Antony Beevor: History and Hubris
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 05. 2024
- English historian Antony Beevor is credited with transforming the military history genre. He’s breathed new life into the popular understanding of World War II - holding cherished national myths up to harsh light and enthralling readers with his gift for storytelling.
For his troubles, he’s been knighted and he’s topped bestseller lists, but he’s also sometimes hit raw nerves at home and abroad. Beevor’s wildly successful 1998 book, Stalingrad, has brought him both the most praise and the most controversy. It’s currently banned in the Ukraine and heavily censored in Russia.
In his latest work of gripping military history, the inimitable Antony Beevor turns his attention to the battle sometimes known as 'Hitler's last victory' - the notorious Battle of Arnhem in the eastern Netherlands. It’s a story of hubris, folly and bad luck - a disaster for the British and their allies - on a grand scale. In Arnhem: The Battle for the Bridges, 1944, it’s a story told with rigour and flair.
Join the eminent and unflinching Beevor as he talks about book bans and battles, with host Michael Veitch, for our Mayhem series.
I'm a voracious reader on WWII and Beevor is one of my absolute favorites. His work is interesting to read and he also has the ability to make cogent, defensible arguments about decisions taken during the war without being (mis)guided by conventional wisdom, unless it happens to be correct.
What does Antony Beevor bring to any Second World War subject hat he spouts off about?
He was not in that war (or in any war). All the key people from the Second World War were dead, any all of the key information was released before ever started work.
@@thevillaaston7811
Beevor plays to the large lucrative US market, in telling Americans what they would like to hear, not what they should hear.
@@johnburns4017 he does all the same lectures in England and Europe
Research
@@garybloom4924
Research he is lacking on. The prime point on Market Garden was that he failed to home in on the prime reason why the operation was not a 100% success. That was the 101st were late, not seizing the Zon bridge - this was not fatal but added up - what was fatal was that the US 82nd failed to move immediately on the Nijmegen bridge.
They were so late, they failed entirely to seize the bridge with XXX Corps having to take it for them. A bridge that had 19 guards it. They could have walked on it.
The two failures by the 101st and 82nd meant that the Germans had a two day time window to bring in troops and armour from Germany. I am sure Beevor knew this.
Beevor regurgitated an old book. Why? Because Market Garden attracts so much interest. Look at the web on the operation. It creates so many comments on CZcams. So this is where some money is. But the prime money is in the USA in sales with such a huge market, so telling them the real truth will not sell. They have been brought up on a diet of the USA won the war - totally incorrect of course.
My favorite WW 2 historian is Beevor
Oh dear...
The "Stalingrad" audiobook was phenomenal.
The book on Berlin was gut wrenching.
And the fall of Berlin 2
Attended this last year .Brilliant evening .
A pity he makes things up.
Pity Monty scrubbed you too hard Burns
@@johnburns4017 Like what? Are you a military historian yourself?
@@dynamo1796
That is about right.
@@dynamo1796 Burns is a carnival barking berk ,who makes crap up and made other accounts to agre with himself
More Monty victims
Barrie Rodliffe joined 26 Sept 2013
Giovanni Pierre joined 28 Sept 2013
John Peate joined 28 Sept 2013
John Burns joined 07 Nov 2013
John Cornell joined 13 Nov 2013
TheVilla Aston joined 20 Nov 2013
Best Beavor interview iin a long time.
This is an absolutely compelling interview on a Story of the Battle in Arnhem during Operation Market Garden.
Its a pile of rubbish.
@@thevillaaston7811 You say that because your beloved Lord Monty failed with his ego driven plan and you just cant handle that, now can you!
@@robertwilkinson8421
What ego driven plan?
Even when i disagree with him at times, his arguments are always sound. A wonderful writer too. One of my favorites along with Andrew Roberts.
I'd just like to say that the Fallschirmjager landed more than 90 miles behind allied lines in Crete, my father was there with the famous 20th Battalion of the 1 Echelon of the NZEF, the most highly decorated battalion in the British Empire of WW2. Monte was thought of as a bit of a Pome Dick in Africa by the ANZACs. Monty was a strange little man, like Hitler he was a vegetarian, teetotaler, and a non smoker and probably batted for the other-side to boot! He was probably a Soccer Player!
My dad was wounded in Operation Crusader and later taken POW, he said that the Medical care improved dramatically once the German Medics took over after the British medics had to retreat. My dad escaped along with Major General Howard Kippenberger, the head of the NZ Division along with 18 others!
New Zealand got screwed in Operation Crusader, thanks to the Poms.
We never relied on British armor again..... we built our own armored regiments! And in Italy we had our own command and worked well with the USA!
Great story thanks for the contribution. Most of the tommies were fine,like any other army some heroes,some hellions most in between.Churchill and Monty should have been brought to heel sooner though. The deep jungle fighting hopping all the Islands was done by ANZACs and GIs. There was so much disease and virus fighting there malaria,dysentary,typhoid and such. The Japanese had never signed the protocols of Geneva Convention for humanitarian treatment in war. They were brutal like the SS or Gestapo and just as fanatical even more maybe
I'm not sure, but there's something in my recollection of the battle of Arnhem taking place in 1944, not 1994.
Beevor…..fabulously erudite and urbane.
The battle happened in 1994???? Am I the only one who picked that up? And Beevor did not correct him?
Sir Anthony i always read your books with excitement though WW2 history is my daily bread. respect from Russia
D
Jj4
Andy S
Why not read a proper history book instead?
@@thevillaaston7811 u need to read MANY books. And Beevor books are among them. And even after that u will hardly know history proper ..
@@andys4664
Beevor tells Americans what they want to hear, and what they have been conditioned to hear from WW2. What scuppered Market Garden being a 100% success, was that two US para units failed to seize their respective bridges, delaying XXX Corps' thrust to Arnhem. Quite simple. Read this book and try and get that simple information explained to you.
