I had a glimpse of the Polish contribution to WW2. I visited Monte Casino one of the most difficult battles of the Italian Campaign. The most moving sight was the Polish Cemetery. After months of battle it was the Poles who finally took the summit at great sacrifice. It was a moving experience. Especially since those young Polish soldiers gave their lives and yet their country was then under Soviet tyranny for another 40 years. They resisted all those years, and finally achieved their freedom. God bless.
I wont argue that freedom has been gained, but are we truly what we ware before? Despite braking out of Soviet political control we ware unable to this day to brake out from its laws. Most of our law's that we use is basicly what was back then but rewriten to "sound" like its new and free from occupation past. Not to mention our politicians who ware eather teached how to be a "good communist" or plain greedy who capitalised on situation to gain power... In the end, we are not free and we are not we used to be. Perhaps we never will now...
They all fought and bled and died just for their nation to be sold out by their allies’. The Eternal Anglo strikes once again, go fuck yourselves you Britbongs.
"Oh, I'm sorry. General Sosabowski, you'll go with the Polish Brigade...." This fragment nicely sums up the attitude of Britain towards Poland during WWII.
The Poles made a valued contribution every where they fought in World War II, some tend to forget that little fact. Or the contributions to code breaking. It should have never been permitted to let the Soviets occupy Poland after the War Ended.
A rhetorical question, no doubt? But still, for those who are unenlightened, it was because Montgomery became a bloodthirsty glory seeking buffoon after El Alamein, he and George Patton were as bad as each other. Added to that, General Browning was always kissing Bernard's hands and feet as well as his backside, even if they were coated in everyone else's blood (metaphorically speaking of course) bar for his own. Sosabowski had every right to be skeptical of Montgomery's plan from the very beginning, as did the rest of the allied commanders. I'm saying this, as my Grandad (my father's dad) was in the Irish Guards, part of General Horrocks's 30 Corps. My father told me that my Grandfather despised Montgomery. As soon as Von Rundstedt pulled Bittrich's Panzers back to Arnhem, so they could rest up to face down Patton... well, that was it really. I mean light infantry/paratroopers versus tanks/mechanized infantry (SchutzStaffel I might also point out, and not the Wehrmacht), one doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to determine the outcome there. But I suppose in a way Market Garden did work out in the long run, but in Patton's favour and not Montgomery's.
1st airborne still held out far longer than they were supposed to. they accomplished their mission to hold the arnhem road bridge despite the panzer divisions in the city. it was XXX corps' mission that failed in taking more the double the planned length of time to reach the city.
Not entirely XXX corps fault though, there's something to be said about 82nd's failure to take Nijmegen bridge on day one when it was lightly defended.
Major General Stanisław Sosabowski, never forgiven by the British Establishment for being outspoken during and after the war. He used to work at CAV Acton London England as a factory worker ie Charles Anthony Vandervell large group of factory buildings. You heard of him, via other workers but nobody really talked about his achievements of WW2, and I for one did not believe that a general was working as a factory hand. It was only after seeing the film on its release , that this true hero of the Poles and fellow fighters came to light.
Robert Rouse my father dispatched poles over their landing ground and witnessed the carnage and slaughter of as he put “the poor buggers “ .that is all he ever said about it.
he was made a scapegoat for the failures of others! he did not even receive a pension and had to work til the age of 75.... You see that lack of respect from the british towards their allies will not be forgotten... next time no one will be jumping in the line of fire to save precious british blood
@@SwabianWookie In Poland, we have a saying that no one goes well on pacts with the British ;) or that the British always fight to the last drop of blood ... their allies ;)
February 1946 the communist government in Warsaw announced that the Polish Armed Forces in the West are no more recognized as Polish. In 1948, General Sosabowski was demobilized. He remained in exile in Britain and worked as a warehouse worker and a factory of television sets. He died September 25, 1967 in London. In 1969 General paratroopers, still faithful to their commander,brought his ashes to Poland,which were buried - according to his will - at the Military Cemetery at Powązki in Warsaw.
With such old movies I often think, while they might have inaccurate tanks and combat scenes limited by the period special effects, the dialogues such as this were so much better than anything in contemporary war movies.
They had good screenwriters who knew how to build characters, and solid actors both in starring and supporting roles. I'll take that any day before relentless CGI barrage or "battle gore".
I remember when I saw this with my son, when the German officer moved the marker to Arnhem he asked me what happened. When I told him that meant that the 2nd SS panzer corp had been moved to that city. He asked what that meant, I told him that the Germans had moved 2 SS tank divisions there. He looked at me and said that might screw up the plan.
They never had a single available tank to throw at the paratroopers. They had to call in tank reinforcements from Germany, which didn't arrive until the following days.
After the battle at Arnhem Sosabowski was unjustly made a scapegoat for the failure of Operation Market Garden, following a critical evaluation by Browning. He was accused of criticizing Montgomery and the Polish General Staff was forced to remove him as the commanding officer of his brigade in December 1944. He was made the commander of guard troops and in July 1948 he was demobilised.
@@HerbiieIsBest The _hell_ he wasn't. Gen. Urquhart -- inexperienced at airborne operations -- allowed the RAF to dictate drop zones that were much too far from his objectives, then he got himself penned up in an attic an was unable to command his troops for two crucial days. There was a severe communications breakdown. British Gen. Frederick "Boy" Browning dismissed critical intelligence brought to him by his intelligence officer, Major Brian Urquhart (who was renamed "Maj. Fuller" for the movie to avoid confusion with Gen. Roy Urquhart, who was played by Sean Connery) that two elite SS panzer divisions were in the area. American General James Gavin has been criticized for securing the high ground around Groesbeek before attempting the capture of the Waal bridge at Nijmegen, but he was following Browning's order to try and secure the heights first -- this resulted in a severe delay. XXX corps fell way behind the timetable for the operation. These are only some of the _many_ reasons for failure at Arnhem. Ultimately, Market-Garden was doomed to fail, not only because of all these errors, but because it was fundamentally _a bad plan._ For it to succeed, everything had to go right, and if any one part of the plan failed, the whole thing failed. There was no room in it for adjustment when things started to go wrong -- as they _always_ do, and for that you can blame the plan's chief architect: Field Marshall Sir Bernard Montgomery. Thanks to bad weather delaying their airlift, Sosabowski and his troops didn't even get into the fight until very late in the game -- by which time the situation was already irretrievable. He was scapegoated after the whole thing was over by Montgomery and Browning, who accused his troops of performing badly (which they didn't) and criticized his "hostility" and his outspoken pessimism about the operation. Well, Sosabowski was _right_ about the operation, and he correctly saw it was doomed to failure.
@@Hibernicus1968 'He was scapegoated after the whole thing was over by Montgomery and Browning' Montgomery was critical of Sosabowski after the operation, in a letter to Alanbrooke. He was was entitled to express his opinion to his superior. Likewise, Browning, in a letter to Weeks. That does mean that Sosabowski was blamed for the failure to capture Arnhem.
@@Hibernicus1968 'The hell he wasn't. Gen. Urquhart -- inexperienced at airborne operations -- allowed the RAF to dictate drop zones that were much too far from his objectives' The final choice of drop zones was down the commander of the FAAA (that's the First Allied Airborne Army, to save you looking it up) the US General Brereton. On this, the evidence is clear: CHESTER WILMOT THE STRUGGLE FOR EUROPE WM. COLLINS, SONS AND CO LTD. 1954 P 588 The Guards, breaking out along one road, met strong opposition nearly all the way to Eindhoven, and yet they drove their armour through these twelve bitterly contested miles in twenty-four hours. When they reached the southern end of the ‘airborne corridor’ on the evening of D plus 1, they were halted for the night by the blown bridge at Zon. This bridge might have been captured intact if the 101st Division had agreed to Montgomery's proposal that it should drop paratroops on either side of the objective, as was done at Grave. THE GUNS AT LAST LIGHT THE WAR IN WESTERN EUROPE, 1944-1945 Rick Atkinson LITTLE BROWN 2013. P 265 ‘General Brereton’s troop carrier commanders had insisted that only a single mission fly on Sunday; a second sortie would ostensibly exhaust air and ground crews and leave insufficient time to service and reload the planes (although double missions over the same distance had been flown from Italy in DRAGOON the previous month). Pleas by airborne commanders and by an emissary from Montgomery to Brereton’s headquarters failed to reverse the decision, despite analysis that showed transporting the entire combat force at a deliberate rate could take up to four days.’ UNITED STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II The European Theater of Operations THE SIEGFRIED LINE CAMPAIGN By Charles B. MacDonald CENTER OF MILITARY HISTORY UNITED STATES ARMY WASHINGTON, D.C., 1993 P132 ‘Naturally anxious that all their strength arrive on D-Day, the division commanders asked that the planes fly more than one mission the first day. They pointed to the importance of bringing all troops into the corridor before the enemy could reinforce his antiaircraft defenses or launch an organized ground assault. For their part, the troop carrier commanders dissented. Flying more than one mission per aircraft, they said, would afford insufficient time between missions for spot maintenance, repair of battle damage, and rest for the crews. High casualties among the airmen might be the result. If weather remained favorable, they pointed out, and if combat aircraft assumed some of the resupply missions, the troop carriers might fly but one mission daily and still transport three and a half divisions by D plus 2. Although it meant taking a chance on enemy reaction and on the weather, General Brereton sided with the troop carrier commanders. He decided on one lift per day. Although subsequent planning indicated that it would in fact take four days to convey the divisions, General Brereton stuck by his decision.’
The saddest part about it was that Sosabowski was one of the best generals allies had. He was offered to be commander of all allied airborne forces but refused to keep command of Polish air borne units that were to be later used to liberate Poland (which never happened). He was against the plan since the beginning and insisted that it needs better intel and better prepared landing zones, but he was ignored cause Monty wanted his glory fast. Anyway watch "The General's Honour" for more info.
See my comment of 2/9/17. Ps We didnt go to war against the Nazis for Poland, it was to protect the British Empire. The irony, was the UK was skint in 1945 and lost its Empire anyway. The real winners were the USA and the USSR. Poor Poland.
Hitler offered to let Britain keep it's Empire if they surrendered and allowed Germany free rein in Europe. It is to Britain's eternal credit that they did not accept this offer.
Where had Sosabowski proved to be one of the best Generals? In Aug 1944 he hadn't seen action since the fall of Poland. Plenty of experience as a junior commander, in three different armies I believe, but he hadn't commanded anything larger than a brigade. Hardly a qualification for one of the best.
