Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What would that defensive position have been, a coastal city with their backs to the ocean and opposing army approaching on two sides and zero hope of resupply. Makes Bataan seem like a walk in the park.
Against a Japanese Army 1/2> their size who couldn't exactly resupply themselves either. Furthermore Japan couldn't really exploit it's air superiority either because of the number of anti-aircraft guns.
Percivel screwed the pooch horribly, by basically ignore all the intelligence he had about pretty much everything.
Against a Japanese Army 1/2> their size who couldn't exactly resupply themselves either.
Ahem, what was standing in the way of Japan's naval supremacy unfettered ability to resupply by sea, the Prince of Wales? Now we can count heads but counting heads doesn't account for the area that the British had to defend as opposed to Japans mobility that allowed it to strike at will anywhere along the Malay peninsula...did I mention that fact that the RAF was vastly outnumbered thus eradicating any ability of the British to control the skies or the sea.
Ahem, what was standing in the way of Japan's naval supremacy unfettered ability to resupply by sea, the Prince of Wales? Now we can count heads but counting heads doesn't account for the area that the British had to defend as opposed to Japans mobility that allowed it to strike at will anywhere along the Malay peninsula...did I mention that fact that the RAF was vastly outnumbered thus eradicating any ability of the British to control the skies or the sea.
Uh the area they had to defend? You mean the Island of Singapore. As to Japan resupplying they had to resupply through Malaya.
Also I though this thread was about intelligence failures and Singapore wasn't just an intelligence failure it was an intelligence abortion.
I think without a doubt the complete lack of the future NATO countries to penetrate the Soviet Intellegence system was a monsterous failure. They sure as hell penetrated ours at all levels. WE might have been able to avoid the cold war if we had done a better job.
Worst Allied failures? I can think of four that would be good candidates...
1. Pearl Harbor Attack - This has nothing to do with conspiracy theories, but is the ultimate example of the need for an intelligence organization capable of separating the "signal" from the "noise". The US had received repeated intelligence warnings about an attack, with some calling for the exact location and rough window of when it would happen. The problem was that the US was being flooded with intelligence on Japanese movements and reports were coming in from multiple "intelligence" sources and organizations. Taken in total, all of the intelligence amounted to nothing when there was no single group tasked with deciding what was credible and what was probable. One of the first think tank discussions run by the newly minted CIA was to review the intelligence the US received prior to Pearl Harbor to determine how to separate good from bad intel and how to handle it. The CIA's conclusion was that, had there been a CIA at the time, they would have most likely been able to have determined that the attack was going to happen days before it did.
2. Operation Market Garden - While there is plenty to criticize in this operation, the failure to heed warnings from credible sources about the presence of strong German units in the Arnhem area prior to launching the operation was a major failure. The operation hinged on securing the bridges and making a rapid advance. While the advance was hampered by the fact the plan called for moving too far, too fast, it was all pointless anyway as the final bridge was impossible to hold against the forces in the area. Even if the road columns had made it, they would have found a bridge in German hands with strong defenses.
3. Battle of the Bulge - SHAEF had received an endless stream of intelligence about a buildup in the Ardennes sector prior to the launching of the operation, but it was routinely ignored as being "impossible". Had the intelligence been heeded, it may not have done much to change the fact the Germans were attacking, but the Allies would have had at least a week or so head start on preparing to stop it.
4. Bombing of Monte Cassino - Recent work has uncovered that the decision to bomb the abbey originated in part from a mis-translated piece of intelligence. A junior officer mis-translated a radio intercept and thought it stated that a "batallion was occupying the abbey". Allied command already leery of the position of the monastary along the Gustav Line as being perfect to observe troop movements and direct artillery, took this piece of information as evidence that the Germans were violating the Vatican neutrality and ordered it bombed. While the mistake in translation was later caught, the bombers were already on their way. At the time of the bombing there were no German units in the abbey and the only ones nearby were situated lower on the slopes. The Germans had agreed that as long as the monks remained in the abbey, the Germans would not occupy it. The only people in the abbey were Italian civilians seeking shelter from the battle and the monks themselves. Following the attack the Germans sent elements of the 1st Parachute division to occupy the rubble which proved to be an excellent defensive position. It took several assaults and over 4,600 Allied lives to take the monastary.
I agree with the Battle of the Bulge intelligence failure. Ended up ok, after a bitter struggle though. Managed to pinch off a large amount of Germans in the salient, and Hitler fired his last offensive in the west.
Probably France not believing tanks could go through the ardennes and sending there best forces into Belgium.....played right into Hitler's hands and it cost France dearly the war might have been very different if not for that catastrophic mistake....another mistake by Hitler this time is believing the Soviet Union could be beat so quickly that country was many times larger then France,Poland etc it simply wasn't feasible especially before the Russian winter and given the almost genocidal and racist nature of that war surrender was not likely. Germany and Italy declaring war on the USA is another.
Probably France not believing tanks could go through the ardennes and sending there best forces into Belgium.....played right into Hitler's hands and it cost France dearly the war might have been very different if not for that catastrophic mistake...
Good point. The French had received multiple reports from Belgian and Swiss Intelligence regarding the Meuse-Sedan area as the primary focus of the German assault. In March Swiss Intelligence had informed the French of the massing of 6-7 panzer divisions and multiple motorized divisions in that area, as well as the construction of pontoon bridges on the Our River. The reports largely feel on deaf ears.
As risky as the German strategy was, adjustments by the French and British to contain the armored columns in the Ardennes could have resulted in a much different scenario.
Good point. The French had received multiple reports from Belgian and Swiss Intelligence regarding the Meuse-Sedan area as the primary focus of the German assault. In March Swiss Intelligence had informed the French of the massing of 6-7 panzer divisions and multiple motorized divisions in that area, as well as the construction of pontoon bridges on the Our River. The reports largely feel on deaf ears.
As risky as the German strategy was, adjustments by the French and British to contain the armored columns in the Ardennes could have resulted in a much different scenario.
And that's what some people fail to understand is that attack was extremely risky.......unfortunate for France that those reports from Belgian and Swiss intelligence fell on deaf ears.
Two other mistakes by Hitler was not finishing off the UK its doubtful they could have held out to much longer and the UK probably couldn't beat Germany one on one even with Commonwealth help not to mention Italy which was also at war with the UK.....Also not Finishing off the BEF at Dunkirk was a mistake I think with France pretty much beaten he wanted an alliance of a sort with Britain I think he respected there empire.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