The forecast that massed armies would no longer confront each other didn’t last long
It took The Mont 85 DAYS ( !! ) to clear the Scheldt Estuary and make Antwerp usable.
Beevor has no bias.
Yes the plan was massively flawed however, the failure of Gavin's 82nd to go for Nijmegen bridge immediately on landing, ,Browning wanted him to guard the Grosebeck heights in case of an attack from the Reichswald, was crucial. XXX corps job was not to help take Nijmegen bridge but to cross the already seized bridge. If Nijmegen bridge had been taken when XXX corps arrived there is a possibility that they would have made it to Frost's men still holding the north end of Arnhem bridge.
XXX Corps reached Nijmegen on schedule, expecting to speed over the bridge to Arnhem six miles way. They found the bridge in German hands. XXX Corps then had to seize the bridge for the 82nd.
Browning was in the air when the 82nd men should have been moving towards the bridge - they dawdled not moving. When Browning found they had not seized the bridge he told Gavin to get it seized ASAP. Gavin said there were 1,000 tanks in the forest wanting to take his men east to counter. Browning had to agree, telling Gavin he he had to seize the bridge before XXX Corps arrived.
*Gavin took his men completely out of Nijmegen town,* after he held the southern approach road overnight. This allowed the 10th SS infantry to pour south across the bridge and into Nijmegen town itself. The town centre was easy defensive terrain being rubble after the USAAF bombed the town by mistake about six months previously.
The 82nd never got back into Nijmegen town or near the bridge. XXX Corps drove the Germans out, using 82nd men as well, and seized the bridge.
XXX Corps seized the bridge, which set them back 36 hours. As the forward Guards tanks moved over Nijmegen bridge, the delay was too long for the 1st Airborne troops at Arnhem, led by John Frost, to hold out., they capitulated. The Nijmegen bridge was seized and the 1st Airborne capitulated simultaneously.
@@johnburns4017 "Gavin said there were 1,000 tanks in the forest wanting to take his men east to counter."
I've always been a bit skeptical that Gavin actually said that, or at least that his meaning wasn't distorted in the retelling. I mean really... Had the Germans actually attacked out of the Reichswald with any significant amount of armor, lightly armed paratroopers wouldn't have been able to stop them from going where ever the hell they wanted to go. Gavin would have known that.
I've always suspected that he said something like "there *could be* a 1000 tanks in the Reichswald", meaning that he really didn't have any idea with the Germans might have in the forest, because it was a forest, so he thought he'd better take precautions.
Having said that, I agree that Gavin made a huge mistake by failing to secure Nejmegen and the bridge and making them the focal point of his defense. Capturing the bridge and a route through the town were the whole point of being there in the first place, and it seems to me that the town would have been a better place to mount a defense against armor than the open field would have been anyway.
@@silentotto5099
He did say 1,000 tanks were in the forest. None of his reconnaissance saw any.
@@johnburns4017 I know that comment has been floating around for decades, but in my mind it just doesn't add up.
A thousand tanks would roll over a parachute division without even noticing and everyone knew it.
I can't imagine that anyone would have approved Market-Garden in the first place had anyone thought there was the possibility that there was that much German armor in the area.
I mean... A thousand tanks... That's something like three full strength panzer corps. That's more tanks than the Germans used in the Ardennes offensive.
That's why I've grown skeptical of the comment over the years.
Burns your pants are filled again.The moron Monty never showd up like a real Field Marshall Model.
Remember Winston's quote, the hun are either at your throat or at your feet.
Beevor is very understanding to the American point of view.
(Regarding US shooting prisoners in the Ardennes: Maybe that's why we didn't execute Peiper for the Malmedy massacre.)
Americans can pick up any Anthony Beevor book on the war with confidence. They will know that none of them will contain a single criticism of the USA.
@@thevillaaston7811
Yes, he tells them what they want to hear, making a fortune in the process.
If an American wants a dose of reality, he should not buy Beevor or Hastings.
Peiper was burnt to death in the 1970s by an attack on his home. Same sort of thing.
A prime strategic problem for SHAEF in September 1944 was opening up the approaches to Antwerp and keeping it from German counter-attack - the logistics problem to supply all allied armies. It was:
*1)* Take Noord Brabant, the land to the north and northeast of Antwerp, or;
*2)* Take the Schedlt.
Noord Branant had to be taken first, as it was *essential.* It was taken with limited forces also sent to take the Schedlt. Market Garden had to go ahead regardless of any threat, actually being a success. To use Antwerp and control the approaches, the Scheldt, everything up to the south bank of the lower Rhine at Nijmegen needed to be under allied control.
The low-lying lands, boggy ground between Arnhem and Nijmegen with land strewn with rivers and canals, is perfect geography as a barrier against a German counter-attack towards Antwerp. Without control of Noord Brabant German forces would have been in artillery range of Antwerp, and with a build up of forces and supply directly back to Germany in perfect position for a counter-attack. Market Garden was the offensive SHEAF wanted to secure Antwerp, a prime port for logistics for *all* allied armies. It made sense as the Germans were in disarray, so should be easy enough to gain.
Monty added Arnhem to form a bridgehead over the Rhine. It made complete sense in establishing a bridgehead over the Rhine as an extra to the operation. You needed Arnhem for a jump into Germany. *Everything up to Nijmegen was needed if you wanted to do anything at all* - that is protect Antwerp and have a staging point to move into Germany. Gaining Noord Brabant, was vital, and was successfully seized. Fighting in the low lying mud and waterways of the Schedlt, which will take time, while the Germans are still holding Noord Brabant made no sense at all.
SHEAF got what they wanted from a strategic point of view.
Actually, it would have made total sense to clear the Scheldte and to ADVANCE in the same time towards WESEL, monty, and the Saar, Patton,...one river, the RHINE, not dozens, plus the polders....which IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED IN 1945, but with severe losses...in 1944 the real doors in Germany, Wesel and the Saar, were open...in 1945 allies paid a heavy price in lives for the missed opportunity.
@@radudiaconu2851
_"Actually, it would have made total sense to clear the Scheldte and to ADVANCE in the same time towards WESEL, monty, and the Saar, Patton,"_
Supplies dictated that could not happen. SHEAF wanted Antwerp operational and protected from counter-attack, that is why they pushed for Market Garden buffer/salient. Antwerp was key in the big push into Germany.
Burns you're funny,uneducated and living with a head wound - but funny
@@bigwoody4704
Rambo, a quiz.
Name the US general who *failed* to seize the Nijmegen bridge?
20 points for the correct answer.
Did Monty hold you under water while he blew bubbles? - and not the good kind.Reading Churchill and the Mongomery Myth,you'd break out inhives
Last bit was prescient with what's going on at the moment. Mariupol. Kiev.
If I were designing a World War 2 game, Operation Market Garden would be a German event card.
After the war Montgomery claimed he never lost a battle. His greatest failing was that he didn’t work well with others. He was the weakest of Eisenhour’s generals.
In Army / Army Group command, Montgomery won in North Africa, Normandy, the Scheldt, the Northern half of the Bulge, and the Rhine.
As a single division commander, Montgomery performed with distinction in trying circumstances in France in 1940.
As a front-line soldier, Montgomery fought on the Western Front during the First World War, in which he was awarded the DSO.
Eisenhower, Bradley, and Devers did not have a single day of combat experience between them. Eisenhower had not even seen a dead soldier until April 1943. None of them had been in the war in the critical years of 1940, and 1941. Eisenhower made a mess of his part in North Africa, the invasion of Italy, and his time as allied land forces commander from September 1944 to May 1945. Bradley missed a big opportunity in Normandy at Falaise, got himself sidelined in the Bulge, and made heavy weather of the final battles in 1945. Devers only ever commanded in the South of France sideshow.
Montgomery 'the weakest of Eisenhour’s generals'? I don't think so.
Hilarious that the host is saying that Market Garden was a hastily made plan and Monty wasn't like that, considering that Monty had already made the Sicily plan by breathing on the mirror of a toilet in Oran and drawing the map. That bit from the Patton movie was actually true.
What bit from the Patton movie was actually true?
@@thevillaaston7811 The scene I mentioned actually happened for real.
@@Perkelenaattori
What?
That Montgomery made the Sicily plan by breathing on the mirror of a toilet in Oran and drawing the map?
@@thevillaaston7811 Yes
But the sequence of events regarding the planning is well documented and not disputed. Montgomery rejected the first plan which would have seen allied troops landed in penny packets around the island. His plan was to concentrate resources in the South East of the island - as this plan was accepted.
If the film you mentioned was the 1970 film Patton, then you might like to note the following:
The scenes showing Patton watching a Rommel attack in North Africa and the scene where Rommel is in France after Patton took command of the US Third Army show events that never took place . Rommel and Patton never opposed each other in Battle. Rommel had left Africa before Patton engaged in battle with the Germans. Rommel was out of the war before Patton joined the battle of France, having been severely wounded by gun fire from two RCAF Spitfires.
The scenes showing Patton gloating as Montgomery arrived in Messina after Patton had already arrived there shows an event that never took place. Montgomery was not at the head of his troops when they entered Messina. He had already offered Patton the opportunity to take Messina in order to get him to return to the battle after Patton had cleared off to take the unimportant Palermo.
The scene showing Patton with Coningham as German planes attack shows an event that never took place. Patton was with Spaatz and Tedder.
There is no evidence that the Germans had any opinion of Patton during the war. Patton did not ever rate a German dossier before D-Day.
All of this was on record by the time that This film was made.
Monty never heard of CRETE.
Afterward, the soundman was executed.
Beevor tells a good story, but his facts are somewhat lacking. XXX Corps was at Nijmegen on time, the morning of Day 3 and only 10 miles from Arnhem. 82nd Airborne sent no troops to take the required bridge (defended by 19 Germans) all day, worried about a phantom army in the Reichswald (even though locals confirmed no masses Germans in the forest and it was too thick for armour). Only in the evening, a battalion (Warren) headed for the bridge, not getting there until near midnight - by which time 10th SS Panzer had crossed from the north. That is what put XXX Corp behind schedule and caused the failure. Beevor also claims the focus on holding the Grossbeek Heights was Browning's idea, not Gavin's - Even though Gavin in 45 stated quite clearly it was his idea, and Browning backed him up. Beevor shows no evidence as to why he claims it came from Browning. Hold the landing grounds, of course - but like 1st Airborne, rush at least a battalion to the key target of the whole operation. Frost made it (the other two were cut off.) why could the 82nd not do the same. If they had taken the bridge on the first day, XXX Corps could have crossed on the morning of the 3rd day, instead of fighting through Nijmegen. Beevor tells a good story, but not very accurately.
