Dad was in a Sherman tank at the breakout at St Lo and the dash across France. Wounded after Fort Driant and Metz, November 1944. Thanks for this excellent discussion of the operation and its importance. 🙏
I once had a B-25 fly overhead at about 2000 feet and I couldn’t get over how loud just 2 of those big radial engines were, I just can’t imagine the sound of 1400, 4 engine bombers! Wow, it must have been something.
Don't forget to throw in the 5 or 6 hundred escort fighters. I can't imagine how that would sound. How long would that take to fly over you? It's crazy to think about the scale of some of these operations.
One quiet afternoon in suburbia on the front lawn something caught my ear big time, turned around in time to see a P-47 appear from behind the neighbor's tree line. It was at least 2000 feet away too, impressive, bet that B-25 was a thunder growl.
I got to the WWII weekend in Reading every year and FIFI shows up, when she roars over head it thunders the ground....what 300+ sounded like during Meeting house must've been absolutely something to behold.
In retrospect, I wish I had been on that D-Day Cruise. I have been on two different National WW2 Tours with Don Miller and they both were superb. Don is a brilliant historian and an even better guy. I had the pleasure of closing down several bars over the years with Don. His book on the 8th Air Force during WW2, "Masters of the Air" is the definitive work on the subject and the kind of book that once you start, you never want the book to end. His latest book on Vicksburg and Grant has garnered wide praise and is probably the finest book on the Civil War in recent years.
Nice to see a presenter not engaging in the "blame game" and bashing generals like Spaatz, Montgomery or Bradley for perceived failures. Very good, even-handed presentation.
@@jaimepatena7372 This would not have happened if people had recognized evil for what it was. The Germans voted Hitler into a position where he could take power, the Italians allowed Mussolini to usurp power, and the Japanese legal system more or less bowed to public pressure and enabled the growth of militarism in Japan. It is the average citizens in these nations that allowed these people to have the power to start the war. And it will continue to happen as long as people blind themselves to real evil and allow themselves to be hoodwinked by demagogues and conmen because they tell them what they want to hear.
The British commonwealth and Polish forces deserve some credit for Cobra’s success since they tied down a number of German divisions. Without them, the operation would have been contained by the Wehrmacht and the breakout ending in failure. It was all a team effort and the Germans were struggling to send in fresh divisions since the majority of their forces were pulverised by the Red army’s offensive in the east.
That’s true the best German troops and the mass of panzers were tied down around Caen in a massive armoured battle. Goodwood, Epsom etc. Monty deserves credit for degrading German forces to such an extent they were severely weakened.
Actually nearly twice as many German tanks were in Normandy than were engaging the Soviet Operation Bagration, including five of the seven Waffen SS panzer divisions.
@@lyndoncmp5751 operation bragation was the largest defeat in German military history. George C Marshall himself admitted that if not for the Red Army, then alot more American troops would have been committed to the European front. More than 80% of German war deaths were on the Easter front.
Two of my uncles were in the 120th Infantry Regiment, 30th Infantry Division. Both were killed by the American bombers at the kickoff of Operation Cobra. Thanks for providing additional details about why that happened.
Against a worn down opposition in full retreat its not surprisng patton was able to advance quickly-the german armoured units concentrated their efforts against 21 st army group as expected and this needs to be emphasised in this discussion
A really interesting lecture which covered a lot of points I was previously unaware of. Unfortunately Operation Bluecoat was not mentioned. The objective of which was to capture ground between Vire and the Orne and prevent a German counter attack on the American flank. In particular the British 15th (Scottish) Division and the 6th Guards Tank Brigade captured Hill 309 on 30th July. The hill overlooked the American advance and, prior to the capture of the hill, spotters would glean information vital to the enemy and also direct artillery bombardments on American positions.
July 30 is five days after COBRA was launched and four days after the breakthrough occurred. The Germans were in no position by then to counterattack successfully.
Brilliant! Would absolutely love to be a part of one of these tours. I especially appreciated the segment on Gen. Elwood Richard Quesada and his development of tactical air support
I am somewhat dismayed by the many mistakes contained in this presentation, which have been correctly pointed out by other commenters. At first I wondered if I was being too picky or had been misinformed by my 7 years of college level study, but then I realized this 'expert' truly was re-writing history but probably not intentionally. I also take exception to the large round numbers he seems to use in describing US psychiatric casualties (at about 18:30). I don't seek / expect a finite number but I believe from listening to relatives who WERE THERE it seems to me that 30 thousand battle fatigue casualties is inaccurate. He mentioned the U.S. Air Force several times. It isn't a small detail- it is factual that the US Air Force wasn't created until 1947. It was the US ARMY Air Corps that was doing the bombing, strafing, etc. He would be more convincing as an "expert" if he chose his words a little more carefully. I gave up on this presentation at about 25:00. I no longer regret missing this tour when it happened.
It wasn't the US Army Air Corps, which was renamed in 1941 to the US Army Air Forces (USAAF) , one of the three components of the US Army. Veterans of the USAAF I knew called it "the air force" despite this.
Appears I wasn't the only one who noticed "mistakes" in the presentation @55:25 "Hitler never went to a bombed city. Never." This is false, simply google: "Adolf Hitler, accompanied by other German officials, grimly inspects bomb damage in a German city in 1944, in this German film captured by the U.S. Army Signal Corps on the western front."
Typical American centric version. First error is labeling the British 2nd Army as Montgomery’s. Montgomery was the Allied Ground Commander. A position he held until September 1. Under him was Gen. Omar Bradley, commander of US 1st army and Gen. Sir Mile Dempsey, commander of British 2nd army.
I was under the impression any area of allied tanks were vulnerable to the panzerfoust, not just bottom. Bottoms were penetrated by the obsolesent 37mm and 20mm AT and AA guns.
On 15th March, and again on 7th April 1944 General (his rank then) Montgomery (as Land Force Commander) set out his strategy for the coming battle to the assembled top-brass in St. Paul's School. It was quite clear: his 21st (Anglo-Canadian) Army group would lure the bulk of the German panzers into the British sector where they would be tied down thus allowing General Bradley the time to formulate a breakout plan ('Cobra') from the American sector, advancing against a much reduced panzer opposition. This happened. (UK)
@@pauladamsfinewines8379 I've read elsewhere that 8th Air Force European casualties exceeded total US Marine Corps Pacific Theater casualties, even though the Marines were 150% of Air Force troop strength.
That figure is over a 5 year period. Bomber command (RAF) had over 25000 casualties (crew). Flak was was mostly responsible. The fighter bombers in Europe were also shot down by flak mostly. The Luftwaffe was also heavily engage in Russia I believe.
The number of aircraft and aircrew lost in accidents was massive. I don't have stats in front of me but it was huge. Should not be all that surprising when you consider how fast the allied air forces needed to expand, with the result that not every pilot or ground crewman was top notch. There's also the terrible weather and the much lower level of tech back then. So all in all a dangerous environment even if no one was shooting at you.
Its refreshing to see detailed account of what really happened during this month or so after D-day. Nothing was won as the narrator clearly state. Most WWII account are so simplified they usually go : after D-Day it was just a walk in the park by allied forces all the way trough germany. The german army had no fuel anymore, no air cover bla bla . There are also very heavy combat zones long after an entire area is already cleaned up, by fortified germans troops who resisted strongly on their own (a la japanese) like Lorient or other germans fortifed strongholds on the atlantic coast.
There is a book title, "No Triumphant Procession" that plays to that public perception of post D-Day events in Europe. It covers the last weeks of the war when the British Second Army fought the German Second Naval Infantry Division. The Naval Infantry were formidable foes as they were well motivated units that had strong unit cohesion. Former UBoat crews, deployed as integrated units, were no walkover.
Don't want to take anything away from anyone but at least one historian said it was a "walk out" as opposed to a "break out". Most of the Germans were engaged with the Brit side well to the east. But it needed to be done and was done
As a side note, the Weald of Kent (and the rest of the Weald) shares many similarities with the Boccage. Just one more reason why Sealowe would have been 'unwise', even if the Germans got ashore.
‘Monty was moving down from Caen’? You do realise Monty was in charge of the whole ground theatre, in charge of Bradley and hence Patton. This lecturer is so inarticulate and unknowledgeable. A typical Ambrose like pastiche of boosting American involvement with minimal understanding
Couple minor things. It’s pronounced Mawkee not Mawqua . Secondly the 12th SS had not been at the Eastern front. Normandy was their introduction to combat. They took part in the Battle of the Bulge and would then be sent to Hungary. The original division was made up of fanatical little sh*ts.
The 12th SS was comprised of NCOs who were eastern front veterans combined with thousands of privates who were HJ "fanatical little shits" (great phrasing there) . So you're right that the division was not experienced, but the key personnel were.
Strange pronunciations eg 'Maquis' as Mackoire (to rhyme with 'Loire')signals a somewhat complacent, one-sided moralistic view that augurs ill for the level of scholarship. e.g at 11:27 he comments, 'the Germans were in there first; they'd been there for weeks'. The Germans began their defensive procedures in Normandy (Autumn 1943) when Allied Invasion in 1944 became a certainty. That adds up to months not weeks.
Bradley's justification for failing to close the Falaise gap was that he preferred to go in with a strong shoulder rather than a thin neck. A lost opportunity for sure.
Nonsense. Patton was deeply interested; Bradley elected not to cross the interarmy boundary line, even though that sort of thing happened routinely. Montgomery (still the overall ground force commander) did not order it done. So lots of fault all around but probably fair to blame Bradley more than anyone else.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- I haven't read his memoirs in a while but yes, that was part of it. One of the really fundamental reasons for boundary lines is to control artillery fire; having friendly units from two different field armies approaching each other without clear boundary lines is a recipe for blue-on-blue fire. That said, it's a problem that could have been managed better.
@@executivedirector7467 Also compared to something like Operation Bagration where the Russian steppes were perfect ground for large encirclements etc, the terrain was a lot more difficult in France. It restricted German armour to the roads, making them highly vulnerable to artillery and air attack, but it also helped the Germans in defending the gap they were escaping out of. It explains why a sizeable amount of troops escaped but without any armour or heavy weapons. There were multiple potential Kessels on the Eastern front in 1943, at least. The Germans were quite good at pulling back or holding a corridor to escape. Obviously 1944 was a different story for multiple reasons. Its interesting, the Germans often managed to keep a corridor open or escape. The Soviets often were surrounded but managed to filter through before the kessels tightened up.
He has some of the most bizarre pronunciations I’ve ever heard. 1. Maquis - “mah-kwa” instead of “mah-kee” 2. Bocage - “boo-kajj” instead of “boh-kajj” 3. Allies - “all-eyes” instead of allies.
At 51:50, he said, "We had 90% of the worlds oil." Is "We" America, America and G. B. together on the west, or all the allies together including U.S.S.R.‽
I always hate it when people use terms like "we", "them", "us" etc. in any historical context for several reasons. First of all its deply unscientific, because history always tries to look at things objective and this kind of talking is everything except objective. Second, as this comment shows, its not always precisely clear what is meant exactly. Third, non of "us" was there, and I dont remember myself to be a nation eather.
So many squabbling children in the comments. War is hard, nobody is perfect and the enemy gets a vote. There is a lot of Magical Thinking about the breakout and 'who were best'. There were both weaknesses and strengths across all the allies. And a fair amount of the Historiography is 'just a little biased', one way or another (theoretical deity save me from the Wheraboos). But so much childish squabbling. Calm down, take a step back, 'kill your darlings' (a writing metaphor), leave your ego at the door, face various realities you won't like and look at the whole moving jigsaw seen through the mists of combat and time. And never forget who the 'bad guys' were. The way some commentators go on the Commonwealth and American troops should have stopped fighting the Germans and started shooting at each other.
Interesting, informative, and well-presented talk................BUT: It is marred by Mr. Miller's total inability to pronounce German, French, and Russian names. I do not expect that an expert like Mr. Miller speak fluent French, German, or Russian. One would hope, such an expert would have a basic reading knowledge of one of these languages. But AT THE VERY LEAST, he should know how to pronounce names like "Operation Bagration". The word does NOT rhyme with "vacation." It is pronounced "BAH - GRAH - TZION". It was named after a famous Russian General during the Napoleonic Wars -- Gen. Pyotr (Peter) Bagration. Likewise (as another user points out below) -- the French underground resistance -- "the Maquis". It's pronounced "MA-KEY" (as in, "I can't find ma key.") It is NOT "MA-KWA", as Mr. Miller pronounces. Come on, Mr. Miller, give it a good college try. You can do it. And it will increase your credibility enormously. Anyone who speaks even a little French -- even an American -- will laugh at you if you pronounce it MA-KWA. And they will then discount the value of your substantive information.
If you're in France, educating, you should probably know how to properly pronounce certain words in your presentation. What's a Maquois? Perhaps you mean Maquis. How does an infantryman have a tank? Shouldn't he be a tanker? Dear oh dear...
One of the most astonishing achievement in the history of mobile warfare? 😂 Oh yeah what could be more astonishing than swanning off through empty country sides devoid of German troops while Monty was bashing up against a dozen Panzer Divisions and three heavy tank battalions. Just shows how overrated the Americans are.
I really feel sorry for the American public being subjected to half truths and innuendos and propaganda even after all these yrs. I do understand that every country needs it's stories for it's psychological well-being and i do understand that America has adopted the battle of Normandie as one of its stories but you do the soldiers who fought and died on all sides no justice at all with this nonsense
@@samiam619 well thank you for your reply....what we are taught here in Vietnam....is to understand WW2 you must understand American foreign policy from 1945-54 and beyond even to this very day. This policy led to a distortion of history which effected people around the world. Not least my country that had 30yrs of war and 19yrs of your sanctions....if you can't understand that, then you can't understand anything... better just watch a movie
@@samsungtap4183 America had an isolationist policy before the war and had to confront an aggressive USSR communist global domination agenda after the war. The war in Vietnam was part of that domino theory, and it worked, I see what a happy little bunch of capitalist you are now. The battles in Normandy is both well documented from both the Germans ,Americans and British and concur; quiet what it has to do with Vietnam evades me. Vietnam was an French colony and I think you will find America hated colonialists, the Suez canal episode springs to mind.
@@keithchapman109 USSR global domination. The great lie...That's what was peddled to you from the cradle to the grave to justify Americas own behavior, Summer of 1945, the victorious soviet armies are set for the invasion of the Japanese mainland. The date is set. 25th of August. the American Army is reluctant to undertake such a enterprise, the Soviets can't wait. Trueman begs Starlin to hold off and he does, he listerns to his Allie and stands down. The threat of occupation by the hated communists is enough to force japanese copitulation. A perfect example of soviet non expansionism but thats not apart of the American narrative. I don't know why i even write this stuff....no one cares, except a few academics
If you're going to present history, then you should make every effort to learn the correct pronunciation of the language of the people and places. This guy was very bad at French.
One of the most detailed lectures on the subject I have seen. Riveting stuff
this lecture deserves millions of views... hopefully some day the TH-cam algorithm will wake up, keep it up The National WWII Museum!
Dad was in a Sherman tank at the breakout at St Lo and the dash across France. Wounded after Fort Driant and Metz, November 1944. Thanks for this excellent discussion of the operation and its importance. 🙏
I once had a B-25 fly overhead at about 2000 feet and I couldn’t get over how loud just 2 of those big radial engines were, I just can’t imagine the sound of 1400, 4 engine bombers! Wow, it must have been something.
Don't forget to throw in the 5 or 6 hundred escort fighters. I can't imagine how that would sound. How long would that take to fly over you? It's crazy to think about the scale of some of these operations.
One quiet afternoon in suburbia on the front lawn something caught my ear big time, turned around in time to see a P-47 appear from behind the neighbor's tree line. It was at least 2000 feet away too, impressive, bet that B-25 was a thunder growl.
I got to the WWII weekend in Reading every year and FIFI shows up, when she roars over head it thunders the ground....what 300+ sounded like during Meeting house must've been absolutely something to behold.
Yeah, I had a Lancaster fly over me in Hamilton, Ontario and the entire building was shaking.
In retrospect, I wish I had been on that D-Day Cruise. I have been on two different National WW2 Tours with Don Miller and they both were superb. Don is a brilliant historian and an even better guy. I had the pleasure of closing down several bars over the years with Don. His book on the 8th Air Force during WW2, "Masters of the Air" is the definitive work on the subject and the kind of book that once you start, you never want the book to end. His latest book on Vicksburg and Grant has garnered wide praise and is probably the finest book on the Civil War in recent years.
Nice to see a presenter not engaging in the "blame game" and bashing generals like Spaatz, Montgomery or Bradley for perceived failures. Very good, even-handed presentation.
Our generals deserved criticism. Their egos killed many fine men.
@@jaimepatena7372 This would not have happened if people had recognized evil for what it was. The Germans voted Hitler into a position where he could take power, the Italians allowed Mussolini to usurp power, and the Japanese legal system more or less bowed to public pressure and enabled the growth of militarism in Japan. It is the average citizens in these nations that allowed these people to have the power to start the war. And it will continue to happen as long as people blind themselves to real evil and allow themselves to be hoodwinked by demagogues and conmen because they tell them what they want to hear.
A pretty sweeping and highly simplistic generalisation there. @@jaimepatena7372
@@nicholasconder4703 an increadivly simplistic and inaccurate analyses. Stip it 😅
The British commonwealth and Polish forces deserve some credit for Cobra’s success since they tied down a number of German divisions. Without them, the operation would have been contained by the Wehrmacht and the breakout ending in failure. It was all a team effort and the Germans were struggling to send in fresh divisions since the majority of their forces were pulverised by the Red army’s offensive in the east.
All the brave men and women who served deserve respect. No matter what they did. We are free now because of their courage.
That’s true the best German troops and the mass of panzers were tied down around Caen in a massive armoured battle. Goodwood, Epsom etc. Monty deserves credit for degrading German forces to such an extent they were severely weakened.
Actually nearly twice as many German tanks were in Normandy than were engaging the Soviet Operation Bagration, including five of the seven Waffen SS panzer divisions.
@@lyndoncmp5751 operation bragation was the largest defeat in German military history. George C Marshall himself admitted that if not for the Red Army, then alot more American troops would have been committed to the European front. More than 80% of German war deaths were on the Easter front.
@@CLARKE176 That's true, Army Group Centre was the best army the Germans had left and the Soviets ripped it apart.
Two of my uncles were in the 120th Infantry Regiment, 30th Infantry Division. Both were killed by the American bombers at the kickoff of Operation Cobra. Thanks for providing additional details about why that happened.
Your lecture was excellent, but the q&a was sublime.
This guy is all over the place.
Against a worn down opposition in full retreat its not surprisng patton was able to advance quickly-the german armoured units concentrated their efforts against 21 st army group as expected and this needs to be emphasised in this discussion
A really interesting lecture which covered a lot of points I was previously unaware of. Unfortunately Operation Bluecoat was not mentioned. The objective of which was to capture ground between Vire and the Orne and prevent a German counter attack on the American flank. In particular the British 15th (Scottish) Division and the 6th Guards Tank Brigade captured Hill 309 on 30th July. The hill overlooked the American advance and, prior to the capture of the hill, spotters would glean information vital to the enemy and also direct artillery bombardments on American positions.
July 30 is five days after COBRA was launched and four days after the breakthrough occurred. The Germans were in no position by then to counterattack successfully.
Excellent points on the acceleration of violence as the war ends. This is a point far too many people miss.
Brilliant! Would absolutely love to be a part of one of these tours. I especially appreciated the segment on Gen. Elwood Richard Quesada and his development of tactical air support
When did Eisenhower allow 4 engine bombers to be used again for tactical air support for ground troops?
As usual, excellent lecture.
"Maquis" is pronounced MA-KI, not MA-KWA.
Yes!!! Another example of what my comment above refers to. I'm going to edit the comment to include your example as well.
I am somewhat dismayed by the many mistakes contained in this presentation, which have been correctly pointed out by other commenters. At first I wondered if I was being too picky or had been misinformed by my 7 years of college level study, but then I realized this 'expert' truly was re-writing history but probably not intentionally. I also take exception to the large round numbers he seems to use in describing US psychiatric casualties (at about 18:30). I don't seek / expect a finite number but I believe from listening to relatives who WERE THERE it seems to me that 30 thousand battle fatigue casualties is inaccurate. He mentioned the U.S. Air Force several times. It isn't a small detail- it is factual that the US Air Force wasn't created until 1947. It was the US ARMY Air Corps that was doing the bombing, strafing, etc. He would be more convincing as an "expert" if he chose his words a little more carefully. I gave up on this presentation at about 25:00. I no longer regret missing this tour when it happened.
It wasn't the US Army Air Corps, which was renamed in 1941 to the US Army Air Forces (USAAF) , one of the three components of the US Army.
Veterans of the USAAF I knew called it "the air force" despite this.
I gave up at 6:06
Appears I wasn't the only one who noticed "mistakes" in the presentation
@55:25 "Hitler never went to a bombed city. Never."
This is false, simply google:
"Adolf Hitler, accompanied by other German officials, grimly inspects bomb damage in a German city in 1944, in this German film captured by the U.S. Army Signal Corps on the western front."
Typical American centric version.
First error is labeling the British 2nd Army as Montgomery’s. Montgomery was the Allied Ground Commander. A position he held until September 1.
Under him was Gen. Omar Bradley, commander of US 1st army and Gen. Sir Mile Dempsey, commander of British 2nd army.
That's a great point about simultaneous events.
I was under the impression any area of allied tanks were vulnerable to the panzerfoust, not just bottom. Bottoms were penetrated by the obsolesent 37mm and 20mm AT and AA guns.
True. This entire presentation is full of outright ridiculous claims.
On 15th March, and again on 7th April 1944 General (his rank then) Montgomery (as Land Force Commander) set out his strategy for the coming battle to the assembled top-brass in St. Paul's School. It was quite clear: his 21st (Anglo-Canadian) Army group would lure the bulk of the German panzers into the British sector where they would be tied down thus allowing General Bradley the time to formulate a breakout plan ('Cobra') from the American sector, advancing against a much reduced panzer opposition. This happened. (UK)
I thought Sir Arthur Currie was the first to employ blitzkrieg in WWI. Also Stormtroopers were adpated from the Canadian.
What a terrific lecture - thank you
Good lecture!
If there was very little left of the Luftwaffe, what brought down 16,000 Allied aircraft? Flak, ground fire, accidents?
12,000 allied aircraft, 16,000 aircrew casualties (yeah I know that bombers have more than 1 crew member!). I’ll have to look into this a little more.
@@pauladamsfinewines8379 I've read elsewhere that 8th Air Force European casualties exceeded total US Marine Corps Pacific Theater casualties, even though the Marines were 150% of Air Force troop strength.
That figure is over a 5 year period. Bomber command (RAF) had over 25000 casualties (crew). Flak was was mostly responsible.
The fighter bombers in Europe were also shot down by flak mostly.
The Luftwaffe was also heavily engage in Russia I believe.
The number of aircraft and aircrew lost in accidents was massive. I don't have stats in front of me but it was huge.
Should not be all that surprising when you consider how fast the allied air forces needed to expand, with the result that not every pilot or ground crewman was top notch. There's also the terrible weather and the much lower level of tech back then. So all in all a dangerous environment even if no one was shooting at you.
55,573 Bomber Command KIA. 44% of their aircrew manpower. Catastrophic losses. RIP @@keithchapman109
Another good point on fuel shortage ending the wars in Europe and Japan or at least coinciding exactly.
Its refreshing to see detailed account of what really happened during this month or so after D-day. Nothing was won as the narrator clearly state. Most WWII account are so simplified they usually go : after D-Day it was just a walk in the park by allied forces all the way trough germany. The german army had no fuel anymore, no air cover bla bla . There are also very heavy combat zones long after an entire area is already cleaned up, by fortified germans troops who resisted strongly on their own (a la japanese) like Lorient or other germans fortifed strongholds on the atlantic coast.
There is a book title, "No Triumphant Procession" that plays to that public perception of post D-Day events in Europe. It covers the last weeks of the war when the British Second Army fought the German Second Naval Infantry Division. The Naval Infantry were formidable foes as they were well motivated units that had strong unit cohesion. Former UBoat crews, deployed as integrated units, were no walkover.
Seriously, I am at 7:55, and he has made numerous mistakes already. Expert?
Horrendously poor talk!
Don't want to take anything away from anyone but at least one historian said it was a "walk out" as opposed to a "break out". Most of the Germans were engaged with the Brit side well to the east. But it needed to be done and was done
As a side note, the Weald of Kent (and the rest of the Weald) shares many similarities with the Boccage. Just one more reason why Sealowe would have been 'unwise', even if the Germans got ashore.
Man who make the hedge hog cutter plow; was from New Jersey...
Born in NJ. spent most of his life in NY.
9:25 The V-1 buzz bomb campaign - 14,000 tons of explosives sum total
Bomber Command nighttime, USAAF daylight = How many thousands of tons per week?
‘Monty was moving down from Caen’? You do realise Monty was in charge of the whole ground theatre, in charge of Bradley and hence Patton. This lecturer is so inarticulate and unknowledgeable. A typical Ambrose like pastiche of boosting American involvement with minimal understanding
Miller very clearly gave credit to Monty’s command, especially their operations around Caen. Just watch the video.
@@messmeister92 Monty was in charge of the whole Normandy ground operation, Bradley and Patton reported to him. He deserved the credit
What are the best books on this subject?
Anything that is not American.
On the entire campaign or COBRA specifically?
Rick Atkinson's "Guns at Last Light" is a decent overview
Where's Waldo
Couple minor things. It’s pronounced Mawkee not Mawqua . Secondly the 12th SS had not been at the Eastern front. Normandy was their introduction to combat. They took part in the Battle of the Bulge and would then be sent to Hungary. The original division was made up of fanatical little sh*ts.
The 12th SS was comprised of NCOs who were eastern front veterans combined with thousands of privates who were HJ "fanatical little shits" (great phrasing there) . So you're right that the division was not experienced, but the key personnel were.
Strange pronunciations eg 'Maquis' as Mackoire (to rhyme with 'Loire')signals a somewhat complacent, one-sided moralistic view that augurs ill for the level of scholarship. e.g at 11:27 he comments, 'the Germans were in there first; they'd been there for weeks'. The Germans began their defensive procedures in Normandy (Autumn 1943) when Allied Invasion in 1944 became a certainty. That adds up to months not weeks.
Patton isn't interested in closing the falaise gap a major mistake-just like Bradley at Hurtgen forest-a huge mistake that Monty predicted
Bradley's justification for failing to close the Falaise gap was that he preferred to go in with a strong shoulder rather than a thin neck. A lost opportunity for sure.
Nonsense. Patton was deeply interested; Bradley elected not to cross the interarmy boundary line, even though that sort of thing happened routinely. Montgomery (still the overall ground force commander) did not order it done. So lots of fault all around but probably fair to blame Bradley more than anyone else.
@@executivedirector7467 I believe it was due to fear of friendly fire wasn't it.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- I haven't read his memoirs in a while but yes, that was part of it. One of the really fundamental reasons for boundary lines is to control artillery fire; having friendly units from two different field armies approaching each other without clear boundary lines is a recipe for blue-on-blue fire.
That said, it's a problem that could have been managed better.
@@executivedirector7467 Also compared to something like Operation Bagration where the Russian steppes were perfect ground for large encirclements etc, the terrain was a lot more difficult in France.
It restricted German armour to the roads, making them highly vulnerable to artillery and air attack, but it also helped the Germans in defending the gap they were escaping out of. It explains why a sizeable amount of troops escaped but without any armour or heavy weapons.
There were multiple potential Kessels on the Eastern front in 1943, at least. The Germans were quite good at pulling back or holding a corridor to escape. Obviously 1944 was a different story for multiple reasons.
Its interesting, the Germans often managed to keep a corridor open or escape. The Soviets often were surrounded but managed to filter through before the kessels tightened up.
He has some of the most bizarre pronunciations I’ve ever heard.
1. Maquis - “mah-kwa” instead of “mah-kee”
2. Bocage - “boo-kajj” instead of “boh-kajj”
3. Allies - “all-eyes” instead of allies.
Yes!!! See my comment above. I forgot that -- in addition to mispronouncing foreign words -- he also mispronounces English.
Collins and Cobra begin 22:30
At 51:50, he said, "We had 90% of the worlds oil." Is "We" America, America and G. B. together on the west, or all the allies together including U.S.S.R.‽
I always hate it when people use terms like "we", "them", "us" etc. in any historical context for several reasons. First of all its deply unscientific, because history always tries to look at things objective and this kind of talking is everything except objective. Second, as this comment shows, its not always precisely clear what is meant exactly. Third, non of "us" was there, and I dont remember myself to be a nation eather.
Start at 5:00
McNair wasn’t wounded he was blown to pieces.
So many squabbling children in the comments.
War is hard, nobody is perfect and the enemy gets a vote.
There is a lot of Magical Thinking about the breakout and 'who were best'. There were both weaknesses and strengths across all the allies. And a fair amount of the Historiography is 'just a little biased', one way or another (theoretical deity save me from the Wheraboos).
But so much childish squabbling. Calm down, take a step back, 'kill your darlings' (a writing metaphor), leave your ego at the door, face various realities you won't like and look at the whole moving jigsaw seen through the mists of combat and time.
And never forget who the 'bad guys' were. The way some commentators go on the Commonwealth and American troops should have stopped fighting the Germans and started shooting at each other.
The content starts at the 3 minute mark
I missed my bus because of you!
Hi,
I wish " The greatest generation " would not be used.
Otherwise, thank you for an interesting lecture.
If you want an example of look to bickering American and British generals. And all the historians who followed them to the present
The 'bickering' is overwhelmingly one-way traffic.
Yo soy canadiense.
2:50 begins
Interesting, informative, and well-presented talk................BUT:
It is marred by Mr. Miller's total inability to pronounce German, French, and Russian names.
I do not expect that an expert like Mr. Miller speak fluent French, German, or Russian.
One would hope, such an expert would have a basic reading knowledge of one of these languages.
But AT THE VERY LEAST, he should know how to pronounce names like "Operation Bagration".
The word does NOT rhyme with "vacation." It is pronounced "BAH - GRAH - TZION". It was named after a famous Russian General during the Napoleonic Wars -- Gen. Pyotr (Peter) Bagration.
Likewise (as another user points out below) -- the French underground resistance -- "the Maquis". It's pronounced "MA-KEY" (as in, "I can't find ma key.") It is NOT "MA-KWA", as Mr. Miller pronounces.
Come on, Mr. Miller, give it a good college try. You can do it. And it will increase your credibility enormously.
Anyone who speaks even a little French -- even an American -- will laugh at you if you pronounce it MA-KWA. And they will then discount the value of your substantive information.
Really god
Exactly. Really, god?
Cobra 21:30
Boo-cawj?
Για την Ελλάδα!
3:46 Bill Guarnere and his new girlfriend.
If you're in France, educating, you should probably know how to properly pronounce certain words in your presentation. What's a Maquois? Perhaps you mean Maquis. How does an infantryman have a tank? Shouldn't he be a tanker? Dear oh dear...
GTENERAL LESLEY MCNAIR FRIENDLY FIRE KILLED
not a great speaker
Learn the corrrect pronunciations FFS!
One of the most astonishing achievement in the history of mobile warfare? 😂 Oh yeah what could be more astonishing than swanning off through empty country sides devoid of German troops while Monty was bashing up against a dozen Panzer Divisions and three heavy tank battalions. Just shows how overrated the Americans are.
I really feel sorry for the American public being subjected to half truths and innuendos and propaganda even after all these yrs. I do understand that every country needs it's stories for it's psychological well-being and i do understand that America has adopted the battle of Normandie as one of its stories but you do the soldiers who fought and died on all sides no justice at all with this nonsense
So what part do you disagree with?
@@samiam619 well thank you for your reply....what we are taught here in Vietnam....is to understand WW2 you must understand American foreign policy from 1945-54 and beyond even to this very day. This policy led to a distortion of history which effected people around the world. Not least my country that had 30yrs of war and 19yrs of your sanctions....if you can't understand that, then you can't understand anything... better just watch a movie
@@samsungtap4183 FOAD DS
@@samsungtap4183 America had an isolationist policy before the war and had to confront an aggressive USSR communist global domination agenda after the war.
The war in Vietnam was part of that domino theory, and it worked, I see what a happy little bunch of capitalist you are now.
The battles in Normandy is both well documented from both the Germans ,Americans and British and concur; quiet what it has to do with Vietnam evades me.
Vietnam was an French colony and I think you will find America hated colonialists, the Suez canal episode springs to mind.
@@keithchapman109 USSR global domination. The great lie...That's what was peddled to you from the cradle to the grave to justify Americas own behavior, Summer of 1945, the victorious soviet armies are set for the invasion of the Japanese mainland. The date is set. 25th of August. the American Army is reluctant to undertake such a enterprise, the Soviets can't wait. Trueman begs Starlin to hold off and he does, he listerns to his Allie and stands down. The threat of occupation by the hated communists is enough to force japanese copitulation. A perfect example of soviet non expansionism but thats not apart of the American narrative. I don't know why i even write this stuff....no one cares, except a few academics
Disgusting misogynistic comment.
Disliked
Oh shut up
@@petergianakopoulos4926 no.
german had no army in the west
LOL
Apart from 60 divisions?
If you're going to present history, then you should make every effort to learn the correct pronunciation of the language of the people and places. This guy was very bad at French.