What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

World War II (2 Viewers)

Torch Part 1

On the afternoon of November 7, 14 hours short of D-Day (the date set for the Torch landings) Gen. Henri Giraud arrived at Gibaltrar in the submarine that had spirited him out of southern France. He came immediately to Eisenhower, demanding to be flown to Algiers to take command of Torch. Ike was astonished at the temerity and hauteur of of this tall, one legged Frenchman, commander of nothing. He asked Giraud to make a broadcast to Morocco and Algeria, urging the French army to cooperate with the invaders. Giraud flatly refused, unless he was given command. Like a man casually changing vacation sites, he calmly proposed to change the target from North Africa to southern France. Eisenhower repeated his request for a broadcast, assuring Giraud that once the Allies moved on to Tunisia, Giraud could have command of the French rear areas. He virtually promised to make Giraud king of North Africa, with all possible American aid. Giraud kept saying, "Non." He wanted command. They argued for 8 hours, with no results. Giraud excused himself at bedtime with the remark, "Giraud will be a spectator in this affair."

By then the invasions had begun. Eisenhower stayed glued to his radio listening with relief to messages reporting that at Casablanca the surf was down and Patton was going in and that at Oran the landings were going well. There was no news from Algiers. At 4:30 am, exhausted, Ike unfolded a cot and went to sleep in his office. He arose at 7:00, reading reports and musing aloud about what to do with Giraud. Under pressure, Giraud finally agreed to become Governor General of all French forces in North Africa. He made the broadcast written for him by Eisenhower.

And nothing happened.

Not a single French soldier paid the slightest attention to this haughty shadow commander. In Casablanca, the French fought Patton's Americans. In Oran, they put up fierce resistance. In Algiers, Murphy's vaunted underground forces tried to arrest General Alphonse Juin, the French amy commander in the city, and were arrested themselves. Murphy rushed to Juin's headquarters and talked him into joining the Allies. Juin ordered his French troops in Algiers to lay down their arms, just as Admiral Darlan arrived. Juin urged Darl as Vichy commander in chief to broadcast similar orders to Oran and Casablanca. Darlan refused to do so until he met Eisenhower. He refused to work with Giraud. Giraud told Eisenhower he would have nothing to do with Darlan.

Now the supreme commander (Ike) was truly exasperated. He complained bitterly of "the petty intrigue and the necessity of dealing with little, selfish, conceited worms who call themselves men." But there was also no escaping the necessity of dealing with Darlan, so he sent Mark Clark to consult with him. In the meantime, Marshal Petain ordered the French to resist the Anglo-Americans. Shortly afterward, Hitler took over unoccupied France.

But to Eisenhower alone with his fears on the Rock, every minute lost in either combat or negotiation gave the Germans that much more time to reinforce at Tunis and Bizerte; every bullet fired at a Frenchman by an Allied soldier was one fewer to fire at the Germans. Reports that the Amercans at Casablanca and Oran were fighting well could banish a sinking feeling that the chances of strategic success were slipping away from him.

At this point in the great struggle, a general in the fighting emerged. In a very short period of time he would establish himself as one of the most brilliant and colorful military figures in all of American history. This was General George S. Patton.

 
Not sure I should continue doing this. It's been a lot of fun, but its also a lot of work, and the interest level seems to have died down. I was hoping for the narratives to result in some serious discussion and commentary, and it did at first, but lately it's just me adding one chapter after another. Perhaps Bentley was right that Guadalcanal went on too long. But I don't know how to be more brief without spoiling the whole thing.

So please let me know if you guys are still interested and want this to continue. If nobody responds, then I'll take that as a sign that the interest level is gone, and move on to other things.

 
I'm still very interested. Hope others are as well. You're doing a fine job. I think there should be some discussion, but too much discussion might derail the thread a bit. :thumbup:

 
Not sure I should continue doing this. It's been a lot of fun, but its also a lot of work, and the interest level seems to have died down. I was hoping for the narratives to result in some serious discussion and commentary, and it did at first, but lately it's just me adding one chapter after another. Perhaps Bentley was right that Guadalcanal went on too long. But I don't know how to be more brief without spoiling the whole thing.So please let me know if you guys are still interested and want this to continue. If nobody responds, then I'll take that as a sign that the interest level is gone, and move on to other things.
I think you are doing a great job, but yes the Guadalcanal info was too long. I think most are interested in brief paragraphs like at the beginning of the thread.I knew nothing about WWII before this thread, and have learned a lot.
 
OK guys, thanks for the feedback. I'll do my best to continue, and I'll try to be a little briefer if I can.
hell no the detail is what makes it good. Keep going as is.
Its a lot easier for other people to add thoughts when the discussion is more general. I'd guess the slowdown in participation outside of Tim is because most of us reading don't have anything to add to the depth of the Guadalcanal discussion.
 
OK guys, thanks for the feedback. I'll do my best to continue, and I'll try to be a little briefer if I can.
hell no the detail is what makes it good. Keep going as is.
Its a lot easier for other people to add thoughts when the discussion is more general. I'd guess the slowdown in participation outside of Tim is because most of us reading don't have anything to add to the depth of the Guadalcanal discussion.
Or because we have nothing of value to add :P
 
rascal said:
Tim, what book(s) are you using for this BTW?
As of the moment, my principle source is Delivered From Evil by Robert Leckie.I have also used:

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by Willam L. Shirer

The Rising Sun by John Toland

The Glory and The Dream by William Manchester

A History of The Second World War by Martin Gilbert

Memoirs of the Second World War by Winston Churchill

All of these are terrific works. The Manchester book is a history of America from 1932-1972, so only one section is devoted to the war. Earlier, DC Thunder listed a series of other books that make good reading as well.

 
Patton

He was born in 1885 to a military family. His grandfather had fought as a Confederate. (This is rather ironic, for as the author Shelby Foote points out in Ken Burn's The Civil War, Patton, in stating that "Americans never surrender!", was forgetting his own family.) At the age of 10 he decided he would become a military hero, and he never forgot this goal which came to dominate his life. He attended the Virginia Military Institute, stayed for one year, then moved on to West Point. There, he married Beatrice Ayer.

In 1912 he represented the United States at the Stockholm Olympics in the first Modern Pentathlon. Originally open only to military officers, it was considered a rigorous test of the skills a soldier should possess. Twenty-six year old Patton did remarkably well in the multi-event sport, consisting of pistol shooting from 25 meters, sword fencing, a 300 meter free style swim, 800 meters horse back riding and a 4-kilometer cross country run. He placed fifth overall, despite a disappointing development in the shooting portion. While most chose .22 revolvers, Patton felt the event's military roots garnered a more appropriate weapon, the .38. During the competition Patton was docked for missing the target, though he contended the lost bullet had simply passed through a large opening created by previous rounds from the .38, which left considerably larger holes.

After the Olympics, Patton kept busy taking lessons at the French cavalry School and studying French sword drills. In the summer of 1913, Patton received orders to report to the commandant of the Mounted Service School in Fort Riley, Kansas, where he became the school's first Master of the Sword. He designed and taught a course in swordsmanship while he was a student at the school.

Patton's first real exposure to battle occurred when he served as a member of legendary General John J. Pershing's staff during the expedition to Mexico. In 1915, Patton was sent to Fort Bliss along the Mexican border where he led routine cavalry patrols. A year later, he accompanied Pershing as an aide on his expedition against Francisco "Pancho" Villa into Mexico. Patton gained recognition from the press for his attacks on several of Villa's men.

Impressed by Patton's determination, Pershing promoted him to Captain and asked him to command his Headquarters Troop upon their return from Mexico. With the onset of World War I in 1914, tanks were not being widely used. In 1917, however, Patton became the first member of the newly established United States Tank Corps, where he served until the Corps were abolished in 1920. He took full command of the Corps, directing ideas, procedures and even the design of their uniforms. Along with the British tankers, he and his men achieved victory at Cambrai, France, during the world's first major tank battle in 1917.

Using his first-hand knowledge of tanks, Patton organized the American tank school in Bourg, France and trained the first 500 American tankers. He had 345 tanks by the time he took the brigade into the Meuse-Argonne Operation in September 1918. When they entered into battle, Patton had worked out a plan where he could be in the front lines maintaining communications with his rear command post by means of pigeons and a group of runners. Patton continually exposed himself to gunfire and was shot once in the leg while he was directing the tanks. His actions during that battle earned him the Distinguished Service Cross for Heroism, one of the many medals he would collect during his lifetime.

