D-Day to Berlin - The Battle for France (Part 3 of 6)

[Paladin1649]

IF ANY AMERICAN tries to claim credit for turning the Battle of Britain, he hasn't studied. The Battle of Britain was a British/English victory. "Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." —W.L.S.C.

[bigjobs5000]

America is a marvellous country, I have been there many times and the people are kind and generous. What they did in WW2 cannot be underestimated. We owe them a lot. But.. Winning the battle of Britain was what saved Britain from being invaded, speaking German, and eating pickled Cabbage. British Radar, British planes, in the main British pilots- although hats off to all the many commonwealth pilots- Canadian+ and many others Poles+ It was a British victory. Also, who sank the Bismark? Patton??

[the82spartans]

@bigjobs5000 -- No, General Patton did NOT a pilot the Swardfish torpeto bomber that jammed the Bismarck's rudder leading to its demise by the Royal Navy. Besides, the US had not yet entered the war at the time the Bismarck was sunk. ; )

[cuzcatlan36]

pansy brits, that's why you need americans to lead the way!!!

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 Spineless Americans- usually to be found sitting on the fence so long, they have splinters in their arse eg WW1 & WW2- the US entered late on. The US has NEVER won one significant war without extensive help from allies. The Yanks certainly led the way in Korea- where they ran away from the Chinese hoardes & embarked on the longest retreat in the history of the US Army. Research the battle of Imjin & how the defiant actions of British 29th Brigade saved Seoul & a US corps. Idiot.

[cuzcatlan36]

@LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH well, if it wasn't for the "spineless americans" you guys would be watching harry potter in german and eating sauerkraut. TWICE we bailed you out of german hands, you should be on your knees saying thanks and making statues of patton and eisenhower and twilight's jacob! we rule the world baby, and there's nothing you pale ass, ugly ass weather, beattle loving brits can do about it. all britain is gotta do is jump as high as we tell you or we'll send the marines to teach you

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 Imbecile. The US 'saved' us from nothing. WW1- the US army barely did any fighting, Germany was on her last legs by the time doughboys arrived on the scene. WW2 Ever heard of the BATTLE OF BRITAIN? The defeat of the Luftwaffe smashed ANY possibility of a German invasion. In addition, they simply did not have the naval nor logistical assets to invade the UK. The Royal Navy was still the most potent navy in the world at that time. The US is on it's way out 1.4 trillion $ debt ROFL

[cuzcatlan36]

@LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH brit, please! we own your crappy little island, what's a coconut island like yours being ruled by an old ass woman, get some pants and get some men in there. no wonder you guys are a bunch of "queens" if we wanted too, we would invent another attack on the US like the 9-11 attacks and say britain has weapons of mass destruction and we would take over your sorry island and turn it into a supermarket! You got royal shit, we sell you all the weapons and we train you, US baby

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 You don't own anything imbecile. Your country has no depth, culture or history of any significance, hence you are all neurotic about claiming to be 'Irish Americans,' or having links to Britain. Our history stretches back over 1000 years. You do not train ANY British forces, that's why they are the most professional services in the world- none of US gung-ho macho bullshit- which evaporates the moment bullets start flying. We have apolitical royality- you have morons like Bush ROFL

[cuzcatlan36]

@LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH a 1000 years of being ruled by women, i wouldn't brag about that! all the culture belongs to us, all the movie stars, all the music, all trends start and end here, you guys spend millions of euros going to see our super stars and movies. We're just the best, we win all the medals in competitions, and we control everything your old queen decides. What we say goes, if we tell you to send some troops to afganistan, all you need to ask is how many! we're your pimp, you're the ho

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 What culture would that be then? Elvis & hotdogs?! What an imbecile. What are you talking about 1000 years of being ruled by women? Your comment highlights your incredible ignorance & stupidity. The Queen does not decide anything halfwit, the monarch is APOLITICAL- go and look it up. Americans fall over themselves to worship the Royal family at every opportunity, I suppose they envy the fact that we have a corruption free head of state as opposed to opprtunistic, corrupt politicians

[cuzcatlan36]

@LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH You brits actually maintain those lazy ass "royals" so they live all in palaces and crap! but hey, it's your crappy island! man, our culture is known throught the world, we invent stuff that everybody in the planet follows like star wars, twilight, michael jackson, elvis, westerns, war movies, all the bad ass special effects movies are done here. we make awsome burritos and slurpees! we make awsome video games and papaya hot dogs! Uhmmm!!!

