Flight Turns to Fight!

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Flight Turns to Fight! 2 Flight Turns to Fight! We have lost a battle, but I tell you we will win this war. Despite everything that has happened, do not allow your firm, confident faith in Germany’s future to be shaken one bit. Gain the time which the Führer needs to bring into operation new troops and new weapons. They will come. This was September 1944. The speaker wasn’t a senior Nazi apparatchik like the head of the SS, Heinrich Himmler, or the Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, but Walter Model, Germany’s top military officer in the West – the Oberbefehlshaber West; OB West for short. This text is from his Order of the Day – Tagesbefehl – a full two days before Dolle Dinsdag. Hollow bombast? Or was there something more to Model’s bold statement? Hauptmann Barthel appeared to agree with his commander: ‘It still won’t be fatal for us if France falls.’1 Even the ever- cynical Wolfgang Dombrowski seemed to be adopting more of a glass half-full attitude: We believed the war was probably over, but you must realise that we lower ranks were only eighteen to nineteen years old, and our officers were only aged between twenty-four and twenty-nine – still all only youngsters! Life’s deeper issues didn’t concern us too much, so we were prepared to fight on.2 Barthel and Dombrowski typified a change in the Westheer as it left the bitter fields of France and Belgium behind it, and found itself closing up on the borders of the Reich itself; German resolve was stiffening, and it was stiffening at exactly the wrong time for the Allies. The wrong time? Everything was going the Allies’ way, surely? Well, actually it wasn’t, and the problem was at the very top of the Allied To VE-Day Through German Eyes military leadership, where politics, missed opportunities and downright mistakes would squander an undeniable chance to end the war by Christmas. Senior command among the Allies on D-Day, and during the campaign in Normandy, was united and balanced, with clear roles and responsibilities for all concerned – the exact opposite of their German counterparts in fact. Dwight D. Eisenhower was the man in overall charge, acting as the coalition’s unifier and the bridge between the political leaders in London and Washington and the military commanders in the field. Montgomery was the battlefield supremo, subordinate to Eisenhower, and responsible for planning and executing a strategy for the Allies to establish a secure landing and then go on to grind the Westheer to dust. Then came success at Falaise, and with it conflict and confusion, at the very moment when there should have been neither. The nub of the issue was simple; what was the best and quickest way finally to defeat Nazi Germany and end the war in Europe? Montgomery – as acting Allied land force commander – was clear in his appraisal of the situation. A single, all-powerful thrust into Germany, aimed at capturing Berlin, was the answer. Resources would be ruthlessly stripped from all other fronts to maximise force at one critical point – and that would be in the north through the Netherlands, over the Rhine and into the Ruhr – Germany’s industrial heart – and then on across the north German plain to the capital. Naturally, this thrust would be commanded by Montgomery himself, and spearheaded by his Anglo- Canadian 21st Army Group. This proposal was massively controversial among the Allies. Controversial, because it seemingly ignored the changing realities in the Allied alliance, and relegated the emergent American behemoth to a subordinate role. Back on D-Day, it had been the Anglo-Canadians who had borne the weight of the landings; three-quarters of the invasion fleet, more than half the air armada, and over half of the assault troops were Anglo-Canadian. This was the high-water mark for Britain and her Empire in terms of military power in the war; from then on, that power leaked inexorably away. The Canadian government’s decision that only volunteers would serve overseas – a policy that placated many French Canadians and others opposed to involvement in ‘Britain’s war’– inevitably starved Harry Crerar’s First Canadian Army of the manpower it desperately needed. By August, Canadian divisions were undermanned, and British units were being used to prop them up. Not that Britain was in any better shape – far from it. Indeed, fighting a global war for five years had worn Britain’s resources wafer thin. Being an imperial power, with possessions and interests worldwide, Britain’s premier armed service had always been its oldest; the magnificent Royal Navy. It had maintained its pre-eminence over the seas ever since it had 28 Flight Turns to Fight! prevailed at Trafalgar by outbuilding its opponents, and by 