A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Officers..The Bridge at Remagen



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 26th 04, 07:26 PM
ArtKramr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Officers..The Bridge at Remagen

When the troops of the 9th armored division reached the bridge at Remaagen on
March 7th they stopped undecided what to do. General William Hoge saw the
bridge standing aand ordered it to be taken with the East end of the bridge
secured. Lt. Karl Timmermann led the charge takig the bridge and setting up a
perimeter line of skernishers on the Eastern side.

When ordered to take the bridge troops obeyed the commands of their officers
instantly and obediently. No debates. No second opinions. Just immediate
action. It is how wars are won.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Ads
  #2  
Old February 26th 04, 07:36 PM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
When the troops of the 9th armored division reached the bridge at Remaagen

on
March 7th they stopped undecided what to do. General William Hoge saw the
bridge standing aand ordered it to be taken with the East end of the

bridge
secured. Lt. Karl Timmermann led the charge takig the bridge and setting

up a
perimeter line of skernishers on the Eastern side.

When ordered to take the bridge troops obeyed the commands of their

officers
instantly and obediently. No debates. No second opinions. Just immediate
action. It is how wars are won.


And no higher orders from those above Hoge to carry out the maneuver--he
acted in accordance with his higher commander's intent. You just don't get
it, do you?

Brooks



Arthur Kramer



  #4  
Old February 26th 04, 08:19 PM
Ed Majden
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"ArtKramr"
When ordered to take the bridge troops obeyed the commands of their

officers
instantly and obediently. No debates. No second opinions. Just immediate
action. It is how wars are won.


Art:
I have been following this discussion for sometime and think I should
jump in. Blind obedience of a direct command by an officer is sometimes NOT
the wisest choice! I site the event of March 16, 1968, the Mylai massacre!
Officers can be dead wrong at times! At the German War Crimes trials the
defence of saying, "I was ordered to do this", did not work.
Ed


  #5  
Old February 26th 04, 08:23 PM
Dave Holford
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



ArtKramr wrote:


But that was after the fact. No debates on the spot.



You speak with authority - you were there?

Dave
  #7  
Old February 26th 04, 08:53 PM
Ed Majden
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


----- Original Message -----
From: "ArtKramr"

We can always give isolated examples that prove the exception. But in an

army
when the exception is the rule, we end up with a mob where everyone is in
business for themselves. Not a good way to go to war.

Unfortunately there are many examples! If an officer has the confidence
of his men and he has respect for the troops he commands in most cases his
orders will be followed without question. Just because a guy has bars on
his shoulders does not necessarily mean he is a good leader or for that
matter a knowledgeable one. In the British forces rank often came from
class distinction not whether you deserved the position. Remember Dieppe or
Hong Kong!

With respect:
Ed


  #9  
Old February 26th 04, 11:17 PM
Ron
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

When the troops of the 9th armored division reached the bridge at Remaagen on
March 7th they stopped undecided what to do. General William Hoge saw the
bridge standing aand ordered it to be taken with the East end of the bridge
secured. Lt. Karl Timmermann led the charge takig the bridge and setting up a
perimeter line of skernishers on the Eastern side.

When ordered to take the bridge troops obeyed the commands of their officers
instantly and obediently. No debates. No second opinions. Just immediate
action. It is how wars are won.


But I will have to chime in on this, with some agreements and disagreements.

Warfare has evolved past the stage, at least with Western countries, where it
was all about just generating maximum numbers of planes, people, etc to a
target and that meant the difference. In much of the history of warfare,
whether it was the Roman conquest of Europe, or B-26s over a bridge, it was
about putting maximum numbers of your side on or over a target for the best
chance of success. The tactics were not usually too specialized typically, nor
were the weapons. One person who questioned or disagreed could mean one less
warrior, or one less plane over the target whose bombs could have made the
difference.

However, warfare today is less numbers oriented, and more about having the
right plan and the right tactics when you go in, because often now we do
undertake operations in which our force, while being at a numerical
disadvantage, will have a huge techological advantage over the enemy, and the
right plans and tactics are going to make maximum use of that.

One B-52, equipped with JDAMs, utilizing highly training soldiers for targeting
and directing, and with the right tactics, can achieve things undreamed not
long ago.

And a special forces team, be it SFOD-D, SEAL, PJs, etc, doesnt just get a
command from the team leader and the rest just go do it without any thinking.
They are going to work out the plan beforehand, and probably each contributing
or adding to it. When fighter and bomber aircraft are doing CAS work, or
interdiction, the technology is best utilized when you properly employ the
weapons, instead of just generating large numerical sorties and hoping for the
best.
Special forces might have been a novelty during WW2, but now they and their
tactics are an integral part of modern warfighting.

But ironically, it is 3rd world armies that still rely on "just do as your
told", "no questions asked", and still fight with massed numbers, not much
technology, and do not coordinate or train solders much, lest they become a
domestic threat, especially Arab and Middle Eastern Armies. Against an
educated well trained army, who uses proper planning and tactics, those 3rd
world armies come up quite short.









Ron
Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4)

  #10  
Old February 26th 04, 11:48 PM
Jim Doyle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ed Majden" wrote in message
news:W0t%b.621339$X%[email protected]

----- Original Message -----
From: "ArtKramr"

We can always give isolated examples that prove the exception. But in an

army
when the exception is the rule, we end up with a mob where everyone is

in
business for themselves. Not a good way to go to war.

Unfortunately there are many examples! If an officer has the

confidence
of his men and he has respect for the troops he commands in most cases his
orders will be followed without question. Just because a guy has bars on
his shoulders does not necessarily mean he is a good leader or for that
matter a knowledgeable one. In the British forces rank often came from
class distinction not whether you deserved the position. Remember Dieppe

or
Hong Kong!

Hang on Ed, surly you can't pin Dieppe on British ineptitude - being an
Allied venture, it needed Allied ratification. If anything it was a Canadian
effort (something like 5,000 Canadian troops), the only British employed
were a number of commandos, IIRC about the same number of US Rangers were
also used. Plus what on earth did the Brits do to Hong Kong except turn it
into the prosperous place of commerce and business it is now?!
Can't argue with your stating that often British officers were born to it.
John E Johnson (sp?), the wartime spitfire ace, had his initial pre-war
pilot application turned down since he stumbled in the interview having been
ask for which hunt he rode! I can guarantee this is not the case any longer.

With respect:


Genuinely likewise,

Jim D

Ed




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A problem in the Military ? Nick Jade Military Aviation 54 March 15th 04 07:59 PM
Bridge at Remagen? ArtKramr Military Aviation 18 February 9th 04 05:24 PM
Why is Stealth So Important? James Dandy Military Aviation 148 January 20th 04 04:17 PM
Two programs help officers join JAG Corps Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 November 19th 03 11:33 PM
Question about the Arado... Bill Silvey Military Aviation 20 August 4th 03 03:00 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.