battle of the bulge

[Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker]

@KarlGauss

Wow! Either seriously whooshed or humour deficient.

ETA: maybe both

Watch out. Don’t get him upset, or he might post a spoiler!

[standingwave]

@KarlGauss

Wow! Either seriously whooshed or humour deficient.

ETA: maybe both

This. Besides, Harrison Ford should have killed Hitler when he had the chance.

[Dale_Sams]

@Chihuahua

Wow, some people have no sense of humor.

Remember that next time you say “Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor??”

The chorus becomes more deafening every year.

[Dale_Sams]

@standingwave

This. Besides, Harrison Ford should have killed Hitler when he had the chance.

Question, does Jones keep the book? He could have sold it for a mint down the line.

[Redfishhunter930]

@stosh

Lets say the Germans did a lot better here. What were their plans ?
They would have been cut off and surrounded. Even if they captured a bunch of our supplies, they would be stuck there and it was only a matter of time til they were killed or captured.
Did they think we would give up or sue for peace ?
I don’t know how they thought they would arrive at the port without a great deal of losses after fighting their way there.
I know that Hitler was a nut, but what did their generals think?

This was an acknowledgement that Hitler’s original plan of putting most weight on the German right, favouring the Waffen-SS, had been a disaster, and that Manteuffel’s Fifth Panzer Army sector had always shown the greatest promise.This was not just because of Manteuffel’s fighting qualities and judgement as a commander, but because the terrain was far better suited and offered more alternatives to fast-moving armoured troops. Surprise was the major advantage the Germans possessed and that had largely been thrown away by the length of time the panzer formations took to bridge their river lines during the first couple of days. Had the Fifth Army possessed Dietrich’s bridging equipment, engineering assets and weight of artillery support, enabling it to bridge efficiently and effectively on 16–17 December, it might have made the Meuse, but even then would not have managed to get much beyond
Snow and Steel, Peter Caddick-Adams.

[AK84]

@Little_Nemo

That’s kind of a different issue though. You’re explaining the reasons why Hitler and his regime wanted to keep fighting as long as possible. But I believe the OP was asking why an offensive against the Americans was chosen as the means to keep fighting.

If Hitler’s goal was to keep the war going as long as possible, his best plan in late 1944 would probably have been to build up a fortified defensive area in the Alps and fall back into it. This was the possibility that Eisenhower was most worried about. If it had been done competently, the Nazis could probably have held out for another year.

The latest the Nazis could have held out was August 45. After that the were properly fucked. On an atomic level.

[standingwave]

@Dale_Sams

Question, does Jones keep the book? He could have sold it for a mint down the line.

“It belongs in a museum.”

[Asuka]

There was an alternate history book that had a successful Battle of the Bulge for Germany where the Germans take Antwerp and cause a second Dunkirk-like pocket, causing Roosevelt to have a heart attack and die, Eisenhower is killed by German commandos, and there’s a succession crisis between Henry Wallace and Truman which paralyzes the country. Germany doesn’t win the war but radically alters US history.

[stosh]

Asuka-Do you know the title of that book. It sounds like an interesting read.

[Jim_s_Son]

@Asuka

There was an alternate history book that had a successful Battle of the Bulge for Germany where the Germans take Antwerp and cause a second Dunkirk-like pocket, causing Roosevelt to have a heart attack and die, Eisenhower is killed by German commandos, and there’s a succession crisis between Henry Wallace and Truman which paralyzes the country. Germany doesn’t win the war but radically alters US history.

There is an interesting alternate history due to the fact that in 1940 Roosevelt and Wallace beat Wendell Wilkie and Charles McNary in the Presidential election. McNary died in February 1944 and Wilkie in October. So if Wikie had won (Roosevelt won in a landslide), then under the rules of succession the Secretary of State would be President.
A few years ago “World War II” magazine had an article on what a President Wilkie would have done in World War II. Pretty much the same as Roosevelt was their conclusion. Wilkie had supported Roosevelt early on but switched to the Republican party in late 1939 over the Tennessee Valley Authority legislation.

[kaylasdad99]

@DrDeth

Tom Cruise wasnt even born yet. :rolleyes:

Huh? He should have been over 160 years old by WWII.

He was born on the Fourth of July, after all.

[mlees]

My assumption with Hitler’s hopes for what became the Battle of the Bulge was a repeat of the May 1940 miracle. His panzers race to the channel, cut off a portion of the Allied army in a pocket to the northeast, and force the surrender of that force. This should somehow cause so much dismay and panic in the opposing high level leadership that the remainder of the [western] allied forces surrender or withdraw.

In retrospect, not bloody likely, but I don’t think anyone in the German high command expected France to fold in 1940 like it did, either.

[silenus]

Hail Mary passes are by definition last ditch prayers for a miracle. Unternehmen Wacht am Rhein was no different.

[dasmoocher]

@Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker

Watch out. Don’t get him upset, or he might post a spoiler!

The Germans lost?

[LSLGuy]

Shhh!! You’ll ruin it!

[Leo_Bloom]

@mlees

…

In retrospect, not bloody likely, but I don’t think anyone in the German high command expected France to fold in 1940 like it did, either.

Really? What had been the consensus, the preparation for the assault then?

I’m sure it was a pleasant surprise, but how do you think the lessons learned or not-learned-and-misapplied affected the subsequent campaigns?

[mlees]

@Leo_Bloom

Really? What had been the consensus, the preparation for the assault then?

I’m sure it was a pleasant surprise, but how do you think the lessons learned or not-learned-and-misapplied affected the subsequent campaigns?

I am assuming your referring to the attack on France in 1940. From the wiki: (Bolding mine)

Manstein Plan

@Wikipedia

When discussing his [Manstein’s] intentions with Lieutenant-General Heinz Guderian, commander of Germany’s elite armoured corps, the latter proposed to turn it into a more “Fullerite” strategy by avoiding the main body of the Allied armies and swiftly advancing with the armoured divisions to The Channel instead, to cause a collapse of the enemy by catching him off guard and cutting off his supply lines. It was thus Guderian who introduced the true “Blitzkrieg” elements to the plan, while Von Manstein had at first many objections against this aspect, especially fearing the long open flank created by such an advance. Guderian managed to convince him that the danger of a French counterattack from the south could be averted by a simultaneous secondary spoiling offensive to the south, in the general direction of Reims.

and

@wiki

However, in many ways, the plan was fundamentally changed by Halder. It no longer envisaged a simultaneous secondary attack to the south. Also, the “Blitzkrieg” elements were largely removed. The river crossings were to be forced by infantry and there would be a long consolidation phase during which a large number of infantry divisions would be built-up in the bridgeheads. The armoured divisions should then advance in a coherent mass together with the infantry divisions. There would thus not be an independent deep strategic penetration by the German armour.

and, finally:

@wiki

This resounding success came as a complete surprise even to the Germans, who hardly had dared to hope for such an outcome. Most generals had vehemently opposed the plan as being much too risky; even those supporting it had mainly done so out of desperation because Germany’s geostrategic position seemed so hopeless.

As I said earlier, I believe Hitler, while planning for an offensive at the end of '44, was hoping for another miracle. He even attacked through the Ardennes (again), the scene of his most memorable military triumph.

[Malthus]

The were some slight differences in the military situation between 1940 and 1944/45, though.

To my mind, one of the best factoids to demonstrate the hail-mariness of the 1944 hail mary, is that the Germans had to count on overcast conditions: they knew full well that, if the skies cleared, they would get pummeled by the overwhelming might of the Allied air force (& artillery), particularly having their spearheads and supply lines swarmed by clouds of P-47 Thunderbolts (which, indeed, is exactly what happened).

An attack that depends on key weather conditions continuing for days or weeks …

[engineer_comp_geek]

Moderator Note

@Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker

Watch out. Don’t get him upset, or he might post a spoiler!

Please don’t take pot-shots at other users in GQ.

[Leo_Bloom]

mlees thank you for your quick and concise reply.