Ask the Scholar

Page 428 of 436
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 428

OCR

J. 333305MONO-State Galley 427 UNCORRECTED GALLEY PROOF serious threat to Strasbourg and there was a good chance of clearing up the Colmar pocket quickly, thus releasing four divisions. In view of the present diminution of German offensive capabilities in the West, it was essential to get to the Rhine in the North as soon as possible and it was hoped that Field Marshal Montgomery's attack would start on 8 February. Turning to the question of the distribution of forces, GENERAL SMITH explained that initially the Staff of 21st Army Group had said that only about 21 divisions could be maintained in the northern thrust; this strength was obviously too small a proportion to use in the main thrust out of a total of some 85 divisions available. The Supreme Commander, however, had directed that logistic arrangements be made to support initially 30 divisions in the main effort and later a total of 36 divisions. These arrangements were under way. Grave thought had been given to the area in which the secondary effort should be staged. The neighborhood of Cologne presented certain advantages in that there could be no question of an Allied dispersal of forces. On the other hand this area was so close to the area of the main effort that the Germans could quickly reinforce between these two threatened areas and little diversion of enemy strength would be achieved. To sum up, in General Eisenhower's view the thrust in the North was absolutely essential, that in the South necessary and desirable and to be undertaken if at all possible. In reply to a question, GENERAL SMITH explained that it was obviously desirable to close the Rhine throughout its whole length but that the Supreme Commander did not intend to do this if resistance was such that the operation would delay the main attack until mid- summer or would militate against an opportunity to seize a bridgehead and effect a crossing in strength on the northern front. A discussion then ensued as to the effect of the spring thaws on the possibilities of crossing the Rhine. GENERAL SMITH and GENERAL BULL explained that the lower Rhine could, it was believed, be crossed at any date after the first of March, though certain risks were entailed. The spring thaws affected the upper Rhine but had no effect on the lower Rhine. SIR ALAN BROOKE explained that the British Chiefs of Staff felt that there was not sufficient strength available for two major operations, and that therefore it would be necessary to decide on one of those proposed. Of the two, the northern appeared the most promising. The base port of Antwerp was nearer, the armies were already closer to the Rhine in that area, and the advance into Germany immediately threatened the vital Ruhr area whose importance had been even fur- ther increased by the fall of Silesia to the advancing Russian Army. In the South, though the actual crossings might prove easier, our armies had further to go before being in a position to cross the Rhine and, after crossing, the country was less favorable for operations and our forces would be further from the Ruhr or the lines of communica- tions thereto. It was therefore felt that the plan should be based on the whole effort being made in the North if this was to be certain of succeeding and that every other operation must be regarded as sub- sidiary to this main thrust. There was, it was felt, a danger of putting too much into the southern effort and thereby weakening the main northern attack.

Page data

Page
428
Source index
0
Type
photo
Media ID
33582bdaeff88613
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
750433
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data
{
    "id": "750433",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Foreign Affairs File, 1940-1953: \"Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945\" (galley proofs, Part I)",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
    "collections": [
        "President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
        "Subject Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
    "imageCount": 436,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity
{
    "localId": "750433",
    "label": "Foreign Affairs File, 1940-1953: \"Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945\" (galley proofs, Part I)",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433"
}
Document source metadata
{
    "id": "750433",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Foreign Affairs File, 1940-1953: \"Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945\" (galley proofs, Part I)",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
    "collections": [
        "President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
        "Subject Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
    "imageCount": 436,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
    "naId": 750433,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
    "seq": 428,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-428.jpg",
    "mediaId": "33582bdaeff88613",
    "ocrText": "J. 333305MONO-State\nGalley\n427\nUNCORRECTED GALLEY PROOF\nserious threat to Strasbourg and there was a good chance of clearing\nup the Colmar pocket quickly, thus releasing four divisions. In view\nof the present diminution of German offensive capabilities in the West,\nit was essential to get to the Rhine in the North as soon as possible and\nit was hoped that Field Marshal Montgomery's attack would start on\n8 February.\nTurning to the question of the distribution of forces, GENERAL\nSMITH explained that initially the Staff of 21st Army Group had said\nthat only about 21 divisions could be maintained in the northern\nthrust; this strength was obviously too small a proportion to use in the\nmain thrust out of a total of some 85 divisions available. The Supreme\nCommander, however, had directed that logistic arrangements be made\nto support initially 30 divisions in the main effort and later a total of\n36 divisions. These arrangements were under way. Grave thought\nhad been given to the area in which the secondary effort should be\nstaged. The neighborhood of Cologne presented certain advantages\nin that there could be no question of an Allied dispersal of forces. On\nthe other hand this area was so close to the area of the main effort that\nthe Germans could quickly reinforce between these two threatened\nareas and little diversion of enemy strength would be achieved. To\nsum up, in General Eisenhower's view the thrust in the North was\nabsolutely essential, that in the South necessary and desirable and to\nbe undertaken if at all possible.\nIn reply to a question, GENERAL SMITH explained that it was\nobviously desirable to close the Rhine throughout its whole length but\nthat the Supreme Commander did not intend to do this if resistance\nwas such that the operation would delay the main attack until mid-\nsummer or would militate against an opportunity to seize a bridgehead\nand effect a crossing in strength on the northern front. A discussion\nthen ensued as to the effect of the spring thaws on the possibilities of\ncrossing the Rhine. GENERAL SMITH and GENERAL BULL explained\nthat the lower Rhine could, it was believed, be crossed at any date\nafter the first of March, though certain risks were entailed. The\nspring thaws affected the upper Rhine but had no effect on the lower\nRhine.\nSIR ALAN BROOKE explained that the British Chiefs of Staff felt that\nthere was not sufficient strength available for two major operations,\nand that therefore it would be necessary to decide on one of those\nproposed. Of the two, the northern appeared the most promising.\nThe base port of Antwerp was nearer, the armies were already closer\nto the Rhine in that area, and the advance into Germany immediately\nthreatened the vital Ruhr area whose importance had been even fur-\nther increased by the fall of Silesia to the advancing Russian Army.\nIn the South, though the actual crossings might prove easier, our\narmies had further to go before being in a position to cross the Rhine\nand, after crossing, the country was less favorable for operations and\nour forces would be further from the Ruhr or the lines of communica-\ntions thereto. It was therefore felt that the plan should be based on\nthe whole effort being made in the North if this was to be certain of\nsucceeding and that every other operation must be regarded as sub-\nsidiary to this main thrust. There was, it was felt, a danger of putting\ntoo much into the southern effort and thereby weakening the main\nnorthern attack."
}