December 2, 1944 - Was Hürtgen Forest Worth it?

There is an underrated WWII television film covering a portion of the battle

Trailer for When Trumpets Fade

(The trailer is pretty bad - the film is better than the trailer suggests, IMHO.)

On HBO/Max. Stars Ron Eldard, Zach Orth and Dylan Bruno. Sort of got lost in the shuffle as 1998 also saw SPR (in which Bruno also had a big part.)

Solid cast, in addition to the leads - pre-Deadwood Timothy Olyphant, Martin Donovan, Frank Whaley, Jeffrey Donovan, Bobby Canavale among others.

Not worth it. The American forces vastly misunderstood the topography and dense Forrest terrain leading to defeat.

This was a defensive victory for Germany. The Allie’s had to regroup before finally pushing through in feb of 45

Which brings up the question of would we have been better off not using Ike’s plan but instead trying for a knockout punch to the head instead of using body blows if you get my drift.

quote:

---

Remind me again WHY we (USA) were involved in a war in Europe during WW2?

---

Germany and Italy declared war on us.

You asked me why the United States was fighting in Europe. I told you.

quote:

---

I personally think Ike was too conservative.

---

While he was an unprecedented genius at coalition building and “CEO” leadership, there is no evidence that Ike was at all gifted at actual battlefield strategy.

Africa? We were embarrassed early until we overwhelmed the Germans with numbers.

Sicily? Was it even necessary? What did it really buy us when we could’ve isolated any troops there using air and naval forces and left them to rot like we did in the pacific.

Italy? He agreed to it to placate Churchill and almost every step from there was a mistake. Anyone with a topographical map could see attacking up the peninsula would be hell and that it all ended in a cul de sac blocked by the alps from the primary theatre. Hell we were almost pushed back into the sea at Anzio. Massive waste of time and resources. Clark should’ve been relieved of duty.

Market Garden? Disaster.

Landing in French Riviera? Why? Was that an efficient use of resources or an unnecessary extension of our supply lines that slowed progress to the Rhine and beyond.

Broad front strategy? Huge waste akin to slowly bludgeoning an opponent to death while taking unnecessary losses.

He deserves credit for managing the coalition when no one else could’ve, but the results of the coalition on the battlefield were a bit of a mess.

quote:

---

No, you did not explain why we sent millions to fight Germans and Italians who never attacked us and only declared war on us after we sank multiple of their ships/subs to the bottom of the sea.

---

You have the answer in your diatribe. Clearly you understand why we sent millions of men to fight Germans and Italians.

In Eisenhower's defense, it was the Combined Chiefs of Staff who decided that Sicily and Italy would be combat theaters. The British were very domineering early on and were obsessed with taking Italy out of the war and using the Italian peninsula as a launching pad into southern Europe. Eisenhower was very much in favor of a Channel crossing as soon as possible but was overruled by his superiors.

But as to most of the other things you said I definitely agree. Eisenhower knew how to placate the disparate personalities of both armies and also knew how to talk to politicians but he had no combat experience and it showed in many instances throughout his reign as Supreme Allied Commander.