Help support TMP


"The Real Reason Hitler Launched the Battle of the Bulge" Topic


10 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the WWII Discussion Message Board



Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land

722 hits since 21 Dec 2018
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP21 Dec 2018 8:39 p.m. PST

"Winston Churchill called World War II's Battle of the Bulge "the greatest American battle of the war." Steven Spielberg engraved the 6-week ordeal on the popular imagination with Band of Brothers, which dramatized the attack on the village of Foy by three companies of the 101st Airborne Division, the Screaming Eagles.

Now, British military historian Peter Caddick-Adams is drawing on his years spent reconstructing the epic battle in his just-published book, Snow and Steel: Battle of the Bulge 1944-45. Speaking from a British military base in Germany, he talks about Hitler's reasons for launching the offensive, why crystal meth was the drug of choice for the Wehrmacht, and what lessons the battle can teach us today….."
Main page
link


Amicalement
Armand

Fred Cartwright22 Dec 2018 1:09 a.m. PST

I have read the book. It is a load of ball hooks. He is unable to provide a shread of evidence to support his theories on the sacred significance of forests to Hitler as a choice of the Ardennnes, or the political reasons for launching the offensive. Unfortunately for the author when Hitler announced the offensive to his generals he spent a considerable time outlining the military situation and his reasons for ordering the offensive and the choice of the Ardennes, all of which were military. It comes a cross as the author's desperate attempt to get a new angle on a very well analysed battle.

Personal logo 4th Cuirassier Supporting Member of TMP22 Dec 2018 2:37 a.m. PST

Yeah, I thought it was because a strike east could only drive the Russians back, whereas a strike west might drive the western Allies out, so obviously you do the latter.

Dave Jackson Supporting Member of TMP22 Dec 2018 6:32 a.m. PST

That one has been out for awhile now.

Legion 422 Dec 2018 10:41 a.m. PST

I believe similarly as 4th Cuirassier. Hitler, etc., et al probably made the correct decision in attacking in the Ardennes. It may have had a better chance of being decisive in combatting the Allies than the continuing fight in the East. But even at that many of Germany's higher ranking leadership didn't think the Ardennes offensive had much of a chance of being successful.

It was a gamble and like Hitler had done many times before in the past. He rolled the dice on a long shot. But as we saw what had happened in the latter years of the war, his "daring" did not workout.

donlowry23 Dec 2018 9:37 a.m. PST

It's kind of like playing the lottery. The odds of winning are lousy, but they're even worse if you don't buy a ticket.

Legion 423 Dec 2018 9:48 a.m. PST

Yes … As we see throughout the war Hitler took a number of risks. Some were more calculated than others. And as we saw, he kept rolling the dice and "winning". But like any gambler knows, "You have to know when to hold'm and know when to show'm." Or sooner of later you will "crap out" …

Old Glory Sponsoring Member of TMP23 Dec 2018 11:47 a.m. PST

His pants were getting to tight???

Legion 423 Dec 2018 2:39 p.m. PST

Maybe … evil grin

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP23 Dec 2018 3:00 p.m. PST

(smile)


Amicalement
Armand

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.