PDA

View Full Version : Battle of Hürtgenwald - horrific battle on the west Front


2RHPZ
08-25-2004, 12:19 PM
Battle of Hürtgenwald, the most horrific battle on the western Front in WW II

Although relatively unknown this battle was probably the hardest fought action on the Western front and the last real American defeat of the war. The Wehrmacht took advantage of the terrain and thus American material superiority was countered. It became mainly a hard fought infantry battle.

Stretching north-east from the Belgian-German border, the Hürtgen Forest covers an area of about fifty square miles within the triangle formed by the towns of Aachen, Duren and Monschau. From September to December 1944, 120,000 American soldiers advanced upon the Germans through this forest. Other battles in World War II have been more dramatically decisive, but none was tougher or bloodier.


Close-ranked fir trees, towering 75-100 feet made the Hürtgen Forest a gloomy, mysterious world where the brightness of noon was muted to an eerie twilight filtering through dark trees onto spongy brown needles and rotted logs.


In the winter of 1944, the ground was alternately frozen hard and then slushy. Snow covered it in deceiving peacefulness. Beneath the snow lay a network of ingenious booby traps and mines. The infantry had to take it. It was simply American men against German steel, and the cold, bitter weather.


There was no more deadly fire, from the viewpoint of the infantryman, than that which burst in treetops and exploded with all its hot steel fury downward to the ground, shattering minds and bodies. Men quickly learned that the safest place when mortar or artillery fire hit treetops, was to "hug a tree".


The following American infantry divisions - the 1st, 4th, 8th, 9th, 28th, 3rd Armored, 78th and the 83rd - fought in the forest. The 9th Division, in effect, fought there twice. Numbers of supporting tank, tank-destroyer, cavalry, chemical, medical, and artillery units, also fought in the forest.


Approximately 120,000 Americans, plus individual replacements augmenting that number by many thousands fought in the battle. More than 24,000 Americans were killed, missing, captured and wounded. Another 9,000 succumbed to the misery of trench foot, respiratory diseases and combat fatigue. In addition, some 80,000 Germans fought in this battle and an estimated 28,000 of them became casualties.


What was gained in this battle? The Americans conquered 50 square miles of real estate of no real tactical value to future operations, and they had destroyed enemy troops and reserves, which the other side could ill afford to lose. The Germans, on the other hand, with meager resources, had slowed down a major Allied advance for 3 months. At the end of November, vital targets, dams along the Roer River, the importance of which were not realized until late in the fighting in the the Battle of Hürtgen Forest, were still in German hands.


Had the First Army gone for the Roer River Dams early in the fighting, there would have been no battle of Hürtgen Forest. That men must die in battle is accepted, and some fighting will always be more miserable and difficult than others. If there had been a push directly from the south to take the Roer River Dams, the cost of lives could have been just as costly. However, if that had been done, at least the objective would have been clear and accepted as important.


Those who fought in the Battle of Hürtgen Forest fought a misconceived and basically fruitless battle that could have, and should have been avoided. That is the real tragedy of the Battle of Hürtgen Forest.

http://www.hurtgen1944.homestead.com/02StorySummary.html

1Cie GevGn
08-25-2004, 02:29 PM
Been on the exact same spot. Eerie place. Difficult terrain to advance. Respect to the ones who fought and died there

MARK.TIGGER
08-26-2004, 06:56 AM
the Charles whiting book the Battle of the Hurtgen forest is a very good account of it. The only General to view the battlefield during the campaign was Gen Horrocks of the British army. It was very like the Battles in france the british fought in WW1.

PsihoKekec
08-26-2004, 10:07 AM
Wasn't this battle nicknamed Paschandale with treebursts?

menel
08-27-2004, 04:57 AM
Other battles in World War II have been more dramatically decisive, but none was tougher or bloodier.

Battles like this happend almoust every day on the east front(for example Dukla Pass in 1944).
This battle shows that US Army had no chance fighting with Wehrmaht face to face.

2RHPZ
08-27-2004, 05:17 AM
Other battles in World War II have been more dramatically decisive, but none was tougher or bloodier.

Battles like this happend almoust every day on the east front(for example Dukla Pass in 1944).


BTW, try to bring some info on this battle. Soviets sent Czechoslovakian troops purpotedly to the slaughterhouse.

This battle shows that US Army had no chance fighting with Wehrmaht face to face.

Do you really mean it?

MARK.TIGGER
08-27-2004, 05:51 AM
According to whiting it was a battle that needn't have been fought and when it was the US army made a real mess of it.

menel
08-27-2004, 06:16 AM
Try this
http://tarkulich.tripod.com/Dukla.html
http://www.iabsi.com/gen/public/Military_dukla_pass.htm
http://www.reenactment-sk.szm.sk/Operations/Dukla.htm
http://www.heartofeurope.co.uk/trav_attractions_dukla2e.htm
Do you really mean it?
I do. Give me an example where US army won with equal german army.
Do you think american soldiers would be able to defend Stalingrad?

Brzeczyszczykiewicz
08-27-2004, 06:39 AM
I do. Give me an example where US army won with equal german army.

Bastogne?

menel
08-27-2004, 07:35 AM
The defence of Bastogne was heroic but the battle was won by bombers.
By the way, how it is possible not to notice thousands of german vehicules in front of you?

2RHPZ
08-27-2004, 07:36 AM
Try this
http://tarkulich.tripod.com/Dukla.html
http://www.iabsi.com/gen/public/Military_dukla_pass.htm
http://www.reenactment-sk.szm.sk/Operations/Dukla.htm
http://www.heartofeurope.co.uk/trav_attractions_dukla2e.htm
Do you really mean it?
I do. Give me an example where US army won with equal german army.
Do you think american soldiers would be able to defend Stalingrad?

At first. thank you for the links. If you allow I will make a topic about Dukla.

At second, you sound biased. The war is not (just) about equal to equal. That belongs to sport or something else. I don´t think that Germans were bad soldiers, rather opposite. But US forces won the war at the West - that is the fact ... and I am convinced that Patton would managed to push Soviets back behind the Ural mountain.

Do you think american soldiers would be able to defend Stalingrad?

Yes, I do. You must think in wide connections. Soviets were at home, they knew it was the very decisive battle. Americans fought under such horrible conditions against Chinese hordes in Korea. I guess that under all similar conditions (especially at their sole) they (US) would fight such a battle as well. By the way, one general (I forgot the name) once said: "You can evaluate the soldier according his fight abroad, not at home". I guess Americans are at the top of this league.

WARNING: Please, for all, don´t turn this topic into the flames. Only moderate proffesional discussion. Thank you.

menel
08-27-2004, 09:19 AM
WARNING: Please, for all, don´t turn this topic into the flames. Only moderate proffesional discussion. Thank you.
So I can't write that in my opinion Zukow would push Patton to Atlantic Ocean?:)
I guess that under all similar conditions (especially at their sole) they (US) would fight such a battle as well.
It's true. You can only guess. USA was never in a situaction that someone wants to kill all the nation. In Hurtgen Forest the only way to win was sending thousands of Americans to death and I think US generals were not ready for it. Americans had wery little occasions to see that war is a real slouter.The western alies tried to do it in a quick way(Market Garden, Hurtgen), but it didn't work, so they had to wait until the Russians did the dirty work for them.