Hello there.
There is always so much interest about specific units of the German Armed Forces during World War II.
Most people consider that some units, like the GD Division, the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Waffen SS divisions, the independent Tiger battalions or the first couple of FJ divisions, to name but a few, were considered "elite units". That is, "the crème de la crème" in what many think of as one of the best armies the world has ever seen.
I wonder, how "elite" were these formations? Did they really perform better when compared to regular German formations?
What makes an elite unit to be "elite"?
Hope to hear what you think.
regards,
corderex
How "elite" is elite?
-
Christoph Awender
- Patron
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:09 am
- Location: Austria
- Contact:
Hello
For the start there are several topics about this on our forum with hundreds of oppinions.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=71285
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=60996
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=73908
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=71448
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=70291
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=64970
\Christoph
For the start there are several topics about this on our forum with hundreds of oppinions.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=71285
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=60996
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=73908
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=71448
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=70291
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=64970
\Christoph
It has also been discussed in feldgrau, most recently at:
http://www.feldgrau.net/phpBB2/viewtopi ... e&start=60
(If you scoll down a bit you can see my two cents worth.)
http://www.feldgrau.net/phpBB2/viewtopi ... e&start=60
(If you scoll down a bit you can see my two cents worth.)
I feel that the term, elite, is often severely misused. For an organisation to be labelled 'elite', its record and performance should really be compared with some established norms. For example, some time ago, a news reporter described 'Elite Haitian paratroops...' -well, Haitian paratroops may well be better-trained than other Haitian soldiers (I've no idea whether they are or not), but does this mean they are 'elite'? I hardly think so. The problem is that the dictionary definition of elite is simply 'the best of a group' (which, no doubt, makes Haitian paratroops elite -if 'the group' is the Haitian armed forces) but, I think, in the military sense, the term elite has evolved beyond this dictionary definition. (PS I've got nothing agains Haitian paratroops -never met one!)
In the context of a six year war "elite" can be a nebulous term.
Consider: at Kharkov the LAH might well be considered an elite formation. But after absorbing serious losses it was used to provide cadres for the HJ. Was it still elite subsequently at Kursk? I tend towards 'yes' but by the beginning of '44 it was a husk. Elite? Probably not.
A div like that tended to get more out of a refit since the survivors had a reputation and could share it with newcomers. But there is a thing called the law of diminishing returns.
The Americans and Brits had an even worse time of it due to their ill concieved replacement policy. By any standard 1 US Inf Div was "elite" on 6 June '44. By the end of its time in Huertgen Forest, scant months later, it had suffered 100 to 150 % casualties in the rifle companies which were kept up to strength simply by plugging in warm bodies. Was it still elite? Perhaps not - but like LAH it had some survivors to use as a cadre and probably did regain its former status.
Thus any such description as "elite" should always be accompanied by a time descriptor else we fall into the trap of slack writers like the ones who blather about "Hitler's vaunted SS elite troops..." or Sadaam Hussein's "elite republican guard."
At the Bulge 12 SS was described as elite by the Americans but certainly not by the Germans - even though HJ had performed admirably in Normandy the cost of that performance in trained officers and men, and the lack of time to absorb replacements and train new junior leaders, made it a whole lot less than "elite."
Just my .02
cheers
Reb
Consider: at Kharkov the LAH might well be considered an elite formation. But after absorbing serious losses it was used to provide cadres for the HJ. Was it still elite subsequently at Kursk? I tend towards 'yes' but by the beginning of '44 it was a husk. Elite? Probably not.
A div like that tended to get more out of a refit since the survivors had a reputation and could share it with newcomers. But there is a thing called the law of diminishing returns.
The Americans and Brits had an even worse time of it due to their ill concieved replacement policy. By any standard 1 US Inf Div was "elite" on 6 June '44. By the end of its time in Huertgen Forest, scant months later, it had suffered 100 to 150 % casualties in the rifle companies which were kept up to strength simply by plugging in warm bodies. Was it still elite? Perhaps not - but like LAH it had some survivors to use as a cadre and probably did regain its former status.
Thus any such description as "elite" should always be accompanied by a time descriptor else we fall into the trap of slack writers like the ones who blather about "Hitler's vaunted SS elite troops..." or Sadaam Hussein's "elite republican guard."
At the Bulge 12 SS was described as elite by the Americans but certainly not by the Germans - even though HJ had performed admirably in Normandy the cost of that performance in trained officers and men, and the lack of time to absorb replacements and train new junior leaders, made it a whole lot less than "elite."
Just my .02
cheers
Reb
Elite Units
I'd have to agree with Reb. The term "elite" is subjective. "Elite" depends on a given time and place.
To those who fought reguardless of nationality
-
Christoph Awender
- Patron
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:09 am
- Location: Austria
- Contact:
Maybe it is interesting here what for example Gfm.Manstein thinks about one of the often stated "elite" divisions. I am sure it loses with my translation from german but I try my best.
