What is Veeky Forums's thoughts on Monty's Folly? Was it a brilliant plan that almost succeeded? Or was it fatally flawed from the beginning?
My opinion is that while it's tactical objective (XXX Corps getting a foothold over the Rhine) was itself absolutely achievable, it's strategic goal (pushing out of the Netherlands and into the Ruhr and causing Nazi Germany's collapse by December) was not.
Even if 1st Airborne had successfully held Arnhem bridge until relieved or XXX Corps and the Polish Airborne successfully retook the Bridge and the city to allow 1st Airborne to escape intact, they could not have easily fought their way out of the Netherlands, let overrun the Ruhr Valley.
The political ramifications for the Cold War would have been massive if Nazi Germany had collapsed 5-6 months earlier.
>Soviet Union doesn't take Poland the rest of Eastern Europe >Allied governments-in-exile in Eastern Europe return to power >Berlin Wall/Iron Curtain is pushed further East >Germany isn't divided >Allied plans for invading Japan are expedited
Also, million of deaths that occurred in the final stage of the war would have been averted. The bombing of Dresden would not have occurred. The final million or so victims of the Holocaust (ex. Anne Frank, Elie Wiesel's father, Wilhelm Canaris) could have been saved. All those terrible fates might have been spared had the Race to Berlin been won by the Western Allies in December/January.
Matthew Ross
It was the greatest airborne attack.
Operation Market Garden, leading to the liberation of Nijmegen and its environs, started on 17 September 1944. It was a concerted action of American, British an Polish Airborne and Ground forces. After initial attacks by hundreds of heavy bombers, the airborne landings (Operation Market) started at about 13.00 hrs. around the cities of Eindhoven, Arnhem and Nijmegen. The task of the paratroopers, landing in the vicinity of Groesbeek, Overasselt and Grave was four-fold; occupying the Groesbeek heights, capturing the Maas bridge at Grave intact, getting hold of the bridges across the Maas - Waal canal (at Heumen, Malden and Neerbosch) and occupying the, strategically very important bridge, across the Waal at Nijmegen.
Lucas Ward
>The bombing of Dresden would not have occurred. Why do you single out this particular event when far more terrible bombings have happened during the war, such as Hamburg about twice the people died than in Dresden.
Adam Collins
The insane thing is the Americans managed to somehow despite repeated delays capture almost all of their objectives intact except for the Son bridge, which was blown up as the 101st Airborne tried to cross it, killing or injuring dozens of paratroopers.
A single battalion from 1st Airborne even managed to hold the Northern half of Arnhem bridge for almost five days before finally being overrun.
If the 101st had managed to reach Son Bridge ten minutes earlier, XXX Corps had raced directly for Arnhem after seizing Nijmegen bridge, or if Roy Urquhart had sent more men to race to the bridge rather than the 725 that actually got there. Who knows? Maybe Market Garden would have succeeded.
Ryan Reyes
Dresden has become the focal point of the controversy surrounding strategic bombing during WW2. Even today, many still it as a needless waste of life and property.
Also, Slaughterhouse-Five is one of the best books I've ever read.
You could make the same argument about Hiroshima and Nagasaki since the death toll and systematic destruction caused by Operation Meetinghouse (March 9th air raid on Tokyo) was far greater than either of those.
Joseph Martinez
Hamburg, while just as if more tragic with its loss of life simply has not generated the same level of attention as is given to Dresden.
Also, not to put too fine of a point on it, but Operation Gomorrah occurred in 1943, long after Market Garden.
Jackson Gonzalez
>long after
I meant before
Wyatt Jenkins
>paradrop onto the 2nd SS panzercorps >what could go wrong
ppl put emphasis on those bridges but thats ignoring the fact how this whole battleplan relied on a very thin thrust into the enemy expecting not to get counterattacked on your wings
Dylan Morgan
That is the legit question: what if that division had been somewhere else - say, northern Denmark?
Chase Smith
>You could make the same argument about Hiroshima and Nagasaki since the death toll and systematic destruction caused by Operation Meetinghouse (March 9th air raid on Tokyo) was far greater than either of those. Do you not know how numbers work? or do you just not know your history?
Adam Martin
wtf are you on about
Jaxson Moore
Fucking brits always looking for an easy way in, it was a miniature Gallipolli because they always fucking think theres a "back door into Germany"
Nathaniel Flores
>Dresden doesn't burn
Nah not worth it
Kevin Evans
Why did the US troops achieve nearly every objective they had while the British fell to pieces and failed to do almost anything right? Were they the biggest meme of ww2?
Zachary Ortiz
>Let's drop paratroops >Let's have an Armored Corps link up with them >Let's have the plan REQUIRE the link up in order to succeed >Let's have those tanks drive through marsh-filled Low Country >Over one road >Requiring several intact bridges
Hey Hans! It's Turkey Shoot time! Warm up the 88!
Jose Lewis
My brother parked a van on the lawn here, it sank up to the center of the wheels in the span of two hours.
How would a modern armored invasion of the low countries look if the roads were bombed?
Luke Parker
>"Thanks for the fun, Montgomery. After Falaise, we needed some cheering up."
Easton Thomas
Yeah our strategic mindset in world wars doesn't have the greatest record
Colton Fisher
>SOFT UNDERBELLY OF EUROPE!
Gavin Garcia
Hey, the invasion of Italy worked great. The plan as implemented didn't see it as a means of knocking out Germany. But it did bring Italy out of the war, forced the Germans to waste enormous amounts of men not just guarding their southern flank, but to take up garrison duties in all those places that the Italians had formerly been keeping occupied, as well as diverting forces to southern France, Greece, and Yugoslavia to prevent opportunistic invasions.
You can argue that bad operational activity (such as letting all those pocketed or enfiladed units escape) robbed Italy of some of its strategic impact, but it's much harder to argue that Italy itself was a bad idea, nor that such operational mistakes wouldn't have happened if they had gone with Roundup.
Chase Thompson
Enternal monty
Connor Smith
What do Brits think of him? Is he revered despite his failings or do they use him as a scapegoat when possible?
Levi Ortiz
Because the Americans actually 100% legit have God on their side.
Xavier Morales
>they always fucking think theres a "back door into Germany" They were right though, just looking in the wrong place. It's called "Wait until they elect a female Chancellor, claim to be refugees, and she'll let you right in."
Asher Thomas
Remember that the 'corps' at this stage was more like a battalion.
Noah Morales
well the russians thought of that and every single vehicle they have that isn't a tank is amphibious
Bentley Price
Made for a great movie
Robert Jones
>The bombing of Dresden would not have occurred. What's the bloody point then
Jayden Evans
Was the point of bombing Dresden to take out the single rail center or was it to murder as many German refugees as possible? That seems like an important distinction.
Chase Gutierrez
>had
Just like the Israelites, we've fallen away chasing evil pleasures. We'll bounce back tho
Aaron Robinson
America had easier objectives
Hunter Martin
tsss market garden? maybe day shoulda bought some more flowers and stuff then or whatever
Jaxson Edwards
Market Garden and Hurtgen both proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that on an equal playing field the americucks stood no chance against the infinitely superior axis forces
The wrong side lost WW2
Julian Lee
ay y y
Elijah Collins
>he fights wars on equal playing fields
Guaranteed to lose
David Roberts
>Soviet Union doesn't take Poland the rest of Eastern Europe What guarantees were that the soviets wouldn't just bumrush Germany and grab as much land as possible as soon as they surrendered?
Jackson Lee
lol
americans won their objectives in market garden
Caleb Perry
Three reasons.
First and most important, the 1st Airborne had to march eight miles from their drop zone to Arnhem bridge and they couldn't all just race to it. A significant number had to stay and hold their drop zones. As a result, 725 men were given the vital task that was supposed to be performed with 10,000. American troops by comparison, were dropped practically right on of their bridges.
Second, the British were at a technological disadvantage. British radio were notoriously poor and 1st Airborne had a complete communications breakdown by the end of Day 1. On top of that, British airborne troops' weapons such as the Lee-Enfield, Sten, and PIAT, were either evenly matched with their German equivalents or inferior. American troops on the other hand, had state-of-the-art M1 Garands and Thompsons, BARs, and Bazookas. This made the different in brutal house to house fighting and against German armor.
Third, both the 82nd and 101st Airborne had participated in combat drops and urban fighting during the Normandy campaign a few months earlier. 1st Airborne hadn't taken part in a significant combat since 1943. As a result, the troops of 1st Airborne were ill-prepared for the kind of fighting that would be required of them.
If the vital objective of Arnhem had been given to 6th Airborne (which had jumped into Normandy and had experience in seizing bridges) or even had been given to an American division (101st or 82nd), their combat experience and better equipment might have been enough to turn the tide.
William Nelson
500 miles and a lot of German troops who would fight on if the Soviets decided to try and make a break for Germany.
Also, such a move would put them in direct confrontation with the Western Allies
Jonathan Rodriguez
Operation Meetinghouse incinerated 15 square miles of Tokyo and killed 135,000+.
Hiroshima killed around 100-120,000 and destroyed a mere 5 square miles of the city. Nagasaki even less.
Josiah Foster
>thompson and BAR >state of the art Jesus, the misinformation is astonishing.
Samuel Adams
Not to mention that the armor in question was led by the British using tanks they weren't very familiar with nor fitting British armor doctrine.
David Howard
How is it astonishing?
Jayden Butler
Not him, but those are both WW1 era weapons. Calling them state of the art is hilariously wrong.
Zachary Reyes
The Thompson also had a longer life in the Commonwealth militaries than the American one. It was issued at about the same rate as the Sten in Europe and at an even higher rate in Africa and the Pacific.
Isaac Cooper
>Third, both the 82nd and 101st Airborne had participated in combat drops and urban fighting during the Normandy campaign a few months earlier. 1st Airborne hadn't taken part in a significant combat since 1943 Are you daft? The Paras got heavily stuck in on D-Day.