An outspoken advocate for tanks, Patton saw them as the future of modern combat. Congress, however, was not willing to appropriate funds to build a large armored force. Even so, Patton studied, wrote extensively and carried out experiments to improve radio communications between tanks. He also helped invent the co-axial tank mount for cannons and machine guns.

After WWI, Patton held a variety of staff jobs in Hawaii and Washington, D.C. He graduated from the Command and General Staff School in 1924, and completed his military schooling as a distinguished graduate of the Army War College in 1932.

When the German Blitzkrieg began on Europe, Patton finally convinced Congress that the United States needed a more powerful armored striking force. With the formation of the Armored Force in 1940, he was transferred to the Second Armored Division at Fort Benning, Georgia and named Commanding General on April 11, 1941. Two months later, Patton appeared on the cover of Life magazine. Also during this time, Patton began giving his famous "Blood and Guts" speeches in an amphitheater he had built to accommodate the entire division.

The United States officially entered World War II in December 1941, after the attack on Pearl Harbor. By November 8, 1942, Patton was commanding the Western Task Force, the only all-American force landing for Operation Torch, the Allied invasion of North Africa.

 
Patton's "Blood and Guts" Speech

(Note- I thought it was a good time to print this now, since he started making this speech during the summer of 1942 just prior to the Torch landings. He would refine it throughout the war, though its basically the same speech. The version I have here was given on June 5, 1944, so it refers to Tunisia.)

"Be seated."

Men, this stuff that some sources sling around about America wanting out of this war, not wanting to fight, is a crock of bull####. Americans love to fight, traditionally. All real Americans love the sting and clash of battle. You are here today for three reasons. First, because you are here to defend your homes and your loved ones. Second, you are here for your own self-respect, because you would not want to be anywhere else. Third, you are here because you are real men and all real men like to fight. When you, here, every one of you, were kids, you all admired the champion marble player, the fastest runner, the toughest boxer, the big league ball players, and the All-American football players.

Americans love a winner. Americans will not tolerate a loser. Americans despise cowards. Americans play to win all of the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war; for the very idea of losing is hateful to an American.

You are not all going to die. Only two percent of you right here today would die in a major battle. Death must not be feared. Death, in time, comes to all men. Yes, every man is scared in his first battle. If he says he's not, he's a liar. Some men are cowards but they fight the same as the brave men or they get the hell slammed out of them watching men fight who are just as scared as they are. The real hero is the man who fights even though he is scared. Some men get over their fright in a minute under fire. For some, it takes an hour. For some, it takes days. But a real man will never let his fear of death overpower his honor, his sense of duty to his country, and his innate manhood.

Battle is the most magnificent competition in which a human being can indulge. It brings out all that is best and it removes all that is base.

Americans pride themselves on being "He Men" and they ARE "He Men." Remember that the enemy is just as frightened as you are, and probably more so. Because they are not supermen!

All through your Army careers, you men have #####ed about what you call "chicken #### drilling." That, like everything else in this Army, has a definite purpose. That purpose is alertness. Alertness must be bred into every soldier. I don't give a #### for a man who's not always on his toes. You men are veterans or you wouldn't be here. You are ready for what's to come. A man must be alert at all times if he expects to stay alive. If you're not alert, sometime, a German son-of-an-#######-##### is going to sneak up behind you and beat you to death with a sockful of ####! There are four hundred neatly marked graves somewhere in Sicily, all because one man went to sleep on the job. But they are German graves, because we caught the ******* asleep before they did!

An Army is a team. It lives, sleeps, eats, and fights as a team. This individual heroic stuff is pure horse####. The bilious bastards who write that kind of stuff for the Saturday Evening Post don't know any more about real fighting under fire than they know about #######! We have the finest food, the finest equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world. Why, by God, I actually pity those poor sons-of-#####es we're going up against. By God, I do!

My men don't surrender, and I don't want to hear of any soldier under my command being captured unless he has been hit. Even if you are hit, you can still fight back. That's not just bull#### either. The kind of man that I want in my command is just like the lieutenant in Libya, who, with a Nazi Kraut poking a Luger against his chest, jerked off his helmet, swept the gun aside with one hand, and busted the hell out of the Kraut with his helmet. Then he jumped on the gun and went out and killed another German before they knew what the hell was coming off. And, all of that time, this man had a bullet through a lung. There was a real man!

All of the real heroes are not storybook combat fighters, either. Every single man in this Army plays a vital role. Don't ever let up. Don't ever think that your job is unimportant. Every man has a job to do and he must do it. Every man is a vital link in the great chain.

What if every truck driver suddenly decided that he didn't like the whine of those shells overhead, turned yellow, and jumped headlong into a ditch? The cowardly ******* could say, 'Hell, they won't miss me, just one man in thousands.' But, what if every man thought that way? Where in the hell would we be now? What would our country, our loved ones, our homes, even the world, be like?

No, #######it, Americans don't think like that. Every man does his job. Every man serves the whole. Every department, every unit, is important in the vast scheme of this war. The ordnance men are needed to supply the guns and machinery of war to keep us rolling. The Quartermaster is needed to bring up food and clothes because where we are going there isn't a hell of a lot to steal. Every last man on K.P. has a job to do, even the one who heats our water to keep us from getting the 'G.I. ####s.'

Each man must not think only of himself, but also of his buddy fighting beside him. We don't want yellow cowards in this Army. They should be killed off like rats! If not, they will go home after this war and breed more cowards. The brave men will breed more brave men. Kill off the #######ed cowards and we will have a nation of brave men.

One of the bravest men that I ever saw was a fellow on top of a telegraph pole in the midst of a furious firefight in Tunisia. I stopped and asked what the hell he was doing up there at a time like that. He answered, 'Fixing the wire, Sir.' I asked, 'Isn't that a little unhealthy right about now?' He answered, 'Yes Sir, but the #######ed wire has to be fixed.' I asked, 'Don't those planes strafing the road bother you?' And he answered, 'No, Sir, but you sure as hell do!' Now, there was a real man. A real soldier. There was a man who devoted all he had to his duty, no matter how seemingly insignificant his duty might appear at the time, no matter how great the odds.

And you should have seen those trucks on the rode to Tunisia. Those drivers were magnificent. All day and all night they rolled over those son-of-a-#####ing roads, never stopping, never faltering from their course, with shells bursting all around them all of the time. We got through on good old American guts!

Many of those men drove for over forty consecutive hours. These men weren't combat men, but they were soldiers with a job to do. They did it, and in one hell of a way they did it. They were part of a team. Without team effort, without them, the fight would have been lost. All of the links in the chain pulled together and the chain became unbreakable.

Don't forget, you men don't know that I'm here. No mention of that fact is to be made in any letters. The world is not supposed to know what the hell happened to me. I'm not supposed to be commanding this Army. I'm not even supposed to be here in England. Let the first bastards to find out be the #######ed Germans! Someday I want to see them raise up on their piss-soaked hind legs and howl, 'Jesus Christ, it's the #######ed Third Army again and that son-of-a-#######-##### Patton.' We want to get the hell over there. The quicker we clean up this #######ed mess, the quicker we can take a little jaunt against the purple pissing Japs and clean out their nest, too. Before the #######ed Marines get all of the credit!

Sure, we want to go home. We want this war over with. The quickest way to get it over with is to go get the bastards who started it! The quicker they are whipped, the quicker we can go home. The shortest way home is through Berlin and Tokyo. And when we get to Berlin, I am personally going to shoot that paper hanging son-of-a-##### Hitler. Just like I'd shoot a snake!

When a man is lying in a shell hole, if he just stays there all day, a German will get to him eventually. The hell with that idea. The hell with just sitting back and taking it! My men don't dig foxholes. I don't want them to. Foxholes only slow up an offensive. Keep moving. And don't give the enemy time to dig one either. We'll win this war, but we'll win it only by fighting and by showing the Germans that we've got more guts than they have; or ever will have. We're not going to just shoot the sons-of-#####es, we're going to rip out their living #######ed guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun ##########s by the bushel-#######-basket!

War is a bloody, killing business. You've got to spill their blood, or they will spill yours! Rip them up the belly. Shoot them in the guts. When shells are hitting all around you and you wipe the dirt off your face and realize that instead of dirt it's the blood and guts of what once was your best friend beside you, you'll know what to do!

I don't want to get any messages saying, 'I am holding my position." We are not holding a #######ed thing. Let the Germans do that! We are advancing constantly and we are not interested in holding onto anything, except the enemy's balls! We are going to twist his balls and kick the living #### out of him all of the time. Our basic plan of operation is to advance and to keep on advancing regardless of whether we have to go over, under, or through the enemy. We are going to go through him like crap through a goose; like #### through a tin horn!

From time to time there will be some complaints that we are pushing our people too hard. I don't give a good ####### about such complaints. I believe in the old and sound rule that an ounce of sweat will save a gallon of blood. The harder WE push, the more Germans we will kill. The more Germans we kill, the fewer of our men will be killed.

Pushing means fewer casualties. I want you all to remember that.

There is one great thing that you men will all be able to say after this war is over and you are home once again. You may be thankful that twenty years from now when you are sitting by the fireplace with your grandson on your knee and he asks you what you did in the great World War II, you WON'T have to cough, shift him to the other knee and say, 'Well, your Granddaddy shoveled #### in Louisiana.'

No, Sir, you can look him straight in the eye and say, 'Son, your Granddaddy rode with the Great Third Army and a Son-of-a-#######ed-##### named Georgie Patton!'

"That is all."

 
Not sure I should continue doing this. It's been a lot of fun, but its also a lot of work, and the interest level seems to have died down. I was hoping for the narratives to result in some serious discussion and commentary, and it did at first, but lately it's just me adding one chapter after another. Perhaps Bentley was right that Guadalcanal went on too long. But I don't know how to be more brief without spoiling the whole thing.So please let me know if you guys are still interested and want this to continue. If nobody responds, then I'll take that as a sign that the interest level is gone, and move on to other things.
:stalker:Still very much in :lmao:
 
Seems like I might be in the minority but I appreciated the detail in Guadalcanal. When you consider Tim is condensing 5 books into a couple of pages it's not long at all.

This thread reads like an old-fashioned serial and I'm looking forward to it when I get off work.

Please continue Tim. Fascinating stuff.

 
Torch Part 2

General Mark Clark returned to Algiers in the midst of the city being attacked, in order to have a showdown with Admiral Darlan. Both he and Ike were determined to get Darlan on their side, in order to have the French troops stand down and save thousands of American lives. At the Hotel St. George, in full view of a room crowded with French North African officials and generals, Clark lost patience with the evasive little admiral. He had demanded that he order all French troops in North Africa to cease fire; but Darlan had insisted that he could do nothing without approval from Vichy. Clark deliberately began to bully Darlan. He shouted and pounded on the table.

"I do not propose to await any word from Vichy," Clark snapped.

"I can only obey the orders of Petain," Darlan replied.

"Then I will end these negotiations and deal with someone who can act," Clark insisted.

They argued again, and Clark threatened to take Darlan into "protective custody." Darlan asked for 5 minutes to talk to his staff. Clark consented, warning him that no one was to leave or communicate with anyone outside the hotel. During the respite, Juin persuaded Darlan to do as Clark demanded. In return, Darlan was made High Commissioner of French North Africa. The deal was done.

When General Eisenhower flew to Algiers to shake Darlan's hand, and the Darlan deal was then announced, there burst upon his head a storm of criticism that was unrivaled in the history of World War II. Here, in the first joint offensive, the Allies had made a deal with one of Europe's leading fascists. And it was Ike who had approved it. No amount of explanation of the military expediency of concluding such an arrangement, of how it secured the Allied rear for the movement on Tunis, of how it reduced American casualties from an anticipated 18,000 to 1,800, of how it removed from Allied shoulders the burden of policing North Africa, of how it guaranteed the French fleet- nothing could mitigate the intensity of the uproar. Eisenhower was called a fascist or a simpleminded soldier who had gotten out of his depth. Churchill claimed to be thunderstruck: "There is above all our own moral position to consider," he said. (This was disingenous. It was Churchill of course, who had urged getting Darlan to cooperate.) Roosevelt, always concerned with public opinion, indicated he might repudiate the deal, meaning that Ike's head would fall.

Eisenhower responded by sending a long memorandum explaining his position. The message impressed FDR. Marshall then chimed in; he told reporters that they had been incredibly stupid in their criticism of Eisenhower and the Darlan deal. By continuing to criticize and discredit Eisenhower, they were playing into British hands, he said. Ike would be relieved and replaced by a British general (which perhaps was Churchill's goal all along.) The newspapers relaxed their criticism, but Eisenhower never forgot it. For the remainder of his life, he resented the Fourth Estate. But for now, the plans moved ahead- because of the deal, Ike was able on November 11 to order an immediate advance on Tunis.

And then Darlan was assassinated. he was shot by a young Frenchman named Chapelle, who had once been a member of Robert Murphy's underground operations. General Giraud took over, but by then the battle had moved beyond the cooperation (or lack thereof) of the French. Truth be told, Eisenhower was relieved. He could now forget all of this political stuff, which he detested, and move on to the goal of winning the battle. The Germans were in Tunis, and that's where the Allies were heading.

 
We have now reached the end of 1942. In the last months of this year, the tide turned permanently in World War II, and both sides knew it. The victories at Stalingrad, El Alamein, Guadalcanal, and Torch put the Axis powers on the defensive. But many of the bloodiest battles were yet to come.

For 1943, I am planning on discussing the following issues in this order (many of these will take more than one post, of course):

Developing the Atom Bomb

The Summit at Casablanca

Victory in North Africa

The U-Boat War

The Warsaw Ghetto Rebellion

The Discovery of the Katyn Forest Massacre

The Capture of Sicily and the Invasion of Italy

Citadel and the Battle of Kursk

Burma

The Central Solomons

The Battle of Bougainville

Tarawa

The Summits at Quebec, Cairo, and Tehran

The Siege of Leningrad

The Battle of New Britain

So obviously, there is a ton on my plate. If anybody wants to help out, as Ozymandius did earlier in the thread, you're welcome to it. If not, I'll get to it all, just be patient.

 
I've been on the road the last three weeks, so I haven't been able to add commentary to what Tim has been posting. But he's doing a great job. I'll be back this weekend.

 
Excellent content, thank you.

Did anyone step up to fill in more about Enigma?

Also, regarding personal stories, I had a great-grand-uncle who was always very coy about his involvement in the Pacific. He died about 8 years ago. What are some good resources to try and uncover his military history? Google led me here. Not sure that is going to work, since there are no surviving "next of kin" (The next of kin can be any of the following: surviving spouse that has not remarried, father, mother, son, daughter, sister, or brother.)

 
The Atom Bomb, Continued

A year had passed since the United States Government on December 6, 1941, had decided to go "all out" in the effort to produce the atom bomb. During that period what had been a dispersed and loosely organized pursuit of this goal by a number of scientists and universities, all acting independently, had coalesced into a unified program under the auspices of the U.S. Army and the harmless sounding name of the Manhattan Project.

A stocky, bluff brigadier general of engineers named Leslie R. Groves was appointed to command the Manhattan Project. Groves was in charge of all army construction in the United States and its offshore bases, and was also then engaged in building the Pentagon, which he finisned in the fall of 1942. Groves was not a popular choice with most of the Manhattan scientists. His brusque manner and his habit of ordering them about like so many private soldiers did not endear him to world-famous physicists and chemists, some of them Nobel laureates. His ignorance of atomic physics appalled them and his indifference to their own knowledge infuriated them.

Pearl Harbor had changed the minds of some scientists unwilling to "do the dirty work" of the military. Among these was Volney Wilson, the brilliant young physicist who, with Arthur Compton and Enrico Fermi, worked on proving the chain reaction. The famous "Fermi Five" came to Chicago, and began building their "pile" at Stagg Field, the new and famous football stadium. It was intended to be a sphere constructed of carefully machined blocks of graphite, each resembing a long loaf of bread with alternate layers composed of lumps of uranium. On December 2, 1942, they tested it. From Delivered From Evil:

Again and again the rod was pulled back. The stylus of a recording meter climbed a graph, leveled off, then climbed again...the light of a galvanometer danced back and forth across a scale...From the Geiger counters came an abrupt clicking... Compton was amazed at the way the reactor performed exactly as Fermi had predicted. But around noon the emergency control rod, acting automatically, slmmed back into its slot with a disturbing crash, Almost immediatedly Fermi discovered this only meant the safety point had been set too low.

"It seems like a good time for lunch," he said casually.

Two hours later everyone assembled again in the squash court. "All right, George," Fermi sang out again... He turned to Compton. "It is self sustaining."

It is self sustaining... with these simple words, mankind entered the Atomic Age.

But the enormous power that had been unleashed could be perverted to evil as well as noble ends. Dr. Compton was aware of this as he returned to his office. The glow in Fermi's eyes as he spoke of the incalculable benefits tht atomic energy would confer upon mankind was the antithesis of the horror Compton had seen in the eyes of Volney Wilson. When Compton was alone, he put through a call to President James B. Conant of Harvard University.

"Jim", he said, striving to keep his voice casual, "You'll be interested to know that the Italian navigator has just landed in the New World."

"Is that so?" Conant said, also trying to be casual. "Were the natives friendly?"

"Everyone landed safe and happy."

In truth, none of us- ever- would be truly "safe" again. But war is war, and the atomic bomb had to be built before Hitler's scientists could build theirs, and as we shall see, the Nazis already had a head start.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Note- I have tried to severly edit the atomic bomb stuff for one simple reason- I don't really understand what I'm talking about. NC Commish was going to give us some background on this, but he's not around- hopefully, if he comes back, he will provide more detail. If anyone else wants to add some thoughts, it would be greatly appreciated. As for me, I'm way out of my depth here.

 
rsanford said:
Excellent content, thank you.

Did anyone step up to fill in more about Enigma?

Also, regarding personal stories, I had a great-grand-uncle who was always very coy about his involvement in the Pacific. He died about 8 years ago. What are some good resources to try and uncover his military history? Google led me here. Not sure that is going to work, since there are no surviving "next of kin" (The next of kin can be any of the following: surviving spouse that has not remarried, father, mother, son, daughter, sister, or brother.)
Spoke with my mother last night and I had a lot more family involved in the war than I ever knew. Wish I would have asked sooner, but better now then never. I'll be learning more details in the coming weeks/months. Here's what I know right now.???? - Battle of the Bulge

Navy - Storekeeper (Stateside)

Navy Cook - actually with the SeeBee's. (Trinidad)

Navy - Overseas

Navy - Submarines

Also, I'd be willing to provide a high school level explanation of the physics around the atom bombs if people are interested, let me know. I don't have much knowledge of the Manhattan Project or timelines though.

 
rsanford said:
Excellent content, thank you.

Did anyone step up to fill in more about Enigma?

Also, regarding personal stories, I had a great-grand-uncle who was always very coy about his involvement in the Pacific. He died about 8 years ago. What are some good resources to try and uncover his military history? Google led me here. Not sure that is going to work, since there are no surviving "next of kin" (The next of kin can be any of the following: surviving spouse that has not remarried, father, mother, son, daughter, sister, or brother.)
Spoke with my mother last night and I had a lot more family involved in the war than I ever knew. Wish I would have asked sooner, but better now then never. I'll be learning more details in the coming weeks/months. Here's what I know right now.???? - Battle of the Bulge

Navy - Storekeeper (Stateside)

Navy Cook - actually with the SeeBee's. (Trinidad)

Navy - Overseas

Navy - Submarines

Also, I'd be willing to provide a high school level explanation of the physics around the atom bombs if people are interested, let me know. I don't have much knowledge of the Manhattan Project or timelines though.
that's fascinating about your family. Would love to hear more as you learn it. And any info on the atom bombs would be quite welcome. The timelines are not a problem for me; the science is, though.
 
Tim,

Just wanted to add my thanks to all the work you are doing in this thread. A lot more information and insight about WWII than I ever knew and is has been a great read. Thank you for all your efforts!

 
The Atom Bomb, Continued

One of the prizes that fell to Hitler following the conquest of Norway was the Norsk Hydro Hydrogen Electrolysis plant in Vermork near Hardanger Fjord in southern Norway. At the time the Vermork plant was the world's largest producer of heavy water, a substance considered the most efficient for construction of a chain-reacting atomic pile. In May, 1940, after the fall of Norway, Germany ordered the plant to increase heavy-water production to the astounding rate of 3,000 pounds a year. In 1942, this was raised to the even more disturbing goal of 10,000 pounds annually.When the Nazis placed an embargo on the export of uranium from Czechoslovakia, British scientists were alarmed. They were almost certain that with enough heavy water and uranium the Nazis could make a chain-reacting pile operate.

Combined Operations began training special forces- both civilian and military- in Britain and later in the United States. Their mission was to pinpoint the Nazi atomic plants and labs for either bombing raids or sabotage. Special Forces saboteurs were either members of the local underground or special troops dropped by glider or parachute. In July, 1942, the dismaying rise in heavy-water production at Vermok made it imperative to strike there. Special Forces was asked to provide a small advance party for a sabotage attack by troops dropped by glider.

Norway's terrain, however, made glider operations unusually difficult. There were few landing fields. Thickly clustered and steep mountains threw up air pockets and atmospheric currents. Moreover, the Vermork plant was located on top of a high cliff. Its front was inaccessible and heavily guarded there and on both sides. It could be reached only from the rear. A landing would have to be made on a high plateau behind it and many miles away. Then the saboteurs would have to make a preciptious descent into a valley, cross it and climb a steep cliff. Snow could be expected.

Nevertheless, a party of 4, code-named "Swallow", parachuted into the area on October 15, 1942. They hid half their food and equipment at a base depot to which they hoped to return. Then they set out on a nightmare trek on skis. In high altitude and bitter cold, it was not possible for a man on skis to carry more than 66 pounds. Swallow had 8 such loads, an this each man had to make 3 journeys daily over the same stretch. Sometimes they could advance only a few miles a dayu. Because the lakes and rivers were not quite frozen, there was slushy water on the surface. The feet of the Swallow trekkers were almost constantly wet, and sometimes they fell through the ice. There was heavy snow about them and those who left the ski tracks sank into it up to their knees. Again and again Swallow tried to make radio contact with London, but were unable to do so until November 9, when they began to make daily transmission of intelligence received from the local underground.

Special Forces was dismayed to hear that the Germans had erected wire barricades around the factory and alongside the penstock lines carrying water down t the factory's dynamos. But the information they received from Swallow enabled them to build a mock up of the Vermork plant at a training camp in Scotland. Troops were drilled in sabotage and the specific demolitions to be used on designated machinery.

On November 19, the mission was launched. Two aircraft, each towing airborne troops in a glider, arose from a field in Scotland. They headed for Vermork. Foul weather engulfed them, and one aircraft and both gliders crashed on the southwest coast of Norway 100 miles from the target. The survivors were captured by Germans and interrogated. Swallow reported that Vermork's defenses were strengthened. The area was being combed for saboteurs and innocent Norwegians arrested. The British now had a decision to make- should they send another party in? Would it accomplish anything, or be simply suicide?

The answer came directly from Winston Churchill, after conferring with his science advisor, Lord Cherwell (Prof. Lindemann, who was a colleague of Einstein and Fermi.): the Germans could not be allowed to produce that heavy water. The entire war could be lost because of it. The factory had to be destroyed no matter what the risk. It was decided to send another group of special forces, this time all Norwegians. Led by a man known only to history as "Joachim" (several of the pertinent details of this mission, such as the name of the participants, remain hidden to the present day), they knew the risks involved. They were all volunteers. Code named "Gunnerside", Joachim and his 5 men left Scotland on January 23, 1943. They actually flew over their country byt a heavy mist obscured the dropping point and the lights laid out by Swallow. They had to turn back. On February 10, Gunnerside returned and landed succsessfully on the frozen surface of Lake Skryken. They were only 30 miles from Swallow but in such formidable country a trek that short was the equal of one 300 miles long elsewhere. Nevertheless, Gunnerside went skiing in search of Swallow.

 
While I'm getting ready to continue relating the story of the Norway espionage, perhaps someone who knows can answer the following questions in layman's terms:

1. What is "heavy water"?

2. How does "heavy water" help in the production of u-235 or plutonium?

3. How difficult it is to produce heavy water? What is the process that this factory in Norway was doing?

TIA

 
While I'm getting ready to continue relating the story of the Norway espionage, perhaps someone who knows can answer the following questions in layman's terms:1. What is "heavy water"?2. How does "heavy water" help in the production of u-235 or plutonium?3. How difficult it is to produce heavy water? What is the process that this factory in Norway was doing? TIA
As I understand it, the early theories about the explosive chain reaction of a nuclear bomb indicated that there were two ways to produce it. The first was using Uranium 235 (an isotope) and the second was using Plutonium. The bomb which destroyed Hiroshima was from U-235 and the one which destroyed Nagasaki was from Plutonium. However, obtaining plutonium was viewed as easier, but it required the use of heavy water (which contained a larger proportion of deuterium oxide--that is an isotope of hydrogen which also contains a neutron--normal hydrogen does not). The deuterium slowed down the neutrons so that they could react with Uranium 238 (the most common isotope) and produce plutonium.As I am sure most people know, an atomic bomb is set off by putting enough U-235 or Plutonium together so that they form a critical mass, and that junction is usually performed by shaped explosive charges which jam the different portions of the bomb together.
 
The Atom Bomb, Continued

13 days after Gunnerside landed in Norway and set out through the snow looking for Swallow, they found them. The next 4 days were spent drawing up a plan of attack. Joachim, the Gunnerside leader, became the chief.All men were instructed that if capture became imminent, they were to kill themselves. On February 27, 1943, they moved out in two groups, a covering party and a demolition party led by Joachim.

They waited until 12:30 am the following day to steal up to the plant's railroad gates. One man went forward with armorer's shears to cut the gates' chains. The covering party slipped into the plant yard. The demolition party followed. Next the factory gates were cut open, and the covering party advanced toward the German guard hut to keep it under surveillance.

Joachim led the demolition party toward the factory cellar. They could not open the cellar door. They glanced around nervously, their faces etched in the bright moonlight. The German guards were due at this point momentarily. They began searching for the cable tunnel, becoming separated as they did. Joachim found the opening to it. He and another saboteur crawled inside over a maze of cables and pipes. They could hear the machinery humming through the open door of the high concentration plant. They stole inside, easily overpowering the surprised Norwegian guard. Joachim began placing the charges while his colleague kept watch. The work went quickly and easily. The models on which he had practiced in Britain were exact duplicates of the real thing. Half the charges were in position when a window behind him was smashed open. Joachim and his colleague whirled, reaching for their pistols. It was one of Joachim's men. He crawled through the window and helped Joachim place the remaining charges. Then he checked them twice while Joachim coupled the fuses. They lighted both, ordering the Norwegian guard to run upstairs for his life, while they burst through the cellar door and sped away.

20 yards away from the factory they heard the explosion.

3,000 pounds of heavy water, a year's production, had been destroyed. Adolf Hitler's atomic bomb program had been severely crippled, and the men who had done it returned safely to their base.

 
Casablanca

During January 14-24, 1943, FDR and Churchill with their staffs and war chiefs met at Casablanca in Morocco in the first of a series of wartime summit conferences. It had been hoped that Stalin would also attend, but he was preocuppied with Stalingrad.

Many problems were solved at Casablanca. The British shelved their objections to new Pacific operations, and the Americans agreed to the invasion of Sicily that summer to be followed by landings in Italy. It was agreed to begin heavy aerial attacks on Germany, with the British striking at night and the Americans by day. Finally, the invasion of France was postponed for a year.

It was at Casablanca that Roosevelt announced the Allied policy of Unconditional Surrender. He told reporters that he was only copying Grant's instructions to Lee at Appomattox. Actually, this was historically incorrect- it was at Fort Donelson, much earlier in the Civil War, that Grant had insisted on "unconditional surrender" from his own West Point buddy Simon Buckner- and had thus become famous. Grant was then trying to win a tactical battle. Against Lee he gave rather generous terms, including amnesty to Confederate soldiers. This is important because FDR misunderstood the history and attempted to apply it to the war at hand. He may also have been thinking of Woodrow Wilson and the failed 13 points which led to the Treaty of Versailles and the rise of Hitler.

The debate over Unconditional Surrender lasts to this day. On the plus side, it may have served to reassure Stalin that the Allies would not betray him (something he was suspicious of every since the Hess flight). It also galvanized the Allies, sending a clear message that the Axis was evil and would be given no quarter. Our historical perspective of World War II as "the good war" (as opposed to other conflicts of greater ambiguity) may stem from this doctrine. (Also the collective American frustration with later conflicts such as Korea and Vietnam in part resulted from the fact that there was no clear victory to reach.)

On the other hand, this policy may have discouraged anti-Hitler conspirators in Germany. It put the steel of desperation into the spines of the Axis warlords, thus prolonging the war and wasting perhaps thousands of lives on both sides. The Germans and Japanese were no longer fighting for conquest; they were now engaged in defense of their homelands, making them ever more desperate. Also, the result in Germany was its utter destruction, leaving central Europe leaderless and allowing the Soviet Union to begin a 40 year reign of terror in Eastern Europe. It was hard to forecast this in 1943, of course. Heinz Guderian, representing typical German military thought, was outraged. He wrote:

The effect of this brutal formula on the German nation, and above all on the Army was great. The soldiers, at least, were convinced from now on that our enemies had decided on the total destruction of Germany, that they were no longer fighting- as Allied propaganda at the time alleged- against Hitler and the so-called Nazis, but against their efficient, and therefore dangerous rivals for the trade of the world.

If anything, the Japanese reaction was even more fierce, as we shall see. (Though, in the event, Truman modified the demands to allow the Japanese to keep its Emperor.) But that is for later in the narrative.

It was at Casablanca that Dwight Eisenhower became the Anglo-American supreme commander, and commander of the British Eighth Army, much to the dismay of the ambitious Montgomery, who detested him. But for better or worse, Ike's was the responsibility when the rainy season ended in Tunisia and the North African campaign was resumed.

 
While I'm getting ready to continue relating the story of the Norway espionage, perhaps someone who knows can answer the following questions in layman's terms:

1. What is "heavy water"?

2. How does "heavy water" help in the production of u-235 or plutonium?

3. How difficult it is to produce heavy water? What is the process that this factory in Norway was doing?

TIA
As I understand it, the early theories about the explosive chain reaction of a nuclear bomb indicated that there were two ways to produce it. The first was using Uranium 235 (an isotope) and the second was using Plutonium. The bomb which destroyed Hiroshima was from U-235 and the one which destroyed Nagasaki was from Plutonium. However, obtaining plutonium was viewed as easier, but it required the use of heavy water (which contained a larger proportion of deuterium oxide--that is an isotope of hydrogen which also contains a neutron--normal hydrogen does not). The deuterium slowed down the neutrons so that they could react with Uranium 238 (the most common isotope) and produce plutonium.

As I am sure most people know, an atomic bomb is set off by putting enough U-235 or Plutonium together so that they form a critical mass, and that junction is usually performed by shaped explosive charges which jam the different portions of the bomb together.
I wanted to expand on the bolded part. Over 99% of natural Uranium is U-238, so as a raw material it was readily available with relatively easy purification requirements.Also, the neutron doesn't so much as react with U-238, but rather, U-238 captures the neutron, thus becoming U-239, and within a matter of days decays twice, ultamately into Plutonium 239. If the neutrons weren't slowed-down, they would split the U-238 rather than be captured by it. I make this distinction because it's easier to visualize why this neutron moderation is important.

Heavy water is such a great neutron moderator compared to regular water because it slows down lots of neutrons without absorbing many. I don't know how carbon compares.

According to this article, Heavy Water was being produced by the plant in question as a byproduct of fertilizer production using electrolysis.

 
While I'm getting ready to continue relating the story of the Norway espionage, perhaps someone who knows can answer the following questions in layman's terms:

1. What is "heavy water"?

2. How does "heavy water" help in the production of u-235 or plutonium?

3. How difficult it is to produce heavy water? What is the process that this factory in Norway was doing?

TIA
As I understand it, the early theories about the explosive chain reaction of a nuclear bomb indicated that there were two ways to produce it. The first was using Uranium 235 (an isotope) and the second was using Plutonium. The bomb which destroyed Hiroshima was from U-235 and the one which destroyed Nagasaki was from Plutonium. However, obtaining plutonium was viewed as easier, but it required the use of heavy water (which contained a larger proportion of deuterium oxide--that is an isotope of hydrogen which also contains a neutron--normal hydrogen does not). The deuterium slowed down the neutrons so that they could react with Uranium 238 (the most common isotope) and produce plutonium.

As I am sure most people know, an atomic bomb is set off by putting enough U-235 or Plutonium together so that they form a critical mass, and that junction is usually performed by shaped explosive charges which jam the different portions of the bomb together.
I wanted to expand on the bolded part. Over 99% of natural Uranium is U-238, so as a raw material it was readily available with relatively easy purification requirements.Also, the neutron doesn't so much as react with U-238, but rather, U-238 captures the neutron, thus becoming U-239, and within a matter of days decays twice, ultamately into Plutonium 239. If the neutrons weren't slowed-down, they would split the U-238 rather than be captured by it. I make this distinction because it's easier to visualize why this neutron moderation is important.

Heavy water is such a great neutron moderator compared to regular water because it slows down lots of neutrons without absorbing many. I don't know how carbon compares.

According to this article, Heavy Water was being produced by the plant in question as a byproduct of fertilizer production using electrolysis.
Thanks for the info, guys!
 
While I'm getting ready to continue relating the story of the Norway espionage, perhaps someone who knows can answer the following questions in layman's terms:

1. What is "heavy water"?

2. How does "heavy water" help in the production of u-235 or plutonium?

3. How difficult it is to produce heavy water? What is the process that this factory in Norway was doing?

TIA
As I understand it, the early theories about the explosive chain reaction of a nuclear bomb indicated that there were two ways to produce it. The first was using Uranium 235 (an isotope) and the second was using Plutonium. The bomb which destroyed Hiroshima was from U-235 and the one which destroyed Nagasaki was from Plutonium. However, obtaining plutonium was viewed as easier, but it required the use of heavy water (which contained a larger proportion of deuterium oxide--that is an isotope of hydrogen which also contains a neutron--normal hydrogen does not). The deuterium slowed down the neutrons so that they could react with Uranium 238 (the most common isotope) and produce plutonium.

As I am sure most people know, an atomic bomb is set off by putting enough U-235 or Plutonium together so that they form a critical mass, and that junction is usually performed by shaped explosive charges which jam the different portions of the bomb together.
I wanted to expand on the bolded part. Over 99% of natural Uranium is U-238, so as a raw material it was readily available with relatively easy purification requirements.Also, the neutron doesn't so much as react with U-238, but rather, U-238 captures the neutron, thus becoming U-239, and within a matter of days decays twice, ultamately into Plutonium 239. If the neutrons weren't slowed-down, they would split the U-238 rather than be captured by it. I make this distinction because it's easier to visualize why this neutron moderation is important.

Heavy water is such a great neutron moderator compared to regular water because it slows down lots of neutrons without absorbing many. I don't know how carbon compares.

According to this article, Heavy Water was being produced by the plant in question as a byproduct of fertilizer production using electrolysis.
Picky, picky... :potkettle:
 
THE JAPANESE PROGRAM TO BUILD AN ATOMIC BOMB

The leading figure in the Japanese atomic program was Dr. Yoshio Nishina, a friend of Niels Bohr and a close associate of Albert Einstein. Dr. Nishina was a highly skilled world class physicist who had established his own Nuclear Research Laboratory to study high-energy physics in 1931 at Riken Institute (the Institute for Physical and Chemical Research), which had been established in 1917 in Tokyo to promote basic research. Nishina had built his first 26 inch cyclotron in 1936, and another 60 inch 220 ton cyclotron in 1937. In 1939 Nishina recognized the military potential of nuclear fission, and was worried that the Americans were working on a nuclear weapon which might be used against Japan.

However, the Japanese fission project did not formally begin until April 1941 when Yasuda acted on Prime Minister Hideki Tojo's order to investigate the possibilities of nuclear weapons. Yasuda passed the order down the chain of command to Okochi Masatoshi, director of the Riken Institute, who in turn passed it to Nishina, whose Nuclear Research Laboratory by 1941 had over 100 researchers.

Meanwhile, the Imperial Japanese Navy's Technology Research Institute had been pursuing its own separate investigations, and had engaged professors from the Imperial University, Tokyo, for advice on nuclear weapons. This resulted in the formation of the Committee on Research in the Application of Nuclear Physics, chaired by Nishina, that met ten times between July 1942 and March 1943. It concluded in a report that while an atomic bomb was, in principle, feasible, "it would probably be difficult even for the United States to realize the application of atomic power during the war". This caused the Navy to lose interest and to concentrate instead on research into radar.

In 1943 a different Japanese Naval command began a nuclear research program, the F-Go Project, under Bunsaku Arakatsu at the Imperial University, Kyoto. Arakatsu had spent some year studying abroad including at the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge under Ernest Rutherford and at Berlin University under Einstein. Next to Nishina, Arakatsu was the most notable nuclear physicist in Japan. His team included Hideki Yukawa, the first Japanese physicist to receive a Nobel Prize in 1949.

Shortly after the surrender of Japan, the Manhattan Project's Atomic Bomb Mission, which had deployed to Japan in September, reported that the F-Go Project had been obtaining 20 grams a month of heavy water from electrolytic ammonia plants in Korea and Kyushu. A heavy water production program had in fact been launched some years previously by the industrialist Jun Noguchi, who in 1926 founded the Korean Hydro Electric Company at Hungnam which became the site of an industrial complex producing ammonia for fertilizer production. However, despite the availability of a heavy water production facility whose output could potentially have rivalled that of Norsk Hydro at Vemork in Norway, neutron-multiplication studies using heavy water as a moderator appear not to have been carried out at Kyoto. A rumor surfaced after the war that Japanese scientists had supposedly been planning to conduct a test of a nuclear weapon near Konan on 12 August 1945, but this could not be verified, as Konan was occupied a few days later by the Red Army before they could be fully investigated by US occupation authorities.

Former Atlanta Constitution reporter and army intelligence officer David Snell of the 24th Criminal Investigation Detachment in Korea authored a report for the International Military Tribunal of the Far East which stated that Hideki Tojo had planned to wage nuclear war if his scientists had been successful. According to Snell, the Japanese project staff had been captured by Russian troops at Konan only three days after they had almost completed a functioning atomic bomb. The Russians had not cooperated with Snell's investigations, but he concluded that the downing of a B-29 bomber over Konan by the Russians on 29 September 1945 was due to the Russians having captured the Japanese nuclear test site.

Following his discharge Snell wrote up the story for the Atlanta Constitution, which published it in 1946. In the story, Snell alleged that the Japanese had successfully tested a nuclear weapon near Konan before being captured by the Russians. He claimed that he had received his information from a Japanese officer who had been in charge of counter-intelligence at Konan.

Though no credence was placed in the story, it was nonetheless thought necessary to get comments from Japanese scientists who would or should have known about such a project. Bunsaku Arakatsu called the article "false and fantastic" as he was personally acquainted with the few people capable of such a project, and said that Japan's nuclear research had never progressed beyond the laboratory stage, nor had any thought been given to the construction of a pilot plant for the production of nuclear material. Further doubt is cast on Snell's story by the lack of evidence of large numbers of Japanese scientists leaving Japan for Korea and never returning.

The 1985 book "Japan's Secret War: Japan's Race Against Time to Build Its Own Atomic Bomb" by Robert K. Wilcox reprinted the Snell material as part of its investigation of Japan's World War Two nuclear research. In addition to detailing the known Japanese army and navy efforts, the book cited numerous intelligence reports and interviews which indicated the Japanese might have had an atomic program at Konan and offered evidence that the Japanese Navy, taking up the atomic project after Nishina’s separator at Riken had been destroyed, had accelerated Japanese efforts to make a nuclear weapon.

A review by Department of Energy employee Roger M. Anders appeared in the journal Military Affairs:

Journalist Wilcox' book describes the Japanese wartime atomic energy projects. This is laudable, in that it illuminates a little-known episode; nevertheless, the work is marred by Wilcox' seeming eagerness to show that Japan created an atomic bomb. Tales of Japanese atomic explosions, one a fictional attack on Los Angeles, the other an unsubstantiated account of a post-Hiroshima test, begin the book. (Wilcox accepts the test story because the author [snell], "was a distinguished journalist"). The tales, combined with Wilcox' failure to discuss the difficulty of translating scientific theory into a workable bomb, obscure the actual story of the Japanese effort: uncoordinated laboratory-scale projects which took paths least likely to produce a bomb.

An article published in the journal "Intelligence and National Security" in 1998, based on a review of many of the same documents used by Wilcox, and more, came to a similar conclusion. The article cited several US military intelligence documents and Japanese corporate records of the Nitchitsu firm that ran most of the industry in Hungnam and found no substantive evidence of any nuclear research program existing there during the war.

 
THE BATTLE OF KHARKOV, PRELUDE TO KURSK

Kharkov was the second largest city in the Ukraine, situated north of the Crimean Peninsula and east of Kiev. It was and a machining and manufacturing center. The famous Soviet T-34 tank was designed and produced there, but the manufacturing machinery was moved to the Urals following Hitler's invasion. This was a close run thing, because the Germans were only 7 miles away when the last of the manufacturing left on a train for the Urals. By October 24th, 1941, the German 6th and 17th Armies had completed an envelopment of the city.

In spring 1942, the Soviets attempted to retake the city, with disastrous results. The success of the Soviet winter offensive had made them believe that the Wehrmacht would crack, but in the event the Germans enveloped the Soviet advance and the Soviet losses were in the range of 250,000. However, the defeat at Stalingrad in the winter of 1942 forced the Germans to withdraw from their campaigns in the Caucasus, and the Soviets launched spearheads after the retreating Germans. In doing so, they overextended themselves, and this led to a German counterattack attack in February-March 1943, commanded by Marshal Von Manstein. The Soviet defeat in this battle cost them 52 divisions, with personnel losses in excess of 80,000.

Following the German success at Kharkov, Hitler was presented with two options. The first, known as the "backhand method" was to wait for the inevitable renewal of the Soviet offensive and conduct another operation similar to that of Kharkov—allowing the Red Army to take ground, extend itself and then counterattack and surround it. The second, or the "forehand method", encompassed a major German offensive by Army Groups South and Center against the protruding Kursk salient. Ultimately, Hitler chose the "forehand method", which led to the Battle of Kursk.

If you looked at a map of the German and Soviet lines, running from Leningrad to the Caucasus, there was a bulge in the line, called the Kursk salient. This seemed to present an opportunity to envelop the salient from both sides, trapping the Soviet divisions within the bulge. The problem was, the Soviets had maps, too.

 
THE BATTLE OF KURSK—Part 1

An interesting development prior to the Battle of Kursk was that the Germans and the Soviets put out feelers regarding a possible armistice. And indeed, Russian Foreign Minister Molotov and his German counterpart, Von Ribbentrop, met in June 1943 in Kirovograd. However, the Germans insisted that the frontier would run along the Dnieper River (well within Soviet territory), and the Soviets insisted that they go back to the original frontiers, so no progress was made.

At the beginning of the war, the Germans had held an immense advantage in their officer corps, in their experienced soldiers, and in their equipment. However, after two years of war the Soviets were blooded, their top officers had all risen through the ranks because of ability, their equipment and materiel were becoming better and more available, and their tactics had been proven on the field. They held an enormous advantage in manpower, and they spent it recklessly in pursuit of their objectives. A Russian General feared the wrath of Stalin far more than the loss of 10,000 troops. They had experienced success with their winter offensives, had held Stalingrad, had kept the Germans out of Moscow and Leningrad, and were fighting with growing confidence.

The Kursk salient, or bulge was enormous. It ran approximately 100 miles across and was 50 miles deep to the south, and over 100 miles deep to the north. This is where the Germans hoped to encircle and trap the advance units of the Russian Army. However, because the Germans had encountered the T-34 tank, they believed that they needed to improve their Panzer capabilities by the addition of new Tiger and Panther tanks, and this caused them to delay their offensive. So the operation was delayed; originally set to go in May, it was delayed to June, and eventually to July.

Hitler saw the Kursk salient, and decided to go for it; some of his generals disagreed, believing that they should prepare to counterattack when the Russians came out and overreached. But no one could argue long with the Fuehrer. However, the Russians also saw the map, and they were ready for the German onslaught. There is controversy about who devised the “defense in depth” that they adopted to face the Germans. Marshal Zhukov was credited with being the mastermind, but subsequent revisionists have diminished his contributions. In the event, however, the Soviets devised a plan that would draw the Germans into successive defensive echelons in depth, and that the Soviet attack would only come when the Wehrmacht was fully extended.

 
BATTLE OF KURSK- Part 2

For the first three years of the war, the German strategy of Blitzkrieg had been brilliantly successful. The core of the strategy was high armored mobility, striking by surprise, and driving deep into enemy territory. This caused disorganization and disintegration on the part of the opposing troops, and often led to encirclement and huge numbers of enemy soldiers taken prisoner. The Germans planned the same thing for Kursk; but they failed to recognize that the advance was predictable, and furthermore that the Soviets had intelligence from a spy ring in Switzerland that indicated that the salient at Kursk was to be the objective. Surprise would not be an ally.

Back in April 1943, Marshal Zhukov had written to Stalin:

“I consider it inadvisable for our forces to go over to the offensive in the very first days of the campaign in order to forestall the enemy. It would be better to make the enemy exhaust himself against our defenses, and knock out his tanks and then, bringing up fresh reserves, to go over to the general offensive which would finally finish off his main force.”

So the strategy was set. The Germans would attempt a Blitzkrieg offensive, and the Russians would absorb the blow, trusting in their defensive arrangements to slow down and weaken the Panzer advance. For this they would rely on the laying of minefields, and the huge preponderance of artillery they had. By this time they had improved their artillery, including anti tank rocket launchers, and were producing them in vast quantities. They dug 3,000 miles of tank stopping trenches, placed one million mines (about half anti-tank, and half anti-personnel), and prepared their air force to fight over the battlefield. The Germans had 2,100 aircraft, the Soviets 2,800. However, it should be noted that the Soviet pilots were relatively inexperienced, many being thrust into combat with only 15 hours of flight training.

But in the end, it would come down to the tanks. And for this, both sides pulled their armor from other areas of the front, so that 3,000 German tanks faced 3,600 Soviet tanks.

On July 5th, the Germans launched their attack. History's greatest tank battle was about to begin.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BATTLE OF KURSK—Part 3

The thrust of the Wehrmacht came with Marshal Kluge in the north, and Marshal Manstein in in the south, a traditional pincer movement aimed at cutting off and encircling the Soviet troops along the front. For a pictorial of the outline of the battlefield, you can go here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Battle_of_Kursk_(map).jpg

There was a slightly higher preponderance of Panzer divisions in the south, (11 vs 7 in the north), and the southern thrust initially experienced more success. The southern pincer penetrated about 20 miles in the first few days, but this was less than the breakthrough that had been envisioned.

In the north, the Luftwaffe directed an all-out effort against Red Army positions on the northern flank during the first day of the operation, while Soviet deployment errors granted the Luftwaffe initial air superiority. General-Leytenant Rudenko, unsure whether this was the major German attack, ordered only one-third of his fighter strength to engage the masses of German aircraft, while the rest stood down. The outnumbered Red Army units were engaged over their own rear areas and suffered heavily. The German fighters had flown ahead of the bomber and Stuka units to prevent Red Army intervention. The unprotected Stuka and Kampfgruppen then began their assault on the Red Army positions unhindered. The Soviets fed in their aerial strength piecemeal and suffered heavy losses.

On 6 July, huge air battles raged over the northern sector. However, there was a lack of Soviet air-to-ground liaison officers, and effectiveness suffered. Counter-attacking Red Army units often took ground very quickly, and there was no effective system in place to inform the Soviet air fleets in time; as a result Soviet bombers attacked areas now occupied by Soviet forces, inflicting casualties. The initial air battles enabled the Luftwaffe to at least maintain a balance in numbers, if not air superiority, over the area held by 47 PanzerKorps. The Luftwaffe concentrated most of its I. Fliegerkorps units to this sector. The Soviet 17th Guards Rifle Corps reported "Appearing in formations of 20–30 or even 60–100 aircraft at a time, the enemy air force played a vital role in the battle". The Soviets suffered heavily on the first day, 16 VA losing 91 aircraft (including 22 Sturmoviks, nine A-20 Havocs, and 60 fighters).

However, because of the artillery, the minefields and the tank traps, the penetration in the north was less than in the south and slowed day by day. Three miles the first day, two the second and less than two each succeeding day. The ferocious resistance and the air attacks took their toll on the Panzers. After a week of struggle in the north, Kluge began to realize that his flank was exposed, and that he had not yet breached the main Russian defenses. He began to pull back his Panzers.

In the south, however, Manstein experienced more success. The offensive opened, as in the north, with a mass of air activity. German air attacks helped badly maul the Soviet 57th and 67th Guard Divisions. As the Luftwaffe shifted its attention against the 6th Tank Corps, it left the skies empty over the 4. Panzerarmee. As a result of Soviet superiority in the air, reinforced Soviet defences, and a lack of heavy air support, the Großdeutschland Division had only around 80 of its 350 tanks operational. The Luftwaffe attacked the Soviet 2nd Tank Corps from dawn to dusk, and Hauptmann Bruno Meyer, Staffelkapitain of I./Sch.G 1 noted: "It was impossible for us to count how many tanks we knocked out".

As a result of the losses sustained by the Soviet 2nd Tank Corp, the 5th Guards Tank Corps began their offensive against the II.SS Panzerkorps alone, and failed, with heavy losses. By the end of the day, 2 VA lost 45 aircraft (including 22 Sturmoviks), 17 VA lost 37 Sturmoviks alone. The Soviets lost approximately 90 machines on this date, while the Luftwaffe suffered 11 losses, mostly Ju 87s.

Rolling over the depleted Soviet defenses, Manstein's Panzers crossed the Donetz River, and began to threaten a complete breakthrough of the Soviet lines. What happened next is generally called the Battle of Prokhorovka.

On the morning of 12 July, the Wehrmacht, determined to push for a breakthrough, scraped together the available reserves of the 4th Panzer Army and advanced on Prokhorovka at the same time that the 5th Guards Tank Army launched a series of attacks as part of multi-front counteroffensive scheduled for 12 July and in an attempt to catch the Germans off balance. The SS and Guards units collided west of Prokhorovka in open country punctuated by farms, rolling hills and gullies.

In stifling heat, an eight-hour battle began. Tanks and artillery on both sides, wheeled and fired, advanced and retreated. The German units had 494 tanks and self-propelled artillery pieces in the attack, with 90% operational. The Soviets brought up 5th Guards Tank Army reserves which had not yet been committed to battle, so they were fresh. The German force found itself heavily outnumbered. The losses were enormous, particularly on the Soviet side. However, after the battle was over, the Soviets held the area, and were able to recover their disabled tanks and wounded crews.

There is much controversy regarding what actually happened here, with some pointing to blunders on the part of the Red Army. What is generally not disputed though, is that the Soviets did enough, at very high cost, to stop any German breakthrough here. In that sense this remains a crucial turning point of the battle and indeed of the Great Patriotic War.

The Blitzkrieg had been blunted.

 
Two things:

1. You noted that the Soviet pilots were inexperienced. But can't this be said of the Luftwaffe pilots at this point as well? Most of the veterans who had started the war and fought over the skies of Britain were dead by now. What was left for Goering was an inferior fighting force.

2. A main question I have when reading of these tremendous tank battles, and the ones in North Africa, as well: in all that dust and confusion, how do commanders have any clue as to what's happening? Just seems like total chaos.

 
Two things:1. You noted that the Soviet pilots were inexperienced. But can't this be said of the Luftwaffe pilots at this point as well? Most of the veterans who had started the war and fought over the skies of Britain were dead by now. What was left for Goering was an inferior fighting force.2. A main question I have when reading of these tremendous tank battles, and the ones in North Africa, as well: in all that dust and confusion, how do commanders have any clue as to what's happening? Just seems like total chaos.
Both your conclusions are correct. However, the Germans had been at war longer than the Soviets, and the Luftwaffe had been replacing pilots since 1939. So they had a pipeline of pilots in training. The Soviets were engaged in a huge buildup and expansion of their Air Force. As a result, their pilots were much less experienced. By the way, the ratio of kills at Kursk was about 4 to 1 in favor of the Germans, even though the planes were relatively evenly matched. As regards tank warfare, the Germans generally had the advantage, because their radio communications on the battlefield were better. The Soviets suffered from poor communications. But agreed, the "fog of war" affected both sides.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BATTLE OF KURSK—Part 4---THE SOVIET EMPIRE STRIKES BACK!

On July 12th, the Red Army turned from defense to the attack. In the north, they attacked the flank of the Wehrmacht troops, forcing them to pull back towards Orel. But the Panzer divisions which Kluge had disengaged came up in time to prevent a breakthrough by the Soviets. It then became and even battle of hard pushing on both sides, but with the Germans gradually being forced to retreat. They abandoned Orel, which they had held since 1941, on the 5th of August.

While the German offensive had been stopped in the north by 10 July, in the south the overall situation still hung in the balance, even after 12 July. German forces on the southern wing, exhausted and heavily depleted, had nevertheless breached the first two defensive belts and believed (wrongly) that they were about to break through the last belt. In fact at least five more defensive zones awaited them, although they were not as strong as the initial belts (and some of them did not have troops deployed). Red Army defenders had been weakened, and major parts of their reserve forces had been committed. Still, the available uncommitted Red Army reserves were far larger than the few available German reserves.

On 16 July, German forces withdrew to their start line. Severely depleted, the Germans then had to face Operation Rumyantsev, an offensive launched to smash the German forces in the Belgorod-Kharkov area on 3 August. On August 4th, the Red Army launched an attack on the weakened line, and captured Belgorod the next day. Exploiting the German exhaustion, they drove 80 miles deep in the next week, wheeling down towards Kharkov and its communications with Kiev. However, the Germans reacted swiftly, and were able to stop the encirclement, but had to evacuate Kharkov on August 23. With the capture of Kharkov, the Soviets considered the Battle of Kursk over.

British military historian Sir John Keegan had this, about the Battle of Kursk:

Although often thought of as a tank battle, Kursk as a whole arguably demonstrated the triumph of artillery, infantry and engineers over armor. The Soviet plan was to soak up the German assault in a colossal web of defensive positions, and only then launch their armored counter-attack. It was also an important air battle, in which the balance now shifted in the favor of the Soviets.

Strategically, the war in the Eastern Front had changed. The Germans would fight a defensive war from now on, gradually retreating until the end of the war.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Excellent content, thank you.

Did anyone step up to fill in more about Enigma?

Also, regarding personal stories, I had a great-grand-uncle who was always very coy about his involvement in the Pacific. He died about 8 years ago. What are some good resources to try and uncover his military history? Google led me here. Not sure that is going to work, since there are no surviving "next of kin" (The next of kin can be any of the following: surviving spouse that has not remarried, father, mother, son, daughter, sister, or brother.)
Spoke with my mother last night and I had a lot more family involved in the war than I ever knew. Wish I would have asked sooner, but better now then never. I'll be learning more details in the coming weeks/months. Here's what I know right now.???? - Battle of the Bulge

Navy - Storekeeper (Stateside)

Navy Cook - actually with the SeeBee's. (Trinidad)

Navy - Overseas

Navy - Submarines

Also, I'd be willing to provide a high school level explanation of the physics around the atom bombs if people are interested, let me know. I don't have much knowledge of the Manhattan Project or timelines though.
rsanford - drop me a PM about the family. I can point you in a few directions that might help. Don't want to derail the thread.Good job by all contributors, please continue on.

 
THE BATTLE OF KURSK--AFTERMATH

The campaign was a decisive Soviet success. For the first time, a major German offensive had been stopped before achieving a breakthrough. The Germans, despite using more technologically advanced armor than in previous years, were unable to break through the in-depth defenses of the Red Army, and were surprised by the significant operational reserves of the Red Army. This was an outcome that few had predicted, and it changed the pattern of operations on the Eastern Front. The victory had not been cheap however; the Red Army, although preventing the Germans from achieving the goals of Citadel, lost considerably more men and matériel than the Wehrmacht .

Heinz Guderian wrote in his diary:

With the failure of Zitadelle we have suffered a decisive defeat. The armored formations, reformed and re-equipped with so much effort, had lost heavily in both men and equipment and would now be unemployable for a long time to come. It was problematical whether they could be rehabilitated in time to defend the Eastern Front... Needless to say the Russians exploited their victory to the full. There were to be no more periods of quiet on the Eastern Front. From now on, the enemy was in undisputed possession of the initiative.

Casualty figures are hard to come by. The Germans probably lost over 700 tanks destroyed or put out of action, while the Russians lost over 1,000. There were over 170,000 German casualties, and probably more than 250,000 on the Soviet side. Over 600 German aircraft were lost, and more than 2,000 Soviet aircraft. But the Germans could ill afford the losses. Soviet war production now exceeded Germany's, and their production was increasing, day by day. Germany's production was maintained, but could not increase as a result of Allied bombing. In addition, Germany was now fighting on three fronts.

One last thing; Hitler became convinced that he had lost Kursk because of the incompetence of his generals. So he took more and more decision making into his own hands. Stalin, on the other hand, gained more confidence in his generals, and tended to leave them free to prosecute the war.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top