Battle of the Bulge: Why were the Allies surprised?
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 07. 2016
- Why were the Allies surprised by the German Attack (Operation Wacht am Rhein / The Ardennes Offensive) in late 1944?
»» GET OUR BOOKS ««
» The Assault Platoon of the Grenadier-Company November 1944 (StG 44) - sturmzug.com
» Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon - see videos early (adfree) - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
» CZcams Membership - / @militaryhistoryvisual...
»» MERCHANDISE ««
» teespring - teespring.com/stores/military...
» SOURCES «
Germany and the Second World War. Volume VII.
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg. Band 7.
Pogue, Forrest C.: The Ardennes Campaign: The Impact of Intelligence. (Unclassified by the NSA in 2007)
www.nsa.gov/news-features/dec...
Cole, Hugh M. The Ardennes: Battle of the Bulge. United States Army in World War II
www.history.army.mil/books/wwi...
--Credits & Special Thanks--
The Counter-Design is heavily inspired by Black ICE Mod for the game Hearts of Iron 3 by Paradox Interactive
forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...
--Song---
Ethan Meixsell - Demilitarized Zone (the Irony :D)
#BattleOfTheBulge,#ArdennesOffensive,#WW2
"The gravest error was to asume they were facing a rational enemy...". I know it wasnt a joke, but that killed me.
Ice Cold It was the perfect summation.
Desperation breeds irrationality, so really it was something of a mistake.
Do nothing and Germany was guaranteed to lose. The bulge was a longshot, but better a slim chance than no chance at all. It was not an irrational counteroffensive.
@@patnor7354 Better to save you forces and create a meatgrinder stalemate à la WW1 to attempt to force the allies to the peace table then waste them on something destined to not succeed.
@@insertgoodchannelnamehere do you remember how world war 1 worked out for them?
1914: It is impossible to march an army through the ardennes. They did.
1940: It is not possible to march with vehicles in the ardennes.
They did.
1944: It is impossible to march with heavy tanks through the ardennes.
They march there with 70 ton tanks.
The allies assumed... :-)
venator5 one reason for the failure of this battle was moving heavy tanks through the Ardennes
@@ralphe5842 I don't think it pretty much affected anything. The soldiers didn't even received food rations. Let alone ammo and fuel.
2024: Russians cant invade through the Ardennes
*Russian 6th Guards Tank army waltzes through the Ardennes and completes their take over of Europe.*
@@CMDRFandragon 2052: China can't invade throug the ardennes
*China builds a high speed Railroad System and a 8-lane Motorway in 3 days*
I hate to be that guy, but I guess you could say that the Allies did nazi it coming.
;)
Had to read that a few times XD
I bet they were Führious...
When I groan out loud like a wildebeest gut struck with a boar spear, that's a mighty fine pun--and Para, yours drew a whimper from me as well.
Very Good!
I love that icon for surprise. The skull-in-a-box! Keep up the good videos!
thank you!
Your conclusion at the end is apt. The Allies assumed they were facing a sane, rational opponent, particularly one who would not risk his entire western front on an offensive that needed to be completely successful to avoid disaster--and any major success was already highly unlikely. Also, the Allied belief that German logistics were in such dire straits by that point in the war that they couldn't conduct a major offensive and keep fighting afterwards--which turned out to be effectively true.
I have long thought that "sane, rational" expectation was the key to everything Hitler did. Munich, the Ruhr, anschluss, Poland, the French attack, Barbarossa, all were nothing that an experienced, sane, rational politician or general would have done. But Hitler did not rise through the ranks either militarily or politically and is spontaneity was never ground down by years of conformity. Everyone expected sane, rational, conformity, and boy were they surprised, time after time. Of course, this also led to Hitler's many mistakes too. By the time his mistakes were ruinous, all opposition had been killed, cowed, or co-opted.
German soldiers took regular doses of pervitin - and would stay awake for days. Designed by Timmler pharmaceuticals it was designed to keep soldiers awake for 3-4 days.
The German offensive at the Bulge was the best thing that could have happened to the allies. Much better to fight the Germans on narrow roads than entrenched in fortifications. They didn't expect a major offensive because they knew it would have been suicidal, as it was.
The best thing that could've happend would be Germany pulling everything east
Agreed sir.
Ever since the American Civil War, it is a well know fact that fighting from prepared positions multiplies the strength of the defender. I have seen estimated ratios ranging from by a factor of 3:1 up to as high as 6:1. The difference being explained by changes in the effectiveness of weaponry.
Even with Germany's depleted resources, the fighting along the West Wall was some of the worst Allied troops faced during the war. In many cases, attacks were suspended so units could be pulled out to be retrained for operations against fortifications.
True understand that nazis leaders it was do or die a 1% chance of victory would justify the attack because many committed suicide when Nazis surrendered they died with Hitler et al
@@JohnSmith-qv6hp Excellent point. Hitler knew he was finished when the war ended so yeah, any chance at all was worth it to him. And he ordered a scorched Earth policy in Germany as the allies advanced (which was ignored). What did it matter to him if Germany was destroyed? He was dead anyway.
It really was a colossal blunder and strategic defeat.
This strategy is often used in sports. We call it the "Hail Mary", because the odds are against you, but you pray it works. Sometimes it does!
1940: naaah they wont attack through the ardennes
1944: naaah they wont attack through the ardennes xD
Somehow in 2030 or 2040: naah they won't invade the usa mainland through the ocean
@@diazkohen2149 Sorry, but USA already learned that lesson. When auletians campaing (No real damage btw) the Americans freaked out... No major meneace at that tiime, i know, but still USA soil, so they know its possible...
1914: Naah they won't attack through the Ardennes
Not all officers were surprised, Patton already had his staff draw up plans before the Battle in case he had to change direction and relieve Bastonge. I think he knew the offensive might happen but knew if an attack was launched it would loose steam because of lack of fuel.
My Dad was in the battle. He said all of a sudden "All hell broke out". He never used the word "hell". He also said he got away with his riffle and the cloths on his back. It took him a couple of week to get back to his unit.
Your final point kind of matched the thought I was increasingly having during your lecture; we weren't expecting our opponent to do something we considered to be thoroughly crazy.
We? Damn, how old are you?
Alright, you got me Tex. I was speaking in a more general, "We the American and allied military of the time" and not so much, "We, Me, and my buddies." I wasn't there, my grandfather was. I was involved more recent and different conflicts.
jonskowitz
Thought so, was just a joke. It sounds odd to me, but maybe because we, the descendants of nazi-germanies citizen get indoctrinated to not like being associated with our ancestors.
Eis Geflüster I think too many of my fellow Americans like to take way too much credit for things our grandparents did (much to my personal embarrassment a lot of times) so I understand where you're coming from.
Besides, we've got a giant psychotic oopma-loompa running for office right now so people in glass houses, you know? ;)
People in glass houses, except the stones are boulders and the glass is saran wrap :P
"Mein Fuhrer,we have reached Antwerp!" "Gut! Now we have a long line of tanks,and troops,on one road from Germany to the coast!There is no way the Allies will be able to fight their way across it".
The idea works a little differently. The idea is provisions such as food. Are distributed in short intervals. So if you surround a force and the nearest relief is a week away. Than you kill them or they surrender before they starve. It was nearly successful. By pretty much all accounts if bastone would have fallen. the scattered allied positions in the low countries would have soon followed. And even if the relief army that was quickly making it's way north continued it to would have been encircled. And they allied would have had no other concentrated force on the mainland. Or it would have stopped adanvcment and established a new perimeter around the buldge. And would be to thin to advance. Delaying the allied offenses by months. Wich would not win the war, but would give to time to improve Siegfried line. It's also noted that the Germans never fully commited to assaulting bastone. They wanted to allow them to run out of ammo, and food first. Because they left several divisions behind they had to halt advancment to the sea. The point is the size of the line d ont matter. What matters is can food and fuel make it through. Tanks get shity fuel economy, and men have to eat daily.
@@jefferyallen5030 whatever get a live
@@Potato79207 dumb ass.
You should be a Historian - very impressive explanation of the battles
thank you, I am a historian, well, at least I have a Master of Arts in History.
I think this was a classic example of people only seeing what they were expecting to see.
There is also a conspiracy theory regarding the Ardennes, that Eisenhower did know but did nothing to counter the attack because fighting the remaining German divisions out in the open was vastly preferable to fighting them in their defensive lines. In a way Wacht am Rhein was the Nazi equivalent of the Japanese banzai charges on Okinawa that actually weakened and shortened the Japanese defense.
If Eisenhower were that cool and cunning he would be one of the most brilliant commanders in military history. I think he was merely good and lucky.
No, almost certainly not. During the Allied counteroffensive to retake the salient, rather than trying to trap the Germans by putting the weight of their attack on the flanks, Allied forces assaulted the salient along its front point, which pushed the Germans back until the line was equalized. This was a more conservative and less risky operation that emphasized retaking ground over destroying fielded forces, and not in line with that hypothesis. Instead, Eisenhower rightfully concluded that a German offensive operation would have a high probability of failure and said failure would leave German forces unable to mount a more hardy defense that would delay the Allies even longer, and so he didn't prepare for the contingency of a counteroffensive.
That's unlikely because Eisenhower rejected Patton's suggestion that we deliberately let the Germans penetrate deeply in order to draw in as much of their army as possible-and then launch flanking attacks to cut them off.
If you haven't done it already, I'd love to see an episode on Patton's preparation for that attack and what his army did after it was launched. I get the impression Patton suspected an attack several weeks in advance, but thought it would merely be a spoiler attack to disrupt his own planned attack. He'd developed a response to that spoiler that he quickly modified to be a full-scale response. In short, Patton was ready for something and that proved better than the other generals who were ready for nothing.
I just read G-2: Intelligence for Patton by Gen. Oscar Koch, Patton's intelligence officer. His explanation was that the rest of the allied armies departed from their traditional doctrine of planning for whatever the enemy was capable of doing (capabilities) and instead acting on what we thought their intentions were. As this episode notes, the allied leaders simply didn't believe the Germans intended to launch an attack with such a little chance of success.
I love your inforgraphics. They really bring the commentary to life. Keep it up.
Really well thought out and researched. Thanks.
This was excellent! Great job! Thanks for illustrating a little-understood part of the war! Bravo!
They were so surprised because they had thought that they had beaten the Germans to the point where they couldn't even mount an offensive. The allies were caught sleeping, they were go if leave to many battalions. Germanys efforts on this war should be respected.
And great video! I love your channel!
As always, very well done. You put alot of research into these videos. Thank you!
Informative, well researched, and well presented! You always do a marvelous job at gathering and analyzing the information available!
(And who designs all the icons you use? They are perfect for the concepts being presented.)
Really like the visuals helps me understand better, keep up the good work
Thank you, for a very thorough and balanced report. Love the red-and-white icons you use to illustrate, simply, and call attention to, each point. Very effective for ADD viewers/listeners. You didn't surprise me, much. I knew of the lack of Ultra info. I knew the allies knew Germany was mostly beaten. You did a great job of clarifying the main points, and summing up a lesson for today: don't assume that we will always face rational actors. Merry 3rd day of Christmas. :)
Great work man, I discovered your channel through Binkhov and I have stuck to it. I appreciate your war effort and the will to stick to the facts and stating the sources. Keep up the great work, victory lies ahead !
Well put together!
Very precise and researched thank you !!! I enjoyed it
as always your analyses is spot on.
Great analytical skills and presentation! Just found your channel, subbed after seeing this vid!
Yep, the 1944-45 "Second Battle of the Ardennes" nearly succeeded for almost the same reasons that the first thrust through the Ardennes surprised Allied forces in 1940.
The security measures dictated by Hitler were extraordinary and derived partly for his extreme distrust of the officer corps of the Wehrmacht. One measure not mentioned here were changes to the codenames used for key operations, road junctions, rollbahns, etc. For example, the overall operational codename Wacht am Rhein was changed at the last minute to Unternehmen Herbstnebel, Operation Autumn Mist, a name used to identify a purely defensive plan from Himmler's Oberkommando Oberrhein. The name switch confused the Allies and the Germans.
Herbstnebel succeeded as much as it did primarily because the Ardennes was the weakest section of the whole Allied front facing western Germany. Eisenhower agreed with Bradley's troop dispositions because an attack through the Ardennes made little strategic sense. Germany used that route successfully twice, in 1914 and 1940, as a means to outflank powerful French forces arrayed along the Belgian frontier. However, a repeat of that strategy in 1944 made no sense to SHAEF because the threat to Germany was elsewhere. Hitler realized that and designated Antwerp as the objective, which if taken would cut the Allied supply lines and isolate the British. The problem was that Hitler did not appreciate the topography of the region. The "grain" of the Ardennes runs northeast to southwest. Hitler proposed to cut across the "grain", forcing his Panzers onto narrow roads with few good bridges. Dietrich's 6th SS Panzer Army was confronted with one deep narrow valley after another, which made the American defense very effective at slowing them to a crawl. In fact, the most effective American defense on the northern shoulder of the "Bulge" was carried out by small groups of combat engineers who destroyed bridges and created roadblocks at every opportunity. Jochen Peiper cursed them as the "verdammte Ingenieure" because their tactics literally ran his tanks out of fuel.
I believe that because of the shortened lines of communication, much of the communcations about the offensive were conducted over landlines, which could not be intercepted by Ultra, which relied on radio transmissions.
I enjoyed your video greatly as I usually do. I do think you forgot a factor that did help the allies. Patton's G2 section warned him that a possible German offensive could occur in the north thus jeopardizing his left flank in his operation tink. His G2 section provided many reasons why they believed this and Patton agreed thinking it would be the most logical thing for the Germans to do. He warned other allied commanders but was ignored. So instead he drew up three plans of advance to help fight back the battle in the north.
One of your best so far.
thank you
Dude, you're awesome. I really appreciate your systematic and thorough approach to analyzing these things. It's hard to say if we can ever know the truth about history but I think the way you go about is our best bet.
Just checked your lineup and don't see anything Market Garden related. I'd love to hear your thoughts on that one. Please keep doing these!
thank you! Market Garden etc. will come: more here due to timing issues: militaryhistoryvisualized.com/frequently-asked-questions-faq/
dude, i want to say your channel is amazing, but its more than that
thank you!
great video as always. But I have a Question, you mentioned in the beginning of the video that the battle of the bulge was the last major German offensive of the war. Is there a historic reason you aren't counting the Plattenseeoffensive?
my error, should have been "in the west".
+Belisarious: nope I mean "Seite", because it is a German source. For English sources I write p.
Milltary History Visualized: Thanks so much for the great work you do and the logic you present.
Excellent brief analysis.
I really like your content. No one else seems to be covering this information the way that you do. And I can tell it's well-informed and thoughtfully written. At the same time, I think you being under served by your visuals. The icons are thoughtful, but have less impact than if you were to show photos of your subjects or the locations. Have you considered using more photos?
yes, but photos would break the style, yet the greatest problem with photos is copyright.
Are you going to use photos and/or footage?
Yes, if they fit and if I have some where I don’t have to add loads
of copyright information in the description or video itself, this means
photos I took.
The reasons for this are simple, I sit in the European Union, which
has rather weak fair use rights. Furthermore, I am also located in
Austria, which is neighboring Germany, where lawyers have a strong
tendency for suing people about minor shit like that. Copyright
law-suits are expensive, because they require a lawyer. Also most photos
and footage I could use, was already used a bazillion times by others
anyway, so I couldn’t add much novelty anyway. Thus, the risk is not
worth the benefit. Although I have some ideas for footage videos in the
future, but I have so many plans and ideas, which are far “safer” too.
TIME!
militaryhistoryvisualized.com/frequently-asked-questions-faq/
Very Well Done!!!! This is a great study of holding onto wrong assumptions and conclusions.......costing many lives.
Nice Analysis. Thank-you!
Nice video. A lot of lessons to learn here about the pitfalls of confirmation bias.
I recommend axis and allies battle of the bulge for a fast paced German offensive game. As the jerrys, capturing supply and ammo whilst trying not to destroy is a great strategic yet difficult feat.
Excellent analysis thanks please keep going.
Always loving these
Thanks for this refreshing interesting insight. There is ,of course, more to say. But I love the parts about Ultra and such. cool stuff.
Can't really blame Germany it was the last chance they had and even if it succeeded the Russians still would have killed them I guess Its like a game of chess and Germany just knew it was going to lose flipped it's shit and started throwing chairs at the opponent whilst screaming in German about it's panzers being the best.They still would have lost the game of chess but it annoyed the shit out of the person who was getting chairs thrown at them.
Speaking from experience here.
the russians were getting killed in hoardes ... had dresden & bulge never occurred and a couple more million soviet troups would be pressed into the meat grinder ... probably the germans could have even defended the western border for another full year ... and that is a tought for speculation
@@sotabaka The kill ratio was about 1: 3 throughout the war, i dont see hordes of soviets dying.
Check out TIK's video
Sanjay Krishnan Nair yah that’s like a good offensive ratio
@Vödör Dárt ... the western alies were doing a lot of work to help the soviet offensive ... they even stopped their own ofensives to let the soviets get that sector of germany ...
@Vödör Dárt ... the soviet ofensive and the western landings were both sides of a TEAM EFFORT to squeeze the germans ... you cant guarantee that if the landings didnt happem the soviets could have pushed the germans ... in fact rhe greatest weapon of the soviet army were the total havoc the western alies were creating all over germany at the time ... usaf p47/p51 basically turned the llufftwaffle into minced meat and the factories were decimated by the bombing ... thats what saved the soviet ofensive in the east
A video I'd love to see on your channel is one showing the War in the Pacific during WW2 - It's tricky to find a nice, well presented source for this. I know the names of many of the island campaigns, as do many, but not when they took place or in what order, etc. Anyway, great stuff! Rock on!
The books by H.P. WIllmott are probably the best source of information about the opening months of the war.
It's interesting, but the U.S-Japanese relationship during the period means that most people just resort to posturing.
Great video!
Are you planing to do a video about "Unternehmen Greif"?
Nice explaining as always
Vielen Dank für die Videos, die wirklich interessant sind!
Really enjoying these Videos which I recently discovered......
The fact that Airborne troops were the ones in Bastone was one of the main reasons for the German defeat. Conventional units would likely have surrendered when surrounded by clearly superior forces. Paratroops are trained and expected to be surrounded thus the morale of the American forces were mostly unaffected by the tactical situation. If the German forces could have seized Bastone and completed their mission the outcome of the war would have been far different. Not German victory of course, but significant changes over what actually occurred.
The only allied army commander who was ready for a German offensive was Patton. He and his intel officer read the tea leaves different. Had operations staff have contingency plans ready.
Great class, thanks!
Nice Video !
My Father was a truck driver during the Battle of the Bulge. He found himself some "Trouble" when he couldn't tell the MPs who had won the last World Series. A Football question, he would have gotten that right!
I always enjoy watching your videos.
They are well researched and I always learn more about the topics that you post.
Lately I have been going back and learning about the world war 2 topics and I cannot believe the amount of people who died as a result of the war and horrible ways that they died.
I truly believe that if Germany did not attack Russian that the war could have gone very different.
I believe that the Russians lost about 26 million people due to the war.
That doesn't include all of the people that Stalin killed.
Thanks for posting your videos because I know that it takes a long time to research and put these together and the hard work definitely show's.
Greetings from Atlantic City New Jersey USA
The video clarifies that the Bulge was the last major offensive in the West, but I would argue it was the last major offensive of the entire war. The only offensive of note that followed in the East was Operation Spring Awakening, which involved similar numbers of troops but was far smaller in scale in most other respects including casualties and material losses on both sides.
Thanks for making that movie
battle of the oWo whats this?
Battle of the A levels
great video thank you
are you going to do a video on Bletchley Park? ~ good video and thank you for all your work
maybe, but not really into that (anymore). Thank you!
Great video
Thank you for the knowledge!! STAY METAL!!!
Wars hell, glad I wasn't there. On either side. Thanks for your hard work.
Great and insightful vid, as always. You might be just a little too easy on the Allies on this one, though. :) I've always been rather amazed that there was apparently no one at Eisenhower's HQ that said "Umm, General, are we totally, completely sure that we want to concentrate on the Low Countries and leave the Ardennes weakly defended, on the assumption that the Germans would just never consider mounting a major motorized thrust through there and then racing north to the coast to trap a lot of our forces? Are, uh, we sure they'd never think of that?"
i love the symbol for "surprise"
There should be a CZcams award for your channel
Haven't watched this yet, but does it mention that the senior allied cmdrs were 100+ miles from the front and that they were living it up in Paris?
Subscribed!
0:35 Your icons are awesome
Love the graphics! Some are quite funny.
You forgot to mention, that Patton did see it coming, and was able to stop it.
A nice presentation about a very important battle. Let us not forget that at the same time the Ost Front was fighting the terrible batle Festung Budapest which began in late October. So it is also quite likely that the allied decision makers believed Hungary to be the priority for Germany.
great videos
Excellent!
Good conclusion.
This kind if last ditch effort rately works. The big exception was the Tet Offensive that the North Vietnamese lost with most of their regular army destroyed. But the pilitical shock caused the media to switch their support away from defending the war.
MIght I say there WAS one more major German offensive after the Battle Of The Bulge? It was called (in English) Spring Awakening, in early to mid-March, 1945, on the east (Russian) front.
It's hard to decide if radio or ultra silence means that nothing is being planned or something very big and hush hush is in the works.
And here I thought it was all about the Ardennes being thought impassable for a major offensive that the Allies were pretty complacent about their defensive position. Heh. Thanks for the vid!
That may have been true in 1940 but shouldn't have been the case in 1944. However the poor road network did play a negative role in slowing the flow of German troops. If the Germans could have gotten through in full strength faster it might have made a difference. More likely, they just would have gotten further extended and lost even more heavily than they did.
For a good source of information on what the Allies had indications of, see chapter seven of Oscar Koch's G-2 For Patton. He devotes several chapters to the Battle of the Bulge and they include much of what was said here about complacency, the Germans plan not being a seemingly rational one, etc. It is a good book. Well worth the read.
I love how Monty basically just said ‘I’m not gonna work until the war gets fun’
You can't just worry about what your enemy should do or,intends to do but everything within his capability to do, and then worry if you understand his capabilities accurately. But that means you are looking at a wide amount of possibilities and not concentrating your preparations on what he is most likely doing.
The dispersal of American units in the Ardennes was a direct result of Eisenhower’s broad-front strategy. A British intelligence officer named General Strong went personally to warn Bradley of the German build up, Bradley said _"Let them come.”_ On hearing of the German advance on December 16, Bradley again dismissed the reports as localized attacks doing nothing. Strong suggested that the attack posed a serious threat to the US 1st Army, having knowledge of the German build up.
During the Battle of the Bulge Eisenhower imprisoned himself in his HQ in *Versailles.* He stayed there for more than 30 days without sending a single message or order to Montgomery. The only thing he did was initially to tell Montgomery to take control of the US 1st and 9th armies, on the advice of two British intelligence officers, General Whiteley and General Strong, and that Bradley's men should counterattack. That is all he did. Montgomery effectively was in control in halting and turning back the German advance. Parts of the US air force had to be put under RAF control. Patton was ordered up from the south with little resistance along the way only to enter Bastogne easily as the Germans had moved west. Patton's advanced stalled.
Montgomery would "lie" or tone down down the intensity of the war when reporting to Eisenhower. (Source: D-Day, Anthony Beevor) I would recommend Antony's series on specific operations or battles to everyone who like reading about the war. He has 4 books in the series about Paris, Berlin, Stalingrad and D-day. They are all excellently written
Maybe there was also a "wishful thinking" factor to the Allied analysis. Remember that the expectations were really high to end the war before Christmas in August/September, but resistance stiffened during autumn ; at the same time, Allied logistics was not that bright and many units were quite low on supplies (Antwerp was not quite available yet, the Normandy beaches were unusable anymore and other ports were far away / in a disastrous state).
Facing the prospect of a war longer than expected before, with fewer ressources to counter a backslash, maybe Allied intelligence guys did not want on top of that a counteroffensive. So they didn't find one.
Just speculating, would be curious to see a sociological approach of that question ...
jesus christ, its so easy to say “Why didnt they see it coming oh my gahwd“ when we now have so much information afterwards and can look back at it and see the dumb choices.
It's not an oversimplification to pinpoint only one factor. We know there's several factors involved and we're not dismissing any of them. But by choosing one and saying "this is the major factor" sparks a debate that in turn gets people interested in the topic. Among other reasons, it provides reason to go out there and analyse the battle to prove or disprove your argument and come up with their own arguments that others can discuss.
History is a debate. Feel free to disagree with me :)
it is almost always, we have a "word" for that mono-causally (which sounds awesome in German, but totally off in English). Especially, it leads to quite some people commenting on every ww2 video: economy (Pacific), Russian Winter (Barbarossa), etc.
The main problem is it does invite lazy thinking and the attitude that people can only hold one thought.
Let's put it this way: pinpointing only one factor as a challenge might be useful, but since a lot of people lack any nuance at all anyway, I think it just furthers lazy thinking. (And I intentionally didn't add "nowadays" cause I don't think it was much different at any given time in History.)
Depends on what you call rational? It was rational to assume in September 44 that the war was going to be lost sooner OR later. It would be more rational to make a risky gamble if you are going to lose.
Very nice, off the top of my head Luttich (can't do umlauts) was also a surprise to the allies. The allies seem to have failed to get inside the heads of German commanders on a number of occasions. There was also a lot of underestimating German abilities.
Had the French and Belgians defended the Ardennes instead of a line based on the Meuse with screening forces in the Ardennes, the Germans would have been stopped cold then as well.
The King of Belgium Leopold III's prevarication and lack of cooperation with France and GB in defense matters in a pathetic attempt to remain neutral, caused the fall of France, the resulting invasions in the East, and the deaths of millions. Not to mention the occupation of his own nation for over 4 years. Allowing allied forces to move up into Belgium during the phoney war period would have forestalled any attack, as the line they could form would be virtually impregnable due to terrain, rivers, and a shortening of the line it made possible.
i love this channel, not only because it's always a pleasure to hear someone who's wise but also I find your content very insightful, I love to hear about big losses and surprises, strategy involved and whole background for wars, I think there is so much to learn from them.
for example battle of bulge teaches to treat people like people, who they really are, not to underestimate them ('they won't attack us because generally we are in the offensive and they are pretty much literally starved to death) but also not to be caught in the 'thinking trap' and not to overestimate them ('they won't attack us because it's retarded')
oh dude if history could be a girl it would be this frikin' hot blonde girl that you fall in love with just from staring at hers legs.
By the allies’ own analysis Germany was in a position where it could either wait to be ground down to defeat by the weight of allied resources. or attempt something bold and unexpected. Under the circumstances the latter course actually sounds pretty sane to me. Desperate perhaps, but far from irrational.
I think all of the factors you mentioned influenced leadership to see what they expected to see because they were tired of the war themselves. This allowed them to assume the enemy was rational and they completely ignored the fact that a cornered enemy may do anything!
Henry Fonda was not there to see the signs.
I wish you'd expanded a little bit more on the idea that a rational opponent wouldn't risk everything on a gamble which wasn't likely to succeed. You mention the Allies thought Rundstedt was cautious but did they think that translated into a man who was not going to launch an attack? Montgomery was cautious and he launched Market-Garden!
Just wondering if you have had a chance to read Beevor's book on the Bulge. I've read his books on WW2 (the history of the war as a whole), Stalingrad, Berlin and D-Day but not the one about this battle yet.
Also do you have any recommendations on books which have been written by German/Axis WW2 military historians with a good English translation?
If I may offer a counter-argument: yes, the offensive (Herbstnebel - Autumn Mist) was unlikely to succeed without very good luck but the alternative to going on the offensive was to lose the war anyway. Better to try and in doing so regain morale from an offensive than suffer the slow pointless attrition of defensive warfare. We assume that great offensives mean great numbers of casualties for the attacker but that is not always the case - the faster an offensive succeeds, the more lop-sided the losses.
Forty-eight hours before the Son Tay POW rescue attempt was made, an in theater Army Intelligence officer who had seen two dissimilar intelligence reports went into his Commanders office and asked if there wasn't a major Spec Op being initiated within the next coupla days north of the DMZ. His CO had him restricted to quarters immediately for the next two days. You can find out anything even if you don't know what you're looking for, if you have the right info available.
Even though your accent is a barrier, I still watch your channel as your content is top notch. you really stand out as a great military tactics and history youtube channel.
Last Major German Offensive? No, not really, that will be "operation spring awakening" in Hungry.
sahil singh One of the last really. Rhineland was the last stop before Germany I believe & Germans won by pushing them back by 2 months. Allies didn't enter Germany until March 1945
Last Major German Offensive on Western front i guess.
Hungary
ooh, i've always wanted to learn about the battle of the boolsh.