Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “Battle of Monte Cassino — Allied Mistake, or Brutal Necessity?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/battle-of-monte-cassino/.
Battle of Monte Cassino — Allied Mistake, or Brutal Necessity?
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
Winchester67
Elite
If anyone on the Forum has kids/grandkids they should be reading everything that is posted in History. They are a quick read and relay a lot of factual information in more detail than the kids get in school.
The Allies fell back, and planned Operation Diadem – the fourth and final battle. The battle involved attacks on four fronts, and took two months to get all the troops in place.
The attack started on the evening of 11 May 1944. By 17 May, the Polish corps broke through the German defences. On 18 May, Polish troops captured the Abbey at the top of Monte Cassino
The attack started on the evening of 11 May 1944. By 17 May, the Polish corps broke through the German defences. On 18 May, Polish troops captured the Abbey at the top of Monte Cassino
As a literary aside, one of the bomber crew men involved in the bombing of Monte Casino was Walter M. Miller Jr.. The moral dilemma it created for him inspired him to write the award winning A Canticle for Leibowitz, considered one of the greatest science fiction novels ever written.
The Allied commanders were acting with the best information they had, and as mentioned, distracted troops the Third Reich needed elsewhere.
The Allied commanders were acting with the best information they had, and as mentioned, distracted troops the Third Reich needed elsewhere.
This has been arm chair quarter backed for years. Truth is you weren't there, neither was I. You NOR I can second guess what was decided, planned, and executed all those years ago. If you think you know better than the generals of that time then clearly you should just go ahead and end hunger, homelessness, and all the wars going on now. Give me a break.
Smiledon#57
Operator
Right, wrong, indifferent, what is done, is done. If the Americans had lost the war, the Germans would have put the American commanders on trial for this.
I'm not taking a position on the article or battle, but learning from history - especially possible mistakes - helps us to make better decisions in the future. We absolutely should examine this battle and learn what we can from it.
CCJ
Operator
Every engagement has its own unique dilemmas and challenges. History and knowledge are important factors to consider in each, but it only goes so far. Those in command must be able to adapt as well as apply new thinking. With that said, this battle could not be avoided but maybe it could have been handled better. Hind-sight is always 20-20, but I would say that those in charge did not have a clear understanding of the battle field. With D-Day on the near horizon, I can understand why they felt the urgent need to commit to the battle, but I am not sure it has the desired affects. These types of battles will always be debated. From my point of view, it seems like a bit of a bungled encounter, and a lot of men died.