Re: OT: Historical Amnesia
From: Timo Nieminen (timo_at_physics.uq.edu.au)
Date: 10/27/04
- Next message: Sam Wormley: "Physicists in the US have made the first high-speed nanomechanical memory element from single-crystal silicon wafers"
- Previous message: Timothy Golden: "Re: Introduction to Unitivity. (kst)"
- In reply to: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Next in thread: Patrick Powers: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Reply: Patrick Powers: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Reply: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:23:52 +1000
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
> frisbieinstein@yahoo.com (Patrick Powers) writes:
> >Timo Nieminen <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> wrote:
> >
> >> OTOH, the Germans were doomed to fail. Whatever brilliance on one side,
> >> stupidity on the other, success was beyond their resources. OTOOH, since
> >> the Germans were going to comprehensively lose the war if they didn't try
> >> it, it couldn't fundamentally make their situation any worse.
> >
> >Historians have a strong "it was inevitable" tendency. The Germans
> >chances were maybe as good as those of the English at Agincourt --
> >almost impossible, but not quite.
The English luck was good terrain; the rest of their advantage was
discipline. 1000 men-at-arms, 5000 archers (and some "few thousand other
footmen" one sometimes reads) vs a French army of 25,000 (10,000
men-at-arms and the rest various infantry), so the English were badly
outnumbered. Still, their tactics were sound, and the English won without
any sudden miracles in the battles. Considering the historical outcome,
"almost impossible" seems a bit strong, at least once the French decide to
attack, although it would describe their chances well were the
French disciplined and well-led, or wise enough to not attack.
> Well, I don't think so. Yes, with an incredible amount of luck and
> everything going their way they might've won the battle and, perhaps,
> retake Antwerp.
Dependence on bad weather, need for speed (alas, the bad weather slowed
them badly), and insufficient fuel (needing to capture enemy fuel is
high-risk planning) all makes for very slim chances. Outnumbering the
immediate opposition made initial gains almost inevitable, but there were
plenty available to stop them long before Antwerp or even Brussels.
Initially, the Germans outnumbered the Americans locally by about 3 times.
A good start, but in 2 weeks, the Americans already outnumbered them,
with more on the way, and had adequate supplies of fuel and ammunition.
Perhaps with particularly inert and sluggish Allied commanders (which the
German plan assumed), "almost impossible, but not quite" might be pretty
accurate - it's conceivable, though highly unlikely, that there are no
delays, sufficient enemy fuel is captured, defending forces are brushed
aside with ease, and the weather keeps enemy airpower out of action.
Against Allied commanders who actually react sensibly, I see no chance for
the Germans.
> That would still have left them in a weaker position
> than the one they held in the early fall of 1944, with fewer usable
> forces and facing a much bigger force. So, if they couldn't hold
> then, what would suddenly have been different in Winter of 1945.
Well, of course, after the capture of Antwerp, the weak and insipid
western Allies would have realised the futility of fighting against the
superior Germans, and hastily agreed to favourable peace terms, allowing
the Germans to turn all their forces east to utterly crush the Soviets.
Conceived as it was by a true genius of strategy, how could the plan fail?
-- Timo Nieminen - Home page: http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/nieminen/ Shrine to Spirits: http://www.users.bigpond.com/timo_nieminen/spirits.html
- Next message: Sam Wormley: "Physicists in the US have made the first high-speed nanomechanical memory element from single-crystal silicon wafers"
- Previous message: Timothy Golden: "Re: Introduction to Unitivity. (kst)"
- In reply to: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Next in thread: Patrick Powers: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Reply: Patrick Powers: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Reply: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: OT: Historical Amnesia"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|