The German Perspective.

I read the US assessment of German units and there were plenty of surprises on which German divisions were feared and which were thought 2nd rate. How did the Germans rate Allied divisions? Any information on any formation will be more than welcomed!

 

anzio diary.germans fear 82nd ,triple c. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KY_672qQf0kC&pg=PR11&lpg=PR11&dq=anzio+german++officer+fear+82nd,diary&source=bl&ots=u82yJrEPZ7&sig=DcXMo9zgqBD3t2q_I9tP-Ro4HiM&hl=en&ei=pMZVS-frFIqk4Qbxj6yjCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CBgQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=anzio%20german%20%20officer%20fear%2082nd%2Cdiary&f=false

 

I have no online links but from the books I have read, the German military leaders did not really fear the army as a whole. They did rate the airborne units high but what they feared more was the air power. They did rate the American and Canadian units higher then the British.

 

Sure, but that is to be expected. Elite units act as elites. I am looking for German estimates of less fabulous divisions that did not have celebrity status and were not "special". 1st, 3nd, 4th, 8th, 9th, 28th, 29th, 30th, 35th, 80th ID for example, or armored divisions like 3rd, 5th, 9th, 10th.... You get the picture. Information about famous regulars like 2nd and 4th AD are fine, but I don't expect to be surprised.

 

I have heard (hearsay I know), or read somewhere that the German as well as the Japanese feared the Ghurka contingents quite deeply. Now, the men of the FSSF (Devil's Brigade) also seem to get their fair share of respect from the Germans in the Italian campaign.

I would think all airborne would get respect, and the artillery of the western allies got attention because of its combined TOT ability, and proximity fuses in the later months of the war when they were allowed to be used by the west.

The Soviet massed artillery and rocket attacks were at the very least un-nerving as well.

 

Thank you all for answering a very arcane question. I am looking for something specific, and perhaps I am chasing a chimera. Most German reports of Allied forces were disappointingly generalized and annecdotal, sometimes self-contradictory and very often came from the lower ranks whereas I am interested in divisions from official sources for operational purposes.

What I would like to have is Abwehr's intellegence report on Allied Order of Battle in which specific units are ID'ed and rated. I know the US Army did that and R. Weigley consulted it in writing his great Eisenhower and His Lieutenants; for example, 2nd Panzer was thought to be the best German mechanized division in the whole Western Front including the SS, and the 11th Panzer were near the top of the menance list.

I skimmed Panzers in Winter which stated most SS troopers thought little of the 30th Infantry Division but also many gained a grudging respect of their opponents and became pessimistic about the outcome of the Western Front. PzJgr said he has the impression that the Germans found the Americans and Canadians more dangerous than the British but Friedrick's grandfather who fought in N. Africa and E. Front inlcuding Berlin rated the Americans at the bottom of the list--though with a note "then we found out they could fight too."

There was one widely respected German Corps commander who commented the infantrymen of the 80th Division as first-rate; on the other hand the German Lessons Learned booklet on the fighting in Lorraine still see US infantry as inferior but improving since Normandy. I actually found references to SS General Preiss's assessment of generalship in Patton's Third Army but that was about the operational level.

Of course, if you have annecdotes on the stardom divisions like the 82nd and 101st Airborne you are welcome to post them. 4th Armored Division was singled out by German propaganda and Geobbels should have the author of that piece shot as it could only serve to demoralize their own troops.

Many units also claimed that the Germans gave them mean-sounding sobriquets, but a lot of times its not substantiated and in any case not something that came from high ranking officers.

About the British and the Canadians I am absolutely ignorant. Again all information are welcome but official assessments of individual divisions are what I want the most right now.

 

One of the easiest for you to find....published lots of works about battle and many related magazines is Krafts after battle report on Arnhem fighting his ss training unit had with British during the first few days while he held the para brigade from reaching the bridge on routes they had planned. Havent looked on net but Im sure it will be there.

 

dont know if this fits the bill triple c ...

STIWOT Forum :: Bekijk onderwerp - Anecdotes from the Battle of the Bulge

 

You mean the AAR of Kampfgruppe Krafts? I will definitely give it a look. Thanks.

 

We can all agree that the fighting quality of the American forces in N. Africa was dismal since they were green afterall. Compare their quality to the period of the D-Day landings and there is a considerable difference.

 

Yes mate thats the one. Its quite propogandish in its narrative as it was written with the reader in mind in this case he knew it would be Himler. But its a good overall assesment of Brit enemy action..means of fighting,,,morale etc. Plus german weaponary and tacticsio used and locations and even political observations. Has some good pencil drawn type maps in original too. Found it in A glider pilot book I had and also in jackdaw history publications. But I'm sure many copies must exist online.

 

Not sure if this is what your looking for Triple C, but it's a comment by one of the German legends of WW2 on an Allied division.


"The Australians were remarkable fighters, even when wounded they would fight to the last breath, they were big & powerful men, who without doubt represented an elite formation of the British Empire."