@@davidrendall2461 He was by far the most combat experienced & capable out of all the Allied commanders during Market Garden (and under what circumstances I might add) and he had consistently proved himself as an exceptionally capable commander under the most horrific odds. I suggest before you make ignorant comments that you actually study the life of the person in question before doing so. Had they listened to him before and during the battle it would have certainly turned out differently.
My Uncle Pat was a C47 pilot. His squadron participated in D-Day and Market-Garden drops. My uncle loved his squadron and never missed a reunion. He received a letter from his squadron committee months before filming started on this movie saying they were looking for experienced C47 (DC3) pilots. He was an attorney by then, in his 50's, and simply couldn't take the time to go work on the movie, but he dearly wanted to.
The guy playing Gen. Maxwell Taylor was in Aliens...he was the suit Ripley was arguing with, right after the meeting where she got blamed for destroying the Nostromo.
someone did a documentary on Sosabowski and the Polish paratroopers. its called the General's Honor. you can find it on youtube. it has lots of good information.
This is a movie. In reality most generals voiced opposition concerning the feasibility of this plan. There were so many flaws in it not the least of which was Monty thinking he could advance that far that fast. In the end it turned in to a race to save the remnants of the British Air Borne division who had held out far longer than they were told they would have to.
Market-Garden was actually the best option for getting across the Rhine and into Germany, at a spot north of the end of the Siegfried Line. Unfortunately, the plan was flawed in too many ways. The presence of Bittrich, the widespread objectives, the failure to get all airborne units into the battle due to the weather, and the one tank front were all major contributions to the failure, but the biggest reason had already taken place. The failure of the British to continue their advance after capturing Antwerp allowed Von Rundstedt to evacuate a large portion of the Fifteenth Army which was trapped on the French coast. These troops were available for counterattacks which cut the road several times and threatened all of the units south of Arnhem. By maintaining pressure on the enemy when their front was non-existent in Holland, the escape route for the Germans could have been sealed, and many objectives of Market-Garden taken before the attack began. I will agree with Monty on one issue. Eisenhower should have stopped Patton, even to the point of saying "buh-bye" when he made his inevitable threat to resign. Bradley had Patton get heavily involved on the 17th so that no supplies could be diverted north, and these supplies could have been used by the other corps in Dempsey's army to broaden the front. Patton wasn't going anywhere anyway. He was obsessed with the Metz fortresses, and did not get clear of them until November. Instead of letting Patton waste time and men in the south, far from the Siegfried line and the Rhine, everything should have gone into Holland, even if Monty was not the best general for the job. He was in the right place, and a maximum effort should have been made on his front.
Exactly, Guderian said it well, don't poke with fingers, but smash with fists. Attacking in the Dutch countryside which is flooded, meant an attack up one single road with a few tanks that could easily be picked off as shown in the movie. And a single division attacking without support on its flanks was bound to not go well.
Montgomery is one of the worst Allied generals who still retains some semblance of praise. He won El Alamein because all the work was done for him and he had 2.5x1 advantage. His slow crossing of Libya allowed Rommel maneuverability vs the Americans, his Sicily invasion plan was idiotic and he fought slowly and incompetently, same for Italy. He allowed the enemy to hold Caan for weeks instead of days. Market Garden was an idiots plan for ending the war, too daring for a man who was known to be ultra cautious, and executed in a way that reflected Monty's incompetence. The fact they blamed the Poles just adds dishonor to their names. To hell with Monty
@@BattlestarPegasus Monty gets praise for chasing Rommel across North Africa, but once the Torch landings took place, Rommel had no choice but to fall back on Tunisia. He couldn't hold at Benghazi or El Agheila when there was a second Allied army in his rear and the Vichy forces had just changed sides. Monty made Rommel's retreat easier by being too cautious. Pausing to regroup and bring up supplies might have been a good idea when Eighth Army couldn't get too far into the desert without coming under the German air umbrella based around Tripoli, but that was no longer an issue.
@@BattlestarPegasus Not a Montgomery fan by any stretch, however, he was the master of the set piece battle. As long as he had time to set up and prepare the battlefield, he was unparalleled on the Allied side. Both battles at El Alamein show this - many people forget about the 1st one that halted the Axis advance in September, 1942. His initial handling of the Normandy landings was also well played. It is after the battle progressed - when plans usually start to break down - that his flaws come to the fore. To me, comparing Montgomery to Patton is a fool's errand. They were two different generals, with very different styles. Patton was a quick planner & mover who believed a good battle plan today beats a perfect battle plan tomorrow. This is evidenced by his offensive against the Axis as soon as he took over II Corps in Tunisia, his pivot to Palermo in Sicily, & his legendary march to the German southern flank at the Bulge.
It was a movie scene, but I would suspect that all of the Division commanders present had to have their own doubts about the ambitious plan, but since it was something Montgomery apparently wanted to do, their choice was to follow orders and do the best they could given the situation on the ground or be relieved of command and have their troops go on the operation without them. Note that Sosabowski did not go any futher when Browning "corrected" the IF to WHEN.
Gen sasabowski un tipo directo y con sentido común; ahora dirían " políticamente incorrecto" jajaja!!!! Lo ningunearon ; pero fué el que más huevos puso!!!!
Theodore Bugsby wwI ended with polands creation WwII ended with an even bigger land grab There is no other nation in europe that actually had such profits from wwII. If there is a country in europe that cant complain, its the poles
'"It is my believe, that this will be the most momentus error of the war." General George S. Patton Jr.' Is this quote on record anywhere? Or did you make it because you think it might be the sort of thing that Patton might have stated?
@@lyndoncmp5751 Yes Lyndon. MARKET GARDEN was not a particularly large undertaking. Its the spectacular airborne stuff that raises interest in the undertaking. This from Alan Moorehead, who as we know, was with the allied armies at thst time: 'Arnhem was an incident magnified far beyond its strategic importance by the peculiar and exciting circumstances and poignant tragedy of the stranded parachutists. Actually, only a handful of divisions was involved, the over-all losses were small and apart from the magnificent outburst of courage the battle had no more significance than half a dozen actions that were fought that same winter.'
One minor error - in the scene where Dield Marshal von Rundestadt is deciding where to send Bitterich's II SS Panzer Corps to rest - the block he places on Arnhem is labelled II SS Pz Div - Div being short for Division, not Corps.
Gene Hackman calls his agent: “I’m playing a general with a speech impediment.” Gene Hackman’s agent: “Actually, you’re playing a general with a Polish accent.” Gene Hackman: “Same thing.”
first of all, Herr Wittmann, you have misspeled general's name. His name was Sosabowski. Second of all, he said "I am a Pole, considered by some to be smart." By the way, there is some suspicion that Michael Wittmann was killed by soldiers of the 1st Polish Armored Brigade. Quite ironic, isn't it?
And the RAF wouldn't fly British 1st Airborne closer to Arnhem either. The plan failed before it even began, due to poor air planning (nothing to do with Montgomery).
@@lyndoncmp5751the decisions around drop zones were made by General Brereton the US General in command of First Airborne Army, he was also the man who refused to allow the aircrew to fly 2 sorties a day (which would’ve got everyone on the ground on day 1).
Monty's plan was to actually defeat the Germans was it not? This operation was a prime example of the utter incompetence of Churchill and that cock up Montgomery
This was another of Monty's brilliant ideas of which he was known. It failed like most of his other ideas or was rejected. How he ever got to make Field Marshall astounds most military scholars for he was clearly second rate. His mouth was always bigger than his abilities. Eisenhower would have been better off if he could have gotten rid of him.
antares4s Have you actually read any genuine history of WWII? Do you really believe the propaganda spread mainly by Omar Bradley's press corps about Monty. This stems from Bradley's dislike of Monty which turned to bitter hatred after the F.M. had to be given command of the U.S. 1st and 9th Armies (Bradley's command) as Bradley was stranded in Luxembourg and out of touch. Bradley realised it was himself who had created the weakened line in the Ardennes Sector, another factor which seemed to him to result in Monty "saving his neck". Finally, although the Battle Of The Bulge was a huge scare for the Allies, it could never have succeeded for the reason that as soon as Montgomery heard of the attack he despatched British XXX Corps to protect the Meuse crossings which he could see were the main objective of the German attack.
The plan was perfectly sound and feasible...... The airborne carpet with 30 corps passing over it was brilliantly simple and attainable. Instead......browning ignored Dutch intelligence reports of strong ss armoured units in the area. Browning held back sossobowski Until it was too late. The drop zones were miles from intended areas A full set of plans fell into german hands from a crashed glider.... This was explicitly forbidden by HQ And would the officer who disobeyed order lived.....I have no doubt he would have been court martialld. The radios issued to units did not work. ...so units could only interact and operate in conjunction by using runners. Lastly......pure without doubt bad luck that by mere chance arnhem Was chosen as the place for 2nd ss panzer to refit.
@@caractacusbrittania7442 the Dutch intelligence was considered to be tainted, as the Dutch SOE had been infiltrated. Browning didn't hold back the Poles - bad weather over England stopped the Poles, as they couldn't take off. The drop zones being too far wasn't really the issue, it was the fact that the German defenses had been "decentralised", and it was the exceptional work of Spindler in cobbling together a workable stop-gap defense. With regards to the sets of plans, there was a set of plans that outlined specifically the actions and objectives of 101st AB ONLY, but given the details, it wasn't hard for Model to work out the real objectives, given that there was also drops in Nijmegen and Arnhem. As for the tanks of 9th & 10th SS Panzer units, they were only at about 30% strength and were not considered to be too large of a threat. The real threat from armour came in the days after (specifically days 3 & 4). Had 82nd AB taken the Nijmegen Bridge at the earliest opportunity, instead of concentrating on the Groesbeek Heghts, then XXX Corp would have been in Arnhem in time to relieve 2nd Para, under Frost's command.
Patton wanted a head on charge at the siegfried line. The bulk of the German western warmachine was holed up there. He MIGHT have got to berlin quicker then Market Garden but at the cost of thousands off allied soldiers being literally "chucked" into the meat grinder. There was a reason why Eisenhower picked Monty. However in my opinion their great success as generals, came when the two worked together. Almost like completing a full circle.
Unlike the II SS Panzer Korps where Monty was located, Patton's 3rd Army faced little to no real armored threat in his sector of the Seigfried Line. Patton's missions were creative, simple, and bold unlike Monty's plans. The REAL reason Ike chose Monty is because the Germans were dropping the V2 rockets onto England. Their launch sites were in that area, and Winston Churchill persuaded Ike to take out those locations as top priority or else the Allies would be authorized to use chemical warfare on the Germans which Ike was vehemently opposed to. The V2's scared the hell out of the English (and rightfully so).
