Effectiveness of Late War Germans (LONGish Post)

[M Hofbauer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tero:

When looking at the Germans the VG has always been belittled. But was their supposed ineffectivness due to the lack of training or was it attributable to something else (like poor or fragile morale) ?

These formations were comprised of young boys and old men. But since the early 1930's there had been various government schemes that were nothing more than military training in disguise. That would mean that they all were for all intents and purposes troops who had undergone basic training similar to the regular conscipts. The quality of the troops inside a unit was uneven. They were out of shape and untested in combat (do WWI veterans apply ?). They had also been subjected for years to the demoralizing effects of the Allied bombing campaign more than the frontline troops (who had suffered reverses but they were not helpless bystanders).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

are you sure you are not confusing Volksgrenadier with Volkssturm?

[Spook]

I suspect where you & I first saw it, Michael, was one the earlier "ASL Annuals" that eventually came up with a "bagpipe" SMC (single-man counter) optional rule. Leastways, that's where I first encountered the term "pibroch."

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spook:

I suspect where you & I first saw it, Michael, was one the earlier "ASL Annuals" that eventually came up with a "bagpipe" SMC (single-man counter) optional rule. Leastways, that's where I first encountered the term "pibroch."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You should have read my letter to the editor, published in the next issue, lambasting them for using it wrong!

Thanks for the reply - I thought perhaps I may have been in error in lambasting AH - but looking it up in the Concise Oxford this morning, I see it is indeed defined as a category of bagpipe music.

Now we all know!

[Andreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The Canadian Army had a lot of Militia in it, too, and Militia formed the core of the overseas Army.

Yet it is doubtful that many Militia troops received anything like useful training before 1939, and when you go from a 50,000 man Army (Militia included) to 500,000, your experienced troops have a little less impact.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which is exactly the problems the Germans had in expanding their conscript army. Conscripting soldiers for two years (as they did) in large numbers (as they did) only makes sense if you have the guys to train them (which they did not - 100,000men was not enough). There were some problems with training early in the war. This became less of an issue once a core of NCOs with battle experience existed, who could train the new waves. As I understand it, the divisions raised pre-war were not up to a consistent standard in 1939 and 1940.

Spook - 7th and 51st certainly improved after the Seine crossings. 50th for some reasons did not seem to have the same problems.

I have seen the same reference to the 49th. Incidentally, they were the division with the 6th DWR incident, where the BN was disbanded. In general I think the overriding feature of the best Commonwealth divisions was a pretty steady performance.

Michael, I was not aware that 59th was either good or bad, I thought they were disbanded because they had the highest number.

Spook, one reason why the heavy losses did not harm battalions as much seems to have been the regimental system. E.g. 5th DCLI, which came off Hill 112 with less than 200 men was refreshed with a large draft from 4th DCLI (the training BN) which had just arrived. The Germans tried the same with their replacement systems, and reading German accounts it seems to have worked reasonably well. Divisions were often referred to by their territorial (landsmannschaftliche) affiliation, e.g. 6. Westfaelische' Panzerdivision, just like in the UK 43rd Wessex Infantry Division.

But yes, your query is difficult, if not impossible to answer, and trying to grade performance is not exactly easy. Throw in changes over time (e.g. 90th US or 12th US AD were fairly abysmal at the outset but turned into good units later, AFAIK) and you end up with not being able to make solid pronouncements.

[Roksovkiy]

You should pick up a history book and also learn reading English, not just typing it.

Try reading US and german sources besides your british tailored history books. You may then gain a better understanding of how poorly your beloved british army performed in WW2.

What is wrong with a bias against Nazis BTW?

Nothing if you want to play a UK fantasy game. Most normal people like historical accuracy and that requires one to be impartial and non-biased.

[Andreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Roksovkiy:

You should pick up a history book and also learn reading English, not just typing it.

Try reading US and german sources besides your british tailored history books. You may then gain a better understanding of how poorly your beloved british army performed in WW2.

What is wrong with a bias against Nazis BTW?

Nothing if you want to play a UK fantasy game. Most normal people like historical accuracy and that requires one to be impartial and non-biased.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are equating Germans and Nazis here. Get your terminology right. Anyway, assuming that is just a stupid little oversight on your part, where does he say anything against Germans (or even Nazis for that matter)?

Apart from that, you have no clue what I am reading, but obviously you have not read the original post closely because you immediately went into 'Must defend Ubergermany overdrive' - the guy quite clearly states who he was fighting and how. Last thing I checked, 1944 German paras were not considered 'dregs' by anyone's standard.

Maybe you want to enlarge on your no doubt considered opinion that all German units in 1944 were 'dregs'? Where did it come from? Meyer's book on his time in 12th SS maybe?

Come on, let's hear about your German sources for the stuff you go on about. Title, author and ISBN please. Particularly the one stating so unequivocally By June 1944 and onwards, the allies were predominantly fighting the dregs of the German army.'

[Roksovkiy]

I originally said the western allies were fighting “predominantly the dregs of the German army”.

Of course there was a small number of good divisions left. 1st SS was still of a high quality and 12 SS was motivated and fanatical, but compared to the total army strength in the west, they accounted for less than 10%. The majority of divisions in the west were of markedly poor quality.

[Andreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Roksovkiy:

I originally said the western allies were fighting “predominantly the dregs of the German army”.

Of course there was a small number of good divisions left. 1st SS was still of a high quality and 12 SS was motivated and fanatical, but compared to the total army strength in the west, they accounted for less than 10%. The majority of divisions in the west were of markedly poor quality.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now, since we are getting real, can you tell me which German divisions were in the line opposite 43rd Wessex in the months 06/44-03/45? And an assessment of their quality? Because that is what we are talking about here - the experience of one officer which was just discarded by you as coming from someone with a personal bias who fought Volkssturm units.

You still have not explained the 'anti-Nazi bias' and where that came from.

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy:

Which is exactly the problems the Germans had in expanding their conscript army. Conscripting soldiers for two years (as they did) in large numbers (as they did) only makes sense if you have the guys to train them (which they did not - 100,000men was not enough). There were some problems with training early in the war. This became less of an issue once a core of NCOs with battle experience existed, who could train the new waves. As I understand it, the divisions raised pre-war were not up to a consistent standard in 1939 and 1940..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

YES! The board ate my post and when I reposted it, I forgot to add that comparison.

[Iron Chef Sakai]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

But seriously Iron Chef, while it is nice to worship the Germans, you do realize that they were only able to maintain their army through the use of millions of slave laborers, that they routinely sold out their allies (the Italians in North Africa, for example, or the Rumanians in Russia) in the same ways you accuse the British of, executed thousands of their own troops to maintain discipline (by way of contrast, exactly 1 Canadian and 1 American were executed for cowardice in WW II), and ultimately fought for a nation that had dedicated itself to the wholesale extermination of between 10 and 12 million innocent people?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok, one i do not "worship germans" i just do not have a biased opinion and base my statements on fact, and as far as the slave labor went? logisticly it was not very bright, they actualy slowed production and i hope i dont have ot mention the many reasons why, the gemrans did not sele out their allies, the italians actualy got the germans involved in a theater they had no intentions of getting involved in, in essence the germans not only bailed out the italians many a time, they almost captured the suez with force allocated to rommel that were meant only to stall the allies, you can thank the italians for us winning the war actualy if you are so learned, you would know about germany, not seeling out their italian ally, but actualy bailing it out of a yugoslav-greek war, wich stalled barbarossa a great deal, so much that in fact if mussolini didnt try to play conqueror the germans would have been placed outside moscow in august rather then october, now i for one am glad we won of course, the nazi's were evil, but the werhmacht were not running the awful death and work camps, they were soldiers , the waffen ss as well is often confused with their very bad counter parts, the waffen ss were elite soldiers, they werent the regular ss bastards who were at the camps, so again how is it that i do not have as much knowledge as the rest of you? i mean i am keeping this simple since their is obviously much you all dont know out side of D-Day, and and the gemrans i beleived helped the romanians a great deal by guarding the ploestri oil fields, they were pretty key to the gemran war machine at the time, you should try picking up more the one book of the accounts of a random soldier

[Iron Chef Sakai]

so the british did not execute candians when they dropped them off on the shores of dieppe france in 1942? yes their was an invasion of france before d-day and yes it was only canadians who were in it sent to their deaths by the british to test the meddle of the gemrans defenses there, oh wait the british backed them up with a small commando unit, but of coruse you knew that now for your own good, pick up some books if these topics are any interest to you, i have been reading these threads and the peng one at least doesnt try to be historians, if your going to try and debate something at least know what your debating

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

ok, one i do not "worship germans" i just do not have a biased opinion and base my statements on fact, and as far as the slave labor went? logisticly it was not very bright, they actualy slowed production and i hope i dont have ot mention the many reasons why, the gemrans did not sele out their allies, the italians actualy got the germans involved in a theater they had no intentions of getting involved in, in essence the germans not only bailed out the italians many a time, they almost captured the suez with force allocated to rommel that were meant only to stall the allies, you can thank the italians for us winning the war actualy if you are so learned, you would know about germany, not seeling out their italian ally, but actualy bailing it out of a yugoslav-greek war, wich stalled barbarossa a great deal, so much that in fact if mussolini didnt try to play conqueror the germans would have been placed outside moscow in august rather then october, now i for one am glad we won of course, the nazi's were evil, but the werhmacht were not running the awful death and work camps, they were soldiers , the waffen ss as well is often confused with their very bad counter parts, the waffen ss were elite soldiers, they werent the regular ss bastards who were at the camps, so again how is it that i do not have as much knowledge as the rest of you? i mean i am keeping this simple since their is obviously much you all dont know out side of D-Day, and and the gemrans i beleived helped the romanians a great deal by guarding the ploestri oil fields, they were pretty key to the gemran war machine at the time, you should try picking up more the one book of the accounts of a random soldier<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would read Irving's account of Rommel and the way he treated the Italians; of course you realie Irving has fallen into disrepute because of his Nazi worshipping, but he has interesting things to do about how the Germans were seeling (sic) out their Italian "allies"...pray tell, what references are you consulting?

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

so the british did not execute candians when they dropped them off on the shores of dieppe france in 1942? yes their was an invasion of france before d-day and yes it was only canadians who were in it sent to their deaths by the british to test the meddle of the gemrans defenses there, oh wait the british backed them up with a small commando unit, but of coruse you knew that now for your own good, pick up some books if these topics are any interest to you, i have been reading these threads and the peng one at least doesnt try to be historians, if your going to try and debate something at least know what your debating<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have read most books on this subject, Loring-Villa's is most convincing that the Raid was carried out on Mountbatten's authority. What do you think of his thesis that news of the raid was leaked, and how do you compare it to the treatment that, say, Whitaker gives it in Dieppe: Tragedy to Triumph?

Actually, since you're an authority on Dieppe, can I trouble you to give me a detailed order of battle of the Canadian forces participating? I am working on some CMMOS stuff regarding Dieppe and it would come in most handy.

[ 10-18-2001: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Iron Chef Sakai]

i don't have to run to the library to look things up, i've retained what i've read from a long time ago, i used ot read alot on world war 2, the germans did not treat their allies bad, the italians i'm afraid had enough trouble with ethiopia, yes they fought there and very poor i might add, take your time and look it up, now the italians as you might read were no fairing very well in north africa against the british, in fact without the africa corps, the british would have sent them packing back to italy in a hurry, the italian leadership was basicaly as bad as it gets, thier soldiers simply did not want ot fight for thier officors and i coulkd make a whole new topic as of why, il stupe, i mean il duce also tried fighting yugoslavia, and albania, and greece, since italy was supposed to be the major partenr in the axis alliance, wich obviously was'nt and mussolini did not want to be out done, the italians fought the alabaninas and yugolsalvs to a stand still untill gemrans forces entered the campaign and virtualy took it over and defeated both countries, the greeks were on the winning side of the greco-italian war until the germans showed up, then after the fall of greese the german invaded and took crete from the british by an airborn invasion, the first of it's kind, they took heavy casualties, but it is still pretty amazing from a tactical view point as the british forces were dug in good, the german paratroopers even actualy rescued mussolini once even though his own people ended up getting him in the end, though the allies never counquered northern italy, where german forces were dug in, and beofre you go on about how bad the italian equipment sucked, dont worry i know this, their tanks were not very good at all, they had a large navy, but their guns were very inaccuarate as the barrles were placed too close together, luckily for the royal navy, i thought that would be a nice little fun fact for you, i have tons of them, i'm not trying ot insult you but i am in first gear in this conversation, if your interested in this you should read, alot, not just once source, if your just quickyl looking things up in a usueless attempt to prove me wrong your wasting both our times

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

so the british did not execute candians when they dropped them off on the shores of dieppe france in 1942? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, this is obviously a fake post. Nobody's spelling is THAT bad without it being on purpose. Nice try, friend. Slapdragon, any idea what his IP was?

If you seriously don't know the difference between "execution" and "killed in action" perhaps its best we not have this discussion?

LOLOLOLOL!

[Iron Chef Sakai]

the canadian order of battle at dieppe?!?! haha, well they landed with a back pack and a rifle and some had bicycles in wich after they overcame the gemrans on the beach head they would ride thier bicycles to liberate paris, hehe, the battle of dieppe was very short indeed with a few thousand candians surrendering very fast, and not saying the canidans were bad soldiers, they fought well, it's just they all would have been alughtered on the beach, literly, so i would say tragedy, since when mass amounts of people die, in my mind it is a tragedy

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

i don't have to run to the library to look things up, i've retained what i've read from a long time ago, i used ot read alot on world war 2, the germans did not treat their allies bad, the italians i'm afraid had enough trouble with ethiopia, yes they fought there and very poor i might add, take your time and look it up, now the italians as you might read were no fairing very well in north africa against the british, in fact without the africa corps, the british would have sent them packing back to italy in a hurry, the italian leadership was basicaly as bad as it gets, thier soldiers simply did not want ot fight for thier officors and i coulkd make a whole new topic as of why, il stupe, i mean il duce also tried fighting yugoslavia, and albania, and greece, since italy was supposed to be the major partenr in the axis alliance, wich obviously was'nt and mussolini did not want to be out done, the italians fought the alabaninas and yugolsalvs to a stand still untill gemrans forces entered the campaign and virtualy took it over and defeated both countries, the greeks were on the winning side of the greco-italian war until the germans showed up, then after the fall of greese the german invaded and took crete from the british by an airborn invasion, the first of it's kind, they took heavy casualties, but it is still pretty amazing from a tactical view point as the british forces were dug in good, the german paratroopers even actualy rescued mussolini once even though his own people ended up getting him in the end, though the allies never counquered northern italy, where german forces were dug in, and beofre you go on about how bad the italian equipment sucked, dont worry i know this, their tanks were not very good at all, they had a large navy, but their guns were very inaccuarate as the barrles were placed too close together, luckily for the royal navy, i thought that would be a nice little fun fact for you, i have tons of them, i'm not trying ot insult you but i am in first gear in this conversation, if your interested in this you should read, alot, not just once source, if your just quickyl looking things up in a usueless attempt to prove me wrong your wasting both our times<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah yes, the old switcheroo. Well done; I am the underread mouth breather. I concede. Your knowledge of the Royal Navy is astonishingly good. In fact, you are the most well read man I have ever encountered, in cyber space or in real life.

Thank you so much for posting this highly relevant and interesting information for all of us to share. Would you mind if I used it on my CM website? This is too good to sit on. I will, of course, give you full credit.

Please, do tell me which institution educated you so I may write them a letter of thanks - but of course, you're probably self educated. Nonetheless - your mother's address will do - she deserves to be thanked as well.

We are all, sir, humbly in your debt. I will advise Professor Granatstein, as well as Mister Loring-Villa, that their manuscripts need to be revised.

Thank God you came along. Tis a far better thing I do, than I have ev....

[Iron Chef Sakai]

um should'nt you be playing quake with some 12 year olds or somehting? i'm 23 and i think your imature , thats pretty sad

[Iron Chef Sakai]

you asked some questons on world war 2 , i simply answered them and since i spwewed some knowledge you weren't aware of you reply with a child like letter of bitterness, do you quit games realy fast when the computer starts winnig too? hehe your funny

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

the canadian order of battle at dieppe?!?! haha, well they landed with a back pack and a rifle and some had bicycles in wich after they overcame the gemrans on the beach head they would ride thier bicycles to liberate paris, hehe, the battle of dieppe was very short indeed with a few thousand candians surrendering very fast, and not saying the canidans were bad soldiers, they fought well, it's just they all would have been alughtered on the beach, literly, so i would say tragedy, since when mass amounts of people die, in my mind it is a tragedy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess you missed out, somewhere in your reading, what "order of battle" means?

I do agree that all the Candians were alughtered on the beech, indeed it was tragidy, all thos peeple dyinge. too bad those bisyclse had flat tiers - they could have mad it to paris!!! good job the Germns were so tugh and had suche cool helmits and stuff. i remember reading a book my cousin (also my half sister) loned me before i quite skool and it taked about how the Germins helmets made them meen. do you think their is anything to that?

[Iron Chef Sakai]

and ask the um proffessor why he bothered writing his own book if their were books writen on the subject before him? i mean why are they so many books on lone subjects that come to different conclusions? strange huh? i mean in your thinking , their should only be one book per subject, since they all agree right? before you fry your brain trying to figure out why there are so many books on the same subjects, just sit down and have a cookie and take a nap or something

[Iron Chef Sakai]

realy? i never knew helmets were so daunting to the enemy? so you conclude that the er in your opinion german "cool" helmets won the battle? ok professor

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

you asked some questons on world war 2 , i simply answered them and since i spwewed some knowledge you weren't aware of you reply with a child like letter of bitterness, do you quit games realy fast when the computer starts winnig too? hehe your funny<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're right, Iron Chef Sakai, and I apologize. (Can I call you "Iggy" for short?"

Iggy, this is the thing. I think i've finaly found my sole-mate

now i can cast off this false facade of edumacashun and schuling, and throw caution to the wind. you see, i'm madly in love with you. i know its difficult for you to believe it, and believe me it's hard to confes to your solemate something like this. i guess its why i'm so hard on you.

a love as deep as ours isn't something to take litely though. all those nites of cryeing bitter teers of lonieleniess - and now, to finally find someone who is my intelliectural equal...i must tell you, if you think you are shocked, sweetcakes, your not half as shocked as i was when i realeized what was goeing on.

send me a picture posthaste, and we can plan the nuptials. my favorite color is blue, and my favoutrite spelling of color is colour. you're farmiliar with canadian courting rituals, i presume?

[Iron Chef Sakai]

realy? i never knew helmets were so daunting to the enemy? so you conclude that the er in your opinion german "cool" helmets won the battle? ok professor, you make fun of the peng thread but at least thier kidding when their arguing , you should stop whining and start discussing things, who wants to discuss things with obtuse people? if you want to whine just i dont know go to some random aol chatroom or somehting

[Michael Dorosh]

Slapdragon - assuming this isn't you - I would like you to be my best man.

I am hoping Madmatt will do the honour of officiating at the ceremony.

No presents - please make a donation to the Calgary Highlanders Regimental Funds Foundation in my name. Think of the veterans.

Slappy - I know I owe you a turn - the computer is so slow at these big files - I will try and get one out tomorrow. ASL Veteran is also owed a turn by me, too.