stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jun 25, 2023 9:02:38 GMT
On today's WWI post something odd here.
a) This 1st bit doesn't make sense. I think it means he's arguing that the only thing keeping the allies in the war is the promise of US forces in large numbers so probably some words missing/corrupted?
b) On the 2nd bit as far as I'm aware the US intent was always to raise an army of about 4M men and 800,000 was never an intention. He's right that the latter number would be too few to be important especially given the rawness of the US forces, worsened by the massive dilution of their regulars by the level of the expansion. In formal documents of this time he was already talking about there being 48 divisions in the US with the constraints being transport to bring them over and then having them trained up for fighting at the front. IIRC there were ~6 US divisions in France by about June 1918 and the 1st couple were finally finishing training and being ready for major front line action.
It should be noticed that the US divisions, in part because of the desperate shortage of experienced men, were about double the size of the standard ones for the allies with about 28,000 men per division.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 65,030
Likes: 46,240
|
Post by lordroel on Jun 25, 2023 9:19:32 GMT
On today's WWI post something odd here.
a) This 1st bit doesn't make sense. I think it means he's arguing that the only thing keeping the allies in the war is the promise of US forces in large numbers so probably some words missing/corrupted? b) On the 2nd bit as far as I'm aware the US intent was always to raise an army of about 4M men and 800,000 was never an intention. He's right that the latter number would be too few to be important especially given the rawness of the US forces, worsened by the massive dilution of their regulars by the level of the expansion. In formal documents of this time he was already talking about there being 48 divisions in the US with the constraints being transport to bring them over and then having them trained up for fighting at the front. IIRC there were ~6 US divisions in France by about June 1918 and the 1st couple were finally finishing training and being ready for major front line action. It should be noticed that the US divisions, in part because of the desperate shortage of experienced men, were about double the size of the standard ones for the allies with about 28,000 men per division.
That is strange, tried to find the letter online to see if it made things clearer, but no luck, will keep digging.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jun 25, 2023 9:24:46 GMT
On today's WWI post something odd here.
a) This 1st bit doesn't make sense. I think it means he's arguing that the only thing keeping the allies in the war is the promise of US forces in large numbers so probably some words missing/corrupted? b) On the 2nd bit as far as I'm aware the US intent was always to raise an army of about 4M men and 800,000 was never an intention. He's right that the latter number would be too few to be important especially given the rawness of the US forces, worsened by the massive dilution of their regulars by the level of the expansion. In formal documents of this time he was already talking about there being 48 divisions in the US with the constraints being transport to bring them over and then having them trained up for fighting at the front. IIRC there were ~6 US divisions in France by about June 1918 and the 1st couple were finally finishing training and being ready for major front line action. It should be noticed that the US divisions, in part because of the desperate shortage of experienced men, were about double the size of the standard ones for the allies with about 28,000 men per division.
That is strange, tried to find the letter online to see if it made things clearer, but no luck, will keep digging.
OK thanks. Don't sweat too much over it but the wording for the 1st part simply makes no sense and for the 2nd it contradicts just about everything I've read on US plans. The basic idea was that the US army would be decisive in 1919 and a lot of the allies, even after the failure of the German spring/summer offensives also expected fighting to go on into the next year. Fortunately it didn't work that way. [Although I have seen the argument that if the Germans had fought to the bitter end with an allied/US invasion of Germany then it would have killed off the old "stab in the back" delusion or at least greatly weakened it].
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jun 27, 2023 9:36:39 GMT
Lordroel
On today's USCW thread I was a bit surprised about
as I thought reinforcement for Canada only came about due to the Trent attack. Mind you given how unsettled things are looking its probably a good move to send some additional forces over.
On today's WWII thread.
Finally some recognition of events in Burma, although largely the side show around Myitkyina where Britain/Gurka forces are aiding a US operation rather than the main battle around Imphal.
Otherwise looking good. Thanks.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 8, 2023 20:15:34 GMT
Found two mistakes in the WW2 thread:
Page 117, Jan 2, 2023: The photo of the three senior officers is shown twice! Once suffices, methinks.