82nd did sent a reinforced company Sunday to take Nijmegen bridges, but after the germans launched wave after wave of infantry attacks exactly towards the Groesbeek heights and the DZ and LZ Gavin was forced to retreat troops from Nijmegen to defend the vital heights and the DZ and LZS; even Gavin engaged in bayonet charges to wipe out the germans. Later , 82nd were to be challenged by 2nd Falschirmjager Corp of general Meindl...a battle between paras. There were no armour in the Reichswald, because there were little roads, german armour was send by priority, first to Arnhem, Oosterhout and Elst, to defeat the paras and to block the advance towards Arnhem and then to attack the corridor at Son and Veghel and to suport german troops fighting near Best and Grave...Reichswald and Hurtgenwald will see later in the war very bitter fighting and huge losses on both sides. THE BIG MISTAKE, however, was twofold: not cutting the retreat of the 15th German Army of general Zangen from Belgium to Holland was one part, not believing Dutch resistance, Ultra reports and aerial recce photos, all pointing to 2 Panzer Corp stationed around Arnhem was second part. People 's vanity, very poor planning, forcing the plan on the actual situation instead of adapting the plan to THE SITUATION and huge mistakes got hundreds of thousands killed, mutilated, starved to death, executed and deported and prodeuced huge material destructions...for a pitifull salient that lead nowhere. That salient itself was also A BIG FAILURE: WHAT WAS THE PLAN AFTER DEFEATING THE GERMANS AT ARNHEM AND CROSS THE RHINE? NOBODY KNEW!!
Horrocks had said Guards Armoured would come over in full force and on time.Well neither happened and the Airborne foot soldiers were left to take on APCs/Halftracks with mounted MG42s and self propelled 20 mm Anti aircraft guns.A real Field marshall would have seen this coming but how could he as he never even showed up.The 82nd got attacked from the city,on the heights were the landing zones were and from across the bridge from Victor Graebners 9 SS .As Helmuth von Moltke stated“No Plan survives first contact with the enemy.” I like the way Mike Tyson said it “Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth.” Any way Monty had absolutely no plan "B" he was in fact a Moron who couldn't conceive how anything could go wrong.And IKE is culpable for not having the balls to tell the urchin to sit down and shut up.Montgomery and IKE own this not the soldiers who were misled
@@bigwoody4704 i have always asked WHY THEY STUCKED TO THE PLAN AND NOT MODIFIED IT...there were no major allied attacks on other parte of the front...that allowed the germans to actually TRANSFER troops and armour from all over in order to defeat botu airborne and land forces...which they managed to achieve, forcing the allies to modify the axe for later attacks towards Wesel and Saar...losing a lot of time and thousands of lives... all because fucking Monty wanted to be first over the Rhine
@@radudiaconu2851 this was a bad idea stem to stern.We have to understand the German Army seemed to be on the ropes,so a lot of Allied Officers had victory disease.But 3 things stood out,1st off the Ruhr was right around the corner from Arnhem and bringing men.materiel in by rail en masse was not a problem.
Secondly the Dutch themselves warned this was a wrong route it was elevated(for 64 miles) with no room for manuever and marshes on both sides.Any manuever was sitting ducks and obviously exposed and the result couldn't have been a surprise.
Thirdly as Admiral Ramsay wanted the massive port of Antwerp needed to be open and operational if a plan of this magnitude was to be sustained he was absolutely right.Even if the Allies somehow made Arnhem then what?they would be in immediate need of resupply of men/materiel/food/fuel/ammo etc.And the Gerries were there with an abundance of those things - it would have been Dunkirk all over again,Either surrender or be routed
@@bigwoody4704 All possibly true - but the 82nd did have the opportunity to seize the bridge shortly after landing. They landed at 1330 and instead of going straight fore the bridge (guarded by 19 Germans at that time) the entire division went to the unoccupied Groesbeek Heights and shelled the empty Reich Wald due to rumours of 1,000 German tanks massing there. Only at 1900hrs did Gavin send Warrens 1/508Bn towards the bridge - who started grappling with Germans at 2130hrs - and it was now dark. Since midday a trickle of reinforcements arrived all through the afternoon and the bridge was now well defended. Gavin has given several versions of why this was, and its is true that Browning agreed to his decision to prioritise Groesbeek - and is equally at fault. Nijmegen was the major choke point and the one bridge that HAD to be taken. Bad weather, plans falling to Germans, unexpected Panzer units, radio failures - every single thing that could go wrong did. But XXX was at Nijmegen early on day 3 (not late as Beevor keeps claiming) and if they could have gone straight over the taken bridge, they only had 10 miles to Arnhem well before the main build of up resistance. The fight in a now well defended Nijmegen was indeed the final nail in 1st Airborne's coffin.
And all the rest of it
wish mateyboy would stop interupting!!!!
Beevor is a good historian,I've read many of the same accounts by mostly British Historians BTW that concur.Britain had good men but Monty wasn't one of them
Problem with the British was that they lacked talented professional soldiers. There were a few but not enough. Also in a way there manner of organizing the military had not much evolved since Wellington.
@@roodborstkalf9664
Total rubbish. British had excellent commanders: amongst them, Alexander, Horrocks, Montgomery, O'Connor, Slim and so on.
Just about all of them had personal combat experience , unlike US commanders.
That's why they followed Monty into the channel and the crown had to come calling - again
@@roodborstkalf9664 On the topic of organizing, the British didn't really have that many issues. The only main issue they really had was in armored formations which had too much armor and not enough infantry. Phase 1 of Operation Crusader for example was a good example of this when XXX Corps got battered by the DAK because the tanks went about unsupported. They got it right later on though.
The Oracle has spoken……Big Woody!
Airborne units have no facility for housing prisoners.
Montgomery is the Gareth Southgate of generals.
Beevor is the Micky Spillane of historians.
Why didn't beevor mention the British airborne troops fighting on arnhem bridge and oosterbeek
Because he writes for Americans.
It was also a Eisenhower's failure.
...
As field commander, he should have stopped the madness of Market Garden..
But even Bradley told that Ike was incapable to read a map...
Why stop there? Let’s blame FDR and Churchill too.
Monty shyt the bed and to some extent IKE for allowing him out of his cage
@@bigwoody4704
Rambo, a quiz.
Name the British general who had to take command of two shambolic US armies in the German Bulge attack?
20 points for the right answer.
You rantings are getting worse,have them dial back the voltage
@@bigwoody4704
*BZZZZZZZT!* Wrong answer.
Rambo, the British general who had to take command of two shambolic US armies in the German Bulge attack was....
🎊🎈🍾 *General Montgomery* 🎊🎈🍾
Zero points Rambo. Zero.
There was much heroism and suffering in this poorly planned and risky operation.
I wonder how the Russians might have evaluated Market Garden had they been asked their opinion. Just asking. They were the experts. Why not ask them now how they guess it might have been seen at the time. It might be revealing. And if it was so poor a plan, who failed at their job in shit canning it as a proposal? Churchill? Ike?
Sorry but I do not think of the Soviets as experts in paratroopers landing in multiple places, marching and fighting for miles, and then holding territory. Did they ever have a parachute landing?
@@calsurf21 Oh it's wrong to condemn an entire nation that has successfully waged wars numerous times. Wellington was a noble; in fact Montgomery was not. Montgomery is a special case - obnoxious, vain, stubborn, pig-headed even. In general, British officers coperated wonderfully with American, Canadian, Australian, Kiwi and other officers.
@@Richard19551 good post for the most part.The British did have some outstanding commanders but like SA hinted they didn't enjoy the advantages of the Aristocracy/Gentry.O'Connor/Slim/Auchinleck/Simmonds come to mind.The AUK - who should have never been relieved after just winning a battle was very good,Winston screwed that up .Monty was propped above his abilities and accomplishmnets by the BBC and it's press.After sacking too many Generals the Brits were stuck with him because the masses thought him good.Although had General Gotts plane not gotten shot down we never would have heard of Monty
@@Richard19551
'Montgomery is a special case - obnoxious, vain, stubborn, pig-headed even.
You met him when?
@@thevillaaston7811 Funny guy - do you ask the same about those who dare to comment on Napoleon or Abraham Lincoln?
The British 1st Airborne made it to Arnhem bridge, taking the north end of the bridge, denying its use to the Germans. The other two airborne units, both US, *failed* to seize their assigned bridges immediately. If they had, XXX Corps would have been in Arnhem on d-day+1, before any armour came in from Germany. Game set and match.
The Germans would not have known what had hit them. The *12 hour delay* caused by the 101st not seizing the Zon bridge, meant the Germans for 12 hours had a critical *_time window_* to pour in troops and get armour moving towards Arnhem. The *36 hour delay,* on top of the 12 hour delay, caused by the 82nd not seizing their bridge at Nijmegen (XXX Corps had to take it for them), meant another longer time window for the Germans to keep up the reinforcing. The 36 hour delay created by the 82nd, meant a bridgehead over the Rhine was precluded, as the *two day time window* in total given to the Germans was far too long.
The British paras did their part in securing a crossing over its assigned waterway, the Rhine. The two US para units *failed* in theirs. XXX Corps never put a foot wrong.
@@calsurf21
_"I remember reading about British XXX Corps tanks "brewing up tea" ahead of US Airborne Units and refusing to advance"_
*Which is total tripe.*
@@calsurf21
_"There is a case to be made that there was blame to be found on both sides. "_
*No.* Blame in _execution_ of the operation is 100% on the US side. Of three airborne units, two were US. The US units *failed* to seize their assigned bridges.
@@calsurf21
The situation on the 17th, d-day, was:
♦ Heavy German forces on the Dutch-Belgian border - naturally as it was their front line
♦ A few German infantry north of Eindhoven.
♦ About 600 older men of a training unit at Nijmegen.
♦ Some scattered German infantry at Arnhem.
♦ The road from north of Eindhoven to Arnhem was totally free.
XXX Corps brushed aside the heavy German resistance on the Dutch-Belgian border, with *"remarkable"* progress as the US Official history states. All it needed was the three para units to secure their assigned bridges immediately, then XXX would have run up the road to Arnhem, crossing the Rhine on d-day plus 1. Operation successful. The British First Airborne secured their crossing, the other two US units *failed.*
It is very simple.
@@calsurf21
Tony Gosling, the bender living Hippy, has not a clue. His Bristol radio show on Market Garden was a joke.
@@calsurf21
The Nijmegen bridge was secured by the Grenedier Guards tanks and infantry. The Irish Guards followed up. *No* US soldier was on the bridge when it was seized. The 82nd who rowed over the Waal (20% of them were British sappers) were more of a distraction.
The tanks met the 82nd men 1 km north of the bridge in the village of Lent, when some of them kissed the tanks. Only *four* tanks crossed the bridge with two hit with some tankers killed and some taken prisoner. Sgt Robinson's leading Firefly knocked out two 88mm guns while on the move. One from the bridge starting to fire when just over the crown of the bridge. The 88mm and Robinson exchanged about six rounds each.
Only two tanks were operational - one attacked tank later joined them with only one man in it. Carrington's tank crossed about half an hour later, being under fire by panzerfausts. He stood at picket duty on the ramp of the bridge. The tanks were to ensure the Germans never took the bridge back. No other tanks could be spared from the fighting in Nijmegen town. Fighting that would not have occurred if the 82nd took the bridge immediately.
Antony you can tell that you to verge on pushing the truth a little too far at times. The British are one of your favorites.... they weren't nice men... the Brits that is!
I still love the Brits, but they were very guilty in starting WW1 which was the 1st half with WW2 being the second.
Britain, France and Russia/USSR ganged up against the country that had become the Powerhouse of Europe; Germany.
All these was later and who is the economic Powerhouse of Europe; Germany. So all that wasted evil envy from France, UK, USSR/Russia is just wasted Hatred!
And now look at Russia and its jealous hatred to its own Brother/Cousin Ukraine.
