They also wrote one about Dieppe

[army]

They also wrote one about Dieppe





Posted by Michael A. Dorosh from Canada on April 23, 1999 at 19:45:25:


In Reply to: Re: "Dolle Dinsdag" posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball on April 23, 1999 at 17:18:21:



you don‘t characterize that one as well researched, I take it? I thought it was a bit of a stretch myself, and tried to hard to make the case that D-Day was only successful because of Dieppe, which I don‘t believe at all. Surely the lessons of amphibious warfare had been learned at Gallipoli, Guadalcanal, Wake Island, Sicily, Salerno and Anzio, yes?

Your thoughts on Whitaker‘s Dieppe book, Geoff?

 

[army]

Re: They also wrote one about Dieppe





Posted by Brad Sallows from Burnaby BC Canada on April 23, 1999 at 20:39:29:


In Reply to: They also wrote one about Dieppe posted by Michael A. Dorosh on April 23, 1999 at 19:45:25:



I haven‘t read the book, hence I only intended to make two general
points: judging commanders and their decisions armed with all the
hindsight history can bring to bear is unfair ground from which to
criticize, and attempting to build a case for "if A then B" is
pointless if the time between A cause and B effect allows for
a lot of variation in enemy reaction.
Some people argue that Dieppe was invaluable for lessons learned
others think it was wasteful. I believe the former are
overwhelmingly correct. The US was pushing for a mainland European
invasion in 1942 Dieppe settled the debate. Much was learned about
the required weight of naval and air support, not to mention
amphibious transport capability. It was known a port would be
required early to logistically support an invasion it was learned
that an indirect approach would be preferable to a direct one. The
inexperienced US forces benefited from a more gradual introduction
to the European conflict via North Africa. Sicily and Anzio had
problems and some additional lessons were learned, particularly
about the employment of airborne forces in support of amphibious
operations Sicily and the need to risk offensive action very soon
after landing while the enemy was off balance Anzio. Also, the
Italian defenses in Sicily were considerably softer than the Germans
in Normandy and allowed the Allies to blood some divisions in
amphibious operations with relatively few casualties. Thus, by the
time they were planning for Normandy, they had a good handle on what
was required and came up with some very creative solutions to
problems. D-Day saw the Allies throwing everything they could muster
after months of planning at the shoreline, and it was still a near-run
thing at Omaha. One can easily argue that every prior amphibious
operation made a contribution to the success of Neptune, and Dieppe
led the way for all of them.

 

[army]

Re: They also wrote one about Dieppe





Posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball from Canada on April 23, 1999 at 20:41:00:


In Reply to: They also wrote one about Dieppe posted by Michael A. Dorosh on April 23, 1999 at 19:45:25:



Happy Friday, Michael,

Just a quick note as I‘m cooking for two of us and four children as we speak more beer please!.

I confess I am unfamiliar with anything Whitaker might have written about Dieppe. Do you have a title? I‘d like to find it...

Having said that, I will also confess that regarding Dieppe, I was weaned on THE SHAME AND THE GLORY Terrence Robertson. Couple that with a healthy dose of cynicism, and my humble opinion is that JUBILEE was a complete cock-up. Mountbatten‘s cock-up. If you like, please don‘t hesitate to start a new topic on this one! *slavering*

I think the old theory about Dieppe being a necessary prelude to a successful invasion of the continent to be propaganda from the apologists who never envisioned our losses there. The original plan, which specified all of the preparation and fire support many claimed were only learned because of Dieppe, should indicate that ‘they‘ already knew what it would take to assault Festung Europa. That it was withdrawn remains criminal.

But I digress... yes indeed, let‘s start a new one on Dieppe... but I really would like your opinion on the original premise of this thread! I find it credible and fascinating...

More later, my potatoes are boiling over! *LOL*

Geoff