Page 121, Mar 8, 2023: "Adolf Hitler issues Führer Order 11"? I guess that should be 54.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 65,030
Likes: 46,240
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 8, 2023 20:20:44 GMT
Found two mistakes in the WW2 thread: Page 117, Jan 2, 2023: The photo of the three senior officers is shown twice! Once suffices, methinks. Page 121, Mar 8, 2023: "Adolf Hitler issues Führer Order 11"? I guess that should be 54. Thanks, it is been a while sins the troll got pointed on a mistake they made, will fix it.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jul 12, 2023 8:27:38 GMT
Is today's WWI post basically a stub to be added to later? Only it seems a lot of mentions of events with no real details. Or is it that whatever sources your using simply have no information on the events?
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 65,030
Likes: 46,240
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 12, 2023 9:02:26 GMT
Is today's WWI post basically a stub to be added to later? Only it seems a lot of mentions of events with no real details. Or is it that whatever sources your using simply have no information on the events? Steve
Think the last part.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jul 12, 2023 18:36:54 GMT
Is today's WWI post basically a stub to be added to later? Only it seems a lot of mentions of events with no real details. Or is it that whatever sources your using simply have no information on the events? Steve
Think the last part.
OK thanks for clarifying.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jul 23, 2023 11:23:19 GMT
Comment on today's WWII post - rather heated but given the circumstances.
I knew from his cowardice in 1956 that Eisenhower was a piece of s**t but the little asshole was playing silly games back in 1944. Britain is doing the bulk of the fighting and both tying and wearing down the main German forces but he's still not happy. While the US with a lot more support against weaker units is largely waiting about for clear weather. Monty had his faults but its highly doubtful any of the US commanders could have done any better.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 65,030
Likes: 46,240
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 23, 2023 12:00:07 GMT
Comment on today's WWII post - rather heated but given the circumstances.
I knew from his cowardice in 1956 that Eisenhower was a piece of s**t but the little asshole was playing silly games back in 1944. Britain is doing the bulk of the fighting and both tying and wearing down the main German forces but he's still not happy. While the US with a lot more support against weaker units is largely waiting about for clear weather. Monty had his faults but its highly doubtful any of the US commanders could have done any better. Well it is not going to be the last time Monty gets the brunt of blame by the Americans. But the British latter on will also do the same as the Americans, this time against a certain Polish general.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jul 23, 2023 12:12:49 GMT
Comment on today's WWII post - rather heated but given the circumstances.
I knew from his cowardice in 1956 that Eisenhower was a piece of s**t but the little asshole was playing silly games back in 1944. Britain is doing the bulk of the fighting and both tying and wearing down the main German forces but he's still not happy. While the US with a lot more support against weaker units is largely waiting about for clear weather. Monty had his faults but its highly doubtful any of the US commanders could have done any better. Well it is not going to be the last time Monty gets the brunt of blame by the Americans. But the British latter on will also do the same as the Americans, this time against a certain Polish general.
True but wrong is wrong and crap is crap. The Polish were unfairly blamed for failures at Arnhem when there were a lot of other failures on many levels.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 65,030
Likes: 46,240
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 23, 2023 12:25:20 GMT
Well it is not going to be the last time Monty gets the brunt of blame by the Americans. But the British latter on will also do the same as the Americans, this time against a certain Polish general. True but wrong is wrong and crap is crap. The Polish were unfairly blamed for failures at Arnhem when there were a lot of other failures on many levels. Yep wrong is wrong. So i need to do 1 month of work and i am done with the Great War, have entered 1862 with the Civil War and i am at the start of Operation Market Garden.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,527
Likes: 12,118
|
Post by stevep on Jul 23, 2023 21:42:34 GMT
True but wrong is wrong and crap is crap. The Polish were unfairly blamed for failures at Arnhem when there were a lot of other failures on many levels. Yep wrong is wrong. So i need to do 1 month of work and i am done with the Great War, have entered 1862 with the Civil War and i am at the start of Operation Market Garden.
It will be strange when its finished as gotten used to checking on it daily. Great work over the last few years.
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Aug 2, 2023 16:42:20 GMT
Since I just read this: "Governor of New York, Edwin Morgan said thanks but no thanks to an offer to raise three 1000-man regiments of Black Soldiers from the state’s African American community."
Strange. One should think that someone would have thought "Hey, nobody hates the slavery system more than the blacks, so they would make the most motivated soldiers."
|
|