1939 was the largest naval force on the planet comprising no fewer than 332 warships (in 2019 the Royal Navy had seventy-five commissioned vessels). Even after the heavy losses of the early war years, including the Royal Oak, the Hood, Repulse and Prince of Wales, the Navy grew to over five hundred warships by mid-1944, with manpower quadrupling from two hundred to eight hundred thousand men.3 The Royal Air Force grew even more rapidly, with just under two hundred thousand aircrew in 1944, kept flying by an additional million men and women in its support services. But it was in Britain’s Army where the greatest wartime explosion in strength occurred. Britain has always favoured an all-volunteer army, only resorting to conscription at times of maximum national emergency, such as in early 1939 when the National Service (Armed Forces) Act was rushed through Parliament to counter the growing threat of Nazi Germany. The initial stipulations of the bill created a liability to military service for all fit men between the ages of twenty and twenty-three. This age range was progressively increased as the war dragged on, until it applied to all men between eighteen and forty-one years of age, increasing the size of the Army to a peak of 2.9 million. However, this seemingly rosy picture masked the grim reality of growing shortfalls on the frontline. A British infantry division in north-western Europe in the summer of 1994 had a theoretical establishment of 18,347 men, but this was rarely achieved, particularly amongst the fighting companies at the sharp end, who totalled a little over six thousand of that number. This was the inevitable consequence of an Allied infrastructure with a ratio of combat to support troops of 1:9, and a philosophy that emphasised artillery, intelligence and logistics above the man with the bayonet – and it was the latter that was desperately needed in the late summer of ’44. Even as early as D-Day itself, the British War Office estimated that the Army would have one hundred thousand men fewer by December than it had at the end of 1943. By August, as casualties mounted, that grim prediction was fast coming true, with just 2,654 fully trained, combat- ready infantrymen left in the country awaiting deployment to the Continent. To try and fill the gaps a series of measures were introduced; at first these were relatively minor, such as the amalgamation of different battalions within the same regiment – for example the merger of the 2nd and 6th Battalions of the Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers. Then troops were stripped from subsidiary fronts; most British infantry battalions in Italy were reduced from four to three rifle companies, with the surplus men sent to France. Next, formations had some of their subordinate units reduced to cadres; like the 168th Brigade of the 56th (London) Infantry Division – again, the men released went to fill the gaps in France. At the same time, thirty-five thousand men from the Royal Artillery and the RAF Regiment (the RAF’s ground security arm) were compulsorily retrained 29 To VE-Day Through German Eyes as infantrymen and sent up the line, along with thousands of comb-outs from support and service units. Needless to say, these measures were hugely unpopular among the vast majority of men concerned, who knew just how dangerous the frontline really was. Many of their new comrades weren’t too happy about the process either, with one British infantry company commander complaining about the replacements: ‘Many men are weak in weapon-handling, I know several who didn’t even know that a grenade had to be primed. Some NCOs can’t map read, even on roads.’4 Not even this proved enough, and all too soon much more drastic steps had to be taken, as Montgomery explained to the Chief of the British Imperial General Staff – Alan Brooke – in a telegram. Regret time has come when I must break up one Inf Div. My Inf Divs are so low in effective rifle strength that they can no (repeat no) longer fight effectively in major operations. Request permission to break up 59 Div at once. Montgomery. The 59th (Staffordshire) Infantry Division – whose shoulder patch was a charming slag heap crowned with a pit winding gear tower to commemorate the coal-mining heritage of its recruitment area – had fought with distinction in Normandy, and its disbandment was no black- mark on its record or the men in it, rather, as the American historian Carlo D’Este explained, it ‘…had been selected because it was the junior division in 21st Army Group and not as a result of its performance in battle’. The 59th wasn’t alone. The British 1st Armoured Division in Italy, having suffered severe losses in the August battles in the peninsula, was also broken up with most of its men sent to other units as replacements.