ROTFL
'- a disaster for the British and their allies - on a grand scale. In Arnhem'
Hardly. Arnhem was no bigger than a number of other allied setbacks at that time.
@Red Spinifex
What mitigated in the case of Arnhem was the stertching of already meagre German resources another 50 miles, the liberation of a fifth of the Dutch population, the ceation of a launching point for the assault on the Rhine in the following Spring and the hindering of the German V2 rocket campaign against British cities.
Or perhaps you do not think that the protection of British civilians was worthwhile?..
Ya that's why monty went for the bridges,the launching sites were not taken they just started firing on Antwerp and more citizens got killed than in London - but that's alright to Vile Asston who wasn't there. And of course the Gerries reprisals brought the horrible Honger Winter on
@@bigwoody4704
Rambo, a quiz.
Name the British general who had to take command of two shambolic US armies in the German Bulge attack?
20 points for the right answer.
I like quizzes Johnny
1)Are you Lucian?
2).So tell me, how come?How come Germans were able to ferry tanks and troops over rivers/canals , under the ever watchfull RAF and Montgomery/Horrocks could NOT do the same ?Not in September, not in October and not in November. Yet NOTHING was established in the rest of 1944 .Probably because unlike Monty ,Model was an actuall Field Marshall and didn't go on walk abouts
0
An otherwise interesting discussion but ruined at the end when Anthony implies the gilets jaunes are hard right. No need for that. What does he make of the French working men and women protesting against so called “pension reforms”. Are they hard left! Get real.
If Rommel was a genius, then Montgomery was greater and that makes a great bit of propaganda. Rommel was human and Montgomery couldn't even manage that, who would have stood in line and be impressed by such a prissy little public school toad? No one I ever met during my 60 years here. Cut the crap I'm drowning.
The finest army in the world from mid 1942 onwards was the British under Montgomery. From Alem el Halfa it moved right up into Denmark, through nine countries, and not once suffered a reverse taking all in its path. Over 90% of German armour in the west was destroyed by the British. Montgomery, in command of all ground forces, had to give the US armies an infantry role in Normandy as they were not equipped to engage massed German SS armour.
*Montgomery* stopped the Germans in every event they attacked him:
♦ August 1942 - Alem el Halfa;
♦ October 1942 - El Alamein;
♦ March 1943 - Medenine;
♦ June 1944 - Normandy;
♦ Sept/Oct 1944 - The Netherlands;
♦ December 1944 - Battle of the Bulge;
*A list of Montgomery’s victories in WW2:*
♦ Battle of Alam Halfa;
♦ Second Battle of El Alamein;
♦ Battle of El Agheila;
♦ Battle of Medenine;
♦ Battle of the Mareth Line;
♦ Battle of Wadi Akarit;
♦ Allied invasion of Sicily;
♦ Operation Overlord - the largest amphibious invasion in history;
♦ Market Garden - a 60 mile salient created into German territory;
♦ Battle of the Bulge - while taking control of two shambolic US armies;
♦ Operation Veritable;
♦ Operation Plunder.
*Montgomery not once had a reverse.*
*Not on one occasion were ground armies, British, US or others, under Monty's command pushed back into a retreat by the Germans.* Monty's 8th Army advanced the fastest of any army in WW2. From El Alamein to El Agheila from the 4th to 23rd November 1942, 1,300 km in just 17 days. After fighting a major exhausting battle at El Alemein through half a million mines. This was an Incredible feat, unparalleled in WW2. With El Alamein costing just 13,500 casualties.
The US Army were a shambles in 1944/45 retreating in the Ardennes. The Americans didn't perform well at all east of Aachen, then the Hurtgen Forest defeat with 33,000 casualties and Patton's Lorraine crawl of 10 miles in three months at Metz with over 50,000 casualties, with the Lorraine campaign being a failure.
Then Montgomery had to be put in command of the shambolic US First and Ninth armies, aided by the British 21st Army Group, just to get back to the start line in the Ardennes, with nearly 100,000 US casualties. Hodges, head of the US First army, fled from Spa to near Liege on the 18th, despite the Germans never getting anywhere near to Spa. Hodges did not even wait for the Germans to approach Spa. He had already fled long before the Germans were stopped. The Germans took 20,000 US POWs in the Battle of The Bulge in Dec 1944. No other allied country had that many prisoners taken in the 1944-45 timeframe.
The USA retreat at the Bulge, again, was the only allied army to be pushed back into a retreat in the 1944-45 timeframe. Montgomery was effectively in charge of the Bulge having to take control of the US First and Ninth armies. Coningham of the RAF was put in command of USAAF elements. The US Third Army constantly stalled after coming up from the south. The Ninth stayed under Monty's control until the end of the war just about. The US armies were losing men at unsustainable rates due to poor generalship.
Normandy was planned and commanded by the British, with Montgomery involved in planning, with also Montgomery leading *all* ground forces, which was a great success coming in ahead of schedule and with less casualties than predicted. The Royal Navy was in command of all naval forces and the RAF all air forces. The German armour in the west was wiped out by primarily the British - the US forces were impotent against massed panzers. Monty assessed the US armies (he was in charge of them) giving them a supporting infantry role, as they were just not equipped, or experienced, to fight concentrated tank v tank battles. On 3 Sept 1944 when Eisenhower took over overall allied command of ground forces everything went at a snail's pace. The fastest advance of any western army in Autumn/early 1945 was the 60 mile thrust by the British XXX Corps to the Rhine at Arnhem.
*You need to give respect where it is due.*
Burns only the Heavenly Father can help you now ! Monty drew a line in the sand then the Krauts pushed him off the beach
@@johnburns4017 How the fuck is Market Garden a victory? It was fiasco for the Allies. Also, if you want to know a about a real badass, the look at Norman Cota or "Mad dog" Mattis.
