Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: the scotsman

Who do you think they used as the “elite assault troops” after the Somme? It was the Aussies and Canucks. And both Dominions were keenly aware of it.

Same in World War 2. The Brits were reluctant to use their own manpower in Normandy. The Brits were not as aggressive in the attack, and Monty used Canadians and Poles to close the gap at Falaise. After Falaise, Market-Garden was the last great offensive gasp of the British Army. Most British operations were done either with the stiffening of American divisions (like 104th Infantry clearing the Scheldt, 7th Armored near Venlo, and keeping 82nd and 101st in the line in Holland until late November).

Pu$$ies? No. But then again, they liked to have others do the dirty work.


19 posted on 01/13/2015 1:46:23 PM PST by henkster (Do I really need a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: henkster

It was the British who bore the brunt 1916-18. Yes, the Canadians and Aussies were brilliant at Vimy and other battles, but it was the British who attacked Cambrai, it was the British who bore the brunt of the Kaiserschlact and it was the British who bore the brunt of the 100 Days Offensive.

And it was the British army more than any other on either side that led tactical and technological advance 1916: new infantry tactics, use of artillery, the tank, air power. A fact modern historians are rediscovering as they shatter the lions and donkeys myth.

ww2: complete nonsense. The British took the brunt of the hellish battles (inc my grandfather) to capture Caen. Battles undertaken to draw the best German troops to the east so as to allow the Americans to break out. Which is always ignored when Americans criticise Monty and the British. We tied down the best SS and Army units, and almost all the German armour. During the Normandy campaign, units facing the US were moved to face the British!. And Monty used fresher Poles and Canucks because the British were frankly battered and bruised. Wonder why......

The swift post-Falaise British advance into N France, Belgium and S Holland is always ignored by US critics, dosent fit the ‘slow British’ myth.

Arnhem was not, by some margin, the last major British offensive either. You have not only the vicious battle for the Scheldt Estuary (heavily British), but the last massive offensive was in Feb 1945 and the horrendous battle for the Reichswald Forest.

A battle fought in flooded plains against THREE lines of German defence, inc the reserve meant to face the US 9th!. Which had failed to stop the Germans flooding the plain, due to the American defeat in the Hurtgen Forest, which was frankly and sadly nothing short of a slaughter, which made Arnhem look like light casualties and a masterclass in fighting.

You also have British offensives from Oct 44 to Feb 45, through Holland and closing up to the Rhine in Jan, all serious offensives eso the latter, Operation Blackcock, the learing of the Roer Triangle. And lets not forget that Monty turned XXX Corps south to help in the Bulge, 90000 British troops eventually fought in that battle. Not that you’d know it.

Read Charles Whiting’s book about the British in the Bulge battle. Its an eyeopener. It explains Monty ‘ignoring’ American generals (the famous Christ come to cleanse the temple controversy) and shows that Monty had more troops moving more quickly on the 16th and 17th than any US general, from XXX Corps to SAS scouts.

Yes, American troops under British command, like Simpson’s grossly underrated 9th army, took part and certainly helped the British. IMO they are too ignored by both UK and US historians and laymen. But to suggest the British offensives of Sept 44 to Feb 45 and beyond to May 45 relied on heavy US involvement simply cannot be supported.

And to make a comment that the British let others do their dirty work from 1916-18 and 1944-45 is not only nonsense, its offensive to the British soldiers who fought in all those terrible battles, as well as those who died. To quote one old Caen veteran in one of my books: ‘Do people realise just what we went through?...’.

Second battle of the Somme, Cambrai, the Kaiserschlact, the 100 Days Offensive, Amiens, Caen, Arnhem, the Scheldt, the Reischwald Forest. To name just some. We let others do our dirty work?. Utter crap.


23 posted on 01/15/2015 12:04:40 PM PST by the scotsman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: henkster

You are clearly a history nut like me, and well educated in WW1/2. Which makes your nonsense more depressing. I am used to the ‘we saved your ass’ stuff, when I get someone like you, I look forward to enjoying a discussion.

Funny you should mention the 7th, as we had to come to its rescue when it was attacked by Model and driven back. And tbh I am a wee bit tired of hearing how the 82nd and 101st had to fight as infantry for 56 days/8 weeks. The British 6th airborne, the Pegasus lads, had to fight in Normandy as infantry for EIGHTY FOUR DAYS. 12 weeks, 3 months. And they had to do it in the battles for Caen. These men were the first Allied troops in France, yet didn’t return home until after the Falaise Gap was shut.


24 posted on 01/15/2015 12:10:03 PM PST by the scotsman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson