German cities and ww2

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

German cities and ww2

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> German cities and ww2

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

German cities and ww2 - 9/15/2003 9:35:51 PM

riverbravo

Posts: 1320
Joined: 1/16/2003
From: Bay St Louis Ms.
Status: offline

During WW2 when the allied forces had Germany sorrounded do you think the Allies made a mistake by taking the cities instead of a siege type tactic?

Look at the first city fighting in Germany.Dont you think the Allies could have starved them out at Aachen and many other German cities?

I dont think the Russians would have held back at all,but if they did.

I think it would have worked with probably a slite chance of taking Hitler alive.It would have also saved lives on both sides.

Do you guys think the allies finding of death camps played a part in the taking of cities?I kind of vengeance thing?

Do you guys think the war could have been won by bypassing the German cities?

_____________________________

I laugh at hurricanes!

Post #: 1

- 9/16/2003 11:02:43 PM

Steelwhip

Posts: 17
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Seattle Wa
Status: offline

The goal of the allies was to end the war as quickly as possible. Seiging cities just does not contribute to a quick end to the war.

Most of the German concentration camps were not found till almost the end of the war...dont think that had to much of a factor determining if the Allies attacked cities....

And you also have to rember that the British and Amercians were in a race with Russia to get to Berlin. American high command realised that the more territory that they were able to capture would give them better standings to deal with the Soviets in the post war years.

Somewhat simplistic opinion on my part I know...but its early and I have had no caffeine to make deep thoughts with=)

_____________________________

(in reply to riverbravo)

Post #: 2

- 9/17/2003 3:12:52 AM

ShermanM4

Posts: 298
Joined: 7/14/2003
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Do you guys think the war could have been won by bypassing the German cities? [/QUOTE] What do you mean by cities? What exactly constitutes a city? When trying to find a stable and permanent bridgehead over a geographic barrier called the "Rhine River," then I have to contend that no, the war could not have been won. I visited both Bonn and Cologne the last time I was in Germany and naturally those cities destroyed their municipal bridges over the river. The bridgehead, of course, was found to the South of Bonn in a little place called Remagen. Is that place a city? I think so! It is not the size of Cologne or Bonn, but there were several thousand people living there then and now. Aachen was then as now criticised as the wrong course of action. General Courtney Hodges felt that Aachen must be taken at all costs if any serious attempts to move across the Rhine were possible. He probably did not realize his men would be sucked into tight, door to door, city fighting for 2 months, while the remnants of the Heer escaped out the back door. Aachen just seemed like it would be an easy victory. In any case we could go down the road of all the hypothesis' you wish to consider. My most favorite is the allies actually succeded in Operation Market Garden! In fact they did not and the war dragged on all the way until may of 1945.

_____________________________

"Perserverance and spirit have done wonders in all ages."

~General George Washington

(in reply to riverbravo)

Post #: 3

- 9/20/2003 3:30:10 PM

BrubakerII

Posts: 538
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Adelaide Australia
Status: offline

[QUOTE=riverbravo]During WW2 when the allied forces had Germany sorrounded do you think the Allies made a mistake by taking the cities instead of a siege type tactic?[/QUOTE]

To be honest RB I think the Allies only had to cast their eyes to the Russian Front where Leningrad (being the most famous of dozens) was a shocking example of exactly how seiges did not work on that front.

As well I think by that time the Germans simply could not maintain a cohesive front in many places and hence the werewolf and militia type defences were built up to asist local battlegroups. Because of this I think cities in siege would simply have tied up too many resources for little gain.

Another would be that I guess you could argue the Allies did in fact bypass many towns, particulalry in the race across France in 1944. A seige was unnecessary ascoherent resistance simply evaporated.

What other cities did you mean in your question (apart from Aachen)? That city in particular was one of the Nazi Empire's jewels so it is probably the last you want to conduct a siege in.

_____________________________