@@bradanklauer8926
In Hitler's directive of 25 September, ordering German forces to push the allies out of the salient created at Market Garden, he used the word *_success._* German forces *failed* to eject allied forces from the salient, in fact it was fleshed out.
@@bradanklauer8926
_'It is interesting to consider how far we failed in this operation. It should be remembered that the Arnhem bridgehead was only a part of the whole. We had gained a great deal in spite of this local set-back. The Nijmegen bridge was ours, and it proved of immense value later on. And the brilliant advance by 30th Corps led the way to the liberation of a large part of Holland, not to speak of providing a stepping stone to the successful battles of the Rhineland.'_
- OPERATION VICTORY, by MAJOR-GENERAL SIR FRANCIS DEGUINGAND , Page 419
_Speer recalled that the first rockets ‘fired at England’ were not, ‘as Hitler imagined, five thousand at one blow, but twenty-five, and then not, ‘as one blow but over a period of ten days. Twenty-six V2 rockets reached London during those 10 days, until_ *_Operation Market-Garden_* _forced the rocket firing troops far enough eastward thereby negating the required range for the rockets to reach England.’_
- A MOST ENIGMATIC WAR by JAMES GOODCHILD, Page 543 ‘
Beevor seems to be unaware of the battle of The Hague in May 1940, when a German Para division was dropped more then 70 or 90 miles behind enemy lines.
That was a sneak invasion by Germany of a nation which hadn't joined the war, and had no intention of doing so ... in other words, a neutral.
The German government had furthermore issued a guarantee of neutrality to the Netherlands
In this context, I think that's stretching the definition of "Enemy lines" more than a touch.
@@Gottenhimfella : even with the element of surprise the German Para division that landed around the Hague was wiped out (90% killed, wounded or made POW, loss of hundreds of planes). They suffered more or less the same fate that the British suffered four years later in Arnhem. Apparently the British didn't learn anything from this earlier battle around The Hague.
@@roodborstkalf9664 That's a fair point. However I don't consider that rehabilitates your insinuation regarding Beevor's putative ignorance, which was (to me, at least) not a fair point.
@@Gottenhimfella : I don't think Beevor is aware of the specifics of battle of The Hague, otherwise he wouldn't have said what he said. After reading his book on Arnhem, which by the way is very good, I watched a lot of the major CZcams videos of him and if I remember correctly, in another video he said more or less the same, so in my opinion it's no slip of the tongue.
@@roodborstkalf9664 94% to be precise. 400 German soliders killed, 700 wounded and 1745 captures. It seems the Dutch were underestimated by the Germans. A significant error.
Crete - the other notable airborne German invasion - was the other offensive less successful than expected. I think their casualties were higher in that one but by a smaller proportion to the size of their attack.
Beevor knows which side his bread is buttered. He makes a fortune reinforcing American beliefs that they had a good army in WW2 and were the *key.* He is telling them what they want to believe. Nothing could be further from the truth. Max Hastings does the same as Beevor.
Which historians give you your preferred version of history?
@@DiviAugusti
If you want to know about Market Garden, read Karl Magry, a Dutchman.
@@DiviAugusti
If you want to know about Monty, read Nigel Hamilton.
Check out the TIK channel, and his very detailed breakdown of Market Garden and Beevor's book. XXX was NOT late to Nijmegen, and the "stopping" for tea vs angry paratroopers is another fiction. 82nd failed to take Nijmegen bridge when it was virtually undefended and sat on Groesbeek heights all afternoon doing very little. A single Bn only set out at 7pm and ended up fighting the reinforced bridge defenders at around 9.30pm in the dark. Blame Browning or Gavin - some interesting conflicts exposed there, but that was the biggest single failure point of the whole operation.
@@HankD13
Blame *both* US para units. The 12 hour delay at Zon gave the Germans a *critical* window to send in reinforcements.
Despite the failure of the 101st, the operation still would have succeeded if Gavin had seized the Nijmegen bridge immediately. But XXX Corps had to seize the Nijmegen bridge for the 82nd, adding another 36 hours to the 12 hour delay. Too long - the Germans in that *two days* given to them poured in reinforcements.
Browning was in the air when Gavin's 82nd men should have been moving towards the Nijmegen bridge. He cannot be blamed. By the time time Browning was there and aware of the situation, the opportunity to easily take the bridge had passed.
The interviewer is really hopeless
His greatest book was STALINGRAD. The others are a rehash of other historians'
His book on the Spanish Civil War is also excellent.
@@Perkelenaattori Absolutely and read by a great actor. I realized that if the Commies had won, Franco would have been viewed as M. NICE GUY.
@ I have to agree. I've got the book version too but I recently got Beevors WW2 chronicle and Sean Barrett is excellent. I love how he does the accents of Welshmen, Scots, Americans when there's a direct quote.
Americans can pick up any Anthony Beevor book on the war with confidence. They will know that none of them will contain a single criticism of the USA.
No he has the nuts to tell the truth,Hastings,Barr,Hart,Barnett,Kershaw,Keegan ,have all stated these things.Revisionsit dweebs like Vile Ass here kick and scream when Monty's foot dragging and story telling are pointed out for all to see.Monty won in the Desert where he couldn't lose really with a 5:1 advantage in tanks and an all most 3:1 advantage in troop strength.and every other measurable advantage in supplies,food,fuel,etc;
Monty was a disaster in Europe at every stop,Britain had good soldiers but Monty wasn't one of them
@Red Spinifex
'I would add John Ellis to your list of British historians of the 2nd World War. His book Brute Force is excellent.' What are John Ellis's credentials?..
'Montgomery's reputation was manufactured by the British press.'
And you know this because?..
@Red Spinifex Spot on the problem was the public bought in but the reporters caught on after a while
@Red Spinifex thank you I'll order that when time permits
@@bigwoody4704
Rambo, a quiz.
Name the British general who had to take command of two shambolic US armies in the German Bulge attack?
20 points for the right answer.
That Pop-Shit, Sugar, sugar by the Archies sold millions of copies but nonetheless it was bubblegum. Beevor is becoming increasingly identified as a conman that writes nice looking books that look lovely on a glass topped coffee table. Pompous.
This guy is in cloud cuckoo land. He said Monty wanted to get across the Rhine before Patton in some sort of rivalry. What codswallop! Monty never gave a hoot at what the others were doing, especially a low general like Patton. Patton a low US three star general. Montgomery was over an army group.
That would put him on a cot next to yours at the home,which he most certainly isn't.Monty was worse at commanding than you are at posting - do you hear me Lucian?
@@bigwoody4704
Rambo, a quiz.
Which US para unit *failed* take the Nijmegen bridge with XXX Corps having to take it for them.
20 points for the right answer.
Yet NOTHING was established in the rest of 1944 .So tell me, how come?How come Germans were able to ferry tanks and troops over rivers/canals , under the ever watchfull RAF and Montgomery/Horrocks could NOT do the same ?Not in September, not in October and not in November..Probably because unlike Monty ,Model was an actuall Field Marshall
@@bigwoody4704
*BZZZZZT!* Wrong answer.
The US para unit that *failed* take the Nijmegen bridge with XXX Corps having to take it for them, was the... *US 82nd.*
Zero points Rambo. Zero.
Listen to Beevor an actual Historian unlike the revisionist carnival barker TIK and the special needs section from whence you evolved.And Puddles they call XXX Corp the Burns Brigade - for all the faffing,tea drinking walk abouts.Not their fault the rancid runt Monty hid away while everyone else fought.Even Carrington tried it for a second or two
- Model being an actual Field Marshall conducted a clinic in modern mechanical warfare.I would say Montgomery appeared helpless but the sad fact is he never appeared at all.Are you Lucian by any chance,Monty pffft!!! Splashing around when there was a war to be fought
Beevor says that the Russians would not have reached Berlin before the Allied if they hadn’t got half a million vehicles from the USA. To make a statement like this one must be in total knowledge of that these vehicles could not under any circumstances have been produced by the Russians themselves. Nobody knows this and it is a hypothetical question which has no answer since it didn’t occur. Therefor Beevor’s statement is outside what historians should go and just guess work. Otherwise he is a brilliant author who deals with facts.
But those vehicles only made up a substantial proportion of Russian vehicles in 1945.
Beevor is a good story writer. He is short on facts and worse on *analysis.*
The Russians made *tanks* the US forces could only drool at operating in their armies. Their ground attack planes had armoured underbellies. Implying they could not build simple trucks? Ridiculous. The German army advanced without masses of trucks - using horses. Would using horses have made the Soviet advance slower? mmmmm
@@johnburns4017
Agree. He passes judgement of people and their actions in circumstances he has no knowledge of.
@@johnburns4017 actually, hot shot, the Germans used a TON of motor vehicles....captured especially from the French Army...one of the reasons Stalin hated the french...a lot of German troops used captured war material from France, Holland, Belgium and Czechslovakia and Poland...the finns used armour captured from the soviets, nothing unusual
As a product of marketing Beevor is great.... as historian.... come on! You have the facts wrong in your book...
Which ones? Give referenced quotes and passages.
You are talking nonsense
@@roodborstkalf9664 ,I was surprised that he had Horrocks wounded in Italy. Horrocks was wounded in North Africa and wasn't involved in the Italian campaign.
Beevor is full of shit and writes for a chauvinistic US audience. He passes on judgement on events before he was even born . He was in and out of the army in less than four years.
No he isn't did John Keegan insrtruct you.He belongs to every accredited/accomplished literary societies for his contributions.Where Villa mops puddles at the Porn Shop
So ... hubris, arrogance and stubbornness are now called 'high functioning Asperger's' ...
I always wondered why the British supported the bombing of Iraq. It was of historical guilt. Shame.
What guilt?
@@thevillaaston7811 The way Brittish leadership unnecessary killed US soldiers ww2
@@Lasselucidora
Where, and when did that happen?
Probably when Ike sent troops to prop up Monty's many misadventures
Such an annoyingly affected accent Beevor has.
It’s not affected at all. And who died and left you in charge of decorum anyway?
@@Rohilla313 I don't know. Who did die? You tell me.
Historian? He is not historian, he is former military guy and salesman. Got huge support from UK officials to represent their point of view. His books is waste of time
his book is spot on slappies like you have an aversion to facts - go read the waterhead TIKs board if you like novels
Ivan
If Beevor got 'huge support from UK officials to represent their point of view', then those officials should ask for their money back.
@@thevillaaston7811 He has won all the literary awards and been knighted.And points out the truth that monty was a 1st rate 2nd rate commander .Beevor didn't even point out Monty liked lathering the lads. Is the last part why you are a Monty Fan? why Tell the congregation little villa how mum took some Jerry prisoners
Sir Anthony believes in Global Warming? He talks about the threat of a nationalist revival in Europe, but I've never heard him relate it to it's cause - Islam.
And a lot more...
Climate change has become the new religion , but what the proponents fail to convince is its cause . A Canadian Physicist and mining expert has calculated that if cars on the western roads were 30% Electric it would only reduce oil usage by 5%. He illustrates his maths by using barrels of oil as a standard, Every Wind Turbine , Solar Cell , Battery , every ton of metal mined has a cost . Which is conveniently overlooked by the politicians and media , who are all for pushing the illusion of clean energy. Many minerals , including copper vital for anything electrical , the yield from the ore is going down , Mark Mills explains all without baffling the viewer with too much ibfo.
Hey Skiiiiiip!