Re: [Epic] That's it!

From: <Bloodax218_at_...>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 1998 17:29:19 EST

In a message dated 98-02-14 16:36:17 EST, you write:

> > Rommel was either a moron or a traitor. The very idea of positioning
> > panzer divisions on the beach is the reason he was suspected by the
> > command, his brazen attempt to end the war early was seen by Hitler,
>
> Please, LT, don't even go there. If any one German general from WWII
> deserves some respect, it's Rommel. He wasn't talking about putting
> them ON the beach, but in local reserve so that they could respond
> quickly. A properly supported amphibious assault is tough to stop - but
> your best chance is to hit it early before it establishes a significant
> beachhead. The panzers were intended for that. The real problem is
> that the High Command bought into the Calais feint enough to keep 15th
> Army fixed there after D-Day. So, there were few panzers in local
> reserve and the rest were either held in strategic or fixed in the
> Calais area.
>


Rommel was quite likely a traitor, and the only thing a traitor deserves is a
bullet in the head (no matter which side he was on). Period.

You are not analyzing the whole situation.

The German command was saturated with traitors, there were conflicting
intelligence reports of where the actual invasion was to take place,
information was being kept from high command.

Even if the Germans knew exactly where the full invasion was to be staged,
having all of the panzer divisions set up in trenches on the beach would have
been suicide, the allies dominated the seas, the ship to shore support
barrages would have kept the panzers pinned down and unable to function
against the allies, especially with constant bombardment from the air, there
would have been a long siege in which the Germans forces would be slowly
demoralized and pecked to death. The allies would
have had free reign, as far as movement, on the beaches, thus the Germans
would be sitting targets for allied bombs and shells.

> This is not to say that it would have worked, but it would have worked
> better. When Patton landed in Sicily, a single German Panzer division
> nearly threw the Big Red One right back into the sea, only being stopped
> by point blank accurate ship to shore support.
>


Sicily was a completely different situation.

The Germans learned a lesson about ship to shore barrages, all but Rommel
seamed to have learned this lesson.

  
> On top of all that, Hitler was insane. To ascribe to him a better
> knowledge of military strategy and tactics than that of Rommel is
> inconceivable. Period.
>


Now that is your biggest mistake, you cannot analyze the situation
impartially, without getting emotionally involved.

Also, you are forgetting that Hitler was a WWI hero, not a simple civillian.

Still further, Hitler was the one who planned the Bulge, an attack though
impossible by the allies.

  
> Now PLEASE stop bring WWII into this. This is an EPIC list.
>


You are'nt paying attention are you? I am not the one who brought up D-Day
tactics.


1st Lieutenant Erik Turner
United States marine Corps
Received on Sat Feb 14 1998 - 22:29:19 UTC