Canadian Special Forces and Light Infantry in World War Two`

[baboon6]

I was talking about those veteran German officers and NCOs who were still around. Yes many of their units were sub-standard by this time, made up of either raw recruits (though some of them weren't too bad) or unwilling Eastern Europeans, but some of them were still bloody good (1st SS Panzer Div, Panzer Lehr etc). How come were they able to regenerate formations that were virtually destroyed in battle several times over? How were they able to hold on for so long, with almost no air cover, very little fuel and, as said above, facing massive Allied artillery and air bombardment? As regards armour, everyone knows the German tanks were better- no matter how brave the Sherman crews, they were at a serious disadvantage (especially attacking when the Germans were defending).

Regarding paratroopers- I wasn't referring to the Canadians specifically, but if you read Peter Harclerode's books Para! and Go to It!: The Illustrated History of the 6th Airborne Division, the PT standards were higher, the weapons proficiency was higher ( paratroopers had to be able to use all British and German weapons, not just their own). The Allies, particularly the Americans, also had a high percentage of raw recruits in their infantry by this stage.Canada, a smaller, mostly volunteerarmy, didn't have as big a problem with quality of infantry ( and had so many good young junior officers they were able, like my country, South Africa, to lend quite a few to the British Army- several hundred in fact).   How many other British or American formations would have fought as well as the 1st Airborne Division at Arnhem or the 101st Airborne at Bastogne? Some would have, but not many( Compare the 101st to the 106th Infantry Div who fought a few miles away a few days earlier). How many German as well as the 1st Parachute Division at Cassino?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I was talking about those veteran German officers and NCOs who were still around. Yes many of their units were sub-standard by this time, made up of either raw recruits (though some of them weren't too bad) or unwilling Eastern Europeans, but some of them were still bloody good (1st SS Panzer Div, Panzer Lehr etc). How come were they able to regenerate formations that were virtually destroyed in battle several times over? How were they able to hold on for so long, with almost no air cover, very little fuel and, as said above, facing massive Allied artillery and air bombardment?

Hold on to what?  The German Army steadily retreated from July 1944 to May 1945 and any counter-attacks they launched were always defeated.  They did manage to retain some of the channel ports.  Other than that, I don't see that they really held on to much.

As regards armour, everyone knows the German tanks were better- no matter how brave the Sherman crews, they were at a serious disadvantage (especially attacking when the Germans were defending).

Tell that to Joe Ekins.

Regarding paratroopers- I wasn't referring to the Canadians specifically,

I was.

but if you read Peter Harclerode's books Para! and Go to It!: The Illustrated History of the 6th Airborne Division, the PT standards were higher,

How so?  To what degree?  Why did that matter?

  the weapons proficiency was higher ( paratroopers had to be able to use all British and German weapons, not just their own).

So what?

The Allies, particularly the Americans, also had a high percentage of raw recruits in their infantry by this stage. 

EVERYONE did by late 1944.

Canada, a smaller, mostly volunteerarmy, didn't have as big a problem with quality of infantry ( and had so many good young junior officers they were able, like my country, South Africa, to lend quite a few to the British Army- several hundred in fact).

By October 1944, they did, actually - not enough reinforcements in the infantry corps, way too many in the ordnance, artillery, and other corps.

How many other British or American formations would have fought as well as the 1st Airborne Division at Arnhem or the 101st Airborne at Bastogne?

What reason do you have to believe that any of the Canadian divisions wouldn't have done just as well?  An airborne tab on a sleeve does not a soldier make.  I think any Canadian division would have done just as well in those situations.  Again, I ask you, what training did the airborne have, that you feel other "leg" infantry divisions didn't (all other things like length of training being equal).

Some would have, but not many( Compare the 101st to the 106th Infantry Div who fought a few miles away a few days earlier).

How may months were the 106th in theatre?  One?  Two?  101 fought in Normandy and Market Garden, two major campaigns.  Big difference.

How many German as well as the 1st Parachute Division at Cassino?

Didn't they lose there, too?   

