Worst 10 officers of each WWII power.

SOE is heavily at fault for Market Garden, from failing to admit that the Resistance in Holland was run by the Gestapo from 1942 or so.
Eh? While it's true that the SOE fucked up in Englandspiel causing a great part of the Dutch resistance to be compromised, the big problem with Market Garden was that the Dutch warning were not believed because of that but were in fact giving solid information about the German forces present.
 

McPherson

Banned
The weather was bad in the UK for most of the operation. It delayed flights.

The weather was bad during air farce exercises when Brereton had his planes caught on the ground twice. Once was a wargame for which he was field jacketed and upbraided in the AAR as nincompetent, and the other was Clark Field of the Philippine Islands on 8 December 1941. No excuses exist for this guy. Worst air force general of the war. Where-ever he went and whatever he touched, he managed to ruin. Market Garden? Someone else could have found a way. because someone (Coningham RAF) else did find a way in contiguous and later ops under worse conditions .
 
Last edited:
I had a co-worker who is something of military history nerd even by our standards who summed up Montgomery this way, when I asked whether it was a good idea for the British to give him the position they did ; “was he a great general, not really, but he was good enough and more important he was the best the British got”. That’s of course hyperbole, but it’s also important to remember the Allies didn’t win because of the superiority of their officers, they won because they outnumbered and outproduced the Axis. Every single incompetent officer was a significant bigger problem for the Axis powers, as the Allies could far better afford the individual fuck ups, bad generals once in a while produced.
 
I hope people who read that thread, understand that I think Montgomery tried a risk that he thought could shorten the war. If I may quote me?

Montgomery said:





Now Browning has his own issues; even Horrocks had some bolos, but MG can be called one of those ad-hockeries where wishes were fishes and the planners used the wrong bait.

Now on the air farce side? (From Wiki)

Commanders and leaders
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
    Bernard Montgomery
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
    Miles Dempsey
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
    Frederick Browning
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
    Brian Horrocks
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_United_States_%281912-1959%29.svg.png
    Lewis H. Brereton < this guy...
  • 23px-Flag_of_Poland_%281928%E2%80%931980%29.svg.png
    Stanisław Sosabowski

I've mentioned that BASTARD before in this thread. Nobody has ever explained his appalling mishandling of the air transport turnarounds to my satisfaction. If you want a bozo in Market Garden, there is a good place to start.

Lots of blame for the ultimate failure of MG - I primarily blame the Germans - but I often look at a single instance and my mind boggles - when Gen. Gavin contacted Colonel Lindquist of the 508th Rgt (which had largely grouped up very quickly after landing earlier that day ) who appeared very surprised when the Gen asked him at 6pm on the first day "have you captured the bridge yet" - I imagine Gavin was equally surprised by the answer!

Lots of failure by all the Para Divisions both in planning and execution on that day but not even attempting to capture the principle Bridge that they had been tasked with capturing ASAP is stunning.

Had the Son Bridge not been destroyed earlier and delayed the Guards anyway then I can only imagine that this staggering failure to capture the Bridge at Nijmegen would have come under far more scrutiny than it appears to have done.

I get that the Heights to the East was effectively the German border etc but to not immediately storm the Bridge which was the principle task of the 508th and by extension the entire division...........
 
Had the Son Bridge not been destroyed earlier and delayed the Guards anyway then I can only imagine that this staggering failure to capture the Bridge at Nijmegen would have come under far more scrutiny than it appears to have done.
If the Germans had managed to blow Nijmegen bridge before it was captured, then the historical view of Market Garden would be very different.
 
He was a shit leader, too. All that psycho was good at was murdering and raping the corpses of children for the hell of it. There is no hell creative enough for him.
I strongly agree he was a complete nuthead and mass murderer, but somehow he kept his unit together.
He had to have some basic leadership skills because the Dirlewanger Brigade did not mutiny until the end of the war.
Or at least it didn't completely fall to pieces after their first battle, which i fully expected would happen given the quality of recruits.
 
Last edited:
I strongly agree he was a complete nuthead and mass murderer, but somehow he kept his unit together.
He had to have some basic leadership skills because the Dirlewanger Brigade did not mutiny until the end of the war.
I'm pretty sure that was because they were used for state terror rather than actual military action for most of their career, and after they got their noses bloodied by the Red Army they were immediately moved back to oppression work.

Also leadership by fear leads to poor unit effectiveness, but it can keep a bunch of sadistic thugs in line.

Either way, the Brigade's actual combat performance isn't particularly complimentary to Dirlewanger's skill as an officer.
 
Montgomery's best quality was the same as that of Ulysses Grant. He may have failed, but he didn't lose. The failures at Cold Harbor and Market Garden were certainly severe, but they didn't compromise the strategic position of either army.
 
I'm pretty sure that was because they were used for state terror rather than actual military action for most of their career, and after they got their noses bloodied by the Red Army they were immediately moved back to oppression work.

Also leadership by fear leads to poor unit effectiveness, but it can keep a bunch of sadistic thugs in line.

Either way, the Brigade's actual combat performance isn't particularly complimentary to Dirlewanger's skill as an officer.
The SS Sturmbrigade RONA was used in the same role in Warsaw as the Dirlewanger Brigade and they fell apart completely and got torn to shreds by Polish rebels.
RONA was dissolved shortly afterwards because they had deevolved into a bunch of looters.
I will agree that Dirlewanger was just a criminal given a uniform and free license to kill anyone the Nazis told him to.
And his unit stood no chance against regular military units.
 
The SS Sturmbrigade RONA was used in the same role in Warsaw as the Dirlewanger Brigade and they fell apart completely and got torn to shreds by Polish rebels.
RONA was dissolved shortly afterwards because they had deevolved into a bunch of looters.
I will agree that Dirlewanger was just a criminal given a uniform and free license to kill anyone the Nazis told him to.
And his unit stood no chance against regular military units.
Fear of a completely psychopathic leader can go a long way. Just ask Stalin's bodyguards.
 
Interesting. I always though that the Politburo bribed them to kill him, though I think your scenario is probably far more likely. :cool:
From what information I've seen, and given that he was already at risk for strokes, the idea of a poisonous little worm like Beria killing him fails the Occam's Razor test. Especially since Beria was on Stalin's "kill if he ever becomes an issue" list and I'm certain that Beria knew it. Safer to just keep his head down and get a steady stream of victims.
 
I'm pretty sure that was because they were used for state terror rather than actual military action for most of their career, and after they got their noses bloodied by the Red Army they were immediately moved back to oppression work.

Also leadership by fear leads to poor unit effectiveness, but it can keep a bunch of sadistic thugs in line.

Either way, the Brigade's actual combat performance isn't particularly complimentary to Dirlewanger's skill as an officer.

But it’s point was not fighting, it was state terror. Dirlewanger was a monstrosity even among other monsters. But that was why he was put in charge of the unit in question. He wasn’t some random commander, who began to behave in such monstrous manner or a incompetent idiot whose incompetence resulted in the disastrous losses. He was a monster put in charge of the worst of the worst, soldiers who was in general useless and who would have been a problem having in other units.

I don’t really think as such he belong in a category of the worst officers in the meaning of incompetent.
 
But it’s point was not fighting, it was state terror. Dirlewanger was a monstrosity even among other monsters. But that was why he was put in charge of the unit in question. He wasn’t some random commander, who began to behave in such monstrous manner or a incompetent idiot whose incompetence resulted in the disastrous losses. He was a monster put in charge of the worst of the worst, soldiers who was in general useless and who would have been a problem having in other units.

I don’t really think as such he belong in a category of the worst officers in the meaning of incompetent.
Jurgen basically sums it up.
The Dirlewanger Brigade was created for tasks that would make any slightly sane person lose their sleep forever or commit suicide.
Dirlewanger isn't really a military officer in the proper sense.
 

McPherson

Banned
Jurgen basically sums it up.
The Dirlewanger Brigade was created for tasks that would make any slightly sane person lose their sleep forever or commit suicide.
Dirlewanger isn't really a military officer in the proper sense.

It is academic to question the criminality or insanity of servants in a regime headed by the Berlin MANIAC. Point being that....


Crazy is relative in a whole sea of insanity.
 
You’re twisting yourself into a pretzel here. Do I need to post pictures of firebombed Tokyo. Hitler wanted to conquer Eastern Europe and possibly Alsace Lorraine. He went to war with Britain, because they came to the defence of Poland. I’m not saying that was immoral. Nazism is despicable. I’m just not going to pretend that the Attack on Mers-el Kebir was morally justified. I’m a patriotic Canadian. I wouldn’t be surprised if Canadians took part in the attack. It wasn’t morally justified.


There’s no evidence that Hitler wanted to destroy Britain. There’s no evidence that the United States wanted to destroy Japan. Neither the attack on Pearl Harbor or the attack on Mers-el Kebir can be morally justified in my opinion.

Not sure what Tokyo has to do with this, aside from nothing. Hitler wanted to dominate Europe, using the resources of the conquered and raped lands in order to do so. He was an untrustworthy megalomaniac who would have destroyed the UK had he been given the chance. Here's what was planned for the UK, had Sealion succeeded:

Thousands of people who the Nazis deemed to be enemies outright murdered.
Women kidnapped and used in Nazi breeding camps.
Men between the ages of 16-45 taken to the mainland and used as slave labour.
Britain's cultural treasures plundered and/or destroyed.

And this is what I can only remember off the top of my head.

Mers-el Kebir was justified. Britain was fighting a war of survival and needed to do what it could to protect itself and those who were fighting Nazism. The best way to avoid it would have been the French simply handing over their ships.
 
Top