Recommended publications
  • Republic of Violence: the German Army and Politics, 1918-1923
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2015-09-11 Republic of Violence: The German Army and Politics, 1918-1923 Bucholtz, Matthew N Bucholtz, M. N. (2015). Republic of Violence: The German Army and Politics, 1918-1923 (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/27638 http://hdl.handle.net/11023/2451 doctoral thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Republic of Violence: The German Army and Politics, 1918-1923 By Matthew N. Bucholtz A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN HISTORY CALGARY, ALBERTA SEPTEMBER, 2015 © Matthew Bucholtz 2015 Abstract November 1918 did not bring peace to Germany. Although the First World War was over, Germany began a new and violent chapter as an outbreak of civil war threatened to tear the country apart. The birth of the Weimar Republic, Germany’s first democratic government, did not begin smoothly as republican institutions failed to re-establish centralized political and military authority in the wake of the collapse of the imperial regime. Coupled with painful aftershocks from defeat in the Great War, the immediate postwar era had only one consistent force shaping and guiding political and cultural life: violence.
    [Show full text]
  • Operation Overlord James Clinton Emmert Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2002 Operation overlord James Clinton Emmert Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Emmert, James Clinton, "Operation overlord" (2002). LSU Master's Theses. 619. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/619 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OPERATION OVERLORD A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Arts in The Interdepartmental Program in Liberal Arts by James Clinton Emmert B.A., Louisiana State University, 1996 May 2002 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis could not have been completed without the support of numerous persons. First, I would never have been able to finish if I had not had the help and support of my wife, Esther, who not only encouraged me and proofed my work, but also took care of our newborn twins alone while I wrote. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. Stanley Hilton, who spent time helping me refine my thoughts about the invasion and whose editing skills helped give life to this paper. Finally, I would like to thank the faculty of Louisiana State University for their guidance and the knowledge that they shared with me.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 X 10. Three Lines .P65
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-51946-5 - The Final Battle: Soldiers of the Western Front and the German Revolution of 1918 Scott Stephenson Excerpt More information 1 Introduction: the divided army Had we returned home in 1916, out of the suffering and strength of our experience we might have unleashed a storm. Now if we go back we will be weary, broken, burnt out, rootless, and without hope. We will not be able to find our way any more. Erich Maria Remarque, All Quiet on the Western Front1 The German empire’s defeat in the First World War was comprehen- sive. By late 1918, Germany military and civilian leaders had cause to wonder which would give way first, the enfeebled institutions of the Second Reich or the front held by its beleaguered army on the Western Front. The question was decided in late October, when naval mutinies at Wilhelmshaven spread to other naval bases and, in turn, launched a revolutionary tidal wave that swept irresistibly across a nation exhausted by war. The day after the sailors’ uprising, Erich Ludendorff’s replace- ment as First Quartermaster General, General Wilhelm Groener, told the imperial cabinet that the army’s powers of resistance on the Western Front were nearly spent.2 When the armistice came a week later, it found the German forces in France and Belgium, the Westheer, exhausted, depleted, and staggering under the blows of the Allied armies. If defeat meant a complete breakdown of an army’s organiza- tion, one might argue that the German Army in the field still remained undefeated.