 

[baboon6]

I concede the day,sir

 

[B.McTeer]

you win

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Well, that's too bad, I thought maybe babs would have some arguments to back up what he was saying; instead it looks like he was simply someone who believes in all that "elite unit" stuff.  I don't doubt that 1 Can Para had higher recruiting standards, but even the argument that they "had better PT" falls flat.  Read Farley Mowat's description of a Battle Drill course, or any regimental history that talks about it.  At the peak of their training, any infantry battalion in First Canadian Army was enduring rigorous physical conditioning.  Throwing out unsubstantiated claims about differing standards will do little to convince me that the paras were any tougher than those who were enduring commando training in Scotland (which many of the "regular" infantry battalions did in preparation for movement to Sicily, or the D-Day landings in Normandy) and constant battle drill training, hardening training, etc.

I also fail to see the relevance of training with German weapons - the MG42, for example, was so distinctive sounding that you would be almost suicidal to use one on a battlefield, and certainly at night, as friendly firepower would likely be brought to bear on you rather quickly.

Other than that, I've seen no discussion of what syllabus the parachute troops trained to, and no compare/contrast with regular soldiers.  So the assessment of my assertions as "silly" don't seem so silly after all.  My own Regiment spent four weeks in front line positions in the Nijmegen Salient - longer than the siege of Bastogne - doing endless patrolling; they crossed a 1600 metre causeway barely 40 metres wide, and created a bridgehead at the far end, in the face of heavy enemy fire, they fought house to house, and even room to room, in at least two major city engagements - as Nimitz said about the Marines "uncommon valour was a common virtue." 

It is well and good to grant "elite" units extra consideration, and I would certainly hold 1 Can Para in very high regard, as individual motivations had to be better due to the nature of their employment.  Scattering all over Normandy in the dark requires a certain kind of perspective and if anyone had guts, those guys did.  But selling everyone else short in the process makes little sense.  Just as I'm pretty sure the Second Canadian Division would have performed well at Bastogne, I don't doubt a battalion of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment would have done equally well at Walcheren Causeway, Hoogerheide, or Groningen.  They were all good - that's why we won.

 

[Art Johnson]

Just a couple of comments. The following two paras concern the massive artillery support comments and are extracted from Dileas by Kim Beattie.
 
1-                 "The artillery representatives with the infantry-O.C.'s Rep at Tac
                   H.Q. and F.O.Os. with the companies-were now having a tough
                   time with their infantry hosts. They were being called shell-scrooges.
                   One night, Capt. Jim Counsell urgently asked the 25-pounder for help
                   -to knock-out a new Spandau position. A single shell finally went
                   overhead to burst with a puny plop in the mud. ("Good cripes! Some
                   fire support--one little shell!") Lt. Court Benson became urgent next,
                   about German movement on the Tollo road; again, one shell from a
                   single 25-pounder answered the 48th call on the guns. They began
                   to realize shells were precious; to hoard them was law. The ration
                   went as low as 1 shell per gun per day.
                    Capt. Con Harrington, 2nd Field Regiment, who was destined to
                   work with the 48th Highlanders more frequently than any other
                   artillery officer, was living the life of a pariah. He could stand being
                   a social outcast, but protested taking the blame for top-level artillery
                  policy.
                    "Hell," he said, "the men of the 2nd Field are stealing shells and
                  hiding them in barns just in case you footsloggers get into real trouble."
                    The Highlanders let up on him the day he recklessly ordered 5
                  (five) rounds fired for Capt. Beal, which resulted in Capt. Harrington
                  suffering a stern lecture from the rear for wasting shells."


2-        " To the left of Charlie's area, Able Company was under even closer
         observation from Kestrel. They had found the going very rough after
         the barrage by the mediums and 25-pounders had been shot-out, and
         ceased to hold German heads down. Their objective was a position
         on a ridge 800 yards northeast of the road junction (the now familiar
         Henley). They had the same open slope to cross, to line-up with
         Charlie's position, and their ridge was in the heart of a landscape    
         that felt naked."

When the the 1st Canadian Div in Italy came into the front line the 1st German Parachute Div would usually show up opposite them within a few days. If it wasn't the Parachutist it was often the Herman Goring Division. It would appear that the Germans held the Canadians in high regard, all the more amazing when you consider that the Infantry units were at half strength.

Regarding the German retreat I believe it started sometime in 1942.

