Skip to comments.
December 16th, 1944: Battle of the Bulge begins
US Army Center for Military History ^
| 12-04-09
| Hugh M. Cole
Posted on 12/16/2009 7:15:00 AM PST by OKSooner
Today marks exactly 65 years since The Battle of the Bulge began. AKA "The Ardennes-Alsace Campaign" by the US Army, and called "Watch on the Rhine" by the krauts who planned it.
Probably not a lot of commentary required for Freepers...
Recommended additional reading: "To Save Bastogne", by Robert Phillips, veteran of the 110th Regiment, 28th Division. It describes "The Battle of the Bulge before The Battle of the Bulge", the delaying action beginning on this day that made it possible for the 101st Airborne Division and other units to have a Bastogne to go to.
TOPICS: History; Military/Veterans; Reference
KEYWORDS: bulge
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
To: C19fan
From what I understand, Bradley performed horribly in the battle.But he was popular with the media and was less threatening to Eisenhower that Patton was.
21
posted on
12/16/2009 8:37:26 AM PST
by
fso301
To: dfwgator
They stop the Germans and fought with great honor.
22
posted on
12/16/2009 8:42:01 AM PST
by
bmwcyle
(Free the Navy Seals)
To: OKSooner
My grandfather got his purple heart from a tank round during the St Vith fight. I'm sure he's reminiscing today.
US Army, 2nd Infantry, Indianhead
Second to None!
23
posted on
12/16/2009 8:42:54 AM PST
by
derekr44
To: OKSooner
My father was 101st Airborne - a paratroop - and was part of this particular battle. Never said much about it.
24
posted on
12/16/2009 9:10:56 AM PST
by
Noumenon
(Work that AQT - turn ammunition into skill. No tyrant can maintain a 300 yard perimeter forever.)
To: fso301
A real waste of German resources that could have been put to better use holding back the Red Army. Had the Germans actually reached Antwerp and held their flanks, little would have been accomplished aside from a lengthening of allied supply lines due to the loss of the major port city.
Plus the surrender of the American First Army, the American Ninth Army, the British Second Army, and the Canadian First Army when they were surrounded and ran out of supplies. Admittedly the Germans were
extremely unlikely to be successful in taking Antwerp, but there were no Allied-held ports north of Antwerp. A major Allied disaster had the Germans succeeded.
In the long run it would simply have resulted in the Soviets reaching the Rhine, instead of just the Elbe, but it's not like Hitler cared what happened after he was dead.
25
posted on
12/16/2009 9:31:25 AM PST
by
Cheburashka
("Allahu Akbar!" translates as "Kill me and stuff bacon in my mouth!")
To: OKSooner
26
posted on
12/16/2009 10:06:16 AM PST
by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: fso301
My contention is that if Hitler had studied Napoleon as carefully as he studied Frederick the Great, he would have never made the mistake of invading the USSR to begin with, especially without warm winter clothing for the troops. I cannot think of a more hostile environment, geographically as well as climate, to invade, control, and subjugate. Even vast territory BEHIND the German lines on the Eastern Front remained under partisan control as the area involved was so vast and most of the troops were desperately needed up on the front lines.
To: Welcome2thejungle
His fatal mistake was not executing Operation Sealion. Had England been invaded and defeated by the Axis, then and only then could sights be set on Russia. The technological advances in Germany weapontry that would have been at their disposal had Operation Barbarossa been postponed to 1943 or even post 1945 would have made attacking the Soviets less of a meat grinder.
28
posted on
12/16/2009 11:49:32 AM PST
by
mrmeyer
("When brute force is on the march, compromise is the red carpet." Ayn Rand)
To: Cheburashka
Plus the surrender of the American First Army, the American Ninth Army, the British Second Army, and the Canadian First Army when they were surrounded and ran out of supplies.Yes but I don't see that as having been any more possible than the chain of speculative if's concerning German armored reserves having a decisive effect at Normandy had Hitler not held them back believing the D-Day invasion to be a deception.
Had the Germans crossed the Meuse in force and captured every allied fuel dump intact, all allied aircraft would have been targeting the German spearhead in order to allow the threatened armies to make an orderly retreat from the Northen pocket, or for the redeployment of allied forces from farther South up to the front.
In the long run it would simply have resulted in the Soviets reaching the Rhine, instead of just the Elbe, but it's not like Hitler cared what happened after he was dead.
True.
29
posted on
12/16/2009 11:52:49 AM PST
by
fso301
To: OKSooner
2nd KIA in Munshausen Luxembourg Company 110th Infantry.
30
posted on
12/16/2009 11:54:41 AM PST
by
wordsofearnest
(Job 19:25 As for me, I know my Redeemer lives.)