    [Show full text]
  • German Army Group D OB West, 12 August 1942
    German Army Group D "OB West" 12 August 1942 At Army Group's Disposal 100th Panzer Brigade 2/202nd Panzer Regiment In the Netherlands: 38th Division: 1/,2/,3/108th Infantry Regiment 1/,2/,3/112th Infantry Regiment 138th Schnell Battalion 1/,2/,3/138th Artillery Regiment 138th Pioneer Battalion 138th Signals Battalion 138th Division (Einheiten) Support Units 167th Division: 1/,2/,3/315th Infantry Regiment 1/,2/,3/331st Infantry Regiment 1/,2/,3/339th Infantry Regiment 238th Panzerjäger Battalion 238th Bicycle Battalion 1/,2/,3/,4/238th Artillery Regiment 238th Pioneer Battalion 238th Signals Battalion 238th Division (Einheiten) Support Units 719th Division: 1/,2/,3/723rd Infantry Regiment 1/,2/,3/743rd Infantry Regiment Panzerjäger Company 663rd Artillery Battalion 719th Pioneer Company 719th Signals Battalion 719th Division (Einheiten) Support Units 15th Army At Army's Disposal: 10th Panzer Division: 1/,2/7th Armored Regiment 10th Panzer Grenadier Brigade 1/,2/,3/69th Panzer Grenadier Regiment 1/,2/,3/86th Panzer Grenadier Regiment 90th Panzerjäger Battalion 90th Motorcycle Battalion 1/,2/,3/,4/90th Artillery Regiment 90th Signals Battalion 46th Pioneer Battalion 90th Division (Einheiten) Support Units SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler 1/,2/,3/1st SS LSSAH Motorized Infantry Regiment 1/,2/,3/2nd SS LSSAH Motorized Infantry Regiment SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler Sturmgeschütz Battalion SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler Armored Troop SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler Motorcycle Regiment 1 1/,2/,3/,4/SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler (mot) Artillery
    [Show full text]
  • 1944: Seventy Years on Conference
    1944: SEVENTY YEARS ON An International Conference 14-17 April 2014 • Royal Military Academy Sandhurst CONFERENCE PROGRAMME Monday, 14 April 0900 Onwards Conference registration takes place in Old College. Registration for accommodation takes place in Victory College and the Slim Annex. 1200-1300 Lunch Old College (for all conference delegates) 1330-1400 Welcome and Opening Remarks Woolwich Hall 1400-1500 Keynote Address: Antony Beevor Armies in Normandy: Characteristics and Contrasts Chair: Robert von Maier 1500-1600 Tea Old College Panel Locations: Panel A – Old College Model Room Panel B – Indian Army Memorial Room, Old College Panel C – Amiens Room, Old College Panel D – Conference Room, Old College Panel E – Overseas Room, Old College 1600-1800 Session 1 1A The Prelude to Overlord ▪ Chair: Evan Mawdsley Revisiting the Decision for Torch: Its Impact and Consequences Kevin Smith, Ball State University The Delay in Closing the Air Gap: British Decision-Makers and the Application of Air Power in the Battle of the Atlantic, Christopher M. Bell, Dalhousie University When Overlord was All [North] American: The COSSAC Plan for an American- and Canadian-led D-Day and how First Canadian Army got the Boot in December 1943 Marc Milner, University of New Brunswick Making the Grand Alliance Work: Anglo-American-Soviet Liaison and the Pursuit of Victory, December 1943 to February 1945, Martin Folly, Brunel University 1B Pre-War Thinking, Wartime Experience ▪ Chair: Matthias Strohn The Secret School of War: The Soviet-German Tank Academy at Kama, 1926-1933 Ian Johnson, The Ohio State University Feldjägerdienst and Werwolf: German Partisan Warfare, 1918-45 Matthias Strohn, Royal Military Academy Sandhurst The Development of German Naval Concepts from 1925-1944 Christian Jentzsch, Marineschule Mürwik Design, Design, Design! Did the RN's Carrier Fleet of 1944 owe its Ships Design more to Wartime Experience, Emergency Construction, or Pre-War Thinking Freed of the Constraints of Treaty? Alexander Clarke, King's College London 1C The British Empire at War ▪ Chair: Marcus S.
    [Show full text]
  • Record Copy to Be Retired When \\O Longer©Needed
    D J 739 MS # C-065a /? aao.C <- * - c.l Fgn MS English Copy GBEIMER_pIABY_MpjgES, 12 Aug 1942 - 12 Mar 1943 RECORD COPY TO BE RETIRED WHEN \\O LONGER©NEEDED flROPSRTY OF US ARMY HISTORICAL DIVISION HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES ARMY EUROPE FOREIGN MILITARY STUDIES BRANCH MS # C-065a Helmuth GREENER Ministerialrat Custodian of the War Diary in HITLER©S Headquarters (August 1939 - April 1943) NOTES on the Situation Reports and Discussions at HITLER©S Headquarters from 12 August 1942 to 1? March 1943 Translator: Werner METER Editor : LUCAS Reviewer : Lt. Col. VERNON HISTORICAL DIVISION EUROPEAN COl-iMAND MS # C~065 a FOBStfOBD This manuscript is part of a narrative history of events in the German Armed Forces Supreme Command Headquarters during World War II. The writer, Hell- Mith G-BSINM, was charged with writing the War Diary at that headquarters from August 1939 to April 22, 1942. He has based hie work on notes taken at various conferences, copies of final drafts for entry in the War Diary, copies of HIJLER©S directives, orders end documents he was able to save from destruction at great personal risk. With the aid of these sources and the trained mind and memory of a professional historian, he has presented a vivid picture of HITLilR© S method of com mand as well as his reaction to reverses end success and the various other factors which influenced de cisions in both the military and the political spheres. In addition to a general description of procedures in the supreme headquarters it includes details of or ganization and the composition of HITLER©S immediate staff.
    [Show full text]
  • World War Ii Veteran’S Committee, Washington, Dc Under a Generous Grant from the Dodge Jones Foundation 2
    W WORLD WWAR IIII A TEACHING LESSON PLAN AND TOOL DESIGNED TO PRESERVE AND DOCUMENT THE WORLD’S GREATEST CONFLICT PREPARED BY THE WORLD WAR II VETERAN’S COMMITTEE, WASHINGTON, DC UNDER A GENEROUS GRANT FROM THE DODGE JONES FOUNDATION 2 INDEX Preface Organization of the World War II Veterans Committee . Tab 1 Educational Standards . Tab 2 National Council for History Standards State of Virginia Standards of Learning Primary Sources Overview . Tab 3 Background Background to European History . Tab 4 Instructors Overview . Tab 5 Pre – 1939 The War 1939 – 1945 Post War 1945 Chronology of World War II . Tab 6 Lesson Plans (Core Curriculum) Lesson Plan Day One: Prior to 1939 . Tab 7 Lesson Plan Day Two: 1939 – 1940 . Tab 8 Lesson Plan Day Three: 1941 – 1942 . Tab 9 Lesson Plan Day Four: 1943 – 1944 . Tab 10 Lesson Plan Day Five: 1944 – 1945 . Tab 11 Lesson Plan Day Six: 1945 . Tab 11.5 Lesson Plan Day Seven: 1945 – Post War . Tab 12 3 (Supplemental Curriculum/American Participation) Supplemental Plan Day One: American Leadership . Tab 13 Supplemental Plan Day Two: American Battlefields . Tab 14 Supplemental Plan Day Three: Unique Experiences . Tab 15 Appendixes A. Suggested Reading List . Tab 16 B. Suggested Video/DVD Sources . Tab 17 C. Suggested Internet Web Sites . Tab 18 D. Original and Primary Source Documents . Tab 19 for Supplemental Instruction United States British German E. Veterans Organizations . Tab 20 F. Military Museums in the United States . Tab 21 G. Glossary of Terms . Tab 22 H. Glossary of Code Names . Tab 23 I. World War II Veterans Questionnaire .
    [Show full text]
  • Airborne Assault
    Operation 'Market Garden' A Bridge Too Far Campaign by nemesszili Can you reach the Bridge Too Far, while battling the Germans on Highway 69? Historical Background Following the grandiose Operation Overlord, the Allies left behind the nightmare of the 'Bocage'. The Germans were exhausted, but still held key positions in France. When the Allies finally succeeded in trapping the 7th Army and the 5th Panzer Army, and Operation Diadem, the invasion of Southern France was also a success, the Germans were forced to leave France, and prepare for the defense of the Reich, and other key positions in occupied Holland. Belgium was also liberated, along with Antwerpen, a large dock, which could be used by the Allies as a supply base for further operation. However, dense mines and V-2 Rockets, not mentioning the shore battery on Walcheren, denied the use of this port, and the Allies needed quickly supplies needed for attacking towards the Rhine. Only the 'Red Ball Express' helped something, but was not enough. So Germany had to be defeated quickly and decisively, so the supply problem could not endanger the Allied cause. Montgomery found the solution first, but this plan was pretty risky. He really underestimated the German strength in the area, not observing the warning of the Dutch Resistance, who warned Allied High command about the presence of German armored forces in the area. However, 'Operation Market Garden' was initiated on September 17th, 1944. The plan had two major phases: Firstly, the 1st Allied Airborne Army, composed by the 101st American Airborne Division (Screaming Eagles), 82nd American Airborne Division and the 1st British Airborne Division.
    [Show full text]
  • Rmy Was Forced to Yield Ground to 2 Frenoh Armd D1V in Tho North and 5 French ..:"..Rmd Div in Tho South
    - 56 - on the left wing of the .irillY GrouPt Nineteenth ..:\rmy was forced to yield ground to 2 Frenoh Armd D1V in tho North and 5 French ..:"..rmd Div in tho South. But the BOSt significant dovelopmont of the day was the rosumJ)tion of largo-scale .~".lliod oporations in the Aachon area. 1fussivo air attacks on lin0s of defenco and sunnly routos ~recodod attacks on a wide front. ~t 1710 hrs O.B. West loarnt from his Chief Intolligence Officor that tho northorn wing of ~\rmy Group B faced an anomy concontration of five armourod and sevon infantry divisions - S080 British, somo P~orican, Concludin6 that tho contro of gravity of tho Allied efforts was now at tho northern wing of Army Group B, O.B West immediatoly authorizod Ittmy G~oup B to coruuit 47 pz Corrys, In addition to this 10 SS rz Div was to ~ovo fron tho aroa oast of !~nhom to the aroa east of Vonlo, and P~my Group H would desryatch 85,245 and 363 VGD's to tho aroa behind tho 1fuas-oast front. Tho consoquent tomporary woakening of l~my Group H was a tolerablo risk and had to bo acce~tod. (Ibid, 16 Nov) 17 Nov 123. Due to IDTIited visibility _\Iliod air activity at tho front of' Army Group B was sOl'lGWhat smaller than on the proceding day, and by cOL~~itting virtually all froG roserves tho l\rmy Group was able to hold tho Allied forces in the greater Aachen area in chock. Developmonts in the aroa of Army Group G woro decidodly unfavourablo; in order to maintain a coherent front First £rny had to fall back to rear positions and loave tho garrison of Metz to its fato.
    [Show full text]
  • Battle for the Ruhr: the German Army's Final Defeat in the West" (2006)
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2006 Battle for the Ruhr: The rGe man Army's Final Defeat in the West Derek Stephen Zumbro Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Zumbro, Derek Stephen, "Battle for the Ruhr: The German Army's Final Defeat in the West" (2006). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 2507. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2507 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. BATTLE FOR THE RUHR: THE GERMAN ARMY’S FINAL DEFEAT IN THE WEST A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of History by Derek S. Zumbro B.A., University of Southern Mississippi, 1980 M.S., University of Southern Mississippi, 2001 August 2006 Table of Contents ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................iv INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • War in History
    War in History http://wih.sagepub.com Junior Officership in the German Army during the Great War, 19141918 Alexander Watson War In History 2007; 14; 428 DOI: 10.1177/0968344507081555 The online version of this article can be found at: http://wih.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/428 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com Additional services and information for War in History can be found at: Email Alerts: http://wih.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://wih.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Downloaded from http://wih.sagepub.com by on November 19, 2009 429-453_WIH_081555.qxd 9/10/07 11:59 AM Page 429 Junior Officership in the German Army during the Great War, 1914–1918 Alexander Watson This article reassesses German junior officers’ performance in the First World War. Contrary to current historiography, it argues that the peacetime corps’s social elitism was successful in ensuring a militarily effective, nat- urally paternalistic and conscientious leadership. The infamous wartime Offiziersha␤ (‘officer hate’) did not derive from social segregation between ranks but was rather a form of the ‘front–rear’ tension common to all bel- ligerent armies, aggravated by material shortage. Despite training and organ- izational difficulties, the successful dissemination of the corps’s aristocratic values to wartime-recruited officers maintained good inter-rank relations within combat units, enabling the army to endure four years of gruelling warfare. I. Introduction The German army performed remarkably well in the vicious fighting on the Western Front during the First World War.1 For four years it success- fully repelled materially and numerically superior enemies, suffering minimal disciplinary problems despite the tremendous strain.
