Lots of important insight today. If you have enjoyed this show, please don't forget to click like, leave a comment for other viewers and if you have not done so already please SUSBSCRIBE so you don't miss our next streams. You can also become a member of this channel and support me financially here ua-cam.com/channels/UC1nmJGHmiKtlkpA6SJMeA.html. Links to any books discussed, WW2TV merchandise, our social media pages and other WW2TV shows to watch can all be found in the full UA-cam description. Lastly, my own book Angels of Mercy is always available online - more info here www.ddayhistorian.com/angels-of-mercy.html
Level of detail is off the charts. I thought i had nothing left to learn about WW2 but admittedly Torch is the 'underbelly of the crocodile' of my WW2 knowledge. And the guest is capable of spouting generous amounts of data concerning this crucial Operation!
This was the best presentation I have seen on Operation Torch! The high quality maps and the great amount of information gives an outstanding overview of a very complex operation. Samuel in-depth knowledge comes through and he give some love to the US Army.
That was an excellent presentation by Sam; loads of great details info/analysis, plus plenty of good maps. Also some top notch input from Woody and the sidebar crew. I'm glad that episode popped up on my YT suggestions, as not only was it good in its own right, it fits in wonderfully the the current (early May 2023) series on Operation Torch from WW2TV.
Wonderful presentation and discussion. I learned a great deal and feel a personal need for a deeper dive into Torch. I wish Samuel great success with his dissertation and defense and hope that we will be seeing more of him on WW2TV. Great work, Paul!. Kiwi57.
Top class presentation. Very engaging young man. I learnt a lot from this lecture - your channel is fast winning me over as the go-to source for WW2 info. Cheers!
Catching up on earlier episodes. Torch does get short shrift in the popular consciousness. This is a really interesting episode. Jon Parshall referred briefly to the importance of Operation Torch and the subsequent campaign from North Africa’s western direction. Sam Wallace’s brief aside into Kasserine was refreshing. His comparison to the Bulge is an apt one. The only difference being that the emphasis re Kasserine is always concentrated on the defeat at the beginning rather than the victory at the end. I imagine a book will be the hopeful progression of Sam Wallace’s thesis which will make for an educational read.
Very good presentation. My father participated in this operation as an engineer. I think he landed a Safi. It’s hard to remember because he discussed all the locations where battles were fought.
This was brilliant, so detailed. Agree about Kasserine, and generally about the North African Campaign, and the "Desert Fox". The Allies won, it won't always go the way they want but overall, they got the job done.
I am speculating but the American novelty, chaos and variation of individual experience make a confusing framework to organize memory. Few men and officers had any real field experience. By 44 inexperienced units were in contact with experienced ones with a functional mental syntax. Your guest does an invaluable overview of the development of allied organization and the amazing quantity and variety of innovations during Torch. Your programs help me understand how in frequently overlooked battles and campaigns lay the critical groundwork for the major battles and successes. As ever thank you and your guests
Great episode, as usual. I wonder about the weighting of the forces to the western end of the operation. I've read there was some consideration to landing at Phillipeville as well (about halfway between Algiers and Tunis) but this was discarded as a leap too far into the Med. But I wonder too whether any thought was giving to seizing Oran and Algiers, and maybe Casablanca, then using their shipping to stage from Algiers port and airfields to leapfrog units forward to Phillipeville. On the whole, though, given the Allies inexperience with joint large-scale amphibious operations, this went down remarkably well.
Torch was, for propaganda purposes, a landing by U.S. forces, supported by British warships and aircraft, under the belief that this would be more palatable to French public opinion, than an Anglo-American invasion. For the same reason, Churchill suggested that British soldiers might wear U.S. Army uniforms, and No.6 Commando did so.[26] (Fleet Air Arm aircraft did carry US "star" roundels during the operation,[27] and two British destroyers flew the Stars and Stripes.[26]) In reality, the Eastern Task Force-aimed at Algiers-was commanded by Lieutenant-General Kenneth Anderson and consisted of a brigade from the British 78th and the U.S. 34th Infantry Divisions, along with two British commando units (No. 1 and No. 6 Commandos), together with the RAF Regiment providing 5 squadrons of infantry and 5 Light anti-aircraft flights, totalling 20,000 troops. During the landing phase, ground forces were to be commanded by U.S. Major General Charles W. Ryder, Commanding General (CG) of the 34th Division and naval forces were commanded by Royal Navy Vice-Admiral Sir Harold Burrough
Another fantastic presentation, thank you gents. If I have one gripe, it's that everytime the invasion of Syria comes up it's only covered in the briefest of passings. To my understanding we had a number of legitimate reasons for invading Syria, not least because it was being used as a base by the luftwaffe to support their operations in Iraq (the coup). Additionally, the cross border raiding by Syrian Bedu, fermented by Vichy, constituted a threat to our longstanding ally Transjordan, and Vichy movements on contested border villages could be construed as an act of invasion itself, if not a deliberate act of hostility aimed at undermining British-Jordanian relations.
Interesting presentation. One aspect I'm curious about and that's the ability of British and allied intelligence services ability to get intel on the ground in Vichy occupied north africa. Vichy was neutral but would still run security operations against potentially hostile spy ops. Casablanca, Algiers and Oran were all ports so it would presumably be easy to get agents infiltrated on neutral ships ? Were there contacts with sympathetic military personnel among the French forces ?
9:57 The Americans had history in the region they're the ones that broke the Barbary Pirates where is the British was having to pay royalties to the sultan the Americans is the one that freed the waters for the British to go by there freelee
Torch was less of a lesson because(you said it) this was not an invasion of a determined enemy. Normandy was going to be against a determined enemy with known abilities. I would like to compare day by day casualty numbers since I think Torch was a much smaller operation.
Dam son I am dissatisfied. I wanted to peek at your channel to see what you have to offer, but I am blocked by the join screen. Maybe I will come back later.
Lots of important insight today. If you have enjoyed this show, please don't forget to click like, leave a comment for other viewers and if you have not done so already please SUSBSCRIBE so you don't miss our next streams. You can also become a member of this channel and support me financially here ua-cam.com/channels/UC1nmJGHmiKtlkpA6SJMeA.html.
Links to any books discussed, WW2TV merchandise, our social media pages and other WW2TV shows to watch can all be found in the full UA-cam description. Lastly, my own book Angels of Mercy is always available online - more info here www.ddayhistorian.com/angels-of-mercy.html
Level of detail is off the charts. I thought i had nothing left to learn about WW2 but admittedly Torch is the 'underbelly of the crocodile' of my WW2 knowledge. And the guest is capable of spouting generous amounts of data concerning this crucial Operation!
Excellent commentary! I did not realize how complicated those landings efforts were. Keep up your great series.
This was the best presentation I have seen on Operation Torch! The high quality maps and the great amount of information gives an outstanding overview of a very complex operation. Samuel in-depth knowledge comes through and he give some love to the US Army.
That was an excellent presentation by Sam; loads of great details info/analysis, plus plenty of good maps. Also some top notch input from Woody and the sidebar crew. I'm glad that episode popped up on my YT suggestions, as not only was it good in its own right, it fits in wonderfully the the current (early May 2023) series on Operation Torch from WW2TV.
Wonderful presentation and discussion. I learned a great deal and feel a personal need for a deeper dive into Torch. I wish Samuel great success with his dissertation and defense and hope that we will be seeing more of him on WW2TV. Great work, Paul!. Kiwi57.
Very interesting presentation on a often ignored Allied invasion.
Thanks!
Great presentation of Operation Torch, very active sidebar on this one, found it fascinating.
Loving WW2TV -- thanks for another great episode!
Hello folks. Brilliant use of maps to tell a complicated story. Kasserine Pass is worthy of a show or two. Don’t miss this one.
Top class presentation. Very engaging young man. I learnt a lot from this lecture - your channel is fast winning me over as the go-to source for WW2 info. Cheers!
This Operation Torch series really has been excellent! Thanks to all who have made it available to WW2 history buffs.👍
Great discussion, thank you.
Excellent episode. I am fascinated by this theater of WW2. Thanks so much for covering it. I would love to read Sam's thesis once it is completed.
Catching up on earlier episodes. Torch does get short shrift in the popular consciousness. This is a really interesting episode. Jon Parshall referred briefly to the importance of Operation Torch and the subsequent campaign from North Africa’s western direction. Sam Wallace’s brief aside into Kasserine was refreshing. His comparison to the Bulge is an apt one. The only difference being that the emphasis re Kasserine is always concentrated on the defeat at the beginning rather than the victory at the end. I imagine a book will be the hopeful progression of Sam Wallace’s thesis which will make for an educational read.
Very good presentation. My father participated in this operation as an engineer. I think he landed a Safi. It’s hard to remember because he discussed all the locations where battles were fought.
This was brilliant, so detailed. Agree about Kasserine, and generally about the North African Campaign, and the "Desert Fox". The Allies won, it won't always go the way they want but overall, they got the job done.
So nice with theese not so covered things :) learning a lot!
I am speculating but the American novelty, chaos and variation of individual experience make a confusing framework to organize memory. Few men and officers had any real field experience. By 44 inexperienced units were in contact with experienced ones with a functional mental syntax. Your guest does an invaluable overview of the development of allied organization and the amazing quantity and variety of innovations during Torch. Your programs help me understand how in frequently overlooked battles and campaigns lay the critical groundwork for the major battles and successes. As ever thank you and your guests
Great episode, as usual. I wonder about the weighting of the forces to the western end of the operation. I've read there was some consideration to landing at Phillipeville as well (about halfway between Algiers and Tunis) but this was discarded as a leap too far into the Med. But I wonder too whether any thought was giving to seizing Oran and Algiers, and maybe Casablanca, then using their shipping to stage from Algiers port and airfields to leapfrog units forward to Phillipeville. On the whole, though, given the Allies inexperience with joint large-scale amphibious operations, this went down remarkably well.
Amazing staff planning for such a large force, disperate transport origins, disperate forces/comms/TTPs. All quite an amazing success.
Would not be easy to duplicate even today.
@@jim99west46 I agree operation torch had many moving parts.
Torch was, for propaganda purposes, a landing by U.S. forces, supported by British warships and aircraft, under the belief that this would be more palatable to French public opinion, than an Anglo-American invasion. For the same reason, Churchill suggested that British soldiers might wear U.S. Army uniforms, and No.6 Commando did so.[26] (Fleet Air Arm aircraft did carry US "star" roundels during the operation,[27] and two British destroyers flew the Stars and Stripes.[26]) In reality, the Eastern Task Force-aimed at Algiers-was commanded by Lieutenant-General Kenneth Anderson and consisted of a brigade from the British 78th and the U.S. 34th Infantry Divisions, along with two British commando units (No. 1 and No. 6 Commandos), together with the RAF Regiment providing 5 squadrons of infantry and 5 Light anti-aircraft flights, totalling 20,000 troops. During the landing phase, ground forces were to be commanded by U.S. Major General Charles W. Ryder, Commanding General (CG) of the 34th Division and naval forces were commanded by Royal Navy Vice-Admiral Sir Harold Burrough
Quickly becoming my favorite WW2 podcast EVEN THOUGH the Brits referred to us Yanks as 'our Italians' early on in the war lol.
Another fantastic presentation, thank you gents. If I have one gripe, it's that everytime the invasion of Syria comes up it's only covered in the briefest of passings. To my understanding we had a number of legitimate reasons for invading Syria, not least because it was being used as a base by the luftwaffe to support their operations in Iraq (the coup). Additionally, the cross border raiding by Syrian Bedu, fermented by Vichy, constituted a threat to our longstanding ally Transjordan, and Vichy movements on contested border villages could be construed as an act of invasion itself, if not a deliberate act of hostility aimed at undermining British-Jordanian relations.
Interesting presentation. One aspect I'm curious about and that's the ability of British and allied intelligence services ability to get intel on the ground in Vichy occupied north africa. Vichy was neutral but would still run security operations against potentially hostile spy ops. Casablanca, Algiers and Oran were all ports so it would presumably be easy to get agents infiltrated on neutral ships ? Were there contacts with sympathetic military personnel among the French forces ?
9:57 The Americans had history in the region they're the ones that broke the Barbary Pirates where is the British was having to pay royalties to the sultan the Americans is the one that freed the waters for the British to go by there freelee
"We fought the wrong enemy" -George S. Patton
Torch was less of a lesson because(you said it) this was not an invasion of a determined enemy. Normandy was going to be against a determined enemy with known abilities. I would like to compare day by day casualty numbers since I think Torch was a much smaller operation.
Dam son I am dissatisfied. I wanted to peek at your channel to see what you have to offer, but I am blocked by the join screen. Maybe I will come back later.
UA-cam does not have any mechanism to block specific viewers from channels. If there is an issue watching, it must be at your end