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 The cost of the 'lazy ass Royals,' is a fraction of the revenue they actually generate in terms of tourism- from grovelling Yanks only too willing to doff their caps! It's a business you buffoon & the UK is laughing all the way to the bank! The US 'invented' Elvis, whilst the British are responsible for minor things like railways, radar, jet engines, television, telephones etc etc ROFL Special effects? Most of the people involved in Hollywood special effects are BRITISH!! ROFL

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 Gee whizz, I guess I have to concede that you are right about culture. The US has given the world so much, Elvis, Mickey Mouse, Hotdogs & Nike trainers. Whilst we Brits can only offer crass things like William Shakespear, Wordsworth, Elgar, Constable and a myriad of inventions from railways to the jet engine etc etc. Aside from the Romans, no other nation has contributed more to the modern world & it's infrastructure than Britain.

[cuzcatlan36]

@LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH shakespeare stole all his works from other people, that crap is borring anyway! Romans you aint sir, you guys were the cave dwelling barbarians the sophisticated latins conquered. believe it or not, elvis and micky mouse bring so much revenue to this country you will be amazed. Not only have we conquered the world, but we entertain it too!!! and get insane amounts of money for it!!!

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 The US exists with a massive debt of 1.4 trillion dollars & it is increasing all the time. Don't you watch the news? You have lost your AAA rating. Your space programme ended with the last flight of the shuttle- Obama effectively pulled the plug on funding future projects. China is now the world's number two econmoy & it is predicted that they will surpass US GDP within 10-15 years. You are in decline yet most of you are too stupid, myopic & blinded by patriotism to see it.

[cuzcatlan36]

@LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH bahh! all that economy crap is just talk, so what if we have economic problems, we got enough resources and technology to last us another two thousand years. twilight is better than harry potter, and your commedy is so lame!

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 Brave if naive talk lol. The US has passed it's zenith of power & you are now on the slippy slope of decline. In the late 60's, the US was able to fund a massively expensive space programme AND a hugey expensive war in Vietnam with 500,000 troops on the ground. Look at you now- NO space programme, and the scale & size of your military effort in Afganistan is a fraction of what you put into Nam. You are a busted flush, yet you are too blinded by gung-ho patriotism to see it.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

@cuzcatlan36 There is NOTHING US Marines with their 13 wks of training can teach the Royal Marines with their 36 wks of basic training- the longest conventional training course in the world. SF? We invented them. Delta Force is a mere copy of the SAS. The US is yet to win ONE major war by itself, every war you have fought, you have done so with extensive support by allies. In Korea, at the battle of Imjin, British 29th Brigade saved Seoul & an entire US Corps from being cut off & destroyed :)

[bikepeddlar6]

hey im just curious. what theater did the royal marine corps serve in during ww2? did they serve with the USMC in the pacific war? or did they not exist yet? or what? im an american but i greatly admire the RMC

[BertFicuselastica]

@bikepeddlar6 Royal Marines served in all theatres of the WW" in a variety of roles. The history of the RM starts from before the Napoleonic wars and although in 1922 there was pressure to disband it, it was very much in existence at the start of the WW2. Marines served on major warships in the Royal Navy, manned landing craft, flew naval aircraft, provided men for both regular infantry & commando brigades, and an armoured support group. RM fought in Burma, not sure it ever served with USMC.

[COUNTVLAIDMIR]

...world war 2 especially in europe is one is my favorite subject whenever I like to discuss about the war...I'm Filipino, so I can't really argue with you about how General Montgomery is just taking care about his image or not, what i can say is that this video will tell is a great way to learn more about the Campaign in France...I get tired discussing about the Japs who invaded our country then, cuz I can tell how they fight through the stories of my grandpa...

[thoumaturgica]

Yes, the US had their head in the sand like an ostrich but the English people were woefully unprepared. For years Churchill warned about the growing threat of Germany and Hitler but he was a voice crying in the wilderness. England got their butts whipped and handed to them on a platter....silver platter; that is, until her offspring in America came to her aid. Thank God George III lost the war because America saved England.

[zero00tolerance]

Monty was just an overated leader there's nothing glory about him.. under his command he has unlimited resource from the powerful American backing up. He has tanks he has planes he has troops what does Rommel has?

Rommel was a true inspired leader who fought for his men it's too bad he fought for the wrong side. Dont ever compare Monty to Rommel

[bluestar66677]

the tiger tank was a feared weapon

[thoumaturgica]

90 days after Victory in Europe Day the English voted Churchill out of power! This failure of the English to have sufficient military preparedness seems to be a trend in the nation.

[Max3851]

@thoumaturgica the English invented radar, and the inigma machine and though hugely outnumbered held the germans off for several years before the us finally woke up.

[Frikkz1]

@thoumaturgica they wotet churchill out because he was good PM during war time but he was not as good during peace just like patton really those 2 men need war to floresh.

[UrgeisIntense]

After seeing this , black people shouldnt be allowed to call americans / british / canadians and other racist cause they would be dead now anyway if they wouldnt have done what they did.."no am no racist :)"think about that..

[dannyj646]

liverpool shut up, the war ended over 60 years ago, everything's going to be ok

[EasyCompanyAirborne]

What a terrible general Montgomery was. He was just like the callous WW1 generals who didn't care about their men. So many colonial soliders died under him.

[james331933]

Eisenhower was worse

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

That is complete and utter BS! Clearly you have no grasp whatsoever about Monty & his attitude towards casualties! He was heavily influenced by the huge losses of WW1, he had fought as a junior officer in that conflict, so it was a huge influence over his thinking. He was extremely concerned to keep losses to a minimum. He was often accused of being, "over cautious," by American officers. They failed to appreciate his primary concern was to win with minimum losses. You are talking utter tripe...

[EasyCompanyAirborne]

Liverpool. Montgomery only cared about his image. He was like most English leaders. The Americans leaders were professional, concentrating on the job of winning. Look at General Clark. He concentrated on winning Rome, and did so, and with minimal losses. The Germans did win easily against the British colonial troops (most of the English troops stayed at home) . Montgomery always considered the colonials as inferiors and expendibles. The English were kept for the final victory battles.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

Again, you are spouting utter tripe. It is your opinion & is completely SUBJECTIVE. The American leaders were professional?! What a hoot! If any general in WW2 was obsessed with his image above all else, it was Patton! Patton was completely self obsessed with his media image eg his two pearl handled pistols- very professional- NOT. You are talking utter bollocks about MG 's view on the Commonwealth troops. Perhaps you would like to quantify your remarks with 'evidence?'

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

Are you going to try and argue that Patton, the wearer of two pearl handled pistols (HOW PROFESSIONAL-NOT!) with his loud mouth & penchant for assaulting soldiers lying their hospital beds was a consummate professional?! Please do try, I would appreciate the comedy aspect to any such argument! MG, like any other General, or human being, can be criticised for certain character traits. He cannot legitimately be criticised for being cavalier towards the welfare & casualty rate of his own men.

[crocfme]

Monty's experience of the carnage of ww1 propogated his conviction never to squander the lives of his men unnecessarily. He cared about his men more than most senior commanders.

[legendarytoyou]

@crocfme well as General Lee once said you have to be willing to destroy the thing you love. War is war, there WILL be loss, there WILL be death. It's not a question of IF its a question of WHEN and how many. I'll admit that I would love nothing more than to launch a defensive campaign to keep as much of the army intact as possible but I do realize as a commander I would have to order my men to die for home field advantage. It sucks I know but that's sadly war.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

"Montgomery only cared about his image. He was like MOST ENGLISH LEADERS." (YOU MEAN "BRITISH," MONTY WAS ANGLO-IRISH, LIKE WELLINGTON) Could that be an outrageous stereotypical remark before my eyes? Where is your 'evidence' to support such a generalised comment about British leaders of men?! Your comments are subjective, biaised, ill-conceived and lack any vestige of supporting evidence! You should research what US General Clark aka Clark of St Vith ad to say about Montgomery during the BoB...

[EasyCompanyAirborne]

Liverpool. Everyone is subjective - and that includes you and me. I am personally not impressed with Montgomery for all the reasons I mentioned. You like him a lot, and are entitled to your (subjective) opinion. Either of us could be right or wrong.

[puchy110]

@LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH if Monty could defeat Erwin Rommel by his own command at El Alemein, I'm sure he was more than a overglorified beret Brit

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

Utter drivel. Clearly you know nothing about Montgomery to post such complete nonsense. He was obsessed with MINIMISING casualties due to his experiences on the Western Front 1914-18. Perhaps you should read a biography on the man, as opposed to posting your entirely unfounded & subjective opinion. It is quite apparent that you are completely ignorant of the facts.

[EasyCompanyAirborne]

Montgomery was a glory seeker. Eisenhower and Bradley had to reprimand him. Montgomery had a low opinion of other English Generals such as Alexander, who acted more professionally than Montgomery.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

Once again, you post subjective opinion without any vestige of evidence. EG You state that Alexander, "acted more professionally than MG." Perhaps you would like to elaborate on that comment with some hard evidence. I find it interesting, having read numerous books on the man by eminent military historians, that none of these PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS & ACADEMICS, have tried to proffer the same arguments as yourself. He is usually criticised for being over bearing in manner & arrogant at times.

[EasyCompanyAirborne]

That is ridiculous. Patton was reprimanding a coward. The English would have had executed him immediately. The English commanders were totally ruthless and did not put up with any cowardice. Have you seen "Paths of Glory"?

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

Wrong. The soldier that Patton slapped had shell shock. The incident caused such an uproar, he came close to being sacked. In addtion, it is hardly appropriate behaviour from a General. Secondly, WW2 was fought by BRITAIN, not ENGLAND. Please refrain from referring only to the English. It is akin to me referring to US forces only as Texans. Have you never heard of the Scottish, Welsh, or Northern Irish?! In WW2, the British did not execute cowards- clearly you watch too many films......

[EasyCompanyAirborne]

You said it! "It is hardly appropriate behaviour from a General". The English Fieldmarshals would order the man's execution and get some low ranked orderly to carry it out. Many men were shot in the British Army for shell shock. It was considered cowardice in the face of the enemy or dereliction of duty. Patton was the bravest of the brave, like MacArthur and Clark. These men could not tolerate cowardice. A decent man would have said sorry to his General and rush off to the sound of the guns.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

Really, where do you get your twaddle from?! In WW2 NO British soldiers were executed for cowardice, that ended in WW1. Most of those executed in WW1 actually had shell shock-a condition that was not formally recognised until the latter part of the war. Any execution was carred out by an appointed firing squad-not a General's orderly. We are talking specifically about WORLD WAR 2, your point is totally irrelevent because it is not pertinent to Monty.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

I am still waiting to read your evidence that supports your opinion that Patton was 'more professional.' Pattons rep was largely sealed by the greatly over exaggerated drive thrugh three very weak German divisions to relieve Bastogne. As already pointed out, the significance of Bastogne has been totally overblown for political reasons IE to bolster US morale after taking a terrible drubbing. The intial stage of BoB was an unmitigated disaster for the US army.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

I prefer to glean my knowledge of military history from reading quality books, EG "Six Armies In Normandy," by John Keegan- an internationally recognised masterpiece. Films are rarely an accurate representation of historical fact- the US made "Battle Of The Bulge," with Robert Shaw is a classic example of Hollywood bilge & drivel......No British soldier was executed by firing squad in WW2 for 'cowardice.' Your comment does not stand up.

[101division44]

The soldiers in Paths of Glory are French Damnit...Not British....

[EasyCompanyAirborne]

101division. True. The English and French have the same intolerance to soliders. A general can have them executed on the spot. American generals aren't that tough.

[waffenss088]

Michael Wittman had a guts

[Unit888]

if the german tank crews were fully trained with tigers...

[culistus]

i have made myself the same question years ago, but now i realise that would be bad for both sides.for the allies the destruction of hundreds of their tanks, and for the germans would be bad because the tiger suffered numerous mechanical problems, and they were not so easy to made. i don't know that's my point of view.

what do you think?

[smoky90210]

At 4:03 was the theme to the documentary "The First World War"which I found to be very interesting to the situation.

[Zmp72883]

Some of the comments I see here make me ashamed to be an American. War is terrible but, some wars have to be fought. To hell with the cowards remember and honor the brave vets.

[Bullettube]

Too many people playing video games. In real combat there is no "restart button",, no 2nd chances, when you're dead, you're dead. The number of people who remember the horrors of the 2nd world war is dwindling, soon, only second hand info will be available and even that will be inaccurate.

[Justiceforall1958]

Its sad at 2:47-4:17 it simply reflects the battles that the Germans and British fought in WW1 and the terriable attrition and causilities that both sides sufered just for a few yards of French mud

[1CalebNoah]

this video keeps messing up

[cdishmo]

Why would any rational thinking sane person participate in a war? Why would any rational thinking sane person start a war?

[Zmp72883]

The reason the allies entered the war was to keep a highly irrational insane person (Hitler) from taking over the world. None of those who gave their lives to prevent this from happening wanted to die but, if everyone shared your cowardice thinking you would be trying to "rationalize" with fascist Nazis who would probably gas you for being such a horrendous coward.

[Bullettube]

The Nazi weren't just Fascists. They were fanatics and self delusional about their destiny. They were the worse kind of enemy, and the world is better off without them. Unfortunately, there are still uneducated nuts out there who want to re-fight, or at least re-write history.

[aurora2k]

Monty is shit compares to Rommel we all know it. The only reason Rommel lost in Africa was because he was out guns, weapons and air covers. If it was equally forces then that would of been a different battle in Africa.

[ajgraham43]

Yeah ok aurora2k.....Thanks for the rant, but have you ever asked that Nationalistic brain of yours why Germany ended up being out gunned, out numbered, and out bombed etc???.....(I mean its hardly a weakness on our behalf is it)? Its the same old story that started the 1st world war....Germany thought it can take on everyone in Europe!!.....But then got HAMMERED....and now she blames everyone else....Just like they blamed the Jews for losing the 1st world war.

[aurora2k]

Ok first of all im not a Nazi as u might

Secondly My comment above only to mentioned about the battle tatics between Rommel and Monty how history overrated Monty for being a better general than Rommel. so I don't know why u started bitching about Germany this Germany that.

Lastly Rommel was a fine general he care for his troops he even disobey order from Hitler to fight till the last man in Africa. he was the only general that disobeyed orders and never agreed with Hitler on anything.

[realitycheck333]

Rommel was also involved in the assassination attempt on Hitler. That's why he was forced to commit suicide.

[aurora2k]

oh wow really yup this guy is my hero in WW2

so that means he will be in that movie

Valkyrie i cant wait to see it !

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

I beg to differ re your point that history has labelled Monty to be a better General than Rommel. I have never read such an assertion in any of the many books about WW2 that I have read! Rommel was hugely respected by allied soldiers & Generals alike. He was not the only German General to disobey Hitler either- Feldmarshal Von Paulus? 6th Army Stalingrad? RIng any bells? Rommel did actually agree with Adolph quite regularly, he was a follower & supporter of Hitler, regardless of what some say!

[alexo25]

Rommel only withdrew from North Africa on the request of Colonel von Stauffenberg (yes the same one who tried to kill Hitler).

[PooPusher007]

he would have been captured if he'd stayed u ass

[realitycheck333]

actually aurora2k Rommel lost mainly because he was out of gas, as in petrol. tigers and panzers were great tanks but they also were fuel hogs. that was their weakness.

[aurora2k]

oh really i did not know that thanks

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

The same can be said for any situation when the allies met the Germans on EQUAL terms with parity of forces. The Germans always prevailed. This was recognised by senior allied commanders. The Germans were better trained, better equipped, more professional & better led at all levels (especially compared to teh US Army!) than the allied forces. FACT.

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

It always amuse me the criticism levelled at Monty re the difficulties he encountered in pushing through Caen 7 breaking the German defensive line. One does not merely walk over German soldiers-they were superb soldiers & dogged fighters. Remember! NO PLAN SURVIVES CONTACT WITH THE ENEMY!! Gen Von Molke.

[Bullettube]

Here, Here! The hedgerows proved to be as effective as trenches in holding up the allies. That the Allies were finally able to break through says a lot about the general ship and bravery of the entire army.

[Fridomfry]

easystreets70:

- OK/Hitler stopping Guderian before Dunkirk

- Disagree/1914 Marne battle. The "west of Paris" version of the Schliefen plan was abandoned, to concentrate on the French armies. On Sept. 5 & 6th, the 2, 3, 4 & 5th German armies had orders to march on at the same fast pace, with the aim to reach the Seine the 7th. Only a part of the 1st Army was supposed to face Paris, as a shield. But it pursued the French and Brits as well, with the belief that these were still in full retreat.

[easystreets70]

The soldier who has shot down appr. 3.000 landing troops at D-Day is *Heinrich Severloh*. He died in 2006, is German (not Austrian as I had wrongly in mind). The American soldiers gave him the nickname "Beast of Ohama beach". Check German wikipedia.

[svaran]

excellent doco.

[yellowspam123]

monty kicked ass!

[Hoykinpuro]

Well montgomery became too cocky, after his succes in afrika against afrika corps and rommel, but in europe, rommel had all what he lacked in africa; reinforces and more tanks, better supplied, familiar ground, preplanned defence etc, and monty expected to face samekind of troops that he faced in libya and egypt, but he was pretty wrong, germany had SS divisions waiting including the hallowed Panzer Lehr division, which was formed out whit best germany had to offer

[easystreets70]

I don't get why the allies have not just used the same tactics the Wehrmacht has used - tanks + air support first, then infantry. And why had no one on the beaches of D-day used anything to prevent from being shot like steal plates holding in front of ones chests. Must be a horrible feeling running safeless into mg-fire.

[mollymange]

The allied army was based on infantry tactics and besides their tanks didn't stand a chance against their german counterparts.

[easystreets70]

D-Day losses through mg-fire are still a riddle for me. Where was the simple allied common sense? One Austrian soldier on the German side, he is still alive btw, had killed 2.-3.000 American soldiers only with one! MG42, shooting it over 9 hours in a row the whole day. The MG is just a gun, not a 150 mm canon. One! guy made 3.000 families sonless. In my mind is some kind of steel plate that the landing troops should have carried in front of them to protect their chests and bellys.

[Clydevale]

That is a hell of a statement on the part of that vet. If it's true he is claiming that he was personally responsible for about 80% of all U.S. casualties on Omaha beach!

[easystreets70]

The story was just in the media (here in Europe); the guy has written a book (recently?) but mainly speaks only with his lawer besides him (simply because he is not a good talker; wasn't a good soldier either). He even got a nickname from the American soldiers (on my tounge, will not come out, maybe later). He said, he had 12.500 rounds of ammunition in the morning and quit firing after 9h when he was out; some he shot with his K98. Regrets? No. He says, he had done his job. Austrian bull-head.