    [Show full text]
  • Anticipating Overlord
    Anticipating Overlord ANTICIPATING OVERLORD INTELLIGENCE AND DECEPTION: GERMAN ESTIMATES OF ALLIED INTENTIONS TO LAND INVASION FORCES IN NORTHWEST EUROPE BY CAPTAIN THOMAS LEON CUBBAGE II MILITARY INTELLIGENCE BRANCH, U.S. ARMY A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GENERAL INTELLIGENCE DEPARTMENT DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE SCHOOL, WASHINGTON, D.C. 06 JUNE 1969 (Re-Typed and Edited: 15 March 2016) Anticipating Overlord Table of Contents CHAPTER PAGE I INTRODUCTION …………………………………………….………….…….. 1 II GERMAN PLANS 1939-40 ……………………………….…….…….….….. 7 III ENGLISH INVASION PLANS 1940-41 ……………………….……….….. 11 IV GERMAN PLANS & ESTIMATES 1941 …………………………………... 14 V ALLIED INVASION PLANNING 1942 …………….……………………..… 17 VI GERMAN PLANS & ESTIMATES 1942 ……………………………….….. 20 VII ALLIED PLANS & DECEPTION OPS 1943 ..…………………….…….… 28 VIII GERMAN PLANS & ESTIMATES 1943 ……………….…………….….... 37 IX “FORTITUDE” – THE ALLIED DECEPTION PLAN ……….…...……,.…. 52 X ALLIED PLANNING: JANUARY THRU APRIL 1944………….…….….... 62 XI GERMAN PLANS & ESTIMATES: JANUARY THRU APRIL ……...….... 73 XII ALLIED INVASION PLANNING MAY 1944 ……………………...……….. 95 XIII GERMAN PLANS & ESTIMATES MAY 1944 ………………….…….…. 103 XIV THE FIRST FOUR DAYS OF JUNE 1944 ………………………….…… 122 XV THE LAST DAY BEFORE THE INVASION …………………………..…. 140 XVI D-DAY, TUESDAY, THE 6TH OF JUNE 1944 (0000 to 0530 Hours) …. 156 XVII D-DAY, TUESDAY, THE 6TH OF JUNE 1944 (0530 to 2400 Hours) …. 173 XVIII AFTERMATH — 7 JUNE THRU 25 JULY 1944 …………………….….. 190 XIX REVIEW OF GERMAN COLLECTION, ANALYSIS AND ESTIMATES CAPABILITY………………………...…………………... 217 XX ROOTS OF THE GERMAN INTELLIGENCE FAILURE RE UNDERSTANDING D-DAY ….…………………………………… 225 XXI IMPLICATIONS OF THE GERMAN INTELLIGENCE FAILURE …..…. 236 i Anticipating Overlord BIBLIOGRAPHY ………………………………………………….………………... 239 Appendixes …………………………………………………………………...…….. 251 A. Table of Equivalent Ranks ……………………………………….………… 251 B. Glossary of German Individuals Appearing in this Paper ………..……... 252 C. Glossary of Code Names and Short Titles …………………………….… 255 D.
    [Show full text]