Board Thread:Timeline Discussions/@comment-7559950-20130911012534/@comment-3428312-20150222234219

Lordganon wrote: ...Would help a great deal, GB, if you would bother to read what others write.

Gaps = as in the spots opened by moving armies around, and to fill in losses overall. Historical fact.

Division strength? You do realize that the US (and maybe Japan - spotty records, there) was the only power after 1943 with full divisions, right? And that was barely. Another three months, and they would have had undersized ones too.

The British solution (and the German one for a while) was to disband formations and use these troops to fill out the others. The Soviets refused to do this. Not an indicator of size or numbers.

Was not a Soviet manpower shortage, really - just too many divisions existing. An administrative matter that others dealt with quite well.

May want to look at a map instead of drawing "Alps" on one. Not only is there passes, but a not insignificant coastal strip. Going up the peninsula not as hard as you think - they just did not have the numbers otl, and used terrible plannimg (hence, Anzio and Cassino) there. Want to get around? Land troops ala~ Dragoon in SE France. Or commit another division to Anzio. Easy. There is a ton of routes around the problem.

Dragoon was better terrain than Overlord, imo. Just harder to do because the logistical trail was longer. Read what exactly? The only who had contradicted what I posted has been you, and just because something is stated on here does not make it fact.

Not sure what you're getting at with regards to "Gaps". Mountain gaps? Manpower gaps?

There's a very major difference between having divisions not at the textbook, and having them cronically undermanned. The only time the US had trouble was in the fall of 1944 in Europe, and that was fully resolved by the Spring. It wasn't even caused by manpower problems, just some kinks in the logistic/structual framework.

As my sources noted, the Soviets were doing this in 1944 and all three explicitly stated it was because they no longer had the manpower to maintain them.

Look, basic reading comprehension would refute this feeble notion. All three sources stated in plain language that the Soviets were facing manpower problems. The third specifically said they were having to extensively recruit from liberated populations (Osprey said Poland was a big one) because of their manpower defencies. Not sure why you're not getting that. Allow me to post them again and bold the relevant parts:

"Bagration, 1944", Osprey Campaign Series (Pg 27-28) -

"Soviet rifle divisions were generally smaller than their German counterparts, averaging 2500-4000 troops. At the time of Operation Bagration a concerted effort was made to bring these units up to an average of 6000 troops.  No serious effort was made to bring them up to their nominal TOE strength of 9600 troops "

"Red Army Handbook", (Pg 32) -

" By this time, however, it was becoming apparent that the Soviet force structure of 500-plus Divisions simply exceeded their capacity to support it. [..] in mid-1944 more drastic action was neccesary. Either some of the rifle divisions would have to be demobilized and their personnel used to fill out other units, or divisional strengths far below envisioned norms would have to be accepted. The  Stavka opted for the latter alternative."

"Soviet Military Doctrine from Lenin to Gorbachev, 1915-1991", (Pg 172)

"Soviet sources reflect manpower deficiencies by emphasizing the low strength of rifle units and the draconian measures used to enlist soldiers in liberated regions. By 1945 Soviet rifle divisions were often understrength, with only 3,500 to 5,000 men each."

So that's three sources confirming my position.

Actually, that's online map I did google search for that shows both the Alps and Dinaric Alps. Yes, there is passes, but there is also a large amount of mountainous terrain before them defended by the Germans. There's a reason the Allies didn't get into Austria from Italy during the War. As well, there is a coastal area on the Pola Peninsula, but it is small and insignificant. It's also an extremely bad idea to bunch up forces in a small area next to the sea. Besides, even the Allies get through that fine and then get throungh the aforementioned Dinaric Alps, they will then have to go throught the Slovenian and East Austrian portions of the Alps. We also can't forget the fact that the Allies have now involved themselves in the mess that is this era's Balkans.

As to the suggestions you made, Anzio was a blood bath. The Germans were not weak in Italy at all, they were well lead and use Italy's terrain to the full advantage. As I noted earlier, Southern France is also hilly country, well suited to the defence. There's a reason the Allies waited until after the decisive engagements had been won northwards through Overlord. As well, the suggestion the topography of Overlord is worse than Dragoon is bizarre, as any map showing terrain would show. Outside of the small Hedgegrow zones, all of Overlord was on the North European Plain. Southern France, meanwhile, is hilly as I have continued to state and is several times larger than the Bocage country.