Nordwind

Discussions on WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic.
Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10055
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: Nordwind

#16

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 21 Dec 2017, 16:21

Mori wrote:
jesk wrote:... But sharing this knowledge with you would be educating a hostile person. I don't see why I should give you an opportunity to learn something and become a better person. Probably other contributors feel the same.
I do. This is certainly not the only example of a unreasonably stubborn or hostile writer on these forums. I've often wondered why so many people waste their time is these futile dialogues. The resulting conversations are usually so incoherent they are not much use for educational purposes despite the best efforts of the participants, and they make the AHF look like a children's playground vs a legitimate research & discussion site.

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017, 09:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Nordwind

#17

Post by jesk » 21 Dec 2017, 16:43

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
Mori wrote:
jesk wrote:... But sharing this knowledge with you would be educating a hostile person. I don't see why I should give you an opportunity to learn something and become a better person. Probably other contributors feel the same.
I do. This is certainly not the only example of a unreasonably stubborn or hostile writer on these forums. I've often wondered why so many people waste their time is these futile dialogues. The resulting conversations are usually so incoherent they are not much use for educational purposes despite the best efforts of the participants, and they make the AHF look like a children's playground vs a legitimate research & discussion site.
The benefit of the topic I created was. First, Nordwind does not justly stay in the shadow of the Ardennes. There were big tasks to defeat the 7th Army, with the advance of the offensive against the 3rd Army. I drew attention to the discussions in the German headquarters regarding the plan for the operation. The consequence of Hitler's interference was a reduction in the strength of the initial strike. The Americans had the opportunity to regroup before the Germans moved deep enough into the rear. Quoted, Clark's landmark moments.
The inability of the successful Vosges attacking forces to break out of the mountain exits was another matter entirely. Here the divided German command structure on the Alsatian front clearly contributed heavily to the ultimate lack of success. Had Army Group Oberrhein launched supporting attacks across the Rhine at the start of the offensive, Brooks might not have been able to transfer the three regiments of Task Force Herren from the Rhine to the Vosges so readily, and at least some of the eastern mountain exits might have fallen to the advancing volksgrenadiers. Although Blaskowitz might still have elected not to employ his panzer reserves through the Vosges, the results would have greatly increased his options.

... The XXXIX Panzer Corps Attacks

The fourth German assault against the Seventh Army began in earnest on 7 January along the vulnerable northern portion of the Lauterbourg salient. On the previous day Blaskowitz had finally obtained permission from Hitler to commit the panzer reserve units in this area, and Decker's XXXIX Panzer Corps arrived to control the operation, with both armored divisions and the 245th Volksgrenadier Division in support.


jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017, 09:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Nordwind

#18

Post by jesk » 21 Dec 2017, 18:50

There even worse situation was with the dispersion of forces. On January 5, several battalions attacked in the Gambsheim area. On January 6, the Americans liquidated the bridgehead. On January 8 the Germans for some reason crossed the Rhine in 15 places. Mori wrote about these episodes. The events of January 5-6 fell out of consideration.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opération_Nordwind

Dans le même temps, une offensive secondaire est lancée au sud de Strasbourg contre les positions françaises. Le deuxième jour, Reipertswiller et Wissembourg sont réoccupées par les troupes allemandes. Le 4 janvier, les Américains se replient et établissent une ligne de front sur la Moder qui traverse le centre-ville de Haguenau.

Dans la nuit du 4 au 5 janvier, plusieurs bataillons allemands traversent le Rhin devant Gambsheim. Ils établissent une tête de pont composée d'éléments hétéroclites et mal nourris. Ils attaquent avec acharnement mais beaucoup de soldats allemands étaient prêts à déserter. Il fait particulièrement froid, l'eau gèle dans les gourdes et le temps est défavorable à l'intervention de l'aviation.

Le lundi 8 janvier, les Allemands massent des forces considérables en Alsace en traversant le Rhin en quinze endroits, en particulier entre Freistett et Gambsheim, et entre Fort-Louis et Söllingen. Le XXXIXe Panzerkorps lance son attaque sur Hatten, passage obligé sur la route de Strasbourg : c'est le début de la terrible bataille de Hatten-Rittershofen qui allait durer 12 jours.

__________________

At the same time, a secondary offensive is launched south of Strasbourg against French positions. On the second day, Reipertswiller and Wissembourg are reoccupied by German troops. On January 4, the Americans retreat and establish a front line on the Moder which crosses the city center of Haguenau.

On the night of 4 to 5 January, several German battalions cross the Rhine in front of Gambsheim. They establish a bridgehead composed of heterogeneous and undernourished elements. They attack fiercely but many German soldiers were ready to desert. It is particularly cold, the water freezes in the gourds and the weather is unfavorable to the intervention of the aviation.

On Monday, January 8, the Germans massed considerable forces in Alsace across the Rhine in fifteen places, especially between Freistett and Gambsheim, and between Fort Louis and Söllingen. The XXXIX Panzerkorps launches its attack on Hatten, obligatory passage on the road of Strasbourg: it is the beginning of the terrible battle of Hatten-Rittershofen which would last 12 days.

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

Re: Nordwind

#19

Post by Richard Anderson » 21 Dec 2017, 19:36

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
Mori wrote:
jesk wrote:... But sharing this knowledge with you would be educating a hostile person. I don't see why I should give you an opportunity to learn something and become a better person. Probably other contributors feel the same.
I do. This is certainly not the only example of a unreasonably stubborn or hostile writer on these forums. I've often wondered why so many people waste their time is these futile dialogues. The resulting conversations are usually so incoherent they are not much use for educational purposes despite the best efforts of the participants, and they make the AHF look like a children's playground vs a legitimate research & discussion site.
I know Carl it is incoherent, but I think it is also possibly the finest example of logical fallacies run amuck that I have ever seen. Every post appears to be one giant non sequitur of a dogmatic circular argument. I almost wish I was still teaching critical thinking so I could use it as an example. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Rich (one of the laughing 325 million Americans)
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

Mori
Member
Posts: 1632
Joined: 25 Oct 2014, 12:04
Location: Europe

Re: Nordwind

#20

Post by Mori » 22 Dec 2017, 02:09

Funny, he quotes the French wikipedia page. Wonder who wrote it :lol:

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017, 09:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Nordwind

#21

Post by jesk » 22 Dec 2017, 09:47

Mori wrote:Funny, he quotes the French wikipedia page. Wonder who wrote it :lol:
Write you. Said that wrote about Nordwind, but what and where, hide it.
Mori wrote:
I actually studied Nordwind, and even wrote a piece about it. I read many of the primary sources available, in 3 langages. Just so that you know.

But sharing this knowledge with you would be educating a hostile person. I don't see why I should give you an opportunity to learn something and become a better person. Probably other contributors feel the same.
Your laughter is not appropriate. The introduction to the topic began with gross errors. Tried to argue with Clark and made a mistake. And even the famous maps of the operation seemed to you to be erroneous. It is not usual, to show ignorance, while laughing at the opponent as an ignoramus.
Anderson too. Earlier, in disputes over the affairs of the Germans in France, he tried to substitute the theory of the combat strength of divisions. When I pointed out the fallacy, he did not like it. And he's evil. Always considers himself knowing history. So often, people do not want to admit that somebody knows better than them. Your comments and Anderson to that confirmation.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

Re: Nordwind

#22

Post by Ironmachine » 22 Dec 2017, 13:17

jesk wrote:So often, people do not want to admit that somebody knows better than them.
Look who's talking! :lol:

Mori
Member
Posts: 1632
Joined: 25 Oct 2014, 12:04
Location: Europe

Re: Nordwind

#23

Post by Mori » 22 Dec 2017, 13:28

Well, reading a few pages of the official history, with a look at wikipedia as a complement, definitively makes one the utmost specialist. No one can know better than that, let's just admit the fact.

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic”