Dieppe Raid - August 19, 1942

[MisterCairo]

Today is the 67th anniversary of the Dieppe Raid, aka Operation Jubilee. Usually described as an attempt to learn lessons prior to the anticipated large-scale invasion of Europe, it remains a sore point in Canadian and Allied military history given the enormous costs, mistakes made, and political fall out on both sides of the Atlantic.

For our American allies, it is a footnote in their WWII history, as the raid marked the first American land combat in Europe, and the first Americans killed in action, by the 1st Ranger Battalion.

The raid was a frontal assault directly on the port town of Dieppe, France, with flanking raids by Royal Marine Commandos and US Rangers. The so-called "lessons learned" included this novel idea: Don't attack ports head on, as they are in fact heavily defended.

Canadian casualties of just under 5000 troops landed:

907 killed
1967 prisoners of war
600 returned to England wounded

http://www.combinedops.com/Dieppe.htm

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWdieppe.htm

 

[benstephens]

Yes, lest we forget.

There have been many debates as to why this operation took place. What ever the reason, many men, especially Canadian gave their lives.

Kindest Regards

Ben

 

[Diamondback]

Ditto--a waste of brave commandos' lives.

There's a time for harassment-raids with expendable forces, but those are almost always small-scale or widely-dispersed operations.

Let us never forget either the bravery of those on-the-ground or the utter stupidity of those who planned/ordered the mission.

 

[Smithy]

What is often overlooked in terms of Dieppe and which hasn't been mentioned here, are the air operations which covered it. This was the largest array of RAF aircraft assembled up til this point of the war with over 3,000 aircraft.

 

[fleet16b]

As a citizen of Hamilton Ontario Canada, I grew up with the Dieppe lore.
The Royal Hamilton Light Infantry was on the beach that a.m.
My dad lost a third of his school chums that morning, my best friends Dad lost his brother, a sargent in the Windsor Essex.
Yesterday as is done each year , Hamilton remember the veterens lost and the ones that returned on that fatefull day. These men are considered a very special group within this City and are revered by all
The battle is a somewhat sore spot in this country.
Many feel in was not necessary only a product of an over infalted ego.
Mountbattens's. While I am sure that the blame cannot be completely oput on his shoulders,there were many wartime and post war Canadian politicians that refused to shake his hand or even associate with the man.
When he was "blown up" by the IRA while on his Yacht, there was a feeling of "what comes around goes around"
Sorry if I have offended any one with these comments but some wounds are deep and don't heal quickly

Thanks to all the veterans

 

[MisterCairo]

Mountbatten was used as a scapegoat for the results of the raid. Blame, if any, lays squarely on the shoulders of two men - Winston Churchill and Mackenzie King (the latter being the Canadian prime minister for those not in the know). Hamiltonians (and I grew up in Burlington) should blame those actually responsible.

I won't, indeed can't, express my views on the IRA and its MURDER of Lord Mountbatten on this forum.

 

[fleet16b]

Mountbatten was used as a scapegoat for the results of the raid. Blame, if any, lays squarely on the shoulders of two men - Winston Churchill and Mackenzie King (the latter being the Canadian prime minister for those not in the know). Hamiltonians (and I grew up in Burlington) should blame those actually responsible.

I won't, indeed can't, express my views on the IRA and its MURDER of Lord Mountbatten on this forum.

Here you go:from the historical accounts of the raid.

Operation Jubilee
Quote:
Almost all concerned believed that a raid on Dieppe was now out of the question; however, though Montgomery wanted it cancelled indefinitely, Mountbatten did not. He began reorganising the raid from 11 July as Operation Jubilee. Despite not receiving Combined Chiefs of Staff authorisation, Mountbatten instructed his staff to proceed in late July. This lack of top-level go-ahead resulted in certain dislocations in the planning. For example, the failure to inform the Joint Intelligence Committee or the Inter-Service Security Board meant none of the intelligence agencies were involved, consequently the operation was mounted on information that was months out of date.
Unquote

Hmmm it appears that the record does not agree with you.
If the account is accurate, then technically one could say that Mountbatten had a personal agenda that cost many unnecessary casualties.
The element of suprise was lost.Even the German Forces knew we were coming. Mountbatten knew this and still forged ahead.
He knew he was sending green troops up against seasoned force and knew casualties would be heavy.
One could suggest he to was a murderer = definition- intentional killing of human beings

 

[DutchIndo]

Years ago I've read or heard that the Brits have always used their Commonwealth troops as "Cannon Fodder". This was alluded to in the movie "Golopolli.

