 | | War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries |
May 28th, 2011, 02:15 PM
|
#1 | | Ex Cold War Warrior
Joined: Mar 2011 From: North East England Posts: 3,033 | Operation Market Garden, defeat at Arnhem Bridge
This ambitious plan was formulated and presented to Allied high command, less than a month before it was put into effect. The British/Polish part of this plan was an unmitigated disaster. The plan was flawed by a combination of poor intelligence, including the following:-
1. Insufficient appreciation of Arnhem and surrounding area.
2. Insuffcient appreciation of the Dutch infrastructure for 30 corp's drive
to Arnhem Bridge.
3. Insufficient air transport to get all of the units on the ground at the
necessary time.
The post war view of this operation is thought by some, to be an excuse to get the airbourne units into employment.
In the opinion of the Forum, should this operation have been postponed untill a later date, in time for better recconaissance, or do we just accept that it could have worked and the defeat was just unfortunate?
JC
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 02:57 PM
|
#2 | | Historian
Joined: Dec 2010 From: Near St. Louis. Posts: 3,914 |
Monty was a vainglorious egocentric. His plans always revolved around him getting the kudos, IMHO. The practicality of a plan wasn't as important as how it would make him look when it succeeded. (Monty fans, sorry about that.)
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 02:58 PM
|
#3 | | None shall pass!
Joined: Aug 2010 From: Somewhere in France(for now) Posts: 6,550 |
shouldn't have gone ahead with it at all, Montgomery thought it up just to put himself back in the spotlight, he was very dissatisfied with how Eisenhower was his superior and felt he should have been in command, even when intel reveled the presence of some SS panzer divisions in the drop area they didn't revise the plan at all, the units were dropped way to far from the bridges, the reason being that the area had too much AA defenses, the moment they landed the germans instantly knew what their target was. the tank units that were supposed to move up highway 69 come under sever attack by the german SS panzer units and heavy artillery which was made easier to keep supplied as they were located very near to an ammunition deport. the tanks couldn't get through, the airborne troops were cut off, it was 'a bridge to far'. all the while Montgomery really wasn't keeping his eye on the ball, he was still to preoccupied with his frustration of not being the overall allied commander
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 03:00 PM
|
#4 | | Varlet
Joined: Dec 2010 From: Pillium Posts: 2,869 | Quote:
Originally Posted by OpanaPointer Monty was a vainglorious egocentric. His plans always revolved around him getting the kudos, IMHO. The practicality of a plan wasn't as important as how it would make him look when it succeeded. (Monty fans, sorry about that.) | I agree totally, and would say exactly the same about Patton too.
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 03:02 PM
|
#5 | | Ex Cold War Warrior
Joined: Mar 2011 From: North East England Posts: 3,033 | Quote:
Originally Posted by OpanaPointer Monty was a vainglorious egocentric. His plans always revolved around him getting the kudos, IMHO. The practicality of a plan wasn't as important as how it would make him look when it succeeded. (Monty fans, sorry about that.) | The US part of the operation went quite well, but 30 Corps had too many bridges to cross and on a road not wide enough for Armour to get a hasty move on.
JC
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 03:06 PM
|
#6 | | Ex Cold War Warrior
Joined: Mar 2011 From: North East England Posts: 3,033 | Quote:
Originally Posted by irishcrusader95 shouldn't have gone ahead with it at all, Montgomery thought it up just to put himself back in the spotlight, he was very dissatisfied with how Eisenhower was his superior and felt he should have been in command, even when intel reveled the presence of some SS panzer divisions in the drop area they didn't revise the plan at all, the units were dropped way to far from the bridges, the reason being that the area had too much AA defenses, the moment they landed the germans instantly knew what their target was. the tank units that were supposed to move up highway 69 come under sever attack by the german SS panzer units and heavy artillery which was made easier to keep supplied as they were located very near to an ammunition deport. the tanks couldn't get through, the airborne troops were cut off, it was 'a bridge to far'. all the while Montgomery really wasn't keeping his eye on the ball, he was still to preoccupied with his frustration of not being the overall allied commander | I generally agree with you, but this plan was not thought through properly, and this resulted in the debacle at the bridge.
JC
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 03:28 PM
|
#7 | | Historian
Joined: Dec 2010 From: Near St. Louis. Posts: 3,914 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Davidius I agree totally, and would say exactly the same about Patton too. | We see eye to eye then. | | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 04:46 PM
|
#8 | | Archivist
Joined: Dec 2010 From: Southwest U.S. Posts: 235 |
Monty was obsessed on ending the war before 1945. This was certainly partly because he was a gloryhound. But, he also felt that the Germans were in full retreat and could be defeated fairly easily--especially if the Sigfried line could be bypassed. He ignored solid intelligence and rushed the operation. The whole operation could, and ultimately did, fail when so much as one delay would occur. This occurred at Son when a bridge was destroyed before the Allies could take it. By the time they built a replacement, the Germans were alerted and organizing a counterattack. Other problems included the use of radios with transmission ranges that were too short to be useful (Some have claimed this was because the radios had the wrong crystals), the dependence upon a single road (which was bound by grass that was often too slick for tanks to traverse), a shortage of transport aircraft which required multiple airdrops over several days, and a shortage of boats. On the whole, it was terribly planned and a complete disaster.
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 05:10 PM
|
#9 | | Historian
Joined: Dec 2009 From: rangiora Posts: 2,832 |
What's this, beat-the-dog-when-he's-down day, is it? If Market-Garden had succeeded - and it very nearly did - we'd all be hailing Monty as a great hero. War is all about risk and Monty was prepared to try something different, at least. He was a professional soldier and although he may have felt slighted at not being given the overall allied command, it is simply preposterous to suggest that his personal feelings had any impact upon operational decisions.
| | |
| |
May 28th, 2011, 05:43 PM
|
#10 | | Cutting your grass
Joined: Mar 2010 Posts: 5,676 |
My old maths teachers was a glider pilot at Arnhem one of thefew to actually escape the whole ordeal. A fascinating chap if we completed our assignments before end of class he'd talk to us about his experiences.
His glider is one of the ones in the darker area on the left of the photo as he was carrying an extra jeep and over shot the landing zone as a result.
God Bless you Mr Poole where ever you are!!!!!
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |