Really Stupid Allied Plans

Precisely why I've never understood the people who list it as a stupid plan. It always seemed to me like something that had to be accomplished for Germany to win the war. The preconditions couldn't be established (at least in part due to poor execution, true), so it wasn't carried out. Simple.

A quick look at the Kerch map (all I've had time for), on the other hand, reminds me of Gallipoli, which does make the top ten on my "Dumb-Ass list."


Gallipoli and Dieppe involved the landing forces being heavily blooded (proportionally) and then withdrawing

Kerch involved the beachead actually being destroyed by enemy forces with all landing elements captured or killed
 
Here are a few of my thoughts on Allied nonsensical ideas.

The belief that 30-40 ton tanks (DD) would float in anything but totally calm surf conditions on Dday. I cringe everytime I read, or see video, of these things.

The entire fall 1944 Westwall campaign - Market Garden, Huertgen Forest, Aachen, Patton's Metz offensive, Vosges campaign. - all of which perpetuated stalemate across the "broad front" and wasted immense amounts of men and materials. Rather than butt their heads up against German defenses at many points, Eisenhower should have built up his resources and used them in a strategic "single thrust" offensive (much like Operation Cobra in Normandy) designed to break through to the Rhine. The United States Army was trained in the doctrine of combined arms mobile warfare as it had exhibited in the break out and pursuit from Normandy. Why were these tactics not used in October/November of 1944? Of course I'm allowing for the month of September to be used for logistical buildup.

Market-Garden - Should never have been attempted for obvious reasons we are probably all familiar with.

Failure of Allied intelligence to detect German buildup prior to Battle of Bulge. Only larger intelligence failure I can think of would be Macarthur's failure to take seriously the intervention of Chinese forces in Korea.
 
Re DD Tanks: The British managed to land tanks in the first wave and they fared relatively well compared. So to me DD Tanks are good intentions that were badle executed.
 
Didn't the DD tanks at Omaha land too far out? The British held them until the landing craft got closer in to the beaches before deploying. Check Antony Beevor's D-Day; it tells that story.
 
Didn't the DD tanks at Omaha land too far out? The British held them until the landing craft got closer in to the beaches before deploying. Check Antony Beevor's D-Day; it tells that story.

I heard that too but never could find a source that isn't wikipedia for that story.
 

Sior

Banned
Re DD Tanks: The British managed to land tanks in the first wave and they fared relatively well compared. So to me DD Tanks are good intentions that were badle executed.

The canadian's did too and they were instrumental in breaking out past the sea wall.

The American ship captains bottled it and launched 3 miles out to sea to avoid shell fire.
 
That's what Beevor says. A few DDs (very few) made it to Omaha, and a number made it to Utah.

I think the number on the first wave at Omaha was like 2 out of 32 surviving or something insane like that... bad combination of being launched too far out, pitching seas and taking mortar fire on their way in
 
I think the number on the first wave at Omaha was like 2 out of 32 surviving or something insane like that... bad combination of being launched too far out, pitching seas and taking mortar fire on their way in


Omaha - the wind was in the wrong direction and pushed the DD's sideways away from their objective, this in turn led them to present their broadside to the waves..hence.. flooded and sunk.. not a nice experience to say the least.
 
Actually the Maginot line did it's job splendidly. It wasn't meant to defeat the Germans on it's own but to keep them away from France itself and channel them into Belgium to prevent the loss of the French industrial heartland like in WW1.

The French industrial heartland in WW1 was around Lille - which the Heer took, and that was outside the maginot line in WW2 also.
 
Gallipoli and Dieppe involved the landing forces being heavily blooded (proportionally) and then withdrawing

Kerch involved the beachead actually being destroyed by enemy forces with all landing elements captured or killed

"Reminds me" In the sense of "Yeah, let's land on a peninsula where the enemy is sitting on the only exit and we can only attack in one direction. They'll never see it coming!"

I was aware of the difference in the end results; I only meant they were bad plans for similar reasons.
 
Top