[mollymange]

You mean like a shield? I've never heard of such things at the time. I can imagine it would be too clumbersome to carry and manouver properly due to weight. I think compared to other operations(like those in the eastern front) casualties weren't so stunningly high. I've seen Russian plate body armour though and even it could only help against shrapnels. I think weapons(and mg-s) were too powerful against any infantry protection.

[easystreets70]

I just say it is a riddle to me. WWI: People moved out of the trenches and appr. 60% got shot in the stomach (the place to aim).

D-Day and such: Why not having five guys carrying an angled steel-thing of 1 x 3 meter in front of them for when the ramps went down as well as for the first 50 meters on the beach? Is this idea abstruse? Better than to be slaughtered so easily. If I had been a soldier, I probably had attached five bibles at my chest and stomach as a better-than-nothing.

[gp556by45]

carrying a steal plate would be harder than you think. Not only would a plate that big weight 500-1000 pounds, there would be almost no place on a landing craft for it, not to mention artillery raning

[gp556by45]

a steel plate would be to cumbersome to carry into combat, would would walk to slow, and the artillery fire would not make it any better. Either way the steel plate would just end up getting more people killed. Not to mention that it would somehow have to fit on the landing craft, and people would have to walk of it carrying the thing. Besides, a plate that big would weight 500-1000 pounds.

[easystreets70]

Seeing films about beach landings, such as D-Day, seeing the ramps going down, hearing bullets fly and soldiers getting shot so easily with machinegun fire, makes me sick. You are probably right. Still I think, to little was thought about body armor. Nowadays it is different. Depends on how much worth a soldier life is given, I guess.

[DavidMed58]

artillery man just blow them up in landing craft

[LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH]

That is a ridiculous concept I have to say! The allied troops were heavily leaden with ammo/rations/water & equipment. It was difficul enough for them to advance up the beaches, without having to carry a large piece of steel that would have weighed 60-80lb!!!! Obviously you have never done a days soldiering in your life to suggest such an idea!! lol

[Clydevale]

Also, the British were constantly fearful of repeating the experience of WWI on the Western Front, Monty especially. As a veteran of Mons, the Somme, Ypres, and Passchendaele he was often too careful and did not take the gambles that U.S. generals like Patton did. For example the U.S. forces in Wester Europe began to cross the Rhine en masse once they came across an intact bride at Remagen; Monty planned an elaborate attack, operation Varsity.

[easystreets70]

Strage things happen:

Patton was rougher and more thoughtless than Montgomery. The German generals in WWI had been hasitating too in the beginning of the invasion in France; the price was a trench war afterwards. Hitler personally had stopped Guderians tanks for 4 days that were just about to enter Dunkirk. The war would have taken another path if not.

The Germans had the A-bomb plans in 1942! They had not started to manufacture the bomb because "it would have been too expensive".

Well.

[Fridomfry]

easystreets70, where in WWI did you see the German generals hesitating in the beginning of the invasion in France? AFAIK, they mobilized and concentrated fast, then rushed into Belgium and France. It was not hesitation, but the French counter-attack on the Marne which forced them to fall back some 40 miles North, along the Aisne river. The front stabilized itself there, and the trench war began.

[easystreets70]

WW1: The Germans stopped in the north of France / Paris in fear not to make it and because of the strength they were confronted with. The Germans then changed their (very important) Schliefen plan. The French and British would have had only ammunition for a few days more, the Germans didn't know that. Therefore the French were able to collect their forces and finally got too strong to be overrun.

WW2 just before Dunkirk: Hitler stopped Guderian for 4 days because of an intern power struggle.

[ProjectAKAA]

You were a crap general you immoral cunt

[lighttunnel]

good documentary

[kulemagnus]

Are you better then him??

[warmadscot]

he was better than bradley, patton and the rest!