Ardennes ( and the battles)



  • The Battle of the Ardennes- 1914 (http://computasaur.tripod.com/ww1/id17.html)
      one of the first battles. France attack though the forest beliving germans were only lightly defending there. they were wroung and the Germans were gathering in very large numbers. the germans were also planing on using the andennes forest but met french soliders.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Schlieffen_Plan.jpg

    THe battle of france- Germany uses the forest to bypass the maggot line and most of the french army. the french did not see this coming and had litle forces there beacause it seemed very unlikely anyone would try this. the maggot line ended where belguim and france met beacuse it was only on the french, german border
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1940-Fall_Gelb.jpg), (http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/5/14/55627/2665)

    THe battle of the bulge- germany caches the allies by surprise and create a bulge. if baston fell so the germans could refueal it would of been very devasting to the allies like the battle of france, however patton was able to rush to the  aid of the 101st airborne divison. (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/P23(map).jpg) and

    what happened each time germany was faced with an enemy? it tried to sneak its army though the ardennes and encircle its opossing force.  it surpised the belgians, the french and the americans each time they did this. France was unpreaped for this so it capital quickly fell resulting in the surrender of the french army. therefore i do not think France is weak but was caughtt off guard by a surpise attacke  less than 200 miles away from its capitol. I do think France should of fought till the last man to save Paris so that the russians would have time to attack in th east and hopefully nritish reinforcments would arrive. therfore this is why France should not be looked down upon beacuse it lost the battle of france but should be looked at for the great nation it is and many other sucesfull battles.


  • 2007 AAR League

    Fool me once, shame on you.

    Fool me twice, shame on me.

    Fool me three times, I must be ……

    😄

    THis thread is not “french bashing” take that to the proper forum please…



  • Well, the Ardenne was suppose to be impassible true, but maybe, just maybe the Germans would use the roads…

    Seriously, it was a huge blunder in the 2nd World War. Maybe not so much in the first, but that was before armies had mechanization.



  • @Baghdaddy:

    THis thread is not “french bashing” take that to the proper forum please…

    I don’t think it’s “trendy french bashing” to point out the number of flaws in French strategic military thinking in the 20th century.  The French historically (and by historically, I mean 1500-1865) always operate from a position of strength.  The rapid success of opposing powers at various stages in combat has led to the myth of the poorly prepared France.

    Additionally, am I missing something about hating on the French?  I remember the vitriol towards them in 2002-03, but five years later, is there still as much of an active disdain for the French?


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    The French bashing in the above post has nothing to do with History. If it had some fact to support it in terms of History then fine. But its nothing but a rant with little substance.

    Of course the French are failures in so many other ways but the poster didnt find one of them.



  • @Baghdaddy:

    Fool me once, shame on you.

    Fool me twice, shame on me.

    Fool me three times, I must be ……

    😄

    :lol: :lol: i get even with the editing but the first and 3rd times barely failed and the second was the only sucess.


  • 2007 AAR League

    It was not intended at French Bashing, just humor at how much it sucks to be the neighbor of and troop manuever area for Germany.

    The Ardennes were judged impassable because if adequeately defended they would be.

    The problem is when the war games always show it to be too hard to get through, the defender stops worrying about putting up a real defense there.

    Next thing you know the Parisian taxi cabs are rushing soldiers to the front or the Germans are enjoying caffe brun on the Champs Elysee.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    arisian taxi cabs are rushing soldiers to the front

    Yea but that was WW1


  • 2007 AAR League

    and Germans enjoying caffe brun on the Champs Elysee was WWII.

    So?

    It goes back to the initial observation that repeatedly the defending side believed the Ardennes were not a reasonable route to attack through.

    Military history is full on encounters where one side uses terrain the other side believe to be impassable.

    That it happened repeatedly with the Ardennes does tend to make one wonder what was taught in the military academies of the day.



  • @Baghdaddy:

    Military history is full on encounters where one side uses terrain the other side believe to be impassable.

    That it happened repeatedly with the Ardennes does tend to make one wonder what was taught in the military academies of the day.

    wonder hom many times hannibal could sucefully pass though the alps. only once and he knew it never tried after the first time.  also the paths alexdander would take his army in the far east. they said he marched though deserts and mountions just to show he could do it but maybe there waws some strgetical value to it.


  • 2007 AAR League

    Heck, I’m just thinking of the “Battle of Glorietta Pass”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Glorieta_Pass

    The Confederate force fought an out numbered Federal force to a tactical draw but the Feds sent a small detachment (400 men, 1/3 of the force) in a flanking move across the top of an “impassable mountain” that destroyed the baggage and supply train of the Confederates.  This was a strategic victory since the Confederated were not able to sustain an army in the field with out the supplies in the wagon train.

    First rule of combat.
    Impassable terrain is never impassable unless you defend it.

    The Ardennes are only impassable if you defend them.  Even then, you have to defend them with enough force to hold them.  The Battle of the Bulge was a classic example of that same problem.



  • Military history is full on encounters where one side uses terrain the other side believe to be impassable.

    First rule of combat.
    Impassable terrain is never impassable unless you defend it.

    Baghdaddy couldn’t be more right here.  🙂

    Another famous example that comes to mind occurred on Bataan where the extremely incompetent Gen. MacArthur failed to defend the “impassible Mount Natib”, therefore losing his stronghold on Luzon.

    From Wikipedia:
    “Mount Natib, a 4,222-foot-high mountain that split the peninsula, served as the boundary line between the two corps. The commanders anchored their lines on the mountain, but, since they considered the rugged terrain impassable, they did not extend their forces far up its slopes. The two corps were therefore not in direct contact with each other, leaving a serious gap in the defense line.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bataan



  • I learned that lesson the hard way.  😛


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 16
  • 2
  • 10
  • 27
  • 40
  • 38
  • 81
  • 7
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

65
Online

13.9k
Users

34.2k
Topics

1.3m
Posts