<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Comments for On this day in 1944...</title>
        <description>We&apos;re the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost.  All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT,  and KA 2003-2010</description>
        <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html</link>
        <atom:link href="http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944_rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:58:04 Z</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Movable Type 4.12</generator>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2012</copyright>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>

        <item>
            <title>On this day in 1944...</title>
            <description> INFANTRY AGAINST TANKS Ben Nason Center for Military History Collection This year I&apos;m excerpting from the Official History - The Ardennes: Battle of the Bulge, by Hugh Cole. Continuing with that theme: A second try came just before dawn, this time straight down the road from Büllingen. Ten German tanks in single file were sighted as they came over a slight ridge to the front of Company F. Two tank destroyers and three antitank guns drove the tanks off or at least caused them to turn west in search of a weaker spot in the 2d Battalion defenses. In...</description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2005 05:21:17 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>

        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-12-21</title>
            <description>
                Geoff - the Germans were coming at that idea from a couple of perspectives...

1.  They&apos;d done it before, in 1940.

2.  No one believed they&apos;d do it again.

3.  And the Americans, the ones holding the sector, hadn&apos;t had it happen to them...

4.  And the greenest or most worn out of us troops were in the region - and there was an Army boundary.  

5.  If the weather didn&apos;t hold, the woods might help negate Allied Airpower.
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36764</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36764</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:56:34 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from cw4(ret)billt on 2005-12-20</title>
            <description>
                SezaGeoff - The French didn&apos;t understand it either. The German armored columns used a very effective tactic called &quot;Drive down the road in single file until you get to a clearing.&quot; Don&apos;t forget, logging trucks used those same roads, and a tank transporter is just a logging truck with a military driver and a load of rectangular logs.


            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36756</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36756</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2005 23:31:24 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from SezaGeoff on 2005-12-20</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[I have driven through that area on a couple of trips, and still don't understand how you could have mounted armoured assault through those hills and valleys.  I will get <b>Armageddon: The Battle for Germany, 1944-1945</b> for Christmas (guess who buys his own prezzies from the girls), and will see if that explains it better for me.
]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36752</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36752</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2005 23:12:06 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from AW1 Tim on 2005-12-20</title>
            <description>
                Comrade John,
   Well, sadly, it was a somewhat slow morning at the northen picket post, and I must confess I am also a military trivia junkie.
   I am enamored with the stories of the soldiers themselves. Not the commander&apos;s points of view, but the stories of the battalion and company and platoon level commanders, the soldiers and airmen and marines themselves.
    It started with John Keegan&apos;s wonderful book &quot;The Face of Battle&quot; and went spiraling out of control from there. I was hooked. Nowadays, SWMBO sighs at the number of geeky military and history tomes littering the available space. Ah well, it&apos;s my money (or at least she lets me think it is) and gives me a pass every now and then.
     I am especially enamored with Civil War soldier&apos;s stories. Their reme,brances, anecdotes, letters and diaries and journals. I find it quite fascinating, and being a veteran, I can also understand what they sometimes don&apos;t say, or what they only allude to. But i digress...
       Thanks for posting the column. It&apos;s a good look at the real fog of war, where more often than not units are playing a deadly game of &quot;bumper cars&quot; with the enemy, and what the General wants, what his staff thinks is going on, and reality often are NOT anywhere close to being on the same page.
       Respects,
         AW1 Tim
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36705</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36705</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2005 12:38:46 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2005-12-20</title>
            <description>
                All good comments and advice, AW1 Tim.  I&apos;m still bemused by the fact that someone read it to the end!
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36683</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36683</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:49:05 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from AW1 Tim on 2005-12-20</title>
            <description>
                Comrade John,

     I agree completely with your assertions regarding the Armchair General. I used to wonder, when I was younger, how commanders could make such mistakes. They were oh so apparent to my mind, the courses that should have been followed, the orders that should have been given.
      Then one day I had the epiphany that some &apos;historians&quot; never have. I had been arguing about Sickle&apos;s decisions on July 2nd, at Gettysburg. I couldn&apos;t understand why he did what he did. So I decided to find out for myself. i took copies of all his known correspondence and orders from that day, copies of after action reports from his brigade commanders, and a topo map, and hit the road for Gettysburg.
       Boy, were my eyes opened. After walking the ground, looking at the tasks assigned to him, the intelligence he had recieved and the various observations coming in to him, coupled with his previous experiences at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, I now understood his decisions.
       What seemed so foolish to my modern mind, based upon decades of research by noted authors, was overturned when I stood where Sickle&apos;s 3rd Corps had formed. I saw what he had seen, the untenability of his original position based upon his force at hand and hs orders, and it all made sense now.
       Primary source material is invaluable to understanding what happened, or to try and understand what happened, but actual, on-the-field observations bring in a whole new picture, and I fully encourage folks to try and visit battlefields and historical sites to gain a better picture and understanding of what transpired.
       Many times, the armchair general can make a valid observation, not realizing how invalid his intelligence data is.
       Respects,
         AW1 Tim

            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36681</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/on_this_day_in_1944.html#comment-36681</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:24:38 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>


