D Day through German Eyes: How the Wehrmacht Lost France, by Jonathan Trigg

[Aida1]

Germany certainly needed to economically exploit the occupied countries to support its war effort so winning hearts and minds would have been very difficult.

You make it sound like they had to invade other countries...

Not the issue. The issue is that Germany needed the material and human resources to sustain the war effort.

[Aida1]

You mention some authors with a very high reputation who have a far more complex way of expressing themselves than the simplistic way you describe their writings. And have done their research.

They can best be described as the school of how good the Germans were. Hastings is in that group. It is obvious why authors from that group are liked by you. Their standing is considerably lower today than it was when they first published.

Your biased opinion.

[Michael Kenny]

Your biased opinion.

Perhaps but given my reading of this type of source greatly exceed yours then I am in a much better position to give informed comment.

[Mori]

Germans didn't even try to "win hearts and minds".

Some tried...https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... yRU5GHExhi

Yes, that's the (somewhat) famous attempt by Schmidt.

Schmidt ended PoW to the Soviet at war end. Some said that the Soviets, who understood a lot about politics, considered Schmidt's attempt so dangerous that they kept him in custody as long as possible. He was of the very last PoWs returned to Germany.

[Aida1]

Your biased opinion.

Perhaps but given my reading of this type of source greatly exceed yours then I am in a much better position to give informed comment.

You overrate yourself seriously. You are an amateur. Not a historian and no professional officer. And being a blind lover of Russia does not make you more credible.

[Michael Kenny]

You overrate yourself seriously.

Not so. I am prepared to back my claim (that I have read vastly more of that type of book than you) by publishing my booklist. If you want to claim you have read more then lets get started. Are you up for it?

[Mori]

You overrate yourself seriously. You are an amateur. Not a historian and no professional officer. And being a blind lover of Russia does not make you more credible.

You already mentioned you never published anything so we all know you are not at all a historian.

A "professional" officer, maybe?
(I don't think there exist anything like an "amateur" officer, but let's read your comments).

[Jan-Hendrik]

A rather forgotten one:

Ewald Klapdor 'Die Endscheidung, Invasion 1944'

Jan-Hendrik

[Westphalia1812]

A rather forgotten one:

Ewald Klapdor 'Die Endscheidung, Invasion 1944'

Jan-Hendrik

Vielen Dank! It focuses on II. SS PzK, right?

[Aida1]

You overrate yourself seriously. You are an amateur. Not a historian and no professional officer. And being a blind lover of Russia does not make you more credible.

You already mentioned you never published anything so we all know you are not at all a historian.

A "professional" officer, maybe?
(I don't think there exist anything like an "amateur" officer, but let's read your comments).

I do not need to be an author. I am a well informed person with a deep interest in military history who has also visited many battlefields. I do not suffer from the armchair general syndrome so i do not think i know bettter than professional officers with real military experience. However ,I do not feel inferior to civilian authors of military history books who are not more intelligent than their readers. I can read their sources and form my own opinion.

[Aida1]

You overrate yourself seriously.

Not so. I am prepared to back my claim (that I have read vastly more of that type of book than you) by publishing my booklist. If you want to claim you have read more then lets get started. Are you up for it?

I have vast reading on military history in general. I have proven that enough so I am not going to enter into a pissing contest with somebody who overrates his own importance. You are only an amateur with an interest in military history like so many here.
Given your blind love for the russian army including Putins army in the Ukraine you are not very credible.

[Michael Kenny]

I have vast reading on military history in general. I have proven that enough so I am not going to enter into a pissing contest with somebody who.........................

.....has read more on Normandy than you.


Wise move. Unlike the German Army of 1944 you at least know when you are beaten

[Aida1]

I have vast reading on military history in general. I have proven that enough so I am not going to enter into a pissing contest with somebody who.........................

.....has read more on Normandy than you.


Wise move. Unlike the German Army of 1944 you at least know when you are beaten

You are overrating yourself. You have made youirself look rather ridiculous by your Prorussian statements.

[Aida1]

A situation report by 9.SS Pz on the time from 29.6 to 02. 7.1944 to illustrate the effect of allied fire superiority

"Situation report of 9.SSPz.div for the period 29.6.1944 1200 until 02.7 1200

1).In the combat action in the abovementioned period, the division had very high losses through the extraordinaly strong artillery fire , that daily strenghtened to a drum fire of 8 to 12 hours duration as in the biggest material battles of the worldwar. Only this artillery superiority forced the brave and exemplary fighting infantry to immediate digging in.
Example: within 3 and a half hour 6-8000 hits were registered in one regimental sector.
In one subordinated Werfer bttr(sfl) in 55 minutes at least 17 cm 400 shots layed in the middle of the position.
All attack attempts by the Pz Greandiere were nipped in the bud by extaordinarily long continuous heavy artillery strikes by at least one artillery regiment on one target. In the defenses the losses were caused by airbursts and drumfire on the whole position until far behind the rgt comand posts while ruthlessly expending ammo of all calibers. For further density several mortar batteries joined. At the SS Pz Gren.Rgt 19, in one area of 300 by 300 the impacts were so dense that between shellholes there was only a distance of one and a half steps.
2) Further advantages of the enemy are the undisturbed use of balloons in high number , the generally firing with artillery aircraft as the brilliant agents apparatus with radio behind the own line.
3) the unrestricted air superiority of the enemy is not taken into account in this.
4) The abovementioned grounds have led to the following personell and material losses within 3 days. "

[Aida1]