 

[MisterCairo]

Here you go:from the historical accounts of the raid.

Operation Jubilee
Quote:
Almost all concerned believed that a raid on Dieppe was now out of the question; however, though Montgomery wanted it cancelled indefinitely, Mountbatten did not. He began reorganising the raid from 11 July as Operation Jubilee. Despite not receiving Combined Chiefs of Staff authorisation, Mountbatten instructed his staff to proceed in late July. This lack of top-level go-ahead resulted in certain dislocations in the planning. For example, the failure to inform the Joint Intelligence Committee or the Inter-Service Security Board meant none of the intelligence agencies were involved, consequently the operation was mounted on information that was months out of date.
Unquote

Hmmm it appears that the record does not agree with you.
If the account is accurate, then technically one could say that Mountbatten had a personal agenda that cost many unnecessary casualties.
The element of suprise was lost.Even the German Forces knew we were coming. Mountbatten knew this and still forged ahead.
He knew he was sending green troops up against seasoned force and knew casualties would be heavy.
One could suggest he to was a murderer = definition- intentional killing of human beings

Ah yes, Wikipedia, that irrefutable source of concise, accurate information, laid on the foundation that anyone with a computer, internet access and opposable thumbs can share their wisdom with the world.

Your quote failed to include the "citation needed" at the end, I note. You may want to reconsider your conclusion that "the record" disagrees with my thesis.

Wikipedia is "the record"? I'm reminded of a line from the film "So I Married an Axe Murderer" - 'I find it scary that you refer to the Weekly World News as THE newspaper!"

More to follow.....

 

[MisterCairo]

A history article from the BBC seems to disagree with Wikipedia:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/dieppe_raid_02.shtml


British Lieutenant General Bernard Montgomery's South-Eastern Command provided the troops for the operation, and planned an unimaginative frontal assault, without heavy preliminary air bombardment. Montgomery was also being pressed by the Canadian government to ensure that Canadian troops saw some action, so the Canadian 2nd Division, under Major General Roberts, was selected for the main force.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/dieppe_raid_06.shtml

Who to blame?

Churchill and the Chiefs of Staff - the heads of the Navy, Army and Air Force, who met daily to discuss strategy and advise Churchill - were responsible for this disastrous misjudgement. But, because no written record exists of the Chiefs of Staff approving the raid in its final form, it has sometimes been suggested that it was really Mountbatten who remounted it without authorisation. This is almost certainly nonsense.

The Chiefs of Staff disliked Mountbatten, regarding him as an upstart foisted on them by Churchill, so any unauthorised action on his part would have given them the ammunition to recommend his removal. Since Mountbatten was not removed, and the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, General Sir Alan Brooke, in his frank and detailed diary, makes no mention of his having exceeded his authority, it seems unlikely that Mountbatten can be accused of mounting the raid without authority.

General Brooke was in the Middle East from 1 August 1942, returning on the 24th, after the event. This was unfortunate, for, as the most forceful and intelligent of the Chiefs of Staff, had he been in Britain in the days preceding the raid, he might have persuaded Churchill to call it off.

'The disaster did point up the need for much heavier firepower in future raids.'
Much has been said since about the fact that the Dieppe raid was a necessary precursor to the great amphibious operations that were to follow, in terms of the lessons learned and experience gained. Mountbatten pursued that line all his life. But as Chief of Combined Operations, he did bear some of the responsibility for mounting the operation, so one can only comment, 'he would say that, wouldn't he?'

