Military mistresses

You are correct Tom.

When Hitler launched the Ardennes offensive prior to Christmas 1944...Operation Bodensee,the US top brass were holed up in the Palace of Versailles enjoying a little R&R.The lightening speed of the offensive took them by surprise with the threat that US and British forces might be split.

Fearing a German breakthrough and reports that Germans, disguised as US troops, were operating behind Allied lines, gave rise to great concern to the point where it was thought that the Germans might make an attempt to kidnap the senior figures at Versailles.Needless to say,security precautions were quickly actioned

 

Jeff

your "SMH" - meaning what .. ?

Cheers

 

Click this link, Tom

SMH

and it is not Sydney Morning Herald.

You trot out that "Ike was piled up, screwing his mistress and ignoring the war" claptrap every opportunity you get and it is, quite frankly, just taurum stercore.

 

Jeff

If you were to read my posting #59 more carefully - you will find that I did not accuse anyone of being adulterous but merely asked a questions as to why both Ike and Bradley missed the

opening of the German offensive in the Ardennes owing to the fact that they were both in an Hotel in Paris with two females- another poster agreed with me and stated that I was correct - no

question that I thought Ike was a poor commander as of his first Command in North Africa - but he was the best you had…….there is no doubt that he " prolonged the war " with his strategy - not

MY words but those of Field Marshal Alanbrooke- who knew a thing of two about command - sorry if you can't handle the truth about Ike BUT you didn't suffer under his leadership…….

Cheers

 

Indeed.
If you have time, please study the (unknown) American military report on strategy in Western Europe, which is far more factual and critical than most American authors.
http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/carl/eto/eto-001.pdf

 

nijmegan

at 91 years old - i don't have the kind of time to read all of that report - but it sounds good

cheers

 

Tom,

Same song, forty-third verse, only this verse is shaped as a question instead of one your many roundly discredited statements on the subject of Ike's supposed days-long mid-December dereliction of duty so he could poke that Welsh-Irish driver of his.

 

No no, you should enjoy the niceties of life Tom!

SHAEF in fact proposed a single thrust (Aachen Gap), with Patton initially as diversion (Metz Gap). Eisenhower compromised and decided for two (not so strong) thrusts, a broad front. Prolongation.

 

Jeff

The "Many roundly discredited statements on Ike " appear to come from yourself - as at least two posters even on this page agree with me - so I can easily ignore yours...

Facts - as they say is facts - both Ike and Bradley spent four days in a Parisian Hotel when the operation Ardennes started on the 16th December '44- they didn;twake up

until the 20th…...
Cheers

 

Pretty good synopsis of those few days at:
http://www.thehistoryreader.com/modern-history/december-16-1944-ardennes-offensive-begins-abysmal-failure-allied-intelligence/

Back on task:
I find it more noteworthy that so few mistresses have gone down in the annals of history.

 

Good response, except that I did not take you to task for his handling of strategic and operational matters. I looked carefully at what I assume are the two posts you referenced, where you stated they support your vile accusation. If my eyes are deceiving me, please let me know, but I did not read where either member backed your claim that Ike was porking someone that was not his wife to the exclusion of his duties as commander of the Allied ground forces in the west.

There are a multitude of errors made by any number of leaders (e.g. Rapido River, Anzio, Dieppe, not clearing the Scheldt Estuary, Philippines defense and liberation, Malaysia) and I am not arguing the merits of the decisions made here. What I am arguing is your slanderous and baseless statements and innuendo concerning the Commander, SHAEF, accusing him of dereliction of duty by intentionally ignoring an impending crisis so he could get his ashes hauled. Weak, my friend, very weak.

Edit: I further add that your accusations are primarily based on your acute dislike, hatred if you wish, all things related or attributed to the US>

Regardless, I have made my point here and other places in the forum, so the floor is yours.

Fred, pardons.

 

Jeff

you can have the floor all to yourself - I don't need it - is not my way to hate anyone - but having just read the Carlo D'este account of December 16th '44 - posting #70 by Wilson - just

confirms my thoughts of many US Authors tend to write for Hollywood to ensure that the US always comes out best - would ask you to read that posting - THEN read Nigel Hamilton's account in his

Vol. 2 of Monty - the truth has to be somewhere and has nothing to do with all things related to my alleged hatred of Americans - I live too closely to them to hate...

Cheers

 

There is no one truth. Personalities are complex, are therefore also history.

I am Dutch, and have discovered that both Americans and British tend to "defend" their country on forums. No news for me.

 

Forbes thoughts


Eisenhower’s experience in the heat of the Battle of the Bulge demonstrates two important things for all managers: Don’t panic, and grab opportunity.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/16/eisenhower-bulge-war-leadership-managing-battle.html

 

not too surprised they shut down the comments…...

cheers

 

Nijmegen.....a good article to revisit this particular era in military history from a US official source.

I see that an invasion into southern Brittany at Quiberon Bay was envisaged to utilise the berthing facilities at Quiberon itself which required the use of landing craft hauled overland to use in the planned capture of Belle Isle which along with batteries at Lorient and St Nazaire were seen as a threat to any supply transports sailing into Quiberon.In the end this operation was not required as the strength of the Resistance aided by the various Jedbrugh groups and the French SAS along with the thrust of the US 3rd Army prevented the Germans holding on to the Brittany peninsula.The Quiberon peninsula proved to be heavily mined and fortified by the Germans which in hindsight would have created a delay in using Quiberon as a supply base for southern Brittany and a drive to the Loire...in the end other events overran the need.

The Lorient festung was left to wither on the vine and did not surrender until Germany surrendered in May 1945.

As regards the surprise mounting of the Ardennes offensive,Max Hastings in his The Secret War points the finger at the Allied Commanders who failed to pay attention to the intelligence provided by Ultra intercepts.

Hasting quotes under a Tarnished Triumph...pages 497- 498 .....Ralph Bennett of Bletchley's Hut 3 believed that after achieving victory in the Normandy campaign at the Falaise Gap in August,euphoria distorted the judgement of Allied Commanders,blinding them in both intelligence and prudence.In early Autumn of 1944,the codebreakers read a stream of desperate signals from German commanders in the West,describing their forces at the last gasp.For some days Eisenhower and his subordinates,as well as the British JIC thought, emphatically not WSC that the war was as was as good as over. Bennett is surely right,however,to emphasise Montgomery's culpability for failure to secure the Scheldt approaches to Antwerp at the beginning of September 1944,when they stood open for the taking.Ultra repeatedly emphasised German determination to defend the estuary and thus deny the vital port to the Allies,together with the shipments of German troops and guns to fortify positions on the east bank.

Incomprehensively,the British failed to interdict the German crossings,even after Admiral Ramsay warned Montgomery of this danger.In the face of the German stand on the Scheldt,Antwerp remained unusable for 3 months after it intact capture.with crippling consequences for Allied logistics.The little British Field Marshal's neglect of crystal clear intelligence,and of an important strategic opportunity,became the major cause of the Western Allied failure to break into the heart of Germany in 1944.

The same overconfidence was responsible for the launch of the doomed airborne assault in Holland on 17 September,despite Ultra flagging of the presence near the drop zone of the 9th and 10th SS Panzer Divisions,together with Field Marshal Model's headquarters at Oosterbeek.The decision to launch Operation Market Garden against this background was recklessly irresponsible,and its defeat remains a deserved blot on Montgomery's reputation.

Regarding the Ardennes offensive....despite the stack of Ultra decrypts that should have alerted Eisenhower and his generals including an interception of the Japanese Ambassador Oshima's message to the Japanese Government outlining Hitler's intentions .....on 11 November the British Joint Intelligence Committee wrote "We do not think that the evidence warrants the conclusion that the Germans are planning a spoiling offensive"....(.but they did and it threw the Allied command into surprise and confusion....my observation)


Jeff.....Just a point regarding English,there is no such word,abbreviation or phase generated as SMH in the OED and that includes new entries for September 2015.

Apt for the discussion is the fact that the OED word of the day for Saturday,recorded as first being used in 1724 is "relationship"....."the state or fact if being related,the way in which two things are connected,a connection,an association.Also kinship"

Not being pedantic of course.

 

Tom, please read my posts. My contention with you in this thread has nothing to do with the decisions made and orders given, as I have amply said twice before above.

But rather:

That you accuse Dwight David Eisenhower of dereliction of duty. Can you not understand that? It has nothing to do with Hollywood, it has nothing to do with the idea that Alanbrooke was wiser, it has nothing do with the writings of D'Estes, it has nothing to do with broad fronts, and has nothing to do with airborne operations in Holland. Nothing.

It does, however, have everything to do with a years-long slander by a British expatriate, now living in western Canada, who claims that Eisenhower neglected his duties as CinC at a most critical time in the war so he could spend a long weekend with an unmarried female.

You may continue to suggest books and articles to me in this thread, but unless they serve to confirm or deny your contemptible theory about Eisenhower's character, I'm not reading them.

 

After 71 years of accusations and innuendo it would actually be disappointing to learn that Ike didn't get laid. As Clinton later proved, performing your duties and getting your rocks off are not mutually exclusive. Dereliction for that reason seems a remote possibility.

 

jeff

you will have to show me where i have accused Ike of any dereliction of duty- all i have written is the fact that both he and Bradley spent some time during the ardennes offensive

in a Parisian Palace with two females…..so show me…!

cheers

 

Adolf did not sent them an invitation ....