@gunnermac70 no Monty was just arrogant, overly optimistic, and did poor planning about Market Garden. not stupid though. should have listened to the Pole.
Had Gavin's troops taken the Nijmagen bridge, on Day 1 as planned, when it was +/- undefended, then the plan would have worked. The delay caused by their failure to capture the bridge for three days was fatal. Fault? Browning - certainly, Gavin - certainly. Montgomery - how?
It was his idea.Shoehorning a whole corp of armor up a 64 mile elevated lane with no room for maneuver is the response of an idiot.He thought he could get to the Ruhr 1st trying to grab glory and he got good soldiers killed
@@14067913 _Montgomery - how?_ By rushing it. The whole thing was done in 7 days (which says a lot about the good competence of Montgomery's staff, who must have been working 24/7)
@@bigwoody4704XXX Corps did everything that was asked of it, 82nd Airborne didn’t even try and approach their primary objective (and one of the few that had to be taken as it couldn’t be bridged) until after it got dark on day 1. If they had prioritised it XXX Corps would’ve got to Arnhem before 2 Para surrendered. (Likewise 1st Airborne made a hash of taking Arnhem Bridge, they could’ve and should’ve gotten a whole Brigade there on Day 1 but they fannied about.
they did too you unread rube where was monty - oh that's right like you no where around.We gave tanks to the British but monty being a moron sent them down ONE ELEVATED ROAD for 55 of the 70 miles. Then they took almost 4 full days to get there - British urgency the 82nd were on foot and fought apc and half tracks with mounted 22mm/37 mm AA Gunsand very easyThe 82nd had the most onjectives and the furthest apart But you don't know that as because you don't read as history isn't important - typical
@@jebbroham1776 He was the main man for defense. It's unfortunate Germany didn't have any resources by 43-44. Hell, even Barbarossa's success rate was around 10% considering the fuel in their reserves and the resources they had. Franz Halder cost Germany the war when he chose Moscow instead of going south. AH was doing well until 6th Army encirclement at Stalingrad. He was right to blame the generals for the failures that cost Germany. His decisions in 1943-44 are peanuts comparing what Field Marshals like Franz Halder did. Germany needed the war against SU for resources, strategic routes and living space.
@@erich2432 Even if the Germans had gone south, didn't the Soviets destroy most of the oil fields at Maikop that they wanted to take anyway? I seem to recall seeing a photograph of German soldiers arriving to see the oil fields a blaze.
Also, several stretches of that route were polder roads. It means that tanks were exposed (at some places even outlined against the sky), had little room to maneuver (polder ground is quite soft and tanks could get bogged down) and could be picked apart by antitank guns posted in the fields. That's why the Highway 69 (the main route taken by XXX Corps - present day A 50 motorway) was nicknamed "Hell's Highway".
Logistics of movement is the Achilles heel of many a great general. Failure to take such things into account has doomed many a plan. However plan with that in mind and you will have success. One should look at Sherman's March to the Sea to understand that bold military maneuvers need such planning to succeed. Every single detail of that was planned to maximize movement speed. For instance the standard marching formation for infantry at the time was 4 abreast, However he had the columns separate into two columns of two one on each side of roads with the artillery and wagons in the middle. Thereby his column length was far shorter. This allowed him to move faster through Georgia.
General Taylor actually wasn't present at the meeting for Market Garden. He sent the 101st's Artillery commander, General McAuliffe (who later became the division CO) in his place.
Ryan Rodrigues 'the idea of the Germans preferring to fight Montgomery rather than Patton'... ...is total rubbish. Patton did not even rate a German dossier before D-Day. www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm Here is a sort of Hors d'oeuvre: 'One piece of the Patton story, however, is pure myth: that Patton was the subject of close scrutiny by the Germans, who anticipated his attacks in fearful admiration. General Patton was not, as his biographer Martin Blumenson wrote in The Patton Papers: 1885-1940, a “hero even to professional German officers who respected him as the adversary they most feared in battle.” Nor was he, as Ladislas Farago claimed in his book Patton, regarded by the Germans “as their most dangerous adversary in the field…. For a while the Germans watched the comings and goings of Patton like rubbernecked spectators following a tennis ball at Wimbledon.” In fact, for most of the war the Germans barely took notice.'
You knob that's why the gerries were waiting for the ghost army to land at the Pas de Calais .You just can't help making up bullshit hoping someone as thick as you believes it ENJOY!!!! *www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/06/d-day-would-be-nearly-impossible-pull-off-today-heres-why/*
Ryan Rodrigues From the same source as I previously posted: 'Despite the Allies’ best efforts, the Germans did not decide until mid-May-months after they concluded that the Allied invasion would land at Pas de Calais or in Belgium-that Patton had indeed taken command of FUSAG. However, his leadership of the supposed landings at Pas de Calais appears to have been incidental to the strategic conclusions the Germans reached regarding the Allied invasion. None of the surviving pre-invasion records from the command of Army Group B, responsible for defending northwestern France, mention Patton outside the FUSAG order of battle. In contrast, the Germans methodically recorded the statements and meetings of Montgomery and Eisenhower, and bombarded their agents with questions about Montgomery’s movements.'
Who did the sums on the drop and keeping it supplied? Big drops like this have never worked because of logistics fuck ups and over optimistic expectations on what can be achieved,.
Morrigan Ravenchild The British 1st Airborne Division was in a difficult supply situation practically from the start. It's planned resupply drop zone was located just north of Arnhem, an area that the division was suppose to easily secure on the first day, but never did due to strong and unexpected German resistence. The resupply planes would dutifully fly over every day, dropping all their supplies to the Germans, and suffering heavy losses to anti aircraft fire. The British Division couldn't tell anyone about the problem because their radios wouldn't work. By the time they could tell anyone, and the dropping zone was changed, they had been forced into such a small perimeter that most of their airdropped supplies still didn't reach them.
The intent was to relieve the Paras within 2-3 days the logistics were fine, it was ten execution by 82nd airborne and 1st airborne that was the issue.
@@morriganravenchild6613 not really, the logistics to keep them supplied was sufficient, or would’ve been if they hadn’t lost the drop zones. Which was a consequence of poor initial deployment meaning they failed to achieve their primary objective and then burning through a lot of the remaining combat power of the Division on D+1 and D+2 trying to retrieve the situation.
I think people are too lazy to look for another word, like overzealous, or selfish (as many generals seemed to be!) they see any misjudged foresight as "stupidity". People sometimes seem lack empathy for the strong willed.
does that mean i have as much of idea of tactics and planning as Montgomery? if you read most books, it described Market Garden as a disaster. poor planning, and everything else. if it was so successful, why did Monty and Browning blame Sosabowski and the Poles for the failure? 1st Airborne was missng three quarters of its forces. may i suggest you read some more books and the history channel. you like Monty, fine, he did some things really good; Market Garden is not one of them.
In the military world, when something goes wrong, it's SOMEBODY's fault regardless. Somebody's taking the fall. If a meteor fell on the planet and wiped out an entire division of troops, somebody's going to get blamed for "improper troop deployment" or something. Disbelieve? Join a western military. Only then will you understand.
"I am a Pole. Considered by some to be smart. If that is so, it makes me member of true minority group. Minority groups are not comfortable in senats." - I recommend to read "Najkrótszą drogą" and "Droga wiodła ugorem". It shows the mentality of this GREAT MAN ! Trule, absolute Legend he was!
Truth be told it quite probably would have worked had not the SS Panzer Division been sent to Arnhem for R&R. The decision to ignore intel that they were there however, that was unforgivable.
@@StaffordMagnusit would’ve worked if 82nd airborne had prioritised taking Nijmegen bridge instead of treating it like a secondary objective. Or if 1st airborne hadn’t dispersed their forces and had gotten a whole brigade to the bridge on day 1.
Patton did not meet Eisenhower until after ww1. Eisenhower choose Monty's plan to rapidly pursue the retreating german army northwards after the falaise pocket and gain a rapid bridgehead over the rhine as opposed to the siegfried line. 30 corps stopped because the SS Panzer divisions were attacking its flanks defended by paratroopers. Actualy read up history.
"Bittrich, II SS Panzer". The unit being moved to Arnhem for a re-fit and the name of their commander. The word Arnhem on the map has the Dutch spelling. It may be a Dutch map. The officers discussing it are speaking German and refer to it as Arnheim.
If only the Germans hadn't arbitrarily stationed a Panzer group in Arnhem the plan would have worked.... If only. In any case the operation was 90% successful according to Monty so that's alright. Who wouldn't be happy with a 90 on a test?
But it’s not a test. Losing 10% of your force *may* be acceptable if you are successful. Losing that many in a failure is close to a failure to command. The loss of the soldiers and their equipment, the impact on morale (of both sides) and the flow on effects are enormous. The outcome of Market Garden came close to giving the Nazis at least a temporary control of the battlefield. A tragic consequence of the operation's failure was the Dutch famine of 1944-45. During the battle Dutch railway workers, incited by the Dutch government in London, went on strike in order to aid the Allied assault. In retribution Germany forbade food transportation, and in the following winter more than twenty thousand Dutch citizens starved to death. As for MG being 90% successful, Montgomery is hardly an objective observer.
@@gary-pv8vz The allies got closer to Germany, the Germans retreated and hundreds of thousands of Dutch people were liberated. The Hurtgen Forest and Lorraine etc debacles dragged the war on, not Market Garden. Market Garden actually even protected Antwerp.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Allies were supposed to reach the Ruhr. But, they didn't which is why Market Garden can be considered as allies strategic failure. Netherlands was completely liberated once the war in Europe came to an end which means the Germans simply withdrew/surrendered once their govt/high-command collapsed. Netherlands also suffered a famine in the winter 44-45. Had MG succeeded, Germans wouldn't dare to pull the Ardennes Offensive or fight a brutal defensive battle at Hurtgen. Germany's priority was the Soviets. The only reason Germans fought hard in the west front post MG operation was due to somebody got hold of the Morgenthau Plan and Goebbels used it to motivate whatever left of German strength to fight against the allies. Maybe this was the reason why there was fierce brutal fighting from the Germans at Ardennes and Hurtgen. Because in the east, there was less action once AGC was destroyed during Bagration until Red Army entered Austria and Prussia.
Montgomery should have been relieved and sent quietly to do administrative duties after Normandy. It should have been obvious after his lackluster commands in Sicily and Normandy he didn't have the skills to fight the Germans on more even terms. The Brits allowed his celebrity from beating the overstretched and undersupplied Afrika Korps to cloud their evaluation of the man. Thousands of British, American, and Polish troops paid the price in blood for his ego and incompetence. It astounds me that anyone defends that idiot now.
who planned the entire of D-Day you colossal moron. If Gavin had done what he was ordered to do and take his bridge in time, it would have succeeded. Yanks bleed that Monty was too cautious (he was because of the carnage he witnessed in WW1). D-Day was hugely ambitious and innovative. He and his staff planned it. Then he planned a hugely risky but ambitious raid which was worth a punt. Then and as usual the Yanks turned up late. In this case Gavin and then everyone else gets the blame for an American failure. The great swan was a huge success and Paris was take before the planned time. All also planned by montgomery.
Montgomery = most experienced and most successful Western Allied ground commander of WW2. Nobody did more to win the ground war in the west than Montgomery. Paris was reached ahead of schedule then he went to the rescue of the Americans in the Ardennes. Monty didnt plan the Market part of Market Garden. The air commanders did. Had Montgomery made those decisions it likely would have succeeded, just like all his other battles did. The Americans screwed up far worse in the Hurtgen Forest and Lorraine etc.
TheBernice 'Montgomery should have been relieved and sent quietly to do administrative duties after Normandy.' Your words. On what grounds? Montgomery was charged with reaching the Seine by D+90 but got there by D+78., with 22% fewer than expected casualties, and with the disruption to the allied build up caused by the great storm in the weeks after D-Day. For Sicily, Montgomery tore up the Patton plan to land troops all around the island, concentrated allied resources and as a result it was all over in a matter of weeks. 'The Brits allowed his celebrity from beating the overstretched and undersupplied Afrika Korps to cloud their evaluation of the man. ' Your words. ‘without consulting Cairo, he issued immediate orders that, if Rommel attacked, all units should fight on the ground where they and that there should be no withdrawal or surrender. The effect on the Army was electric.’ ‘I was dumfounded by the rapidity with which he had grasped the situation facing him, the ability with which had grasped the essentials, the clarity of his plans , and above all his unbounded self-confidence-a self-confidence with which he inspired all those that he came into contact with.’ Alenbrooke ‘I saw a great many soldiers that day, who greeted me with grins and cheers. I inspected my own regiment, the 4th Hussars, or as many of them as they dared to bring together - perhaps fifty or sixty - near the field cemetery, in which a number of their comrades had been buried. All this was moving, but with it all there grew a sense of the reviving ardour of the Army. Everybody said what a change there was since Montgomery had taken command. I could feel the truth of this with joy and comfort.’ Churchill ‘I have always considered that Montgomery’s first two or three days with his Army was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life, and the way in which he put over his personality, right through the Army, was really remarkable. Besides talking to the staff and laying down what he called his ‘military philosophy’, he met all Commanders and their troops and, of course, examined in great detail the ground now held and that over which we would have to fight. I accompanied him during the reconnaissances which resulted in decisions as to the way he proposed to dispose his forces for the defensive battles which we all expected. It would be Rommel’s last desperate to reach the Delta, and failure would remove once and for all the threat to our Middle East Base.’ DeGuingand. "Montgomery when he arrived in Africa changed the way the 8th army fought, he was a very good army trainer and was ruthless in his desire to win, he changed the battle into an infantry battle supported by artillery. " German Generalmajor FW von Mellenthin Btw. At Alam el Halfa, Montgomery with four divisions, defeated Rommel's six divisions.
XXX Corps didn't reach the paras in the estimated time. Paras were supposed to hand those strategic points they captured to the armoured artillery units/frontline troops. Paras are just special troops for special missions.
This movie was most excellent but Gene Hackmans polish accent is so terrible. I didnt realised that he was suppose to be playing a Polish officer. His accent is like the mixture of Irish, english and some other foreign accent. I dont understand! 😂
Monty doesn't make brilliant performance in africa too.. "Supercharge" in Alamein and following pursuit after Romel wasn't acts of genius. I say in versus.
This scene never really made much sense to me. The germans deploy the Bittrich's pz corps that was supposed to stop Patton behind the line opposing Montgomery's sector. Why would they want to put the reserve so far north and then have them march all the way south for battle to stop Patton. Seems like a movie premise tko show German high regard for Patton, nothing else.
@John Cornell It fits historical facts. Please remember, that entire Allied rouse before D-Day was also centered around Pattton. We was basically being dangled before Germans, who had alredy knew him.
Cornhole lies at the drop of a hat and drops the hat himself.He wouldn't recognize the truth if it blew up in his face and circled around and bit him in the ass.CORNHOLE You knob that's why the gerries were waiting for the ghost army to land at the Pas de Calais .You just can't help making up bullshit hoping someone as thick as you believes it ENJOY!!!! *www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/06/d-day-would-be-nearly-impossible-pull-off-today-heres-why/*
no General Sosabowski, the Polish General. 90% of the goals may have been achieved but the cost was too high. Allies had more casualties than in the Normandy campaign. the plan looked good but to many ifs and overly optimistic planning. too many things went wrong, as General Powell has said, no plan survives the point of contact. it would have been great if it worked by all means.
@bpiotrAgain The poles may have had a air brigade in 1944, but it was a brigade euipped, outfitted and supplied by Britain. Also the poles had no wings to fly to their country, the still needed some sort of airtransport, the RAF. So much for the hopes of thousands of people in warsaw, only fools would hope, a parachute drop into poland was a no go, completely unrealistic.
It may have been equipped, outfitted and supplied by Britain but it was at Poland's expense, Poland's gold reserve had been spirited away by ship before the Germans could get it at the start of the war and it was held in Canada until the end, Poland paid in full for its armed forces in the West (for fighting Britain's war) only to be betrayed & sold off to Stalin by her allies. You call it fools would, hope, completely unrealistic but actually it wasn't and it wasn't a solely Polish plan - but jointly agreed by Britain & the Poles, which is the sole reason they raised a Polish parachute brigade.
@dolcann z Furthermore, individual Poles paid for their equipment as well, the Brits charged their salaries for every scrap of equipment they were provided with.
"it was a brigade euipped, outfitted and supplied by Britain"....for which Polish government in exile paid in pure gold. Help for fighting Warsaw was possible and realistic. But there was no will to help...and the question is why?
I had a glimpse of the Polish contribution to WW2. I visited Monte Casino one of the most difficult battles of the Italian Campaign. The most moving sight was the Polish Cemetery. After months of battle it was the Poles who finally took the summit at great sacrifice. It was a moving experience. Especially since those young Polish soldiers gave their lives and yet their country was then under Soviet tyranny for another 40 years. They resisted all those years, and finally achieved their freedom. God bless.
I wont argue that freedom has been gained, but are we truly what we ware before? Despite braking out of Soviet political control we ware unable to this day to brake out from its laws. Most of our law's that we use is basicly what was back then but rewriten to "sound" like its new and free from occupation past. Not to mention our politicians who ware eather teached how to be a "good communist" or plain greedy who capitalised on situation to gain power...
In the end, we are not free and we are not we used to be. Perhaps we never will now...
Thank you for sharing that, friend.
They all fought and bled and died just for their nation to be sold out by their allies’. The Eternal Anglo strikes once again, go fuck yourselves you Britbongs.
@@kptparker absolute unfortunate truth !!!
brutal truth massive travesty incredible sacrifice ... still brings tears ... "lest we forget" ... countless Polish Heroes, including MJ Sosabowski !!! ... of-course "God Bless"
"Oh, I'm sorry. General Sosabowski, you'll go with the Polish Brigade...." This fragment nicely sums up the attitude of Britain towards Poland during WWII.
The Poles made a valued contribution every where they fought in World War II, some tend to forget that little fact. Or the contributions to code breaking. It should have never been permitted to let the Soviets occupy Poland after the War Ended.
George Semel Yeah I never understood how Poland was allowed to taken by the Soviets.
A rhetorical question, no doubt? But still, for those who are unenlightened, it was because Montgomery became a bloodthirsty glory seeking buffoon after El Alamein, he and George Patton were as bad as each other. Added to that, General Browning was always kissing Bernard's hands and feet as well as his backside, even if they were coated in everyone else's blood (metaphorically speaking of course) bar for his own. Sosabowski had every right to be skeptical of Montgomery's plan from the very beginning, as did the rest of the allied commanders. I'm saying this, as my Grandad (my father's dad) was in the Irish Guards, part of General Horrocks's 30 Corps. My father told me that my Grandfather despised Montgomery.
As soon as Von Rundstedt pulled Bittrich's Panzers back to Arnhem, so they could rest up to face down Patton... well, that was it really. I mean light infantry/paratroopers versus tanks/mechanized infantry (SchutzStaffel I might also point out, and not the Wehrmacht), one doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to determine the outcome there. But I suppose in a way Market Garden did work out in the long run, but in Patton's favour and not Montgomery's.
1st airborne still held out far longer than they were supposed to. they accomplished their mission to hold the arnhem road bridge despite the panzer divisions in the city. it was XXX corps' mission that failed in taking more the double the planned length of time to reach the city.
Not entirely XXX corps fault though, there's something to be said about 82nd's failure to take Nijmegen bridge on day one when it was lightly defended.
Major General Stanisław Sosabowski, never forgiven by the British Establishment for being outspoken during and after the war. He used to work at CAV Acton London England as a factory worker ie Charles Anthony Vandervell large group of factory buildings. You heard of him, via other workers but nobody really talked about his achievements of WW2, and I for one did not believe that a general was working as a factory hand. It was only after seeing the film on its release , that this true hero of the Poles and fellow fighters came to light.
Robert Rouse my father dispatched poles over their landing ground and witnessed the carnage and slaughter of as he put “the poor buggers “ .that is all he ever said about it.
he was made a scapegoat for the failures of others! he did not even receive a pension and had to work til the age of 75.... You see that lack of respect from the british towards their allies will not be forgotten... next time no one will be jumping in the line of fire to save precious british blood
@@SwabianWookie Add his name to the list of those made scape goats in WWII , Kimmel, Short, Stillwell
The Poles were betrayed by the Western Allies time and time again during the war
@@SwabianWookie In Poland, we have a saying that no one goes well on pacts with the British ;) or that the British always fight to the last drop of blood ... their allies ;)
God bless 🙏 the Poles from the UK 🇬🇧
February 1946 the communist government in Warsaw announced that the Polish Armed Forces in the West are no more recognized as Polish. In 1948, General Sosabowski was demobilized.
