Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ambrose Right?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ambrose Right?

    Was Stephen Ambrose right in his analysis that the German Army was inferior to the Allies in most respects in D-Day?
    10
    Yup he was, they were horrible.
    50.00%
    5
    No he wasn't, they were excellent.
    50.00%
    5
    Last edited by panther3485; 02 Jun 13, 09:06. Reason: correction of spelling error
    The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed. -Carl Jung

    Hell is other people. -Jean-Paul Sarte

  • #2
    I would have to say that he was right. Hitler was convinced deeply that the attack was going to be somewhere else........cant remember where.
    Plus........Rommel was on leave when the attack began...........That REALLY hurt the Germans.

    Mark
    Deo Vindice
    Si vis pacem, para bellum. (If you want peace, prepare for war.)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by last_cav1971
      I would have to say that he was right. Hitler was convinced deeply that the attack was going to be somewhere else........cant remember where.
      Plus........Rommel was on leave when the attack began...........That REALLY hurt the Germans.

      Mark
      Deo Vindice
      Calais.

      Cheers!


      Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

      "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

      What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Ambrose Right?

        Originally posted by BarcelonaBlom
        Was Stephen Ambrose right in is analysis that the German Army was inferior to the Allies in most respects in D-Day?
        Nope. Dead wrong. :nonono: I'm not taking anything away from the Allied soldiers, but the German Army was a formidable foe during D-Day. He (the Deutsch Soldaten) might be out numbered and out supplied, but it would be bad history to say he was inferior to the Allies.

        If you have some of Ambrose's specific points. We can debate them at leisure. :thumb:


        Cheers!


        Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

        "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

        What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by RStory
          Calais.

          Cheers!


          The primary landing beaches were thought, by the Whermacht, to be in the area between the Seine and the Somme.
          Scientists have announced they've discovered a cure for apathy. However no one has shown the slightest bit of interest !!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Tigersqn
            The primary landing beaches were thought, by the Whermacht, to be in the area between the Seine and the Somme.
            I don't have an atlas of France handy...how a far is that from Calais? I know OKW and OBW felt Calair was a primary target because of the harbour.

            Cheers!


            Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

            "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

            What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Re: Ambrose Right?

              Originally posted by RStory
              Nope. Dead wrong. :nonono: I'm not taking anything away from the Allied soldiers, but the German Army was a formidable foe during D-Day. He (the Deutsch Soldaten) might be out numbered and out supplied, but it would be bad history to say he was inferior to the Allies.

              If you have some of Ambrose's specific points. We can debate them at leisure. :thumb:


              Cheers!


              I absolutely agree with this.

              The Heer soldier(not to mention the Waffen-SS) was by and large better trained and better motivated (don't forget the unconditional surrender policy) than his Allied counter-part by the time D-Day rolled around.

              By the time 1945 came however..........well then other factors had taken hold for Germany and the US soldier had properly learned his craft.
              Scientists have announced they've discovered a cure for apathy. However no one has shown the slightest bit of interest !!

              Comment


              • #8
                Ambrose was incorrect when he said that the German army was inferior to the Allied Armies. I find this to be false. The German army's training was very hard and mentally changeling. They were the most effective fighting force on the planet until 1944.
                They also had more men in 1939 than the United States did.

                Thanks
                Peter Williams

                "We're not lost private, we're in Normandy"-

                Lt. Richard Winters 101st 506 pir

                Comment


                • #9
                  He was wrong. The German 352nd ID was crack troops. The 719th ID wasn't as well rated but still was good troops.
                  http://canadiangenealogyandresearch.ca

                  Soviet and Canadian medal collector!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Ambrose Right?

                    Originally posted by BarcelonaBlom
                    Was Stephen Ambrose right in is analysis that the German Army was inferior to the Allies in most respects in D-Day?
                    In terms of experience, armor, artillery and, probabaly, command, no! Supply was also a key issue - the longer it took the Aliies to get of the beach, form bridgeheads and take at least one or two ports, the more precarious their supply situation was. Additionally, care of the wounded would have been chatic at best, with many hundreds dying for lack of intensive medical care. The prime handicap they had, as throughout the war, was Hitler's meddling. His refusal to release 15th Panzer was a key blunder. Had this formation struck while the Allies were still on the beach, the result could have been catastrophic, possibly allowing the Germans to destroy the Allies in detail.
                    Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
                    (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Apples, Oranges, and Pears?

                      This really depends on which allied soldiers and which German soldiers.

                      I found these ratings of the German formations that fought in Normandy.

                      http://www.fireandfury.com/britinfo/germnormqual.pdf

                      If you asked me which was better, the 1st US Infantry Division or the 352nd German Infantry Division, that would be a bit of a toss up. The Big Red One was probably more experienced and better equipped, but the 352nd was sitting in an excellent position.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        At Normandy both sides were pretty even. Many of the US formations were veteran divisions, but many were green and this was their first operation. Much the same as on the German side. The leaders on the German side were hamstringed by Hitler's idiotic orders, while the Allies could do what needed to be done. The main advantage the Allies had was complete air supremacy. You could be the toughest outfit in the world, but constant air bombardment is something out of the basic rifleman's control.
                        "Anything worth fighting for is worth fighting dirty for"
                        "The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step, and a lot of bitching"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Re: Ambrose Right?

                          Originally posted by RStory
                          Nope. Dead wrong. :nonono: I'm not taking anything away from the Allied soldiers, but the German Army was a formidable foe during D-Day. He (the Deutsch Soldaten) might be out numbered and out supplied, but it would be bad history to say he was inferior to the Allies.

                          If you have some of Ambrose's specific points. We can debate them at leisure. :thumb:


                          Cheers!


                          "Hasting's (Max) judgement has become popular among military historians a half-century after the war. The German soldier in World War II has assumed a mythical quality as the best fighting man not only in the war but in almost every other war ever fought. (New Paragraph) The judgement is wrong. The Wehrmacht had many fine units, and many outstanding soldiers, but they were not supermen. Not even the Waffen-SS elite troops of 1944-45 were much, if any, better than ordinary Allied troops. And the Allied elite units, the airborne and Rangers and Commandos, were better than anything put into the field." (Ambrose 52, D-Day)
                          The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed. -Carl Jung

                          Hell is other people. -Jean-Paul Sarte

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            For more debate.
                            "What made the Germans look so good, what so impressed Hastings and others, was the kill ratio. It was almost two-to-one in favor of the Wehrmacht, sometimes higher. But that criterion ignores a basic fact: the Wehrmacht vs. Anglo-American armies was always fighting on the defensive behind prepared positions or fixed fortifications..." (Ambrose 52, D-Day)
                            The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed. -Carl Jung

                            Hell is other people. -Jean-Paul Sarte

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Finally the one that is true in most cases.
                              "Hitler's problem was not his priorities, it was how to hurl the coming invasion back into the sea. That problem was compounded by many factors, summed up in one word- shortages. Shortages of ships, planes, men, guns, tanks." (Ambrose 30, D-Day)
                              The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed. -Carl Jung

                              Hell is other people. -Jean-Paul Sarte

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X