"The SS-"T" Division met better terrain conditions but also a strong bunker line at the advance towards Sebesh. Here the weakness got obvious, which was inevitably present in such kind of unit where the leader-corps lacked of proper training and experience. The division gave without a doubt a good impression concerning discipline and military attitude. The very good march discipline, which was important for the smooth movements of motirzed units, gave me cause to highlight the division. The division always attacked with guts and stood strong in defense. The division was several times under my command later and I think that it was the best division of the W-SS which was under my command. Its commander in that time was a brave man who was wounded and fell later. But all this wasn´t was not enough to compensate the lack of training of the officer corps. The unit had extraordinary high casualties because the men and officers had to learn in battle what regiments of the Heer knew already for a long time.
These casualties and lack of experience caused that there was no advantage taken of favourable situations which lead to new fighting. Nothing is more difficult to learn than taking advantage of favourable situations where the weakness of the enemy allows a success of the attacker.
So I had to help and intervene at the division several times during the fighting but without being able to reduce the high casualties. Already after ten days the three regiments of the division had to be reduced to two.
As brave as the divisions of the Waffen-SS fought, as nice as their successes may have been there is no doubt that the forming of this special formation was an unforgivable mistake. Replacements which could have filled the ranks of NCO´s in the Heer were used up in the Waffen-SS in a manner that was not justifiable. The high toll of lives stands in absolutely no relation to the successes achieved.
It is self-evident that the responsibility cannot given to the troops. The guilt was with these which formed this special organisation in total disregard of positions in the Heer.
It may not be forgotten that the units of the W-SS stood as good comrades beside the Heer and bravely fought and stood strong. For sure many members of the W-SS would have been happy to get out of the power circle of Himmler and become a member of the Heer"
Erich von Manstein, Verlorene Siege, Bonn 1955
\Christoph
"The SS-"T" Division met better terrain conditions but also a strong bunker line at the advance towards Sebesh. Here the weakness got obvious, which was inevitably present in such kind of unit where the leader-corps lacked of proper training and experience. The division gave without a doubt a good impression concerning discipline and military attitude. The very good march discipline, which was important for the smooth movements of motirzed units, gave me cause to highlight the division. The division always attacked with guts and stood strong in defense. The division was several times under my command later and I think that it was the best division of the W-SS which was under my command. Its commander in that time was a brave man who was wounded and fell later. But all this wasn´t was not enough to compensate the lack of training of the officer corps. The unit had extraordinary high casualties because the men and officers had to learn in battle what regiments of the Heer knew already for a long time.
These casualties and lack of experience caused that there was no advantage taken of favourable situations which lead to new fighting. Nothing is more difficult to learn than taking advantage of favourable situations where the weakness of the enemy allows a success of the attacker.
So I had to help and intervene at the division several times during the fighting but without being able to reduce the high casualties. Already after ten days the three regiments of the division had to be reduced to two.
As brave as the divisions of the Waffen-SS fought, as nice as their successes may have been there is no doubt that the forming of this special formation was an unforgivable mistake. Replacements which could have filled the ranks of NCO´s in the Heer were used up in the Waffen-SS in a manner that was not justifiable. The high toll of lives stands in absolutely no relation to the successes achieved.
It is self-evident that the responsibility cannot given to the troops. The guilt was with these which formed this special organisation in total disregard of positions in the Heer.
It may not be forgotten that the units of the W-SS stood as good comrades beside the Heer and bravely fought and stood strong. For sure many members of the W-SS would have been happy to get out of the power circle of Himmler and become a member of the Heer"
Erich von Manstein, Verlorene Siege, Bonn 1955
\Christoph
Thanks everybody for taking the time to answer my question.
One thing seems clear to many people. An "élite" unit is not necessarily better when considered in purely military terms (remember the Paras in the Falklands/Malvinas, or the Waffen SS divisions during WW2, as you have pointed out). There has to be something else: could it be the always elusive "morale" factor?
Something every member of an elite unit always has (now as in WW2) is a heightened sense of pride for belonging to a special body of men (The Few, The Proud), a sense that everyone else is watching what they do, which may in turn propel them to -regardless of losses- achieve success in extremely difficult missions.
Elite=higher morale. What do you think about it?
regards,
corderex
One thing seems clear to many people. An "élite" unit is not necessarily better when considered in purely military terms (remember the Paras in the Falklands/Malvinas, or the Waffen SS divisions during WW2, as you have pointed out). There has to be something else: could it be the always elusive "morale" factor?
Something every member of an elite unit always has (now as in WW2) is a heightened sense of pride for belonging to a special body of men (The Few, The Proud), a sense that everyone else is watching what they do, which may in turn propel them to -regardless of losses- achieve success in extremely difficult missions.
Elite=higher morale. What do you think about it?
regards,
corderex