Is this historical of Anzio (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV



Message


spinecruncher -> Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 12:33:40 AM)

Trying out this scenario, Anzio 1944 @ 2km, at turn 4 Allied troops (me) easily penetrating 45 km inland in all directions. I thought the Allies got bottled up there.

Incidentally I visited Anzio this summer but all there is, a small plaque. I think the Italians forgot about this war.




Meyer1 -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 2:19:10 AM)

So you are not making a very good Lucas impression [:D]

And in RL Robert Mitchum easily reached Rome [:)]




spinecruncher -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 3:17:26 AM)

ok just read Wikipedia. So Lucas did not have faith in the size of his invasion force and he consolidated at Anzio to the consternation of Churchill -- instead of quickly moving towards Rome and the nearby mountain chain which is how I am playing it. John Keegan argues that had Lucas made a quick spring towards Rome his troops would have been overpowered outside that great ancient city.




RFalvo69 -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 4:24:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ballyhoo

Incidentally I visited Anzio this summer but all there is, a small plaque. I think the Italians forgot about this war.


I can assure you that we didn’t. The wounds are still deep. However, Anzio happened during the rebellion against Mussolini and the partisan warfare part of the war - a war, to paraphrase “The Hunt for the Red October”, without monuments, without cemeteries: only dead.




spinecruncher -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 6:44:39 AM)

Well let's face it, between the Renaissance and Ancient Rome I do not think there is much more room for history in Italy -- oh and the Italian unification.
The only time I heard anything about Mussolini in my two visits to Italy was at Ostea Antica.




Auchinleck -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 4:06:01 PM)

If I recall the history of Anzio, The Allies established a beachhead of only a few miles, and then proceeded to 'dig in'. Anticipating an immediate counter attack from Field Marshall Albert Kesselring's forces. In reality it took Kesselring time to gather enough forces muster his counter attack, which the Allies handed him as a gift by digging in after the initial Anzio landings. If the Allies had pushed on after landing, they would have been virtually unopposed, and might have been able to drive right on to Rome. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill summed up Anzio by saying something to the effect of: "I thought we were hurling a Wildcat ashore, when all we wound up with was a Stranded Whale".




solops -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 4:19:55 PM)

Anzio was an abysmal failure. I have never thought much of Keegan's ramblings and his Anzio comments are some of his oddest. Lucas should never have been in command as he obviously did not view the operation the same way as his superiors did. The Germans called Anzio the war's largest self-contained POW camp.




Cohen_slith -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 5:36:16 PM)

German forces later - once they gathered - were about to overwhelm the dug in Allied positions at Anzio. If the Allies would have overextended, yes they'd have been suffering a grand debacle.
Ultimately the fact they kept on the beachead saved them, since they could easily rely also on defensive shore bombardment.





spinecruncher -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 10:33:50 PM)

I completely disagree with how that campaign was prosecuted and John Keegan was wrong. The allied objective was to liberate Italy, and the USA had the strongest military in the world at that time. The Allies enjoyed air supremacy and shore bombardment capacity that could have supported troops in Rome. A defensive doctrine employed by Lucas was completely inappropriate for the objective. Sure there was risk in advancement, but what did the USA civil war teach US commanders: War is won by sheer aggression. US Grant taught us that when he was made overall commander and he made his famous march across the Potomac in '64. Yes, US Grant lost a lot of men in his campaign towards VA, Cold Harbor, etc. But there was no other way to win the war. Aggressive docctrie wins wars. That is also why France was occupied -- IE phony war.




Meyer1 -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/27/2017 10:41:06 PM)

The plan was flawed as it didn't consider how the Germans could react. They just said: we are gonna land there and they will retreat. So they didn't gave Lucas a force strong enough to be more aggressive without taking much risk.




solops -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/28/2017 1:04:00 AM)

There are a number of good books on Anzio. The most complete is "Salerno to Cassino" by Martin Blumenson, published by the U.S. Army Center for Military History. It is a free download here:

https://history.army.mil/html/books/006/6-3-1/index.html

For a complete overview you really need to read at least chapters 17 through 22.




riflebrigade -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/28/2017 1:11:22 AM)

Very difficult to move a long distance from a beachhead, remain supplied, protect the beachhead and the entire length of the supply routes from the beachhead.

I read General Mark Clark warned Lucas not to create the same problems the allies had when they landed at Salerno, the allies were nearly push back into the sea. They even considered re-embarking at one stage as the situation got so bad.

The Allies did not know the extent of German forces at Anzio or the strength of the force the Germans could quickly move to Anzio (the first 24 hours would have been critical).

The allies had a shortage of landing craft after the Anzio landing, many of which were removed from Italy for the invasion of Southern France.

My father fought with the American 5th Army at Anzio, he though many of the Germans units were first class troops and you could not underestimate them. The naval gunfire support was the last option in many cases to stop the German attacks.

Although losing the war since the end of 1941 the Germans could inflict massive casualties if they managed to concentrate sufficient forces for an attack, especially against overextended forces.

Look at what they did to massively superior Russia forces with large numbers of tanks in many Russian breakthroughs on the Eastern front.

In a crisis the Germans would almost always react much faster than the allies could.

I would not call Anzio a failure as German units moved to Anzio weakened other parts of the front.








spinecruncher -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/28/2017 2:42:38 AM)

Well, in war, aggression breeds success. RF makes the case that the Germans moved swift, and were dangerous. So was General Robert E Lee, Thomas Jackson, and A Johnston. So, McClellan played a defensive doctrine -- and again, the French held back in the phony war. Lucas was wrong. He needed to be aggressive. Also him hunkering down in Anzio gave the Germans plenty of time to gather their forces. It passed the initiative to the Germans. I wonder if Lucas was not a student of the US civil war. that is where we learned about defensive versus offensiveness doctrines and what is reaped respectively.




IslandInland -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/28/2017 3:58:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: solops

The Germans called Anzio the war's largest self-contained POW camp.


The Russians used to say the same about the Germans in the Crimean peninsula.






Lobster -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/28/2017 6:02:03 PM)

Even more true in Courland peninsula, Latvia.




larryfulkerson -> RE: Is this historical of Anzio (11/29/2017 4:18:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: riflebrigade
Very difficult to move a long distance from a beachhead, remain supplied, protect the beachhead and the entire length of the supply routes from the beachhead.

I read General Mark Clark warned Lucas not to create the same problems the allies had when they landed at Salerno, the allies were nearly push back into the sea. They even considered re-embarking at one stage as the situation got so bad.

The Allies did not know the extent of German forces at Anzio or the strength of the force the Germans could quickly move to Anzio (the first 24 hours would have been critical).

The allies had a shortage of landing craft after the Anzio landing, many of which were removed from Italy for the invasion of Southern France.

My father fought with the American 5th Army at Anzio, he though many of the Germans units were first class troops and you could not underestimate them. The naval gunfire support was the last option in many cases to stop the German attacks.

Although losing the war since the end of 1941 the Germans could inflict massive casualties if they managed to concentrate sufficient forces for an attack, especially against overextended forces.

Look at what they did to massively superior Russia forces with large numbers of tanks in many Russian breakthroughs on the Eastern front.

In a crisis the Germans would almost always react much faster than the allies could.

I would not call Anzio a failure as German units moved to Anzio weakened other parts of the front.

Thank you very much for that analysis. I've got a lot to learn still. I can tell.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0625