He remained in exile in Britain and worked as a warehouse worker and a factory of television sets. He died September 25, 1967 in London. In 1969 General paratroopers, still faithful to their commander,brought his ashes to Poland,which were buried - according to his will - at the Military Cemetery at Powązki in Warsaw.
"If you invade Poland, then a state of war will exist between our two countries"......
God Bless the General ... the horrors he experienced are beyond definition !!!
@@exsappermadman25055 state 9f phoney war :)
@@gamerguy3629 Eh?.....
The Ribbertrop and Molotov plan came first, and more subsequently, before the rest afterwards became History, sadly enough.
With such old movies I often think, while they might have inaccurate tanks and combat scenes limited by the period special effects, the dialogues such as this were so much better than anything in contemporary war movies.
They had good screenwriters who knew how to build characters, and solid actors both in starring and supporting roles. I'll take that any day before relentless CGI barrage or "battle gore".
The Polish general knew it was a disaster before they put the first gallon of Petro in a plane.
Nonsense scene. Sosabowski was ok with Market Garden. It was the previous Operation Comet he was reticent about.
I remember when I saw this with my son, when the German officer moved the marker to Arnhem he asked me what happened. When I told him that meant that the 2nd SS panzer corp had been moved to that city. He asked what that meant, I told him that the Germans had moved 2 SS tank divisions there. He looked at me and said that might screw up the plan.
You should have promoted him to field marshal!
smart!!
🤣. That's adorable.
They never had a single available tank to throw at the paratroopers. They had to call in tank reinforcements from Germany, which didn't arrive until the following days.
After the battle at Arnhem Sosabowski was unjustly made a scapegoat for the failure of Operation Market Garden, following a critical evaluation by Browning. He was accused of criticizing Montgomery and the Polish General Staff was forced to remove him as the commanding officer of his brigade in December 1944. He was made the commander of guard troops and in July 1948 he was demobilised.
see my comment of 02/09/17
No, he wasn't made a scapegoat at all.
@@HerbiieIsBest The _hell_ he wasn't. Gen. Urquhart -- inexperienced at airborne operations -- allowed the RAF to dictate drop zones that were much too far from his objectives, then he got himself penned up in an attic an was unable to command his troops for two crucial days. There was a severe communications breakdown. British Gen. Frederick "Boy" Browning dismissed critical intelligence brought to him by his intelligence officer, Major Brian Urquhart (who was renamed "Maj. Fuller" for the movie to avoid confusion with Gen. Roy Urquhart, who was played by Sean Connery) that two elite SS panzer divisions were in the area. American General James Gavin has been criticized for securing the high ground around Groesbeek before attempting the capture of the Waal bridge at Nijmegen, but he was following Browning's order to try and secure the heights first -- this resulted in a severe delay. XXX corps fell way behind the timetable for the operation. These are only some of the _many_ reasons for failure at Arnhem. Ultimately, Market-Garden was doomed to fail, not only because of all these errors, but because it was fundamentally _a bad plan._ For it to succeed, everything had to go right, and if any one part of the plan failed, the whole thing failed. There was no room in it for adjustment when things started to go wrong -- as they _always_ do, and for that you can blame the plan's chief architect: Field Marshall Sir Bernard Montgomery.
Thanks to bad weather delaying their airlift, Sosabowski and his troops didn't even get into the fight until very late in the game -- by which time the situation was already irretrievable. He was scapegoated after the whole thing was over by Montgomery and Browning, who accused his troops of performing badly (which they didn't) and criticized his "hostility" and his outspoken pessimism about the operation. Well, Sosabowski was _right_ about the operation, and he correctly saw it was doomed to failure.
@@Hibernicus1968
'He was scapegoated after the whole thing was over by Montgomery and Browning'
Montgomery was critical of Sosabowski after the operation, in a letter to Alanbrooke.
He was was entitled to express his opinion to his superior. Likewise, Browning, in a letter to Weeks.
That does mean that Sosabowski was blamed for the failure to capture Arnhem.
@@Hibernicus1968
'The hell he wasn't. Gen. Urquhart -- inexperienced at airborne operations -- allowed the RAF to dictate drop zones that were much too far from his objectives'
The final choice of drop zones was down the commander of the FAAA (that's the First Allied Airborne Army, to save you looking it up) the US General Brereton. On this, the evidence is clear:
CHESTER WILMOT
THE STRUGGLE FOR EUROPE
WM. COLLINS, SONS AND CO LTD. 1954
P 588
The Guards, breaking out along one road, met strong opposition nearly all the way to Eindhoven, and yet they drove their armour through these twelve bitterly contested miles in twenty-four hours. When they reached the southern end of the ‘airborne corridor’ on the evening of D plus 1, they were halted for the night by the blown bridge at Zon. This bridge might have been captured intact if the 101st Division had agreed to Montgomery's proposal that it should drop paratroops on either side of the objective, as was done at Grave.
THE GUNS AT LAST LIGHT
THE WAR IN WESTERN EUROPE, 1944-1945
Rick Atkinson
LITTLE BROWN 2013.
P 265
‘General Brereton’s troop carrier commanders had insisted that only a single mission fly on Sunday; a second sortie would ostensibly exhaust air and ground crews and leave insufficient time to service and reload the planes (although double missions over the same distance had been flown from Italy in DRAGOON the previous month). Pleas by airborne commanders and by an emissary from Montgomery to Brereton’s headquarters failed to reverse the decision, despite analysis that showed transporting the entire combat force at a deliberate rate could take up to four days.’
UNITED STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II
The European Theater of Operations
THE SIEGFRIED LINE CAMPAIGN
By Charles B. MacDonald
CENTER OF MILITARY HISTORY
UNITED STATES ARMY WASHINGTON, D.C., 1993
P132
‘Naturally anxious that all their strength arrive on D-Day, the division commanders asked that the planes fly more than one mission the first day. They pointed to the importance of bringing all troops into the corridor before the enemy could reinforce his antiaircraft defenses or launch an organized ground assault. For their part, the troop carrier commanders dissented. Flying more than one mission per aircraft, they said, would afford insufficient time between missions for spot maintenance, repair of battle damage, and rest for the crews. High casualties among the airmen might be the result. If weather remained favorable, they pointed out, and if combat aircraft assumed some of the resupply missions, the troop carriers might fly but one mission daily and still transport three and a half divisions by D plus 2. Although it meant taking a chance on enemy reaction and on the weather, General Brereton sided with the troop carrier commanders. He decided on one lift per day. Although subsequent planning indicated that it would in fact take four days to convey the divisions, General Brereton stuck by his decision.’
The Poles were very important during WWII. They were fierce fighters, almost religious fanatics . I tip my hat to them.
And Gene Hackman since he was in the Marine Corps in real life.
The saddest part about it was that Sosabowski was one of the best generals allies had. He was offered to be commander of all allied airborne forces but refused to keep command of Polish air borne units that were to be later used to liberate Poland (which never happened).
He was against the plan since the beginning and insisted that it needs better intel and better prepared landing zones, but he was ignored cause Monty wanted his glory fast. Anyway watch "The General's Honour" for more info.
born2lol no the saddest part is that he was "demonised" by the english millitary and press as the rensposible for the failing of the operation.
See my comment of 2/9/17. Ps We didnt go to war against the Nazis for Poland, it was to protect the British Empire. The irony, was the UK was skint in 1945 and lost its Empire anyway. The real winners were the USA and the USSR. Poor Poland.
Hitler offered to let Britain keep it's Empire if they surrendered and allowed Germany free rein in Europe. It is to Britain's eternal credit that they did not accept this offer.
Where had Sosabowski proved to be one of the best Generals? In Aug 1944 he hadn't seen action since the fall of Poland. Plenty of experience as a junior commander, in three different armies I believe, but he hadn't commanded anything larger than a brigade. Hardly a qualification for one of the best.
@@davidrendall2461 He was by far the most combat experienced & capable out of all the Allied commanders during Market Garden (and under what circumstances I might add) and he had consistently proved himself as an exceptionally capable commander under the most horrific odds.
I suggest before you make ignorant comments that you actually study the life of the person in question before doing so. Had they listened to him before and during the battle it would have certainly turned out differently.
R.I.P. Sean Connery
And Dirk Bogarde.
My Uncle Pat was a C47 pilot. His squadron participated in D-Day and Market-Garden drops. My uncle loved his squadron and never missed a reunion. He received a letter from his squadron committee months before filming started on this movie saying they were looking for experienced C47 (DC3) pilots. He was an attorney by then, in his 50's, and simply couldn't take the time to go work on the movie, but he dearly wanted to.
Bless your uncle Pat
The guy playing Gen. Maxwell Taylor was in Aliens...he was the suit Ripley was arguing with, right after the meeting where she got blamed for destroying the Nostromo.
Yup, recognized him instantly.
someone did a documentary on Sosabowski and the Polish paratroopers. its called the General's Honor. you can find it on youtube. it has lots of good information.
Your silence is thunderous. Marvelous dialogue
Gen.Sosaboski polish player number one Market Garden.
The acting in this movie was really good. I even liked the brief humor, even if it was on the axis side.
This is a movie. In reality most generals voiced opposition concerning the feasibility of this plan. There were so many flaws in it not the least of which was Monty thinking he could advance that far that fast. In the end it turned in to a race to save the remnants of the British Air Borne division who had held out far longer than they were told they would have to.
Market-Garden was actually the best option for getting across the Rhine and into Germany, at a spot north of the end of the Siegfried Line. Unfortunately, the plan was flawed in too many ways. The presence of Bittrich, the widespread objectives, the failure to get all airborne units into the battle due to the weather, and the one tank front were all major contributions to the failure, but the biggest reason had already taken place. The failure of the British to continue their advance after capturing Antwerp allowed Von Rundstedt to evacuate a large portion of the Fifteenth Army which was trapped on the French coast. These troops were available for counterattacks which cut the road several times and threatened all of the units south of Arnhem. By maintaining pressure on the enemy when their front was non-existent in Holland, the escape route for the Germans could have been sealed, and many objectives of Market-Garden taken before the attack began.
