Down playing Point du Hoc

4,861 Views | 28 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by Wildman15
Burdizzo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://beta.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/06/02/one-d-days-most-famous-heroic-assaults-may-have-been-unnecessary/

Curious to hear Aggie commentary on this issue. I was always told General Rudder and the Rangers accomplished something incredible. This article and these people kind of crap on it.
who?mikejones
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quite the monday morning qbing
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just read the article and my reaction is that I have no problem accepting the diminished importance of Pont du Hoc as a threat to D-Day while continuing to revere the Ranger's skill and courage in assaulting it.

I don't find it surprising that Rudder assaulted PdH despite perhaps knowing that the guns had been moved, because without taking PdH he could not subsequently attack his secondary objectives--the other two nearby German artillery complexes. The only alternative course of authorized action available to Rudder, as far as I know, was to divert his Rangers to join the beach landings if the element of surprise in assaulting PdH had been irretrievably lost.

I also have no reason to doubt Rudder's assertion that, once on PdH, he received radio orders to block the highway rather than move on to those secondary objectives. Ad hoc orders transmitted over the air in the chaos of D-Day could easily be lost to history and a paper record might never have been created in the first place. Is there anything in Rudder's entire life of service that would substantiate such a gross lack of integrity on his part?

All of this is consistent with the fog of war and the need to adapt plans and orders to actual circumstances on the ground. As far as I am concerned, the story of Pont du Hoc and Rudder's Rangers is still intact in all aspects that matter.

I now stand ready to be corrected by those who inevitably know far more about this than I do.
BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So did Maisey cause a bunch of undo chaos on the beaches? No
Does an intelligence failure in any way diminish what the Rangers did? No
Is this guy trying to create a narrative because he "discovered" Maisey? Probably.

I too doubt the Rudder blew off his orders to attack Maisey. Holding the Verville Highway between Omaha and Utah was a pretty critical assignment for a few hundred men.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
.........and the Rangers had suffered significant casualties by then, too. I wonder if the change in orders to block the highway wasn't more a reflection of the Ranger's lack of sufficient remaining strength to attack their secondary targets?
Burdizzo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I had similar feelings. Considering the amount of carnage and confusion going on during that time it still amazes me the invasion succeeded. Not to mention trying to track down orders during that time has to be unbelievably difficult.

I have my suspicion the main driver of this is the Brit that owns the property where Maisey sits and is trying to diminish PdH in order to promote tourism at the Maisey site.
BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I would think that is a pretty good assessment, they were in no condition to attack, holding what they got was about all they were good for at the end of June 6.
BigJim49 AustinNowDallas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The guns were only moved back ! Sgt Lomell who put thermite egrenades to ruin the gun barrels has testified to this . he is probably on the New Orleans War museum website !
BigJim49AustinnowDallas
Rabid Cougar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There were a lot of plans that really didn't need to be executed but were done so anyways like the high level bombing and the use of DD Tanks, just off the top of the head.
Polish1979
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I honestly didn't think the article is too bad. However, I do find it weird that someone took the time to write a negative piece about PdH. What purpose does it serve? I will point out that I found it on the landing page for MSN today and was coming here to post it.

As some of you have mentioned already, there are any number of plausible explanations for what happened and how. why write an article that is critical against Rudder and his men, other than online trolling??

I get the guy wants to bring attention to his discovery, but why go negative?

BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
They were but not in a condition where they could have been used to counter the invasion, thus the intel failure.
Marauder Blue 6
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Polish1979 said:

I honestly didn't think the article is too bad. However, I do find it weird that someone took the time to write a negative piece about PdH. What purpose does it serve? I will point out that I found it on the landing page for MSN today and was coming here to post it.

As some of you have mentioned already, there are any number of plausible explanations for what happened and how. why write an article that is critical against Rudder and his men, other than online trolling??

I get the guy wants to bring attention to his discovery, but why go negative?
I think Burdizzo nailed it. This guy has books to sell and real estate to pay for.
cbr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've stood in barbed wire looking down over pdh

It still full of shell holes.

I wouldn't want to climb that mother on my best day with modern gear and a beer at the top.

Climbing that mother****er in ww2 ranger gear with nazis shooting down and tossing grenades at you is an incredible feat of physical achievement and bravery.

Frankly the Germans standing their ground were brave as hell too.

Just because that intel failure meant that the targeted guns were not there doesn't diminish anything. Frankly pdh was still strategic without the guns.

And rudders men made good on the rest of their day too.

I am fine pointing out military issues and history, but anyone writing anything less than praise for those men today is one pussified pos in my book.


CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The weirdest assertion to me, was the claim that Rudder knew the guns were gone, and didn't tell his superiors.

As I said on the Politics Board thread, exactly how was a LtCol battalion commander supposed to have come to this knowledge? And exactly how would he know it and his superiors all the way up to IKE, not know it?
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Burdizzo said:

I have my suspicion the main driver of this is the Brit that owns the property where Maisey sits and is trying to diminish PdH in order to promote tourism at the Maisey site.
And you can tour this site for a mere $8
aalan94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Is there anything in Rudder's entire life of service that would substantiate such a gross lack of integrity on his part?
Other than his friendship with Lyndon Baines Johnson, you mean?
CT'97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
CanyonAg77 said:

The weirdest assertion to me, was the claim that Rudder knew the guns were gone, and didn't tell his superiors.

As I said on the Politics Board thread, exactly how was a LtCol battalion commander supposed to have come to this knowledge? And exactly how would he know it and his superiors all the way up to IKE, not know it?
I agree, and to suggest that he alone could decide to simply attack somewhere else is uninformed. Where he was going to land was pushed down from Army command to the Navy. When they boarded those boats there was no changing plans, it was simply ride alone to where the Navy was told to drop you off. Battalion commanders don't make decisions to attack different objectives. They plan and execute the objectives given to them.
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think the bottom line is that the guy making the claims "discovered" Maisey, bought it, wrote a book about it, and is trying to sell his book and tours to Maisey.

Follow the money

I own a farm 30 miles from the Battle of Palo Duro Canyon. Anybody got a few arrowheads and cavalry artifacts I can strew around?

Mackenzie didn't descend into the Canyon along a narrow trail, he simply rode down Buffalo Lake Road (FM1714) and attacked 10000 Indians on a certain 160 acres.

Ive got a book coming out, and in the meantime you can tour it for $10 a head
BigJim49 AustinNowDallas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BQ78 said:

They were but not in a condition where they could have been used to counter the invasion, thus the intel failure.
Go to WW11 Foundation website for a great explanation of the deeds at Pointe Du Hoc .

Sgt. Leonard Lomell ( acting Lt. due to casualties ) and his men were the first to the 5

camouflaged guns - found them " ready to fire " - put them out of condition with thermite

grenades ! For his actions Lomell got the DSC !

Stephen Ambrose in his book "The Victors ---" said that if one single American was

responsible for the DDay success other than Dwight Eisenhower- it was Leonard Lomell !


BigJim49AustinnowDallas
Rabid Cougar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Truth be told, the entire Normandy Invasion was unnecessary. The Russians were doing the lions share of the killing and it was just a matter of time that they would finish the job. The Normandy Invasiond took place to keep the Russians from going all the at to the English Channel.
CT'97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rabid Cougar said:

Truth be told, the entire Normandy Invasion was unnecessary. The Russians were doing the lions share of the killing and it was just a matter of time that they would finish the job. The Normandy Invasiond took place to keep the Russians from going all the at to the English Channel.
I think that's a big assumption. With shortening supply lines and reduced battle front for the German army to cover I'm not sure it's a done deal the Soviets roll through Germany. Without a second front to pull away German resources I think the Germany army could do a lot of damage and fight for a stalemate.
If that happens and the Germans sign an armistice with the Soviets there is no way an invasion of France is successful.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Watched an interesting documentary called Garbo about the Spaniard who was almost singularly responsible for convincing the Germans that Normandy was a feint and the real invasion would be at the Pas de Calais.

Does the invasion succeed if all those troops hanging around at Calais has been turned loose on Normandy?
JABQ04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Id say no doubt the Russians roll through the Germans if we don't invade Normandy. Operation Bagration in the summer of '44 basically destroyed Army Group Center. Alot of German units in France were being refitted from being mauled in Russia, or 2nd rate troops for occupation duty. The number of frontline combat ready troops wouldn't have been enough to stem the tide in the East. Plus, even if no invasion is launched, the Germans still have to man the Atlantic Wall in preparation for the invasion. So it's not like every German could bail out of France and head East. And while only a sideshow, they still had the Italian Front to contend with.
BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Regardless, the Germans had to man the beaches at Pas de Calais until they got overrun. There always could have been a second invasion, as there was in the south of France. If the Germans had abandoned the Pas de Calais then a second invasion there, instead of continuing to send more men into the Normandy meat grinder, might have ended the war by Christmas like the Western allies wanted.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BQ78 said:

Regardless, the Germans had to man the beaches at Pas de Calais until they got overrun. There always could have been a second invasion, as there was in the south of France. If the Germans had abandoned the Pas de Calais then a second invasion there, instead of continuing to send more men into the Normandy meat grinder, might have ended the war by Christmas like the Western allies wanted.


Thanks. Serious question- what was the availability of troops to support such a second invasion?
BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
600,000 men reinforced Normandy after the first week through the end of June.

Patton's Third Army was added in July, just think what havoc Patton could have caused attacking the German rear in Normandy after landing at an empty Pas de Calais. Army Group B would have been encircled and destroyed, war over before Christmas.

Cherbourg was getting a daily influx of hundreds of new troops well into September.
Rabid Cougar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
XUSCR said:

BQ78 said:

Regardless, the Germans had to man the beaches at Pas de Calais until they got overrun. There always could have been a second invasion, as there was in the south of France. If the Germans had abandoned the Pas de Calais then a second invasion there, instead of continuing to send more men into the Normandy meat grinder, might have ended the war by Christmas like the Western allies wanted.


Thanks. Serious question- what was the availability of troops to support such a second invasion?
See Operation Dragon 15 August 1944.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thanks
aalan94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
A point should be made that if a fortification is made up of a lot of concrete emplaced years in advance with very elaborate defenses, it's a better target for air power, vs. a few guns which may move around at any time (and in fact did), which can only be taken out by troops on the ground.

Using the Rangers against the former target vs. the latter would be stupid.
Wildman15
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It was an Aggie led mission. Therefore, I believe it needs to be in every single history book.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.