Canada Ping!
Posted on 07/10/2013 12:48:20 PM PDT by Kaslin
The U.S. was the biggest loser of World War II.
The U.S. was the biggest loser of World War II.
The invasion of Italy forced the Germans to deploy troops who were desperately needed elsewhere. Without it, the Overlord could have failed because the Germans would be able to bring more resources to bear on the invaders.
3 of the BIGGEST BOOBS of WW II:
1. “Dugout” Doug MacArthur
2. Marc Clark
3. Omar Bradley
Canada Ping!
Care to elaborate?
Are you suggesting that we allowed ourselves to get suckered and act against our own interests?
Would a Soviet liberation of Paris been preferable?
Considering how Western Europe has degenerated, I wonder if they would now be on the road to recovery from Communism rather than degenerating into it.
I always thought the Germans were. Followed by the British.
The terrain isn't, for certain. But against Italian and Balkan military prowess, that's quite another matter. IMHO, too many worthy American lives were needless sacrificed rescuing the ungrateful French. Had we taken Churchill's advice and gone through the Balkans, much of eastern Europe might have been spared the trauma of Communism and we most certainly would have reached Berlin before the Russians.
We all keep in mind that 80% of Wehrmacht was destroyed by USSR. USSR lost about 35 million people and 14.5 million soldiers, over a million second lieutenants.
Allies committed ~18 divisions to Italy, and tied down a smaller number of less capable German division, but also managed to get Allied units and commanders significant combat experience that was later used in France and Germany.
At the time of the Italy landings, it was announced that Germany called off their offensive in kursk to counter the invasion of Italy.
Soviet Union (per Glantz who had access to Soviet archives) lost 14.5 million soldiers, and over a million second lieutenants. Who gets to be a 2nd lieutenant? A bright young man with potential for responsibility.
Omar Bradley was another fine general. Beloved by his men and one of the few who could get super-sized egos like Patton and Montgomery to cooperate.
Mark Clark? I won't disagree. He lost more men taking Anzio Beachhead than MacArthur lost taking the entire Pacific. And he was callous about it, too!
IMO the USA and Canada were the biggest winners, as they are the only major belligerents to come out of the war stronger (in economic and military terms) than they were going in. Britain, Germany, Japan, China, France, the USSR and Eastern Europe took years to recover while we almost immediately entered an era of unprecedented prosperity.
A lot of old men like that were murdered in German death camps. A lot of men like that were murdered at Kaytun Wood by Soviets.
Germany had over 42,000 detention sites that fed to the death camps.
I believe Napolean said - Italy is indeed like a boot. It can only be entered from the top.
LS, your take?
Reading of America’s successes of the past depresses me since we have no ability to do this under the current circumstances.
We don’t even have a space program with the shuttle any longer. At least Obama made them do a fly over of the shuttle on the way to the mothballs so that it would look like we were doing something.
No, doubt, MacArthur has a good case for being the worst general in U.S. history. But how about the U.S. general who landed in Italy, then waited for reinforcements? Can’t remember his name. And what about Friedenhall?
No, doubt, MacArthur has a good case for being the worst general in U.S. history. But how about the U.S. general who landed in Italy, then waited for reinforcements? Can’t remember his name. And what about Friedenhall?
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.