Erwin Rommel on the Australian 9th Division at Tobruk.


Rommel's opponent at Tobruk was quite a Commander too......

Lieutenant General Sir Leslie James Morshead KCB, KBE, CMG, DSO, ED (18 September 1889 – 26 September 1959) was an Australian soldier with a distinguished career in both world wars. He is considered to rival John Monash for the appellation of "Australia's greatest general". He commanded the Australian troops at the Siege of Tobruk and Second Battle of El Alamein where Australian troops inflicted crushing defeats on the German Afrika Korps. During World War II, Morshead was known to his soldiers, in part affectionately, as "Ming the Merciless", after the villain in Flash Gordon comics.

From Wiki.

In WW1 he fought at Gallipoli including the battle of Lone Pine, He led his battalion, part of Major General John Monash's 3rd Division through the battles of Messines, Passchendaele, Villers-Bretonneux and Amiens. For his services, he was awarded the Distinguished Service Order (DSO) in June 1917,was made a Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George (CMG) in December 1919, was awarded the French Légion d'honneur in the grade of Chevalier, and was Mentioned in Despatches five times.

He went on to New Guinea & defeated the Japanese at Finschhafen, & was in overall charge of the forces in New Guinea in the battles of Sattelberg, Jivevaneng, Sio and Shaggy Ridge. He was rewarded with the capture of Madang in April 1944.

 

Max Simon said the same thing about Russians that sometimes, when a wounded Russian soldier came-to from unconsciousness, he would seize a weapon and attempt to attack his German captors. He likened fighting them in '41 to facing the British Royal Guards Division so that's pretty high complement...

Anyone have any information on what the Germans thought of the US 1st Division? In spite of crushing the 28th Division in the Hurtgent forest, the Germans apparently had a very high oppinion of that unit's aggressiveness whereas their impression of the 4th Division was surprisingly unfavorable.

 

Hmm, my impression is that at least at Normandy, the Germans rated the British and Canadians as more dangerous than the americans. This can be seen in their force desposition, which focused their stronger units, and especially armour, on the non-american areas of the front. Certainly the Firefly was more threatening to German heavy armour than most of what the Americans had.

 

Any proof of that officially? The Germans naturally were going to concentrate far more firepower around Caen regardless of which army they were fighting because that's the gateway out of Normandy, not the bocage country which was bad for armor. Not that I have anything against Canadians, Brits or Poles, mind you. Besides... I would really like to have more sources about individual divisions!

 

That's not what I have been told by the grandson of a Waffen SS member. His grandfather said the Americans were the best of the allies then the Canadians.

 

I am sure that I have spoken to a hundred and more German war veterans, of which easily about 20 account for being my family members.

The impression they gave me would be as such.

Polish Soldiers – tough but no leadership
French – no fighting spirit and revengeful bast.. after 1944
Norwegians – tough bast.. but hopelessly outgunned and outnumbered.
Canadians - never mentioned (sorry)
Englaenders – disciplined, tough but slow, overall at the same level as the Wehrmacht
Aus, SAfricans and Nz – the stuff the SS was always looking for
British Paras – just as good as the original German paras
SAS – LRDP – highly professional murderers - no equivalent in the Wehrmacht or SS
(99,9% of the Germans didn’t know of the Brandenburger)
Italians – in general poorly equipped soldiers, with no intend to fight – slight exception being units such as Ariette? or Folgore?
Russians – before 1940 considered useless scum, after 1941 acknowledged as cannon fodder, after 1943 considered to be a serious enemy, after 1944 feared
Americans – in general looked down upon, only respected in regards to their provisions and kindness of sharing cigarettes and chocolate.
If true or not – the tremendous amount of hardware, supply and ammo behind them made the Wehrmacht and SS tremble, their actions in combat are usually described as dishonorable and cowardice. (Goebbels propaganda surely helped along to that interpretation or feeling).
Finns – just like Russians after 1943
SS infantry units – (Evaluated by Wehrmacht) reckless idiots that caused more trouble than good on the battlefield, especially after 1943.
SS tank units – fanatics that gave hope to the regular Wehrmacht soldier, but constantly feared after Jan 45 for killing more Wehrmacht soldiers then allied.

Regards
Kruska

 

Reminds me of a something that I have read in the Past about Canadians. I believe it went like something along the lines of the Germans fearing the Canadians because they were thought to be Elite Colonials held in reserve by the the British. After the Victory at Vimy, Canadians had gained much respect from the Germans, they were considered warnings of impending attack in WW2.

Ill look for where I read this from, I know that I had seen it on a website as well.

 

Hello T....

Maybe this "feeling" refers to the WWI?? indeed the Canadians had a fantastic reputation during the Great War amongst the Germans.

Regards
Kruska

 

Thats what I meant, sorry it looked a little jumbled up. IF I remember though, it did carry over into the second war as well.

PS, if you dont like my name you are welcome to call me Dustin