The disaster did point up the need for much heavier firepower in future raids. It was recognised that this should include aerial bombardment, special arrangements to be made for land armour, and intimate fire support right up to the moment when troops crossed the waterline (the most dangerous place on the beach) and closed with their objectives.

However, it did not need a debacle like Dieppe to learn these lessons. As judged by General Sir Leslie Hollis - secretary to the Chiefs of Staff Committee and deputy head of the Military Wing of the War Cabinet with direct access to Churchill - the operation was a complete failure, and the many lives that were sacrificed in attempting it were lost with no tangible result.


Not exactly a glowing review of Lord Mountbatten's participation and leadership, but hardly the vilification often portrayed.

Something incorrect repeated ad nauseum over several decades, is incorrect.

And really - Mountbatten had the ability to launch a raid, involving 5000 Canadian troops, 1000 British commandos, the first American soldiers involved in the war, several dozen Canadian and British warships, and as noted above, the LARGEST concentration of aircraft in the war to date, WITHOUT authority?

Puh-lease!

 

[Smithy]

Years ago I've read or heard that the Brits have always used their Commonwealth troops as "Cannon Fodder". This was alluded to in the movie "Golopolli.

This is a bit of an old chestnut that possibly contains a smidgen of truth in there but Commonwealth soldiers were generally regarded (for right or wrong) as having high morale and being tenacious fighters, especially New Zealanders and Australians due to the pioneering hardships of their respective countries.

There is the German Field Marshall Erwin Rommel's remark...

"Give me a division of Maori and I will conquer the world".

 

[MisterCairo]

The Commonwealth cannon fodder myth has hopefully run its course. If it were true, there would have been a million man army from India in France before Christmas 1914! Several thousand did see action in Europe, but as part of Empire, not as fodder.

We like to think Canadians had a bit of a pioneering spirit too, by the by! And without the benefit of beaches at Christmas time!

We even let the Aussies help us on occasion (the start of Germany's "Black Days"):


In this strategy, the “enemy” was also distracted with the appearance of Canadian troops. The Germans regarded them as storm troopers and considered them an indication of a coming attack. At the time, the Canadian Corp. was near Arras. A good portion of the Canadians-two (2) battalions were dispatched north to Kemmel in Flanders. The bulk of the Canadians were filtered down to the Somme while inventive rumors were engineered by the British to account for their presence.

The Canadians and the Australians appeared to be spreading themselves out in a defensive position. The Canadian Corp (Currie) was just south of the Somme on the right with the Australian Corp (Monash) positioned on the left and next to the river. The III Corps (R.H. K. Butler) advanced north of the river protecting the flank of the main punch being the Canadian Corp (Currie) on the right; and the Australian Corps (Monash) on the left.

In actuality, the Canadians did not move into the front line until a few hours before the assault. In the interim, the Australians were extending their front south to Amiens-Roye Road, thus, relieving the French and at the same time giving the Germans a “false sense of security.” The force did not appear to be a “threat” as they were spreading themselves out in a defensive posture.

The entire front (of attack) was approximately fourteen miles in length.

The German side consisted of six (6) divisions (averaging 3,000 each) of the Second Army. Their weakness in numbers was weakened further by their lack of defense. There was none of the usual deep dugouts to keep the morale safe until the start of the fighting.

Five days prior to the offensive, a German raid captured an Australian post; and, three days afterward, a local attack took two hundred prisoners from the III Corps front. However, such information received by the Germans only tended to further delude them.

Conclusively, victory, as demonstrated in the August 8th 1918 offensive was accomplished by subtle components as well as the most important element–that of surprise.

 

[fleet16b]

Actually wiki echoes many many of the historical sources about the Dieppe raid.
I would not want to regard much of what the BBC states as gospel either.

It is an historical fact that Mountbatten went ahead with the raid without authorization from above. That is an undisputed fact. I seem to recall Mountbatten even admitting to this.
Please read the book Unauthorized Action: the Dieppe Story.

As I stated originally, I am sure that he alone cannot be blamed.
It is fact that HE WAS IN CHARGE, HE WENT AHEAD AFTER BEING ADVISED NOT TO BY MONTGOMERY, HE WENT FORWARD WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION.
Conclusion :he was the principle figure in the event, therefore is the most responsible for the disaster.

 

[MisterCairo]

Actually wiki echoes many many of the historical sources about the Dieppe raid.
I would not want to regard much of what the BBC states as gospel either.

It is an historical fact that Mountbatten went ahead with the raid without authorization from above. That is an undisputed fact. I seem to recall Mountbatten even admitting to this.
Please read the book Unauthorized Action: the Dieppe Story.

As I stated originally, I am sure that he alone cannot be blamed.
It is fact that HE WAS IN CHARGE, HE WENT AHEAD AFTER BEING ADVISED NOT TO BY MONTGOMERY, HE WENT FORWARD WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION.
Conclusion :he was the principle figure in the event, therefore is the most responsible for the disaster.

It clearly is a disputed fact - we are in a dispute over it! And sorry, but between the BBC and Wikipedia - come on! Who was the "author" of the Wiki entry?

Guess what - I can log in tonight and change it! So could you!

Give me time, I'll find my own books disputing yours (I've read two in fact that support my position, and that of the HISTORIANS at the BBC).

I say again - 5000 Canadian troops, 1000 British commandos, 100 American rangers, 3000 aircraft - and all without any authorization! Mountbatten must have been the most powerful man in the Allied armies.

Puh-lease!

 

[MisterCairo]

Okay, the first "dispute" of your thesis, in fact, a dispute over your cited book "Unauthorized Action" by Brian Villa.

Check out what is written about Mr. Villa's conclusions:

"Dieppe Revisited: A Documentary Investigation"

http://books.google.ca/books?id=G1p...esult&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false

I like these quotes in particular:

"There is admittedly a danger of falling into the trap of assuming that the only reliable information is contained in war diaries, committee minutes, planning papers and the like, or that the official record should always be treated as the gospel truth" [in reference to relying on nothing but official documents to "prove" historic fact]

"According to Brian Villa, however, the reference of 12 August could not have been to Jubilee, because, for one thing, the Vice Chief of the Imperial General Staff ... was indignant because he did not find out about Jubilee until after it had taken place. Therefore JUBILEE WAS AN UNAUTHORIZED ACTION ON MOUNTBATTEN'S PART, and VILLA'S BOOK DARINGLY RESTS ON THIS ONE POINT LIKE AN INVERTED PYRAMID. This is documentary research with a vengance, a tour de force. Villa is acting not so much as a detective as a prosecuting attorney".


I put it to you, sir, that this is not "undisputed fact" after all.


I won't bother adding further evidence, my point is made. Suffice it to say, again, it is not "fact" that Mountbatten was to blame for an unauthorized raid. It is very much an issue in dispute.

 

[dhermann1]

This will be one of those arguments that goes on forever. Mountbatten showed a similar imperious attitude in 1947 with the partition of India. Another debate that will never end.
Having read Gen. Brooke's memoirs, I'm pleased to see him get a little credit here. He really deserves more attention than he gets.

 

[fleet16b]

This will be one of those arguments that goes on forever. here.

Quite true , an interesting discussion but as you say a never ending one.
We all have our various views and discussions, a well as our varying sources.
At this point i will jump off the merry go round by saying even though i disagree with some of the opinions , I respect everyones right to differ.

 

[MisterCairo]

A civilized response. Democracy is wonderful, isn't it? And what the war, and the raid in its own way, was fought to maintain.

 

[kampkatz]

Even eye-witnesses give differing accounts, since they don't always have the chance to see everything that happens.

 

[MisterCairo]

Another year has passed, and today marks the 68th anniversary of Operation Jubilee, the Dieppe Raid. I am marking the solemnity of the date, not re-opening any debates.