Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

Discussions on all aspects of the United States of America during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Carl Schwamberger.
User avatar
genstab
Member
Posts: 2116
Joined: 15 Jul 2003, 23:50
Location: The Big City on Lake Erie

Eisenhower Rates his Corps Commanders

#16

Post by genstab » 19 Jun 2005, 19:25

I'd like to make one additional amplification concerning my last post. I do believe the U.S. generals of World War II deserved a special honor- to be retired at their wartime rank as a permanent rank. The nation could do no less and I believe that is what was done in individual cases by separate Acts of Congress though I am not sure who was so honored and when. An aside on that as regards the Navy admirals- because of his screwups ("Where is Task Force 54? The world wonders" at Leyte and piloting into TWO different typhoons resulting in ships sunk) Halsey was kept from getting his fifth star as Fleet Admiral for a full year after the others; I think Spruance should have gotten it instead becaue he was the vistor of the Battle of Midway and wasn't even an aviation admiral. At least Congress made Spruance a permanent full Admiral on retirement- which leads me to conclude that it wasn't automatic for all high officers.

I appreciate your incisive comments, Steen- always a pleasure to read yur posts. And Ken, you've done a lot of work with those lists. Your resources have to exceed mine.

Best regards,
Genstab

User avatar
Ken McCanliss
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 21 Apr 2002, 06:06
Location: California, U.S.A.

Bradley's evaluations

#17

Post by Ken McCanliss » 19 Jun 2005, 19:45

Steen,

Only that he had done so "at Eisenhower's request".

~ Ken


User avatar
Steen Ammentorp
Member
Posts: 3269
Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 13:48
Location: Denmark
Contact:

#18

Post by Steen Ammentorp » 20 Jun 2005, 20:55

Thanks Ken.

Kind Regards
Steen Ammentorp
The Generals of World War II

User avatar
USA_Finn
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 03 Sep 2003, 00:45
Location: Seattle, WA

#19

Post by USA_Finn » 22 Dec 2005, 04:15

Peter H wrote:
Steen Ammentorp wrote: What I find interesting is that Devers (CinC 6th AG) is only ranked 24th of the 38th senior officer ranked.

Kind Regards
Steen Ammentorp
The Generals of World War II
Steen,

Something about Devers from Eisenhower at War 1943-45 by David Eisenhower.

-Devers was an appointee of Marshall,made ETO commander 1943...."he never enjoyed Eisenhower's complete confidence."

-Eisenhower and he clashed in 1943 over the transfer of air assets back to England before the Salerno landing.

-Eisenhower considered that Devers "underestimated the staying power of the German 19th Army in Alsace and his apparent inability to control the French."

-Devers made "slow progress in the Colmar pocket" fighting and was "reluctant to push Leclerc".In late January 1945 Eisenhower sacked the commander of the US 75th Infantry Division after a stern conference with Devers.

Regards,
Peter
Ike played favorites as per the following. Matti

"Lost Victories" (with apologies to von Manstein) Source of text and images: http://efour4ever.com/44thdivision/bridgehead.htm


The ETO had its own Mason-Dixon line. The border ran along the intersection of the Third and Seventh Armies.

General George Patton believed that he would be the first man on the banks of the Rhine, wrote to his wife that Devers and his Seventh Army had "made a monkey out of me." The Seventh reached the Rhine before Thanksgiving Day 1944, with an intact bridge and the capture of the historic Strasbourg to complete history's first wintertime crossing of the Vosges Mountains. Ironically, Hitler saved Patton's reputation by way of the Ardennes offensive, only one month removed.

General Eisenhower professed support to take advantage of any opportunity of the moment. After months of grasping to take a bridgehead on the Rhine, through a brilliant coup-de-main, the Seventh Army handed the Allied Commander in Chief a historic opportunity: An open door into Germany by way of Strasbourg and the intact Kehl Bridge.
Image
In early November, Eisenhower ordered Generals Montgomery, Bradley and Devers forward in a broad-front offensive toward the Rhine. The goal: end the war by Christmas. Bradley's First Army General Hodges and Third Army General Patton employed meat-grinder tactics like those used in WW1. While the American First and Third Armies sapped precious strength in the morass of the Hurtgen Forest and against the fortresses around Metz, the 44th I.D. and other Seventh Army units assailed the unassailable. Their order: Mission Impossible. Break through the enemy's winter line in the Vosges Mountains and cross the Rhine. All the while constrained by command of the fewest resources and holding firmly last place in re-supply priority. With Ike's support, Monty hoarded supplies and troops while Dever's attacked. Then, to everyone's amazement, the Seventh Army breached the Vosges and reached the Rhine. The frosting. A liberated Strasbourg with an intact bridge over the Rhine.

The day after the Strasbourg's coup-de-main, Devers received Eisenhower and General Omar Bradley, at his headquarters at Vittel in the Vosges Mountains. Instead of offering congratulations, the SHAEF commander came to borrow some of Seventh Army's divisions. Patton needed help in the Third Army's stalled offensive just to the north. Devers countered. His proposal, strike boldly beyond the Rhine and bypass the German forces on the west bank. And abandon Patton's offensive and move the Third to Alsace under Devers' command. From this point, move Alexander "Sandy" Patch and the Seventh Army across the Rhine for a northward push on the far side of the river inside Germany while Patton made a parallel drive northward on the near side of the Rhine. The objective: Roll up the enemy's entire rear and cause Germany to abandon the Rhine's west bank all the way up to Holland. And end the war.

This bold new proposal startled his guests and his boss. Bradley fought against the plan with its transfer of the Third Army. Eisenhower had nothing of this plan. He did not even want Devers' forces to cross the Rhine, with or without Patton. To General Patch and his Seventh Army staff, the Supreme Commander's decision canceling the Rhine crossing amounted to a betrayal and smacked of favoritism. It directly contradicted the formal orders under which they had brilliantly succeeded. Eisenhower made no apologies nor explanations regarding 'the why' to his changing 7th Army's mission. He simply commanded Devers to abandon any plan to cross the Rhine. His new edict: Support Patton's right flank in his failed offensive against the Saar.

The only point Devers won was to keep the divisions coveted by Patton. Obviously the boss favored Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery. Monty and his 21st Army Group continued to hold priority in the race to Berlin. Even though Monty stood pat, disobedient of his commander's explicit order to go on the offensive, Eisenhower would not budge for his stated position. Dever's soldiers fought and won. Bradley enjoyed a strong secondary priority from his long-time friend, mentor and now his commander, General Eisenhower. Bradley benefited by receiving the bulk of U.S. troop replacements and supplies while Devers divisions ran short. In the face of such favoritism, only the Seventh Army armies stood victorious in the fall of 1944. For the ETO, the sole source of triumphant news-reel and newspaper headlines for a war-weary home front emanated from the unfortunate one, the Seventh. All others failed to produce battlefield wins. Or in the case of the Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery, the First Viscount of el Alamein led 21st Army Group, did not even try.

Fate is often cruel. General Alexander Patch, in early November 1944, lost his son Captain Alexander Patch Jr. near Luneville, France, while serving in the 79th Infantry Division. Matters were different for the Eisenhower family. A change of assignment greeted Lt. John Eisenhower upon his arrival in France. For this West Point graduate and 'favorite son' instead of the command of an infantry platoon came a cushy and safe staff assignment.

Ironically, musician and song-writer John Fogerty response when asked what inspired his late 1960s hit song 'Fortunate Son' was: "Julie Nixon was hanging around with David Eisenhower, and you just had the feeling that none of these people were going to be involved with the war" (the Vietnam conflict). David Eisenhower is the son of the same John Eisenhower. (Fortunate Son Lyrics http://efour4ever.com/44thdivision/fortunate_son.htm)

The legacy of the Eisenhower pre-occupation or bias to the ETO north continues many years removed from November 1944. The story with legs remains the six months later coup de main of the Ludendorff Bridge at Remagen in March 1945. The potential war ending and first to the Rhine River bridgehead at Strasbourg, with it's superior Kehl Bridge, continues as the historical footnote.

With apology to Erich von Manstein, failure to capitalize at Strasbourg may well be one of America's costliest 'Lost Victories.'


Sources:
"The Final Crisis: Combat in Northern Alsace January 1945, Richard Engler, pages 54 - 55
"Policy Versus Strategy: The Defense of Strasbourg in Winter 1944-1945" Franklin Louis Gurley, The Journal of Military History, Vol. 58, No. 3 (Jul., 1994), 481-486.

HMan
Member
Posts: 75
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 22:33

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#20

Post by HMan » 02 Aug 2016, 02:36

From my notes from a book called "Ghost Front" (I assume its by Charles Whiting, but my notes do not
have that detail):

The book claims that Ike was in a bad mood in Nov. / Dec. 1944 - speculating that it was personal
due to nagging letters from his wife. At any rate, the book claims Ike took it out on Devers, "blowing
up" after Devers planed to cross the Rhine the last Friday in Nov. '44.

Ike demanded it be stopped (Devers already had 2 companies across). The book says this strange
business is virtually ignored in histories & is a great mystery why Ike didn't give Devers permission
to continue. This offensive might have precluded any change of a German offensive in the Ardennes.

I stress that this is just from my notes from the book - I got it in the library and do not have access
to it. I would be interested if anyone has any insight in this affair.

User avatar
Pips
Member
Posts: 1280
Joined: 26 Jun 2005, 09:44
Location: Country NSW, Australia

Re:

#21

Post by Pips » 05 Aug 2016, 02:28

USA_Finn wrote:
General Eisenhower professed support to take advantage of any opportunity of the moment. After months of grasping to take a bridgehead on the Rhine, through a brilliant coup-de-main, the Seventh Army handed the Allied Commander in Chief a historic opportunity: An open door into Germany by way of Strasbourg and the intact Kehl Bridge.
Bradley's First Army General Hodges and Third Army General Patton employed meat-grinder tactics like those used in WW1. While the American First and Third Armies sapped precious strength in the morass of the Hurtgen Forest and against the fortresses around Metz, the 44th I.D. and other Seventh Army units assailed the unassailable. Their order: Mission Impossible. Break through the enemy's winter line in the Vosges Mountains and cross the Rhine. All the while constrained by command of the fewest resources and holding firmly last place in re-supply priority. With Ike's support, Monty hoarded supplies and troops while Dever's attacked. Then, to everyone's amazement, the Seventh Army breached the Vosges and reached the Rhine. The frosting. A liberated Strasbourg with an intact bridge over the Rhine.

The day after the Strasbourg's coup-de-main, Devers received Eisenhower and General Omar Bradley, at his headquarters at Vittel in the Vosges Mountains. Instead of offering congratulations, the SHAEF commander came to borrow some of Seventh Army's divisions. Devers countered. His proposal, strike boldly beyond the Rhine and bypass the German forces on the west bank. And abandon Patton's offensive and move the Third to Alsace under Devers' command. From this point, move Alexander "Sandy" Patch and the Seventh Army across the Rhine for a northward push on the far side of the river inside Germany while Patton made a parallel drive northward on the near side of the Rhine. The objective: Roll up the enemy's entire rear and cause Germany to abandon the Rhine's west bank all the way up to Holland. And end the war.

The story with legs remains the six months later coup de main of the Ludendorff Bridge at Remagen in March 1945. The potential war ending and first to the Rhine River bridgehead at Strasbourg, with it's superior Kehl Bridge, continues as the historical footnote.
Fascinating. I was not aware of this. Why on earth would Eisenhower and Marshall pass up (what appears to be) such a marvellous opportunity?
It just doesn't make sense.

Have the reasons ever been adequately explored and explained???

User avatar
genstab
Member
Posts: 2116
Joined: 15 Jul 2003, 23:50
Location: The Big City on Lake Erie

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#22

Post by genstab » 17 Aug 2016, 20:11

While we're on the subject of it's who you know, Mark Clark is a good example of a general who got Army command because he was Ike's buddy.
He showed his true colors when he ignored Alexander's orders which would have resulted in the destruction of the German 14th Army and shorten the Italian war. Instead he opted to capture Rome for the glory. He should have been relieved, but later he got the Army Group command.
Best regards,
Bill in Cleveland

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6349
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Re:

#23

Post by Richard Anderson » 17 Aug 2016, 21:00

Pips wrote:Fascinating. I was not aware of this. Why on earth would Eisenhower and Marshall pass up (what appears to be) such a marvellous opportunity?
It just doesn't make sense.

Have the reasons ever been adequately explored and explained???
Insofar as I know, the Kehl bridge was never captured "intact". In fact, the French blew the western end in 1940 and it was only operating through temporary repairs, when the Germans blew up the eastern end in November 1944.

