Apologies mate! Was typing fast, I should have said Allied not American.
Also when I say it was a waste of German supply and materials I mean men as well, they lost around 200,000 men in the offensive!
Forgiven, lol. ;D That is a very interesting fact Vaalto, small world eh? At any rate, yes, the 101st was just the most prominent of the units as Bastogne simply because of their size, being an entire division.
Last Edit: Mar 11, 2009 14:49:33 GMT by Scott Evans
In peace, sons bury their fathers. In war, fathers bury their sons. -Herodotus
Post by Jonas Merhoff on Mar 11, 2009 22:03:28 GMT
Yeah, the Bulge wasn't really going to work at all really. Their tanks just weren't made for it, they were use to open plains and the like and storming through in Blitzkrieg, not rolling down a road enclosed by trees. The tanks had more cons than pros there, often blocking the rest of the line up and what not. If I remember correctly, it was a bulge because the North and South were mainly tanks and what not moving up through the forest (but failing royally) and the infantry actually managed to do something worthwhile and make it up to Bastogne, but just didn't have the support.
The Germans knew they weren't going in with enough fuel, and the same tactic they used to get in there also screwed them over. They were able to plan for the poor weather that would constrict the Allied's supplies in time for them to take the major ports they wanted. But this also crushed any chance of them getting the fuel for their tanks either. Because this was all extremely top secret and Hitler had lost his trust in a lot of his men, they didn't have crucial intel they needed to. They walked right on past one of the biggest fuel dumps. So really, they went in...****ed themselves over and then abandoned the place.
Although, yes if there was a bit more of planning and intel and the rest of the offensive went as well as the beginning... yeah the German's would have won and slaughtered us all.
Last Edit: Mar 11, 2009 22:04:04 GMT by Jonas Merhoff
Post by deutschlandschutze on Mar 12, 2009 4:53:07 GMT
Thinking about it now I would have to say that neither was more important than the other. Both contributed majorly to the war, the problem is, its really impossible to tell what would have happend if the Germans had won either one. In other words Using the arguement that without an Allied successful D-Day there wouldn't have been a Bulge is null and void. That is because then I could say that the German assault of Poland was the most important campaign because without it, there wouldn't have been a Russian one... That logic doesn't get anywhere... So I would say that they both were important, but to label one more important than the other isn't really up to us.
Also, I don't know how many of you have read the memoirs of Donald Burgett, but as Vaalto and I have said before, other units were there. Burgett speaks highly of several of them. If you guys haven't read his memoirs I would highly suggest them. They give a great perspective on the war.
Last Edit: Mar 12, 2009 4:57:57 GMT by deutschlandschutze
Scott Evans
New Member Second Lieutenant (American)
Yeah, the Bulge wasn't really going to work at all really. Their tanks just weren't made for it, they were use to open plains and the like and storming through in Blitzkrieg, not rolling down a road enclosed by trees. The tanks had more cons than pros there, often blocking the rest of the line up and what not. If I remember correctly, it was a bulge because the North and South were mainly tanks and what not moving up through the forest (but failing royally) and the infantry actually managed to do something worthwhile and make it up to Bastogne, but just didn't have the support.
The curious matter about this entire battle was that it was the very same area that they had originally punched through in 1940, pushing to the sea and cutting off the British and a French Army forcing Dunkerque. You cannot teach an old dog new tricks is a fitting saying. This time it went up against enemy air superiority and a much more flexible and well led force.
It certainly cut back the time for Germany to fall though, but maybe if they had of used the forces to hold the Russians instead we would have gotten to Berlin first.
The one reason I see D-day as much more important in a sense, may be due to it's unique character. There was only one amphibious return to Europe, which was definitely important, whereas every campaign has its high points and low points. If the Germans had succeeded, then yes, it would have been major but then what about Market Garden? If that had succeeded the war in Europe likely would have been over by Christmas. Risks and gambles are part of wars, attacks, counterattacks are all part of of any war. But it is very rare you see an Operation like Overlord, with all its preparation and the detail put into it. If Overlord had not been a success, it is true, it would have had major repercussions. If the Bulge had been pushed all the way to the sea, with the state of the German army, defeat of the British, Canadian and American armies in the north would be far far far from certain.
In peace, sons bury their fathers. In war, fathers bury their sons. -Herodotus
Post by Vadik Kuzichinko on Jan 5, 2010 3:32:40 GMT
The important thing to know during 1944 and 1945, is that the Germans were not inferior technologically or numerically.
The reason for a good portion of the losses on the Western Front especially is lack of resources. Many tanks were only given about twelve AP shells when they left the factory.
Soldiers' food was rationed, and so they weren't up to strength.
The Battle of the Bulge was Hitlers' attempt to stockpile resources and than attack. At the end of the Ardennes' battle, most of the King Tiger tanks not destroyed had to be abandoned, because there wasn't enough fuel to get them out of the encirclement.
If Germany had enough fuel throughout 1944 and 1945, think of Wehrmacht offensives like the Bulge and Kursk the entire time.
If the Germans had succeeded, the Red Ball Express would've been cut off, and a massive amount of American and British fuel depots would've fell into German hands.
Though I'm not sure if this amounts to anything.
80% of all Panzer losses after June 6th, 1944 were because of air attack anyway.