Urban Warfare in World War II

[James]

Yes and no. In Europe at least, the USSR was pretty good about sticking to its agreements, hence (for example) their lack of support for the Communists in Greece which had been designated as being in the "British" sphere of influence. Even in Asia (for example), the USSR stopped at the 38th paralell in Korea as per agreement. Their support for the Chinese communists was very weak despite their local military power too - it took a full blown set of cock-ups by the KMT and George Marshall to allow the CCC to win.

The USSR moved hard for central Europe in the mid/late 1940s but got blocked. Do some research and tell me I'm wrong.

The Soviets were actually notorious for disregarding their agreements.

[TheKiwi]

I don't disagree - although they already had a substantial chunk of it. My point was that in the immediate aftermath of WW2 they stuck to their agreements - whether out of honour or exhaustion or both. There was at the time a very strong streak of "legalism" to Soviet foreign affairs. Agreements might be stretched to the very limit of their wording, but they weren't going beyond them. Joint occupation of Berlin, the removal of occupation from Austria, the inital setup of Korea and the handover of power to the KMT in China all suggest that they did during that time stick to agreements.

[James]

I don't disagree - although they already had a substantial chunk of it. My point was that in the immediate aftermath of WW2 they stuck to their agreements - whether out of honour or exhaustion or both. There was at the time a very strong streak of "legalism" to Soviet foreign affairs. Agreements might be stretched to the very limit of their wording, but they weren't going beyond them. Joint occupation of Berlin, the removal of occupation from Austria, the inital setup of Korea and the handover of power to the KMT in China all suggest that they did during that time stick to agreements.

Good points, I agree with you. FWIW, I think Stalin also took advantage of Roosevelt, even after he'd been president for more than a decade. He was a dying man at Yalta. Churchill, not so much, and still feisty.

I believe Stalin stuck to the agreements he could tolerate. He didn't need another war.

[PEMM]

Yes, I know there were actions and destruction. I didn't intend to downplay anything. But, I was never clear if the attitude on the Finnish side was "yes, this is s war" or "we're obligated to show our former allies the door, but we're hoping do it with as little violence that can be managed.

The view we got from school was that it was like your later comment until operation Tanne ost, where germans tried to take Suursaari in south, and battle of Tornio. But as they were retreating all the time, there were not that many casualties in the war.

The reason the hostilities had to be started at all, was that they werent retreating fast enough according to soviets.

[pocoloco]

I remember reading "An Army at Dawn" about the US army in North African campaign & during Operation Reservist (Oran) the landings at french port were heavily fought over and resulted in 90% casualties among the attacking force.


http://www.familysaunders.org/operation%20torch.htm

Thank you LD, very intense action.

[CPL Trevoga]

Battle of Berlin was a big clusterf@ck. Only because of superior firepower it did not turned into a bigger disaster. I've read that one of the reasons for the rush was desire to capture a secret German nuclear program lab inside the Berlin.

[Lzheuser]

The bombing of Dresden has nothing to do with this topic.

[Pete031]

Just a small part of WW2, but to us, it launched new TTP's and created the standard for Canadian Army FIBUA for years,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ortona

[oldsoak]

Was there any formal training amongst the western allies for FIBUA etc in WW2 ? The anecdotes I've come accross suggest it was all rather ad-hoc

[Pete031]

I think it was more bunker assault training. I don't know for sure, but I do know they made a lot up on the fly... My Great Uncle who fought through Europe told me that when they would prepare to gain lodgement in a building, in the "stack" they would throw a grenade and yell out "grenade" but not pull the pin, but follow it in, while the enemy was seeking cover they would hammer them. Pretty smart, however it must have taken a few assaults to get that down pat....

[Piirka]

Yes, I know there were actions and destruction. I didn't intend to downplay anything. But, I was never clear if the attitude on the Finnish side was "yes, this is s war" or "we're obligated to show our former allies the door, but we're hoping do it with as little violence that can be managed."

So it was at the start. Retreat and advance was choreographed with former allies. As Hitler ordered the troops to destroy everything while retreating and russians were about to send their forces "to help", things got different. Old vets were relieved and new recruits put in their place, so they had no camaraderie with the germans. As casualties began to mount for mines, b00by-traps and engagements and the soldiers saw the destruction, they became enemies. I believe the germans were tolerated, but not especially loved by the common soldier to begin with.

[James]

Was there any formal training amongst the western allies for FIBUA etc in WW2 ? The anecdotes I've come accross suggest it was all rather ad-hoc

I think it was up to unit commanders more than commanded from on high. I've read about various UK Commando Units taking advantage of bombed out areas of London for FIBUA training, but as you say, I think it was mostly ad-hoc. Also, as Pete says, quite a bit of assault training for bunkers and fortifications.

As an aside, the units that landed in Normandy on D-Day had gone through a tremendous amount of training that enabled them to get off the beach, but as soon as they got inland a little ways, a lot of them (at least the U.S. units) were kind of lost, because they'd had little or no training for operating in the bocage.

[LineDoggie]

Was there any formal training amongst the western allies for FIBUA etc in WW2 ? The anecdotes I've come accross suggest it was all rather ad-hoc

I've seenimages of faux german towns with G.I.'s and Tanks training in them. here's the Calgary Highlanders doing House to House training in WWII.

http://www.calgaryhighlanders.com/ph...ndworldwar.htm


Heres a small image of US troops doing similar training

Cp. Lee Va. 1943

[Zorro C9]

IIRC there was a bit of village clearing and whatnot going on in the leadup to D Day as well.

[Pete031]

I think the training for D-Day encompassed all the lessons learned from previous years of the war.... I doubt there was much FIBUA training going on in 39... But then again I could be wrong.. I will check the Regimental Library on Tues.