To: wordsofearnest
31
posted on
12/16/2009 11:55:11 AM PST
by
wordsofearnest
(Job 19:25 As for me, I know my Redeemer lives.)
To: Cheburashka
Plus the surrender of the American First Army, the American Ninth Army Yes, my father, who was 19 years-old at the time, was captured at this time and would spend the rest of the war a in German prison. When the troops were liberated, he was in such bad condition that he had to be kept in a German hospital for several more months before being able to come home.
He did not discuss the details of this ordeal during his lifetime, other that to say that they had to lay their rifles down without ever firing a shot. I think that pained him more than his physical wounds. He died nineteen years ago.
32
posted on
12/16/2009 12:01:47 PM PST
by
The Citizen Soldier
(At the first of the year I feared for my grandkids... then it was my kids... now it's me.)
To: mrmeyer
After the Luftwaffe was defeated in the Battle of Britain, I think that made Operation Sea Lion a no go.
To: Welcome2thejungle
My contention is that if Hitler had studied Napoleon as carefully as he studied Frederick the Great, he would have never made the mistake of invading the USSR to begin with, Taking Russia was the Hitler's paramount objective. The Western war was just Hitler securing his flank.
especially without warm winter clothing for the troops.
When orders were that Barbarossa had to succeed in 1941, talk about provisioning for the winter was considered defeatist.
34
posted on
12/16/2009 12:10:23 PM PST
by
fso301
To: OKSooner
My uncle (mother’s brother) died in that battle. Left a wife and 3 children.
35
posted on
12/16/2009 12:11:28 PM PST
by
Ditto
(Directions for Clean Government: If they are in, vote them out. Rinse and repeat.)
To: fso301
I think Hitler would have ended up dominating most of Western and Central Europe for decades if he had followed his generals advice and not have invaded the East. Even the usually compliant and notorious yes man, Field Marshall Keitel, strongly advised against invading the USSR. Of course we all know Hitler did it for ideological puropses. But the military logic—well that’s another thing. Didn’t Hitler learn from WWI the difficulty of waging a two front war? We know he didn’t learn from Napoleon’s greatest mistake.
To: Welcome2thejungle
Right. Germany only had short to medium range bombers at the time with no long distance fighters for support. Focusing on bombing cities instead of airfields and radar was an idiotic move to say the least. Had they had the patience to amass a larger submarine fleet, with possible launching pads in France to strategically place missile sites things could have been much different. Thank God for their impatience.
37
posted on
12/16/2009 12:27:43 PM PST
by
mrmeyer
("When brute force is on the march, compromise is the red carpet." Ayn Rand)
To: mrmeyer
England has not been successfully invaded since 1066. A tough nut to crack to say the least.
To: fso301
Yes but I don't see that as having been any more possible than the chain of speculative if’s concerning German armored reserves having a decisive effect at Normandy had Hitler not held them back believing the D-Day invasion to be a deception.
I don't see it as realistically possible at the time, but you're the one who stated the following:
Had the Germans actually reached Antwerp and held their flanks, little would have been accomplished aside from a lengthening of allied supply lines due to the loss of the major port city.
The capture of Antwerp would not have been a mere lengthening of supply lines, it would have been
the complete severing of supply lines for about half of the Allied front-line troops on the West Front, to be followed quickly by food, ammunition, and fuel shortages to that half of the Allied armed forces. It would have been a disaster for the men captured in that gigantic pocket of
Stalingrad-like proportions, and for the civilian population trapped inside that pocket. Great Britain, Canada, the U.S. have never suffered a military disaster comparable to such a hypothetical mass surrender. And without food, ammunition, and fuel surrender would have been inevitable.
You seem to not understand the level of the disaster had the Germans reached Antwerp. Which happily, was extremely unlikely, and in fact never even came close to happening.
39
posted on
12/16/2009 1:20:16 PM PST
by
Cheburashka
("Allahu Akbar!" translates as "Kill me and stuff bacon in my mouth!")
To: Cheburashka
The capture of Antwerp would not have been a mere lengthening of supply lines, it would have been the complete severing of supply lines for about half of the Allied front-line troops on the West Front, to be followed quickly by food, ammunition, and fuel shortages to that half of the Allied armed forces. It would have been a disaster for the men captured in that gigantic pocket of Stalingrad-like proportions, and for the civilian population trapped inside that pocket. Great Britain, Canada, the U.S. have never suffered a military disaster comparable to such a hypothetical mass surrender. And without food, ammunition, and fuel surrender would have been inevitable.And we know what happened in Holland after the failure of Market Garden, mass starvation.
40
posted on
12/16/2009 1:23:08 PM PST
by
dfwgator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson