hitlers underpants Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 after reading many books on the subject of waffen ss effectiveness,ive come to the conclusion that they were much better in defence than on offence,would anybody like to enlighten me maybe or give their view as i would be very interested to hear other peoples thoughts on the subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 I don't understand the question. What you say is sweeping and not fact-based. What would lead you to believe this? Could it be that the majority of what you've read has been from the last half of the war when all of Germany was basically on the defense? It is my opinion (and pretty much accepted all around) that there was no real difference in troop quality between SS and Heer in general. The factors that might contribute to a SEEMINGLY superior SS showing in battle would be 1.) theS S.S. usually had the newer and better equipment, and 2.) they might (possibly) have a bit more "fanatical" mind-set, but even that is disputable. As far as advance/defend goes, in the early days, when advancing was viable, the S.S. pretty much kicked butt right along-side their Heer companions. Check out the LSSAH, the Totenkopf, and especially Das Reich (to name a few), 1940 - 1943 for numerous examples. It is true, however that some S.S. units, Hitlerjugend, for example, defended tenaciously when called upon. I think, however, that they were comparable to how any other German unit would perform under the circumstances. Jut my opinion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlers underpants Posted April 15, 2002 Author Share Posted April 15, 2002 my topic of conversation goes back to a conversation i had 20 yrs ago with my late grandfather who served under brigadefuhrer de witt in the hitlerjugend division,he basically said that the ss divisions(mainly the classic ones)were very fanatical and believed themselves to be the best fighting force in the world,this led to my grandfather believing that ss losses,which in a lot of offensive engagements in mid 44 were 60% or higher but he said this was covered up to keep morale high.He also said that many of the commanders preferred fighting defencivly (sic) because of the divisions "saturation firepower"to back this up he told me a story about a defence around caen were the allied casualties were 10 times greater than the ss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conscript Bagger Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 Oh good, I'm here early enough to grab a good seat before the grogs show up. My immediate reaction is that your grandfather's opinion is (understandably) skewed since he's talking about his own branch of service. I'd hardly expect him to say "my bunch were okay, but we got kicked around worse than the Italians" or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Bates Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 Originally posted by hitlers underpants: He also said that many of the commanders preferred fighting defencivly (sic) because of the divisions "saturation firepower"to back this up he told me a story about a defence around caen were the allied casualties were 10 times greater than the ss.I have the figures for Caen somewhere and 10 times greater Allied casualties does not sound right at all. The Germans of course had a very great concentration of tanks in the Caen area. The Germans may have been able to defend in an urban area with high overlooking ground behind them, but I seriously doubt this would give such a defensive advantage... the German defenders in Caen were seriously carpet bombed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted April 16, 2002 Share Posted April 16, 2002 Originally posted by hitlers underpants: they were much better in defence than on offence,Isn't everyone???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted April 16, 2002 Share Posted April 16, 2002 1) I bet if you ask some old Russian vets, they can tell you the Waffen-SS were were quite good in any role, attack or defense. Considering they spearheaded some of the most important offensives on the Eastern Front, the Waffen-SS could obviously do both quite well. 2) If you are focusing on the later period of war, the entire German army was basically on the defensive with some limited offensive operations to mainly throw the Allies off balance. There were a few bigger offensives but nothing like the Germans could muster for Kursk or at the beginning of Barbarossa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted April 16, 2002 Share Posted April 16, 2002 This thread is better suited to the General Forum although I would caution Mr. "pants" that making broad statements like that withoutnany cited source material is not going to win you any discussion points here. Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts