What do you think would have happened had Ike gone ahead with his broad-front strategy instead of Montgomery’s Market-Garden? I know Market-Garden was an embarrassing defeat for the Allies. The Brits lost 80% of its troops at Arnhem.
I think it proves that Ike was right in his approach! However every military commander makes a mistake a some point. Be it small or large.
In someways I think it was good that Market Garden happened. If it had succeeded the winter offensive launched by the Germans might had been more successful. Of course its all what if.
I think Market Garden shows the ego of the Allies…the Germans werent finished just yet.
Market Garden actually showed the ego of Montgomery more than anyone else. One reason he was so against Ike’s broad-front was because he was jealous that Ike was the Supreme Commander and not him. Also, Gen. Marshall was the one who told Ike to approve Monty’s strategy.
Episode 4 of Band of Brothers illustrated why Market Garden was a failure. The Allies were supposed to just capture the roads leading to Arnhem. That was all good and dandy, but the Germans had surrounded the Allies on their flanks. The Germans had tanks off the roads, whereas the Allied tanks were still on them. Since the roads were cut off, the British troops who parachuted into Arnhem were pretty much left to fend for themselves.
You should watch a bridge too far … great movie about the event!
I’m actually currently reading the book on which that movie is based. 
i think the main reason market-garden failed was because the british armour, i’m not sure if it was inexpierience or the superiority of german tanks but they simply didn’t move fast enough twards arnhem
Ive heard numerous complaints about Brits refusing orders from American commanders. Smaller level. Naturally they were used to orders from British soldiers.
i’ve heard alot about that too, i heard one story where dick winters instructed two firefly tanks to work there way around a road in order to attack a tiger from the rear, instead the firefly’s pulled rightout into the open field right in front of the tiger’s main cannon, needless to say both tanks were destroyed
That’s kinda what happened in Band of Brothers, except not exactly. There, one of grunts in Easy spotted a German Tiger hidden next to house. He tried to tell a firefly commander to shoot the Tiger through the house, but the commander said he has been instructed to “avoid unneccassary property damage”. One of the firefly got into the open and the Tiger destroyed it.
Yet another example of TV becoming historical fact? Ultimately as always it was logistics that cut the allies off - that single road they were advancing down had to carry their entire log chain given that there simply were no other roads in the area that weren’t underwater. The narrow front concept (the only way the allies had to penetrate deeply - like it or not, there wasn’t sufficient Petrol available to support a broad front offensive until Antwerp had been cleared in December 1944 at the cost of nearly 13,000 casualties) also meant that the whole supply route was vulnerable to German interdiction.
Incidentally, it is at least as easy to blame the 82nd Airbourne for failing to take Nijmegen bridge for 3 days as it is to blame Guards Armoured for not moving quickly enough. Having to assist the 82nd to take Nijmegen bridge cost them 36 hours compared to the position they would have been in had it been taken in the initial assault (at the time of the drop and for some hours afterwards there were only a dozen Germans holding the bridge). Had it been taken in time, it is probable that the tanks would have reached Arnhem in time.
The failure of the Market Garden operation is a lot more complex and the blame, if there is to be any blame can be spread far and wide. Firstly Allied intelligence knew the 9th SS and 10th SS Panzer Divisions were refitting in the area and yet the operation went ahead.
This was partly due to the belief in some quarters(SHAEF) that the airborne forces were now sitting on their arses and should be better utilized.
Another factor to consider is that already the Allied supply lines were stretched and thus the advance was slowing, allowing the German defenders much needed breathing space. Simpson’s 9th Army and Hodges 1st Army were also having a hard time of it around Aachen and any thought or suggestion of Patton funneling his forces through the Ardennes was discounted.
Yes Market Garden was a balls up for a variety of reasons other than Montgomery or any failings of the troops involved in the operation.
Regards digger
No it is historical fact! Maybe this preticular example is false but there are many examples ive heard, seen written, TV and alot from first person thru the history channel…etc. Now its not like this is the reason for the failure (as you have explained) however it goes to show that it was a poorly planned and hastily thrown together operation. The problem im pointing out is a breakdown at the most basic level. Dont get me wrong the failure was all allied. I curse Monty for drawing up the plan and Ike for approving it.
Also agreed!
I wouldn’t put too much stock in Band og Broterhs or A bridge too far.
WRT the road, 30 XXX were trying to get up the road, but were not road bound.
They could have left the road and moved up cross country, but this would slow them down.
What did happen was that whilst the spear head of the advance moved up the road, units would peel off to protect it’s flanks. Moving up the road at speed and then slowing down when off.
The Mil Police did an awesome job of traffic control.
The whole op was based on speed. Several of the Bridges to be taken early on by the Americans, for various reasons were not taken as quickly as invisages which held up the 30 XXX advance.
The Op (I think) was planned around the tanks moving up the road and fighting at night. Unforutuantly after Op Totalise (shortly before) it was realised that tanks could not do this. THus they HAD to stop at night.
The infamous “stopping for Tea” is complete blx. It is either completely made up, or was a euphamism for the pattern the tanks parked up in at night (a T with a span of tanks across facing the enemy with a reserve to the rear). or that the men in the tanks would only eat hot food (Tea) when the vehs had stopped. The cooked this on the engine blocks (and we still do 
)
Other problems?
The Americans had problems gaining the Bridges. Whilst some American commanders have indicated that 30 XXX were not as aggressive as they should have been. The same charge could be laid against some of the American Paras, the Bridge at Son had to be Bailey Bridged (which took time) and the 82nd needed support from 30 XXX to capture it’s bridges. The Son bridge was blown before the Americans could capture it.
This all slowed 30 XXX down.
The terrain in the area did not suit tanks at all. Off the road it would have been very slow going. Fine if (like the Germans) you are just sitting still firing. Not so fine if (like 30 XXX) you are trying to reach Arnham.
In truth the best description of the attack was “a bridge to far”. The Paras at Arnham, could have helped by attacking the bridges closer in, alongside the Americans. The comms, supply, weather etc don’t really affect the operations final outcome as the fact that the distance required for 30 XXX to move up, was too far.
I do believe that Allied intelligence also vastly underestimated how far these German units had been reconstituted and reequipped --after their near destruction in Normandy…
And as for the operation on a whole: I enjoy pointing out what an occasional arrogant dolt Gen. Montgomery could be. However, Operation Market Garden was tantalizing as a “coup de main” operation that could have shortened the War considerably had it worked. But in the end, the odds were too long and static airborne troops are simply too vulnerable when facing mobile armored infantry. But I probably would have signed off on this operation if I were Ike, but nevertheless, the operation was poorly planned and severally underestimated the Germans’ ability to continue to send fresh men and equipment to the front despite strategic bombing. This arrogance would ultimately result in the Battle of the Bulge…
But I think there is a saying: If you never fail, then you are not trying hard enough…
And that road had German units concealed in the wood line in textbook ambush position…
Yes, but unfortunatly (as pointed out) it was the ONLY road available.
It is nice to be able to say, we can’t go this way as it is likely to be ambushed, but we can go this way instead. But all to often you have to fight through the route you know is likely to be ambushed.
Be wary of watching TV/Films or computer games and believing them to be fact. They are often wide of the mark, purely for entertainment or for other reasons.
Examples include.
Gallipoli (with Mel Gibson) utter rubbish in making you think that the British threw the Ausy lives away, and that that Gallipoli was the largest slaughter of Austrailian men. In reality more were lost in Europe, and the attack was commanded by an Austrailian. More British were killed in Gallipoli than Ausies.
U-571 - The British captured the first, and second, U-Boat Enigma. End of.
300 - A lot of histotical fact in here believe it or not. The quotes of fighting under the shade of arrows is the Greek Army Corps motto, as is the quote of “come and get them” in response to requesting for the surrender of the Greek Army, now a motto of another greek formation.
Likewise they were betrayed by one of their own greeks, admittedly not a mutant.
Saving Private Ryan - good film, several flaws (and I will let the mortar bang and throw technique/sticky bomb socks slide) for example, there were more British involved than shown, in particular the landing craft drivers were Brits.
ZULU - Pte Hook was portrayed as a bounder, thief and malinger. In fact he was a very professional and loyal soldier. CSjt Bourne was portrayed as a wizened old pro, in fact he was the youngest Colour in the British Army ever (at the time) but still a pro I hasten to add.
The commisariat was shown as slightly effeminate and not a fighting man, in fact, it is highly likely that the survival of the station was down to this man, a soldier of 22 years, who moved to South Africa and rejoined the Commisariats dept to serve during the Zulu war. He had tons of knowledge about the zulus and the land, which was apparently given by ardendorf (a man who in all likely hood scarpered).
Micheal Caine couldn’t have been further from the true Coy Commander, a deaf and shortsighted officer, who was put at Rourkes Drift (most likely) to keep him out of the way.
See what we mean about films?
Terrible to relate for Australians convinced that Gallipoli was a purely Australian exercise, but even France lost more men than Australia.
Casualties at Gallipoli
Turkey 86,692
Britain 21,255
France 9,798
Australia 8,709
New Zealand 2,701
India 1,358
Newfoundland 49
http://www.dva.gov.au/commem/commac/studies/anzacsk/aday4.htm#cas
But on national population levels, there are some surprising results in WWI, both on enlistment and casualty figures. As there are in WWII.
Yet the dominance of some nations at Versailles was out of all proportion to their contribution to the war and their enlistment rates and the casualties they suffered. And the reverse is true.
Might want to include Enemy at the Gates, Heroes of Telemark and Bridge over the River Kwai.
And for f**ks sake come off the U571 thing already. There is a booming movie industry in Britain make your own version. Yes the Brits get all props for their efforts surrounding the Enigma. Make your own movie and if it flops at least you can say its accurate. :roll:
Like I’ve said, if it’s not a doucumentry it has some “Hollywood” in it…but that’s another thread.