Was Market Garden Worth It

market was an american debacle.failure to grab son bridge.gavin sendng 1 company on day 2 to capture the wilhelmena bridge at njimegen and needding british help to keep the advance routes open.im sorry,but this is my opinion.all garden units had to stop and help.

 

less monty bashing.eisenhour was in charge.i think a yank was c/o of the allied airbourne army.american a/b divs could,nt hold open corredor,so british units actually had to clear corridor instead of driving through to arnhem.all we see on telly is band of brothers.i am sorry if this upsets people,but look at the big picture.lee

 

Let me get this straight, the failure of the Allies at Market Garden was the direct result of the wholesale negligence on the part of the US Army and had nothing to do with any shortcoming of other forces involved?

It had nothing to do with parachute infantry being dropped 9 miles from the Arnhem bridge?

Or that the 1st Airbourne got split up, leaving Frost and his men to try to hold the bridge essentially alone? I mean, if the US are expected to take a bridge before it is blown up in their faces, why couldn’t the 1st AB take both ends of bridge with troops assigned this task, instead of engaging Germans along the route? (y’all calm down, I am being facetious with this last sentence.)

Or that after the US 3/504th crossed the Waal at Grave, the Guards Armoured Division held in place for 18 hours instead of driving on to Arnhem?

Or why was Dutch underground information on the presence of the 9th and 10th Panzer Division in the area ignored?

There are many other areas of contention that I will not mention for the sake of brevity. I am not trying to beat up on the British Army, nor am I trying to say the US has no culpability. Like any failure, there are usually many separate problems that add up to one big problem and in this case, that is very true. Any one delay or problem, by itself, probably would not have rendered the attempt to force the Rhine River a failure, but all or most of them together, doomed it in the end.

Your attempt to lay all the blame at the feet of the US Army is simply disingenuous.

edit---corrected 1st Airbourne for 6th Airborne...Apologies all around, please.

 

i thought it was the first airbourne division

 

and so it was, the Sixth was at Normandy.

 

Market Garden was crucial I believe as a push from the western front, this would of had a direct effect on german military and considering how much was being done on by our russian commrades in the east it would have been brash not too!

 

It is the idea held by some here, that after chasing the enemy across France Belgium and Holland, As soon as he stops and turns to fight, you stop the war and sit on your hands... For Market Garden was the spearhead of the drive. The way folk talk here because the enemy got stronger as we headed north, we should not have continued the battle???
Really? Arnhem was the tip of the spear...Fighting men FIGHT...Sometimes they lose!
Those that suggest that we should never have gone into Market garden are really saying "We did pretty well now lets us sit on our hands"

You have to push on until you are stopped, that happened at Arnhem. By the way our company Motto "Bash On" and that is just what we did. Sometimes annoying the upper echelons by driving ahead on our own. The usual message came...."Those Bloody Sappers Again" HUGE GRIN!
Sapper

 

the fact remains that americans were culpable.ike was in command of all forces from 1st september.i believe gen brereton was airborne army c-in-c.the buck stops at the top.

 

the fact remains that americans were culpable.ike was in command of all forces from 1st september.i believe gen brereton was airborne army c-in-c.the buck stops at the top.

So by your logic, then, Eisenhower and the US Army was solely responsible for the final victory in Western Europe in May 1945, since he was in command of all ground and air forces? Is this in spite of the fact that the Brits had been fighting since 1939 and still fielded a rather large army? However, since the 21st AG was under Eisenhower, a US general, then should the US get all the credit for winnning the war?

I'm just interested in clarity and trying to understand your thoughts. After all, if there is blame to be placed on one for the actions of others because they are in command, then I guess the accolades of one can be given to the other for the same reason.

 

that is correct.ike was a brilliant tactical and strategic general,just read ambrose books.watchband of brothers,see shootout and all the other ww2 docs on the history and discovery channels.saving jessica,sorry private ryan all prove you are correct.

 

I am detecting from your tone that you are being sarcastic. It is far too easy for each side to blame the other. the fact is that Market Garden was at best a huge risk, one worth taking as Sapper puts it, but a risk nonetheless. We can get into a mudslinging contest about who failed to keep their end up but another factor you are missing out on was the tenacity of the German Defence. One of the miracles of the Western Front in 1944 was how the Germans managed to put up a defence against the attack.
The fact was that both Allies would probably (with the benefit of hindsight) do things differently.
If you want to blame the Americans for Market Garden then why dont we just Blame Montogmery for any Allied Plans that went awry in June, July and August 1944 because as you say, the buck stops at the top! not a very constructive argument is it?

 

Without wishing to get too controversal as Sosabowski is alledged ot have said what about the Germans....if you consider that up till the beginningo f September they had retreated quicker than the Allies could advance across Belgium then the planners of OMG probably felt the Germans were close to folding and to do the 64 miles from start line to Arnhem in around 4 days was feasible. Apart from the German reaction and getting thier breath the plan was flawed at many levels.....but to blame a specific Division or Nationality is I feel somewhat wrong....

 

Without wishing to get too controversal as Sosabowski is alledged ot have said what about the Germans....if you consider that up till the beginningo f September they had retreated quicker than the Allies could advance across Belgium then the planners of OMG probably felt the Germans were close to folding and to do the 64 miles from start line to Arnhem in around 4 days was feasible. Apart from the German reaction and getting thier breath the plan was flawed at many levels.....but to blame a specific Division or Nationality is I feel somewhat wrong....
òh I agree with you Airborne, the general feeling was that the Germans were finished and indeed came very close to being that way. But they did regroup and managed to stop the advance on Arnhem, indeed across the whole front.

 

Blame the Americans? No way, we were allies, and we fought together as one. I will never hear anything against the "Yanks"
That the two nationalities fought the war in their own ways, goes without saying. But blame no one. for any short comings.
What is this idea that you have to win every battle? just because we won most (nearly all) Does not mean that the other side does not come off best now and again.
Then for some odd reason if we lose we have to have a scapegoat? or a reason why? Simple my old fruits...Its called the enemy.
sapper

 

Gothard, I was being sarcastic, also, but apparently the irony of my statements were missed by the target at whom it was directed and I am certain that you know me well enough and have read my comments to have realized this. I guess I wasn't over the top enough or the other reader chose not to see the obvious, because my out-in-left field statements fit nicely with his firmly held beliefs where the colonies are concerned.

4th Wilts, my comments in the past have more that stated my beliefs on the leadership of the war as directed by the various leaders and they do not coincide with your snide remarks directed at me. I do not need to restate them, the search functions works well in this forum.

You also have an obivious bias against anything to do with the US. I asked direct questions seeking clarification and I get more biased statements, with nothing more included to support your broad, baseless condemnation, only opinion a.e.b. your statement "im sorry,but this is my opinion".

You have some nerve to try to trivialize me as one who garners my beliefs from televison, movies and Stephen Ambrose. Once again, a search of my posts for my views on those subjects will demonstrate the fallacy of your misplaced assumptions.

Since you choose to get personal with your attacks on me, I will return the favor. No, second thought, I will stay above your childish behavior and just say goodbye.

I have tried to maintain a measure of decorum when posting here. I apologize to the others for my visible anger and hope that I have not been offensive to y'all.

edit---I am not grousing at Gotthard, even though my wording may lead readers to think so. I appreciate his support in this thread.

 

Blame the Americans? No way, we were allies, and we fought together as one. I will never hear anything against the "Yanks"
That the two nationalities fought the war in their own ways, goes without saying. But blame no one. for any short comings.
What is this idea that you have to win every battle? just because we won most (nearly all) Does not mean that the other side does not come off best now and again.
Then for some odd reason if we lose we have to have a scapegoat? or a reason why? Simple my old fruits...Its called the enemy.
sapper


Mr Guy,

Thank you for your kind, knowledable words and "on the scene" appraisal.

 

i i reckon twas worth a go.