Discussion in 'Western Europe' started by whodunit, Aug 26, 2010.
I didn't know about that.
Dieppe Raid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Big part of our history.
In the city next to mine (Hamilton Ontario), there is a large memorial to all the soldiers of the RHLI (Royal Hamilton Light Infantry) that died in the raid. It's quite an important part of history around here as well.
Great, didn't know the fact.
Maybe because I'm interested in Eastern Front more than the Western one.
Here are links to posts on Dieppe on the Forum, you will find photos and good posts regarding the raid, the planning, the why and the waste, as well as recommendations for other reading. Some threads are better than others or repeat what is in other threads. I'll have a look to see if there are links to more information that could be added to one of them. I'll be adding some of my Dieppe photos - the problem with taking over 4000 photos when we were on the battlefield tour this spring is that it takes a lot of editing and organizing before I can share.
An essential thing to know about Dieppe was that as a failed attempt to hold a beachhead, it directly influenced the delay in the Allies opening a second front in France.
In some ways that can be said to be true, because a lot of planning and innovation had to be done after the Dieppe raid made the possibility of capturing a port directly look too difficult.
However, the Americans would have been very unlikely to agree to a French expedition in 1943 even if Dieppe had never happened due to believing the troops needed 'blooding' first, and D-Day could not have been much earlier in 1944 due to weather and tidal conditions. So overall, Dieppe didn't delay much. Even if Dieppe had been a localised success, the British and Canadians didn't have the forces available to start a true 2nd front without the Americans, which was never going to happen before 1944.
Did you mean British, rather than "Americans"?
No. I meant Americans
But didn´t the US especially want immediate action on the French soil? Invasion plans for 1943?
It would seem not, although they may have considered it desirable politically - If they had wanted to do it, they probably would have done it.
I'm unsure you can argue with logic like that. Case closed.
IT is one of the lesser known facts about World War II that D-Day, Operation Overlord, in 1944, was not the first time the Allies attempted to land in Occupied Europe.
The idea of Operation Jubilee was never to secure a true invasion foothold – it was simply a deadly experiment, to gauge the level of German defence and to wreak as much havoc as possible among the Nazi forces during the nine-hour window between two high tides.
The bulk of the land attack was carried out by men from the 2nd Canadian Division supported by 1,000 men from the British Royal Marine Commandos and some 50 US Rangers.
The day was a catalogue of blunders – ranging from some of the landing craft following the wrong gun ships, to tanks becoming stricken in the heavy shingle of the beach.
Out of the 6,000 men who had taken part in the landings, 4,384 men were killed, wounded or missing by the end of the day – a loss rate of 73 per cent.
It was, in short, a bloodbath, and all tragically pointless – although the horrors of the operation gave the Allies an important wake-up call ahead of D-Day.
Text from link....
My uncle Sgt P McCarthy was involved in the Raid he was with the Royal Marine Commandos and won the Military Medal, he died a number of years ago and I had a page full of questions to ask him and never got the chance.
US Chief of Staff, Gen George Marshall, very much wanted an invasion of Europe in 1943. This position was vigorously opposed by the British, who maintained the operation was too risky and that emphasis should be put on the Med. In this opposition the British were aided and abetted by the US Army Ari Forces (Gen H.H. Arnold) and US Navy (Adm King). The USAAF, along with RAF Bomber Command, wanted to prove that the bombers could win the war alone and Adm King, speaking for the US Navy wanted to concentrate on the Pacific theater.
The list of reasons why the invasion could not take place in 1943, included U-boats, insufficient landing craft, insufficient number of troops, insufficiently trained troops (US and British), the Luftwaffe, intelligence on the strength of the Germans in France, and so on. The decision not to invade in 1943 was made in the middle of 1942 when Operation Torch (the November 1942 invasion of North Africa) was approved.
It was primarily the British, not the Americans, who opposed an invasion attempt in 1943.
Not so. At least according to Whitaker.
The Brittish logistical planners did not see how D-Day could be possible before 1944. (for the reasons spelled out by Canambridge above) They wanted North Africa as a second front for 1944. Tobruk made this even more urgent. This was only possible with the Americans.
The US wanted nothing to do with North Africa. There is speculation that the Americans wanted nothing better than to bring about the definitive end of the British empire by letting their allies bleed out in North Africa and parts of Asia. This may be cold, but think of how manipulative the American were in entering the war and how calculating they were in their use of the Atom bomb at war's end. The FRD-Truman crew were nothing if not smart and opportunistic.
Roosevelt and his principal military advisers wanted action in Western Europe (i.e France) but were not ready to wait for the necessary build up of materials and men. They wanted the UK to open the beach head in 1942 to which they would commit air power (and perhaps not much else at first). This was partly to pacify their Russian allies. If the Russians sued for a seperate peace it would create a bad situation for the eventual Western Front.
Meanwhile the us was busy holding ground in the Pacific and re-tooling its economy and industry for war production. It is more than unlikely that the US would have been able to contribute anything (including air power) sooner than they did.
I just read Miller's "Masters of the Air" and he also gives numbers in support of this assertion. Bomber production took at least a year to get into full swing (this would have been early 1943) before America had any sort of presence in Brittain. And then the bombers were sent to three theaters of operation. It took another precarious year before the American air force had any real impact. He discusses the question very thoroughly. Highly recommended read.
I've been reading the links given further up the page and see that No.3 and No.4 Commando got a mention.
They were Army Commando - dad was with No.4 and went on the charge with Pat Porteous who was awarded the VC.
Been waiting for a new password cos I was itching to remind folk that they weren't all RM Commandos back then - Army were the originals.
The lads from No.3, who got ashore, carried out their duties and engaged their battery - No.4 carried out their task to completion. Although Operation Cauldron was a success, and tactics still taught today, the fact the whole operation was carried out baffled those who took part at the time, and to this day.
None of those who took part will be forgotten.