Nor was Devers ever interested in an attack east from Strasburg, which he assessed correctly as a topographical cul de sac on the same order as having the French cross south of the city into the Schwarzwald. He wanted to advance to Rastatt and attack east from there in an assault crossing of the river, cutting to Pforzheim and then turning north.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

South
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: 06 Sep 2007, 10:01
Location: USA

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#24

Post by South » 18 Aug 2016, 09:06

Good morning Genstab and all,

US General Joseph "Vinegar Joe" Stillwell was not glorified.

He got fired by FDR.

Warm regards,

Bob

South
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: 06 Sep 2007, 10:01
Location: USA

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#25

Post by South » 18 Aug 2016, 09:07

Good morning Genstab and all,

US General Joseph "Vinegar Joe" Stillwell was not glorified.

He got fired by FDR.

Warm regards,

Bob

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10056
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#26

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 20 Aug 2016, 05:20

& Roosevelt subsequently signed off on giving Stillwell command of the US 10th Army.

South
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: 06 Sep 2007, 10:01
Location: USA

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#27

Post by South » 20 Aug 2016, 10:08

Good morning Carl,

True, yet the significance is the loss of the China "portfolio".

Fate and Army-Navy "disagreements" got Stillwell the 10th. General Buckner ran the 10th and he leaned toward Nimitz of Navy.

It was MacArthur who asked Stillwell if he'd be interested in the 10th Army.

Gen Buckner was killed .

When traveling back to CONUS, Stillwell got a message from MacArthur at Honolulu to return to Guam for job as Cdr of 10th.

FDR did sign off on this.

Warm regards,

~ Bob

User avatar
Steen Ammentorp
Member
Posts: 3269
Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 13:48
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#28

Post by Steen Ammentorp » 21 Aug 2016, 18:58

South wrote: Fate and Army-Navy "disagreements" got Stillwell the 10th. General Buckner ran the 10th and he leaned toward Nimitz of Navy.

It was MacArthur who asked Stillwell if he'd be interested in the 10th Army.

Gen Buckner was killed .

When traveling back to CONUS, Stillwell got a message from MacArthur at Honolulu to return to Guam for job as Cdr of 10th.
Not quite the story according to Stephen R. Taaffe in his excellent "Marshall and his Generals". According to him MacArthur and Stilwell when Stilwell was on inspection tour in the Pacific as Commander AGF. Both critical of Buckner, MacArthur told Stilwell that he would relieve Buckner and put Stilwell in charge. Later when Buckner Stilwell on his way home radioed MacArthur offering his service, however at this time MacArthur was lobbying for Griswold for the appointment. Only Marshall's backing for Stilwell as commander 10th Army led MacArthur offer it to him.
Kind Regards
Steen Ammentorp
The Generals of World War Two

South
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: 06 Sep 2007, 10:01
Location: USA

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#29

Post by South » 22 Aug 2016, 04:42

Good evening Steen,

Understand the somewhat / slightly different views.

I usually follow Tuchman's.

General Beckner did have Navy support of which I assign much significance.

Still, ... my overall theme presented on this thread is that Stillwell lost the China "portfolio", the high-visibility, highly-charged political assignment.

The other Commands, to include the 10th, were much less significant from the political perspective.

Warm regards,

~ Bob

Virginia, USA

User avatar
Steen Ammentorp
Member
Posts: 3269
Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 13:48
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Eisenhower rates his Corps Commanders

#30

Post by Steen Ammentorp » 23 Aug 2016, 17:15

Hi Bob,

Although Stilwell is not on topic here (Eisenhowers ratings) I just wanted to point out that MacArthur may not really have wanted Stilwell despite his statement to him. In this I don't see necessarily that Tuchman disagree, because she is concerned with what was said between MacArthur and Stilwell nor between MacArthur and Marshall.

Anyway in regards to Devers I can only recommed the two recent and long overdue biographies on him. John A. Adams' "General Jacob Devers : World War II's Forgotton Four Star" and James S. Wheeler's "Jacob L. Devers : A Generals' Life". Wheeler's clearly the better of the two IMHO, but neither goes into much deatails about a November crossing of the Rhine.
Kind Regards
Steen Ammentorp
The Generals of World War Two

Post Reply

Return to “USA 1919-1945”