I will agree with Monty on one issue. Eisenhower should have stopped Patton, even to the point of saying "buh-bye" when he made his inevitable threat to resign. Bradley had Patton get heavily involved on the 17th so that no supplies could be diverted north, and these supplies could have been used by the other corps in Dempsey's army to broaden the front. Patton wasn't going anywhere anyway. He was obsessed with the Metz fortresses, and did not get clear of them until November. Instead of letting Patton waste time and men in the south, far from the Siegfried line and the Rhine, everything should have gone into Holland, even if Monty was not the best general for the job. He was in the right place, and a maximum effort should have been made on his front.
Exactly, Guderian said it well, don't poke with fingers, but smash with fists. Attacking in the Dutch countryside which is flooded, meant an attack up one single road with a few tanks that could easily be picked off as shown in the movie. And a single division attacking without support on its flanks was bound to not go well.
Montgomery is one of the worst Allied generals who still retains some semblance of praise. He won El Alamein because all the work was done for him and he had 2.5x1 advantage. His slow crossing of Libya allowed Rommel maneuverability vs the Americans, his Sicily invasion plan was idiotic and he fought slowly and incompetently, same for Italy. He allowed the enemy to hold Caan for weeks instead of days. Market Garden was an idiots plan for ending the war, too daring for a man who was known to be ultra cautious, and executed in a way that reflected Monty's incompetence. The fact they blamed the Poles just adds dishonor to their names. To hell with Monty
@@BattlestarPegasus Monty gets praise for chasing Rommel across North Africa, but once the Torch landings took place, Rommel had no choice but to fall back on Tunisia. He couldn't hold at Benghazi or El Agheila when there was a second Allied army in his rear and the Vichy forces had just changed sides. Monty made Rommel's retreat easier by being too cautious. Pausing to regroup and bring up supplies might have been a good idea when Eighth Army couldn't get too far into the desert without coming under the German air umbrella based around Tripoli, but that was no longer an issue.
@@BattlestarPegasus Not a Montgomery fan by any stretch, however, he was the master of the set piece battle. As long as he had time to set up and prepare the battlefield, he was unparalleled on the Allied side. Both battles at El Alamein show this - many people forget about the 1st one that halted the Axis advance in September, 1942. His initial handling of the Normandy landings was also well played. It is after the battle progressed - when plans usually start to break down - that his flaws come to the fore.
To me, comparing Montgomery to Patton is a fool's errand. They were two different generals, with very different styles. Patton was a quick planner & mover who believed a good battle plan today beats a perfect battle plan tomorrow. This is evidenced by his offensive against the Axis as soon as he took over II Corps in Tunisia, his pivot to Palermo in Sicily, & his legendary march to the German southern flank at the Bulge.
@@BattlestarPegasus "His slow crossing of Libya"
An advance of 780 miles in 20 days is slow? 😂
It was a movie scene, but I would suspect that all of the Division commanders present had to have their own doubts about the ambitious plan, but since it was something Montgomery apparently wanted to do, their choice was to follow orders and do the best they could given the situation on the ground or be relieved of command and have their troops go on the operation without them. Note that Sosabowski did not go any futher when Browning "corrected" the IF to WHEN.
Gen sasabowski un tipo directo y con sentido común; ahora dirían " políticamente incorrecto" jajaja!!!! Lo ningunearon ; pero fué el que más huevos puso!!!!
1:45 "Arnhem bridge, and hold it" historically accurate quote from General Roy Urquhart's book.
WWII started with Poland being invaded, WWII ended with Poland still being invaded.
hehe we were in berlin on may 1945 U know :-). we were everywhere :-)
@@stilonek you were not in Moscow, jeje.
Theodore Bugsby wwI ended with polands creation
WwII ended with an even bigger land grab
There is no other nation in europe that actually had such profits from wwII.
If there is a country in europe that cant complain, its the poles
@@kloschuessel773 I see that the Germans still haven't learned anything.
WW2 is not over yet. Look at the comments of undenazificated Germans.
The ending is such a "oooooohhh f*ck" moment.
"Actually, the plan is very, very simple?"
Everybody-"What freaking alternate universe?""
"It is my believe, that this will be the most momentus error of the war." General George S. Patton Jr.
His Lorraine campaign was far worse. As was the Hurtgen Forest campaign, and falling asleep in the Ardennes and getting pushed into a retreat.
'"It is my believe, that this will be the most momentus error of the war." General George S. Patton Jr.'
Is this quote on record anywhere?
Or did you make it because you think it might be the sort of thing that Patton might have stated?
@@lyndoncmp5751
Yes Lyndon.
MARKET GARDEN was not a particularly large undertaking.
Its the spectacular airborne stuff that raises interest in the undertaking.
This from Alan Moorehead, who as we know, was with the allied armies at thst time:
'Arnhem was an incident magnified far beyond its strategic importance by the peculiar and exciting circumstances and poignant tragedy of the stranded parachutists. Actually, only a handful of divisions was involved, the over-all losses were small and apart from the magnificent outburst of courage the battle had no more significance than half a dozen actions that were fought that same winter.'
@@thevillaaston7811 Read Patton's autobiography.
One minor error - in the scene where Dield Marshal von Rundestadt is deciding where to send Bitterich's II SS Panzer Corps to rest - the block he places on Arnhem is labelled II SS Pz Div - Div being short for Division, not Corps.
Gene Hackman calls his agent: “I’m playing a general with a speech impediment.”
Gene Hackman’s agent: “Actually, you’re playing a general with a Polish accent.”
Gene Hackman: “Same thing.”
I'm glad you liked it. it gives a whole new perspective on things.
first of all, Herr Wittmann, you have misspeled general's name. His name was Sosabowski. Second of all, he said "I am a Pole, considered by some to be smart." By the way, there is some suspicion that Michael Wittmann was killed by soldiers of the 1st Polish Armored Brigade. Quite ironic, isn't it?
It's always by Christmas isn't it?
Just make sure Gavin take his bridge on time. He didn't, plan failed.
And the RAF wouldn't fly British 1st Airborne closer to Arnhem either. The plan failed before it even began, due to poor air planning (nothing to do with Montgomery).
@@lyndoncmp5751the decisions around drop zones were made by General Brereton the US General in command of First Airborne Army, he was also the man who refused to allow the aircrew to fly 2 sorties a day (which would’ve got everyone on the ground on day 1).
Monty's plan was to actually defeat the Germans was it not? This operation was a prime example of the utter incompetence of Churchill and that cock up Montgomery
It was a cock up & Sosabowski shouldn’t have been scapegoated, but I suppose your alway perfect Captain Bryant
@edavismookie25
Thank you so much... and greetings from Poland
Wow. Dirk Bogarde, Gene Hackman and Sean Connery in the same scene.
This was another of Monty's brilliant ideas of which he was known. It failed like most of his other ideas or was rejected. How he ever got to make Field Marshall astounds most military scholars for he was clearly second rate. His mouth was always bigger than his abilities. Eisenhower would have been better off if he could have gotten rid of him.
antares4s Which British General would you have take his place ?
antares4s Have you actually read any genuine history of WWII? Do you really believe the propaganda spread mainly by Omar Bradley's press corps about Monty. This stems from Bradley's dislike of Monty which turned to bitter hatred after the F.M. had to be given command of the U.S. 1st and 9th Armies (Bradley's command) as Bradley was stranded in Luxembourg and out of touch. Bradley realised it was himself who had created the weakened line in the Ardennes Sector, another factor which seemed to him to result in Monty "saving his neck". Finally, although the Battle Of The Bulge was a huge scare for the Allies, it could never have succeeded for the reason that as soon as Montgomery heard of the attack he despatched British XXX Corps to protect the Meuse crossings which he could see were the main objective of the German attack.
The plan was perfectly sound and feasible......
The airborne carpet with 30 corps passing over it was brilliantly simple and attainable.
Instead......browning ignored Dutch intelligence reports of strong ss armoured units in the area.
Browning held back sossobowski
Until it was too late.
The drop zones were miles from intended areas
A full set of plans fell into german hands from a crashed glider....
This was explicitly forbidden by HQ
And would the officer who disobeyed order lived.....I have no doubt he would have been court martialld.
The radios issued to units did not work. ...so units could only interact and operate in conjunction by using runners.
Lastly......pure without doubt bad luck that by mere chance arnhem
Was chosen as the place for 2nd ss panzer to refit.
@@caractacusbrittania7442 the Dutch intelligence was considered to be tainted, as the Dutch SOE had been infiltrated. Browning didn't hold back the Poles - bad weather over England stopped the Poles, as they couldn't take off. The drop zones being too far wasn't really the issue, it was the fact that the German defenses had been "decentralised", and it was the exceptional work of Spindler in cobbling together a workable stop-gap defense. With regards to the sets of plans, there was a set of plans that outlined specifically the actions and objectives of 101st AB ONLY, but given the details, it wasn't hard for Model to work out the real objectives, given that there was also drops in Nijmegen and Arnhem. As for the tanks of 9th & 10th SS Panzer units, they were only at about 30% strength and were not considered to be too large of a threat. The real threat from armour came in the days after (specifically days 3 & 4). Had 82nd AB taken the Nijmegen Bridge at the earliest opportunity, instead of concentrating on the Groesbeek Heghts, then XXX Corp would have been in Arnhem in time to relieve 2nd Para, under Frost's command.
@@Infernal460 Slim. A true military genius.
Patton wanted a head on charge at the siegfried line. The bulk of the German western warmachine was holed up there. He MIGHT have got to berlin quicker then Market Garden but at the cost of thousands off allied soldiers being literally "chucked" into the meat grinder.
There was a reason why Eisenhower picked Monty.
However in my opinion their great success as generals, came when the two worked together. Almost like completing a full circle.
Unlike the II SS Panzer Korps where Monty was located, Patton's 3rd Army faced little to no real armored threat in his sector of the Seigfried Line. Patton's missions were creative, simple, and bold unlike Monty's plans. The REAL reason Ike chose Monty is because the Germans were dropping the V2 rockets onto England. Their launch sites were in that area, and Winston Churchill persuaded Ike to take out those locations as top priority or else the Allies would be authorized to use chemical warfare on the Germans which Ike was vehemently opposed to. The V2's scared the hell out of the English (and rightfully so).
@gunnermac70 no Monty was just arrogant, overly optimistic, and did poor planning about Market Garden. not stupid though. should have listened to the Pole.
Had Gavin's troops taken the Nijmagen bridge, on Day 1 as planned, when it was +/- undefended, then the plan would have worked. The delay caused by their failure to capture the bridge for three days was fatal. Fault? Browning - certainly, Gavin - certainly. Montgomery - how?
It was his idea.Shoehorning a whole corp of armor up a 64 mile elevated lane with no room for maneuver is the response of an idiot.He thought he could get to the Ruhr 1st trying to grab glory and he got good soldiers killed
@@14067913 _Montgomery - how?_
By rushing it. The whole thing was done in 7 days (which says a lot about the good competence of Montgomery's staff, who must have been working 24/7)
@@bigwoody4704XXX Corps did everything that was asked of it, 82nd Airborne didn’t even try and approach their primary objective (and one of the few that had to be taken as it couldn’t be bridged) until after it got dark on day 1. If they had prioritised it XXX Corps would’ve got to Arnhem before 2 Para surrendered. (Likewise 1st Airborne made a hash of taking Arnhem Bridge, they could’ve and should’ve gotten a whole Brigade there on Day 1 but they fannied about.
they did too you unread rube where was monty - oh that's right like you no where around.We gave tanks to the British but monty being a moron sent them down ONE ELEVATED ROAD for 55 of the 70 miles. Then they took almost 4 full days to get there - British urgency
the 82nd were on foot and fought apc and half tracks with mounted 22mm/37 mm AA Gunsand very easyThe 82nd had the most onjectives and the furthest apart
But you don't know that as because you don't read as history isn't important - typical
There is an actual documentary made just a year or so after the battle! With all the stuff that didn’t make the movie! Better then this movie!
Model looks like a confident General rearing to take his troops to the battlefield
He certainly was, and his defensive genius proved decisive in preventing total collapse in more than a few battles.
@@jebbroham1776 He was the main man for defense. It's unfortunate Germany didn't have any resources by 43-44. Hell, even Barbarossa's success rate was around 10% considering the fuel in their reserves and the resources they had. Franz Halder cost Germany the war when he chose Moscow instead of going south. AH was doing well until 6th Army encirclement at Stalingrad. He was right to blame the generals for the failures that cost Germany. His decisions in 1943-44 are peanuts comparing what Field Marshals like Franz Halder did. Germany needed the war against SU for resources, strategic routes and living space.
@@erich2432 Even if the Germans had gone south, didn't the Soviets destroy most of the oil fields at Maikop that they wanted to take anyway? I seem to recall seeing a photograph of German soldiers arriving to see the oil fields a blaze.
British stiff upper lip and American arrogance can often end in a costly defeat.
That's why I always say,"I don't believe it till I see it".
You'd think an engineer if he saw the plan, would say 63 miles on a single two lane road with armour? You know tanks take up the whole road right?
Also, several stretches of that route were polder roads. It means that tanks were exposed (at some places even outlined against the sky), had little room to maneuver (polder ground is quite soft and tanks could get bogged down) and could be picked apart by antitank guns posted in the fields. That's why the Highway 69 (the main route taken by XXX Corps - present day A 50 motorway) was nicknamed "Hell's Highway".
Nevertheless XXX Corps still did 90km in just 2 days. Pretty good going, in spite of having to also have to build their own bridge.
Logistics of movement is the Achilles heel of many a great general. Failure to take such things into account has doomed many a plan. However plan with that in mind and you will have success. One should look at Sherman's March to the Sea to understand that bold military maneuvers need such planning to succeed. Every single detail of that was planned to maximize movement speed. For instance the standard marching formation for infantry at the time was 4 abreast, However he had the columns separate into two columns of two one on each side of roads with the artillery and wagons in the middle. Thereby his column length was far shorter. This allowed him to move faster through Georgia.
General Taylor actually wasn't present at the meeting for Market Garden. He sent the 101st's Artillery commander, General McAuliffe (who later became the division CO) in his place.
McAuliffe was a good egg: He is celebrated for his one-word reply to a German surrender ultimatum: "Nuts!"
one of the things I found most interesting about this movie was the idea of the Germans preferring to fight Montgomery rather than Patton
TRUTH
Ryan Rodrigues
'the idea of the Germans preferring to fight Montgomery rather than Patton'...
...is total rubbish. Patton did not even rate a German dossier before D-Day.
www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm
Here is a sort of Hors d'oeuvre:
'One piece of the Patton story, however, is pure myth: that Patton was the subject of close scrutiny by the Germans, who anticipated his attacks in fearful admiration. General Patton was not, as his biographer Martin Blumenson wrote in The Patton Papers: 1885-1940, a “hero even to professional German officers who respected him as the adversary they most feared in battle.” Nor was he, as Ladislas Farago claimed in his book Patton, regarded by the Germans “as their most dangerous adversary in the field…. For a while the Germans watched the comings and goings of Patton like rubbernecked spectators following a tennis ball at Wimbledon.” In fact, for most of the war the Germans barely took notice.'
You knob that's why the gerries were waiting for the ghost army to land at the Pas de Calais .You just can't help making up bullshit hoping someone as thick as you believes it
ENJOY!!!!
*www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/06/d-day-would-be-nearly-impossible-pull-off-today-heres-why/*
Ryan Rodrigues
From the same source as I previously posted:
'Despite the Allies’ best efforts, the Germans did not decide until mid-May-months after they concluded that the Allied invasion would land at Pas de Calais or in Belgium-that Patton had indeed taken command of FUSAG. However, his leadership of the supposed landings at Pas de Calais appears to have been incidental to the strategic conclusions the Germans reached regarding the Allied invasion. None of the surviving pre-invasion records from the command of Army Group B, responsible for defending northwestern France, mention Patton outside the FUSAG order of battle. In contrast, the Germans methodically recorded the statements and meetings of Montgomery and Eisenhower, and bombarded their agents with questions about Montgomery’s movements.'
Monty and movement aren't one in the same.As Patton demonstrated in Sicily - look it up yourself Ryan.Little Hans here is a revisionist
1. Should have planned for spring. 2. Should have had alternate routes just in case. 3. More air transport and drop zones closer to each bridge.
It was of the moment, there was no point in waiting until the following Spring.
We are going to ignore air reconnaissance and drop British 1st airborne on top of 2 ss panzer divisions. It will be great
Bullcrap monty later admitted he didn't think they could fight.No shit after single handedly eviscerating 3 allied airborne divisions
@@bigwoody4704 It wasn't just the two Panzer divisions. There was a multitude of heterogeneous, rag tag units that the Germans threw into battle.
That Monty chose to ignore both ULTRA and Dutch operatives told intel about
Who did the sums on the drop and keeping it supplied? Big drops like this have never worked because of logistics fuck ups and over optimistic expectations on what can be achieved,.
Morrigan Ravenchild The British 1st Airborne Division was in a difficult supply situation practically from the start. It's planned resupply drop zone was located just north of Arnhem, an area that the division was suppose to easily secure on the first day, but never did due to strong and unexpected German resistence. The resupply planes would dutifully fly over every day, dropping all their supplies to the Germans, and suffering heavy losses to anti aircraft fire. The British Division couldn't tell anyone about the problem because their radios wouldn't work. By the time they could tell anyone, and the dropping zone was changed, they had been forced into such a small perimeter that most of their airdropped supplies still didn't reach them.
The intent was to relieve the Paras within 2-3 days the logistics were fine, it was ten execution by 82nd airborne and 1st airborne that was the issue.
@@martyndawson5768 Realise this. As I said, they didn't do the sums....as the French hadn't at Dien Bien Phu 10 years later
@@morriganravenchild6613 not really, the logistics to keep them supplied was sufficient, or would’ve been if they hadn’t lost the drop zones. Which was a consequence of poor initial deployment meaning they failed to achieve their primary objective and then burning through a lot of the remaining combat power of the Division on D+1 and D+2 trying to retrieve the situation.
Well it was worth the gamble if they succeeded it wouldve ended the war early and stop the bloodshed.
George Repeki For the germans it would be easy to stop an allied advance on one road.
I think people are too lazy to look for another word, like overzealous, or selfish (as many generals seemed to be!)
they see any misjudged foresight as "stupidity". People sometimes seem lack empathy for the strong willed.
Super classic film👍👍👍👍
Is difficult to fight with light tanks against 88 mm guns and Tiger panzers.
does that mean i have as much of idea of tactics and planning as Montgomery? if you read most books, it described Market Garden as a disaster. poor planning, and everything else. if it was so successful, why did Monty and Browning blame Sosabowski and the Poles for the failure? 1st Airborne was missng three quarters of its forces. may i suggest you read some more books and the history channel. you like Monty, fine, he did some things really good; Market Garden is not one of them.
In the military world, when something goes wrong, it's SOMEBODY's fault regardless. Somebody's taking the fall. If a meteor fell on the planet and wiped out an entire division of troops, somebody's going to get blamed for "improper troop deployment" or something. Disbelieve? Join a western military. Only then will you understand.
"Minority groups are more con-fort-able, in silence."
"Gen-eral Browning! What of the Guuuurmens?"
Oh gawd that accent...
"I am a Pole. Considered by some to be smart. If that is so, it makes me member of true minority group. Minority groups are not comfortable in senats." - I recommend to read "Najkrótszą drogą" and "Droga wiodła ugorem". It shows the mentality of this GREAT MAN ! Trule, absolute Legend he was!
The plan was simple... devised by simpletons.
Truth be told it quite probably would have worked had not the SS Panzer Division been sent to Arnhem for R&R. The decision to ignore intel that they were there however, that was unforgivable.
@@StaffordMagnus It wasn't ignored.
@@StaffordMagnusit would’ve worked if 82nd airborne had prioritised taking Nijmegen bridge instead of treating it like a secondary objective. Or if 1st airborne hadn’t dispersed their forces and had gotten a whole brigade to the bridge on day 1.
Interesting. A relative of mine fought in this operation. He was in charge of a small part of it. I think he got all his bridges OK.
Patton did not meet Eisenhower until after ww1. Eisenhower choose Monty's plan to rapidly pursue the retreating german army northwards after the falaise pocket and gain a rapid bridgehead over the rhine as opposed to the siegfried line.
30 corps stopped because the SS Panzer divisions were attacking its flanks defended by paratroopers. Actualy read up history.
How called that item on the map-4:22-map magnet?
"Bittrich, II SS Panzer".
The unit being moved to Arnhem for a re-fit and the name of their commander.
The word Arnhem on the map has the Dutch spelling.
It may be a Dutch map.
The officers discussing it are speaking German and refer to it as Arnheim.
Sosabowski warns Alies about tanks I Arhem no one license
Sosabowski knew nothing.
This reminds me of the market garden mission from Medal of Honor airborne
If only the Germans hadn't arbitrarily stationed a Panzer group in Arnhem the plan would have worked.... If only. In any case the operation was 90% successful according to Monty so that's alright. Who wouldn't be happy with a 90 on a test?
But it’s not a test. Losing 10% of your force *may* be acceptable if you are successful. Losing that many in a failure is close to a failure to command. The loss of the soldiers and their equipment, the impact on morale (of both sides) and the flow on effects are enormous. The outcome of Market Garden came close to giving the Nazis at least a temporary control of the battlefield.
A tragic consequence of the operation's failure was the Dutch famine of 1944-45. During the battle Dutch railway workers, incited by the Dutch government in London, went on strike in order to aid the Allied assault. In retribution Germany forbade food transportation, and in the following winter more than twenty thousand Dutch citizens starved to death.
As for MG being 90% successful, Montgomery is hardly an objective observer.
@@gary-pv8vz The allies got closer to Germany, the Germans retreated and hundreds of thousands of Dutch people were liberated.
The Hurtgen Forest and Lorraine etc debacles dragged the war on, not Market Garden. Market Garden actually even protected Antwerp.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Allies were supposed to reach the Ruhr. But, they didn't which is why Market Garden can be considered as allies strategic failure. Netherlands was completely liberated once the war in Europe came to an end which means the Germans simply withdrew/surrendered once their govt/high-command collapsed. Netherlands also suffered a famine in the winter 44-45. Had MG succeeded, Germans wouldn't dare to pull the Ardennes Offensive or fight a brutal defensive battle at Hurtgen. Germany's priority was the Soviets. The only reason Germans fought hard in the west front post MG operation was due to somebody got hold of the Morgenthau Plan and Goebbels used it to motivate whatever left of German strength to fight against the allies. Maybe this was the reason why there was fierce brutal fighting from the Germans at Ardennes and Hurtgen. Because in the east, there was less action once AGC was destroyed during Bagration until Red Army entered Austria and Prussia.
Patten was the General the Germans feared most
Nope. They no notice of him during the war.
the movie was based on the book, did you bother to read it?
Thank you for making it clear. I don't how perfect they want the movie to be.
True Lad. Courageous... yes we are but also... credulous... eh...wheel of history hates us cause many times fucked up my nation. :)
"Why this is almost as bold and brilliant as Build Back Better".
Montgomery should have been relieved and sent quietly to do administrative duties after Normandy. It should have been obvious after his lackluster commands in Sicily and Normandy he didn't have the skills to fight the Germans on more even terms. The Brits allowed his celebrity from beating the overstretched and undersupplied Afrika Korps to cloud their evaluation of the man. Thousands of British, American, and Polish troops paid the price in blood for his ego and incompetence. It astounds me that anyone defends that idiot now.
who planned the entire of D-Day you colossal moron. If Gavin had done what he was ordered to do and take his bridge in time, it would have succeeded. Yanks bleed that Monty was too cautious (he was because of the carnage he witnessed in WW1). D-Day was hugely ambitious and innovative. He and his staff planned it. Then he planned a hugely risky but ambitious raid which was worth a punt. Then and as usual the Yanks turned up late. In this case Gavin and then everyone else gets the blame for an American failure. The great swan was a huge success and Paris was take before the planned time. All also planned by montgomery.
Montgomery = most experienced and most successful Western Allied ground commander of WW2. Nobody did more to win the ground war in the west than Montgomery.
Paris was reached ahead of schedule then he went to the rescue of the Americans in the Ardennes.
Monty didnt plan the Market part of Market Garden. The air commanders did. Had Montgomery made those decisions it likely would have succeeded, just like all his other battles did.
The Americans screwed up far worse in the Hurtgen Forest and Lorraine etc.
TheBernice
'Montgomery should have been relieved and sent quietly to do administrative duties after Normandy.' Your words.
On what grounds? Montgomery was charged with reaching the Seine by D+90 but got there by D+78., with 22% fewer than expected casualties, and with the disruption to the allied build up caused by the great storm in the weeks after D-Day.
For Sicily, Montgomery tore up the Patton plan to land troops all around the island, concentrated allied resources and as a result it was all over in a matter of weeks.
'The Brits allowed his celebrity from beating the overstretched and undersupplied Afrika Korps to cloud their evaluation of the man. ' Your words.
‘without consulting Cairo, he issued immediate orders that, if Rommel attacked, all units should fight on the ground where they and that there should be no withdrawal or surrender. The effect on the Army was electric.’
‘I was dumfounded by the rapidity with which he had grasped the situation facing him, the ability with which had grasped the essentials, the clarity of his plans , and above all his unbounded self-confidence-a self-confidence with which he inspired all those that he came into contact with.’
Alenbrooke
‘I saw a great many soldiers that day, who greeted me with grins and cheers. I inspected my own regiment, the 4th Hussars, or as many of them as they dared to bring together - perhaps fifty or sixty - near the field cemetery, in which a number of their comrades had been buried. All this was moving, but with it all there grew a sense of the reviving ardour of the Army. Everybody said what a change there was since Montgomery had taken command. I could feel the truth of this with joy and comfort.’
Churchill
‘I have always considered that Montgomery’s first two or three days with his Army was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life, and the way in which he put over his personality, right through the Army, was really remarkable. Besides talking to the staff and laying down what he called his ‘military philosophy’, he met all Commanders and their troops and, of course, examined in great detail the ground now held and that over which we would have to fight. I accompanied him during the reconnaissances which resulted in decisions as to the way he proposed to dispose his forces for the defensive battles which we all expected. It would be Rommel’s last desperate to reach the Delta, and failure would remove once and for all the threat to our Middle East Base.’
DeGuingand.
"Montgomery when he arrived in Africa changed the way the 8th army fought, he was a very good army trainer and was ruthless in his desire to win, he changed the battle into an infantry battle supported by artillery. "
German Generalmajor FW von Mellenthin
Btw. At Alam el Halfa, Montgomery with four divisions, defeated Rommel's six divisions.
It sounds like one of Churchill's "great" ideas.
What Churchill do do with it?
Montgomery...... 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
35,000 men dropped behind enemy lines....
It just SOUNDS like it should have worked!!!!!
Logistics goes brrrrr
XXX Corps didn't reach the paras in the estimated time. Paras were supposed to hand those strategic points they captured to the armoured artillery units/frontline troops. Paras are just special troops for special missions.
RIP Sean Connery
This movie was most excellent but Gene Hackmans polish accent is so terrible. I didnt realised that he was suppose to be playing a Polish officer. His accent is like the mixture of Irish, english and some other foreign accent. I dont understand! 😂
Again they were “Careful” not to put a Monty in this movie! An odd thing! It was his plan! Great Movie though!
Because he was at the British army's HQ in France and not the UK. That was another contributing factor to Market Garden's failure.
Monty doesn't make brilliant performance in africa too..
"Supercharge" in Alamein and following pursuit after Romel wasn't acts of genius. I say in versus.
If I director, I would have told Hackman to ditch the polish accent. He sounds like he’s chewing on tree bark whenever he speaks in this movie.
Now old man, that's a good description of the Polish accent. Chewing on tree bark - I'll use that one.
Best faulier in 2 ww Montgomery
Not really.
Sept 1944 inHolland
This scene never really made much sense to me. The germans deploy the Bittrich's pz corps that was supposed to stop Patton behind the line opposing Montgomery's sector. Why would they want to put the reserve so far north and then have them march all the way south for battle to stop Patton. Seems like a movie premise tko show German high regard for Patton, nothing else.
@John Cornell It fits historical facts. Please remember, that entire Allied rouse before D-Day was also centered around Pattton. We was basically being dangled before Germans, who had alredy knew him.
Cornhole lies at the drop of a hat and drops the hat himself.He wouldn't recognize the truth if it blew up in his face and circled around and bit him in the ass.CORNHOLE You knob that's why the gerries were waiting for the ghost army to land at the Pas de Calais .You just can't help making up bullshit hoping someone as thick as you believes it
ENJOY!!!!
*www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/06/d-day-would-be-nearly-impossible-pull-off-today-heres-why/*
That accent and pronunciation of words by Gene Hackman...it sounds absolutely horrendous.
It’s why he even says “General, I am a Pole”
So we can figure out where he’s from through that accent
That's the part of his role
He plays a Pole
And Poles doesn't speak english
no General Sosabowski, the Polish General. 90% of the goals may have been achieved but the cost was too high. Allies had more casualties than in the Normandy campaign. the plan looked good but to many ifs and overly optimistic planning. too many things went wrong, as General Powell has said, no plan survives the point of contact. it would have been great if it worked by all means.
It’s was well known in the British army that Monty was gay.
@Alex Bowman Eh? He was married to Elizabeth Carver.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- doesn't mean he wasn't gay.
@@alexbowman7582 Theres no evidence
'It’s was well known in the British army that Monty was gay.'
Who has stated this?
@@thevillaaston7811 me B)
James Bond is on our side. Good.
And then we have the Germans.....
1:11 - He should have looked in the camera when he says "It's all a question of bridges."
@bpiotrAgain The poles may have had a air brigade in 1944, but it was a brigade euipped, outfitted and supplied by Britain. Also the poles had no wings to fly to their country, the still needed some sort of airtransport, the RAF. So much for the hopes of thousands of people in warsaw, only fools would hope, a parachute drop into poland was a no go, completely unrealistic.
It may have been equipped, outfitted and supplied by Britain but it was at Poland's expense, Poland's gold reserve had been spirited away by ship before the Germans could get it at the start of the war and it was held in Canada until the end, Poland paid in full for its armed forces in the West (for fighting Britain's war) only to be betrayed & sold off to Stalin by her allies.
You call it fools would, hope, completely unrealistic but actually it wasn't and it wasn't a solely Polish plan - but jointly agreed by Britain & the Poles, which is the sole reason they raised a Polish parachute brigade.
@dolcann z Furthermore, individual Poles paid for their equipment as well, the Brits charged their salaries for every scrap of equipment they were provided with.
tomtom34b Poles dependent youcand They paid for it... by their lifes, blod and gold
"it was a brigade euipped, outfitted and supplied by Britain"....for which Polish government in exile paid in pure gold.
Help for fighting Warsaw was possible and realistic. But there was no will to help...and the question is why?
Poland evacuated 80 ton gold reserve from Poland in 1939. Poland had to pay Britain for supplies during war...
que desastre foi esta operação
Montgomery is so underrated, and Patton is overrated
Weird Brit < warhappy American
At least when stories are told.
A Movie Too Long
AIRBORNE ALL THE WAY