Jump to content

Great book & CMETO resource


Recommended Posts

I recently finished reading Fred MacKenzie's remarkable combined memoir and post battle history, MEN OF BASTOGNE. He was the only journalist in Bastogne from the beginning and chose to be there, having been in camp with the 101st Airborne at Mourmelon

when the word of the attack was received, followed a few days later by the movement orders. He had incredible access to everyone from McAuliffe on down and paints a terrific picture of the battle from the inside of the ring. The level of detail is such that several CMETO battles, including night actions, could be made based on the descriptions he provides.

Beware, though, that there are some garbles and confused IDs. The standard U.S. antiaircraft gun was a 40 mm, not a 57mm, with the exception to this rule being single 37s mounted with twin .50s on the M-17 GMC. References to an armored 57mm appear to be to a standard towed 57mm ATG, and other references will have to be checked to make sure the Tigers really are Tigers (I or II not given, either) and not some other type of tank. A major surprise was the sheer firepower in Bastogne--11 artillery battalions--even if many were probably 75mm. When the guns had the ammo, the Germans found the artillery simply attack shattering. Some days, though, the guns had 10 rounds per gun. Period.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Emrys,

Basically, it describes him as a lean, thoroughly professional six footer, lists his company, and explains where it fits in with the other units. Encountering his name was one of those Aha! moments

in which I put two and two together, then actually emerged with four as the result. I don't remember the details, but thought it was kind of cool to encounter someone whose book I'd read; in another book and set at a higher command level. I recently had a similar experience in reading A BRIDGE TOO FAR

when it dawned on me that "Shan" Hackett was the same man who wrote THIRD WORLD WAR 1985, the first version of which was reportedly rewritten at the Queen's request. Why? NATO lost in the book as originally written.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...