as well are coming back. Arabs for work, English for nice life after a hard life of work and bad weather…
Just a proof the French are indeed resilient but always succeed and France is THE final destination where even old enemies want to live….
:-D

---

Says the Frenchman living in Croydon.

Says the Frenchman living in Croydon. Because married with a Englishwoman who doesn't speak French. :-D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrooK

Yep - definitely.
Starting from Caesar, then Attila,, Englishmen, Russians, Prussians/Germans to whole Africa. Yep my Lord - you are end of all the roads.
And your cooking is something unique in the world.
I think living in France is interesting experience for typical European.

---

Says someone from Poland...

Well I suppose I should close the thread at this point. It is past bedtime for the kids, they are getting restless.