Recently I heard that a Canadian Forestry Corps unit was involved in the fighting in the Bastogne are. It seems they were doing their thing, cutting down trees, when they came under attack from German troops. They dropped their tools grabbed their weapons got into their slits and drove the German unit off.

 

[baboon6]

I don't think only "elite" units were very good- the combat performance of plenty of Canadian, British, American (and South African) line units proves this and I would never deny it. I admit maybe my argument wasn't thought out properly. It's probably more applicable to the US Army than the Canadian. All the US airborne units performed well in combat, while some "leg" infantry divisions never did- mainly the ones which had been leveed for replacements several times and sent to Europe inadequately trained.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I don't think only "elite" units were very good- the combat performance of plenty of Canadian, British, American (and South African) line units proves this and I would never deny it. I admit maybe my argument wasn't thought out properly. It's probably more applicable to the US Army than the Canadian. All the US airborne units performed well in combat, while some "leg" infantry divisions never did- mainly the ones which had been leveed for replacements several times and sent to Europe inadequately trained.

I will certainly agree with you on these points.

 

[Bfalcon.cf]

However, you certainly cannot deny that the elite units like the 1st ssf trained much more intensely than pretty much any other units in england at the time. They had very few leaves, everything was done at the double, they had better weapons training, and a much more difficult pt regime/ I'm sure that the instructors also would have been much better for the special unit

 

[Michael Dorosh]

However, you certainly cannot deny that the elite units like the 1st ssf trained much more intensely than pretty much any other units in england at the time. They had very few leaves, everything was done at the double, they had better weapons training, and a much more difficult pt regime/ I'm sure that the instructors also would have been much better for the special unit

What are you basing these statements on?  Which time period are you referring to?  The SSF trained in skiing, which units in England did not do, mountain climbing, which units in England did not do though I believe it formed part of "commando" training for units sent to Scotland, parachute jumping, which units in England did not do.  Do you realize that of these skills, the only ones actually used in combat was mountain clmbing?  Ask the Hasty P's how they got to Assoro and you may be surprised at the answer.  ;-)

So how much of the training the SSF received was actually applicable to conditions in theatre?  The regular units in England also conducted battle drill courses and were probably in good shape physically - though without specific details or references, one finds it difficult to compare. 

The SSF had espirit de corps and benefited from having hand picked volunteers, at least initially.  The fact they held such a large part of the line in Anzio is often touted, however, how much of that frontage was laced with canals or else wide open ground?  That point was made to me quite rudely when I proudly pointed it out on another forum.  The fact that they were opposed by Hermann Goering notwithstanding.

You'd need to present some specific understanding of the training syllabus of a regular infantry battalion in the UK, and the "regular" aspects of the SSF training to really compare.  I've read Adleman's history as well as Burhans - they were worthy of a great deal of respect, but I don't agree that their training was all that different from what anyone else in the Army was enduring.  Check out Exercise TIGER and see how far all the troops marched, and in how long.

 

[George Wallace]

However, you certainly cannot deny that the elite units like the 1st ssf trained much more intensely than pretty much any other units in england at the time. They had very few leaves, everything was done at the double, they had better weapons training, and a much more difficult pt regime/ I'm sure that the instructors also would have been much better for the special unit

This is true at the beginning, but as the war progressed and they lost people in Combat, their replacements had lower/fewer qualifications.  The father of my RSM was one such person, and went on to be Force RSM in Petawawa.  Although, he had been 1 SSF, as RSM of the SSF, he refused to wear a Maroon Beret, as he was not Jump Qualified.  

In the end 1 SSF was a rather short lived Force, existing for only a couple of years.  It's memories and traditions live on longer.

GW

Hot topic, I see I have to wait while others post.....

 

[strat0]

I think the subject is being missed. What you are refering to are Commando Units. The 1st SSF were volunteers from various regiments they were trained soldiers, Infantry, etc and trained as Commando's, i.e. extra specialised training. The Parachute Battalion could be put into this category as they again were trained volunteers and received extra specialised training(not sure about hand to hand cbt, etc but probably)

The Canadian Army did supply volunteers to British Army Commando units as well, I don't know of any "Canadian" Commando organisations/units that existed, I may be wrong on this. My father was commando trained in WW2 but as he never spoke much about it I don't know what unit he served with other than his parent regiment(I have his pay book and discharge papers). Anyway, I hope this helps.

 

[Bfalcon.cf]

I think the subject is being missed. What you are refering to are Commando Units. The 1st SSF were volunteers from various regiments they were trained soldiers, Infantry, etc and trained as Commando's, i.e. extra specialised training. The Parachute Battalion could be put into this category as they again were trained volunteers and received extra specialised training(not sure about hand to hand cbt, etc but probably)

This is exactly wut i have been trying to discuss-from  the books i have read, the commandos, and elit spec forces units did have special roles to play. And in response to you comment, michael, about them only using mountain climbing, they also did other special things the "d-day amphibious landing" groups in england did not do: ie, mastering of ALL battlefield weapons (bazookas, flamethrowoers, enemy weapons, rifles, the various machine guns, AND luger and colt pistols, etc) they learned stealthy tactics, espec. the paras who had to sneak up on guards and knife them, etc, which the main troops did not learn. they also WERE in better shape (not that the regulars weren't, i think that the people in england were in stupendous shape, just these ones, were, perhaps, more). All of them, also, had to learn explosives and demo skills. they had to learn cold weather operating and fighting procedures, etc, which was invaluable in  sum of the winters in europe and italy. Eg, of how they were different from regulars (at least americans)At two mountains in Italy where German troops were entrenched in two mountains, inflicting heavy casualties on the 5th US Army  The first regiment- 600 men, scaled a 1000-foot cliff by night to surprise the enemy. Planned as a 3 to 4 day assault, the battle was won in just 2 hours. The force remained for 3 days, packing in supplies for defensive positions and fighting frostbite, then moved on to the second mountain, which was soon overtaken. In the end, 1SSF suffered 511 casualties including 73 dead and 116 exhaustion cases. The commander, Col. Robert Frederick, was wounded twice himself. Also, are you insinuating that anzio was easy because it was flat and easy to defend? uring Operation Shingle at Anzio, Italy, 1944, the Special Force were brought ashore on February 1st, after the decimation of the U.S. Rangers, to hold and raid from the right-hand flank of the beachhead marked by the Mussolini Canal/Pontine Marshes, which they did quite effectively. If the rangers were decimated, it must have not been easy. Finally, i have a couple more questions-1st what would you have to say about the german army over the latter half of the war (you can go into great detail). and how would you say that all canadian infantry differed from yanks and brits (like were they better shock troops, etc) Thank you all for participating in this discussion, it is most enjoyable, i would like to keep it up. for those of you in WW2, I thank you with all my heart...

 

[Michael Dorosh]

This is exactly wut i have been trying to discuss-from  the books i have read, the commandos, and elit spec forces units did have special roles to play

Of course they did, hence the specialized training. 

. And in response to you comment, michael, about them only using mountain climbing, they also did other special things the "d-day amphibious landing" groups in england did not do: ie, mastering of ALL battlefield weapons (bazookas, flamethrowoers, enemy weapons, rifles, the various machine guns, AND luger and colt pistols, etc)

Before D-Day, all troops in the Canadian Army went to displays by Demonstration units, who wore German uniforms, used German weapons, and did mock attacks using German tactics, in order to familiarize the Canadians with what they would look like in action.  I'm not sure how much hands-on training was done, but really, how often did that become useful?  For either the Paras, SSF, or regular units?

they learned stealthy tactics, espec. the paras who had to sneak up on guards and knife them, etc, which the main troops did not learn.

What is your source for this?

they also WERE in better shape (not that the regulars weren't, i think that the people in england were in stupendous shape, just these ones, were, perhaps, more).

Ummm....what is more than stupendous, exactly?

All of them, also, had to learn explosives and demo skills.

How often were they issued with explosives?  Every Canadian infantry battalion had a pioneer platoon, and each division had Field Squadrons of the RCE available to use demolitions.

they had to learn cold weather operating and fighting procedures, etc, which was invaluable in  sum of the winters in europe and italy. Eg, of how they were different from regulars (at least americans)

There was snow on the Canadian front in NW Europe for about 4 weeks in the winter of 44-45 if I remember correctly, and the winter stalemate lasted from November to the beginning of February - patrolling was the main activity during this time.  It was the same in Italy - operations tended to slow down in the winter months.

At two mountains in Italy where German troops were entrenched in two mountains, inflicting heavy casualties on the 5th US Army  The first regiment- 600 men, scaled a 1000-foot cliff by night to surprise the enemy. Planned as a 3 to 4 day assault, the battle was won in just 2 hours. The force remained for 3 days, packing in supplies for defensive positions and fighting frostbite, then moved on to the second mountain, which was soon overtaken. In the end, 1SSF suffered 511 casualties including 73 dead and 116 exhaustion cases. The commander, Col. Robert Frederick, was wounded twice himself.

Remetanea and la Difensa.  Admirable feats of arms.  The Hasty P's performed a similar feat at Assoro, on a smaller scale.  I would agree that this operation, however, probably necessitated specially trained troops.  I'd also say the mission was a rarity - why do you think the Force was disbanded in December 1944?

Also, are you insinuating that anzio was easy because it was flat and easy to defend?

No, I'm insinuating that you didn't need ski, mountain, amphibious, parachute trained specialists to hold the perimeter there - just aggressive soldiers like the SSF.  I think they also outperformed "regular" Canadian units in this instance, as Canadian units were not known for being aggressive in their patrolwork - though they were certainly competent enough.

Finally, i have a couple more questions-1st what would you have to say about the german army over the latter half of the war (you can go into great detail). and how would you say that all canadian infantry differed from yanks and brits (like were they better shock troops, etc) Thank you all for participating in this discussion, it is most enjoyable, i would like to keep it up. for those of you in WW2, I thank you with all my heart...

My point was, and is, that Canadian troops were no better or no worse than British and American troops.  All had their strengths and weaknesses, and I think all learned to use well the tools they had - artillery especially.  Canadian troops were criticized postwar for lack of aggressiveness, but US and British divisions were also war weary by late 1944.  I think my main point is I don't see the point of pitting them against each other - they were all good enough to get the job done, with some notable exceptions.

As for the German Army, all I can say is I'm very glad they lost.

 

[Art Johnson]

Commandos mastered BAZOOKAS hmmm???. One of the problems at Anzio was at the beginning the Americans had more vehicles ashore than men.
More comments to come.

 

[Art Johnson]

"they learned stealthy tactics, espec. the paras who had to sneak up on guards and knife them, etc, which the main troops did not learn."

The following is a story about stealth it took place against the German Parachutist in broad daylight.

Extracted from Dileas by Kim Beattie:

" Capt. Wallace's patrol of 10 men confirmed the presence of tanks a
        little later, when they went up the terraced ridge to the north. The
        Captain had 2 snipers out on the flanks, both with telescopic sights.
        Cpl. Charlie Male and Pte. Tom Evenden were beside the Company
        Commander. They climbed the escarpment without being spotted,
        and on reaching the rim found themselves looking at a group of Ger-
        man panzermen playing cards beside a hull-down Mark IV. In the
        dragging moments, while Capt. Wallace debated whether to withdraw
        quietly or to give the order to let go with everything they had, and
        thus jeopardize their return down the cliff face, a German officer
        strolled into view, and began using his binoculars, lined up just above
        the Highlanders' heads at the rim of the last terrace wall. He was
        dressed in Luftwaffe blue, and not German feld grau.
            The peacefulness of the scene was emphasized when the German
      officer snapped something to a reclining private, who jumped up and
                    ran behind the tank. "Probably wants a cigarette," muttered Cpl. Male,
                    beside Capt. Wallace.
                      His scouting party was not a fighting patrol, but they were well
                    armed. To Capt. Wallace, the opportunity seemed too good to miss;
                    their scout was certainly over. He whispered the order to his 10 men
                    to get ready, and then to let everything loose. The two snipers were
                    first to fire; they. each drilled a German; a Tommy gunner smacked
                    a long burst of shots into the group; well-hurled grenades exploded in
                    the midst of the scrambling card players, and Capt. Wallace took dead
                    aim at the officer in Luftwaffe blue.
                      There was such a wild scatteration they could not clean out the
                    group, but the confusion was insurance for their safe return down the
                    exposed face of the cliff. They had thrown such a scare into the
                    Germans they were slow to react; the patrol was down and away
                    before bombs and machine-gun fire could catch them.
                      Capt. Wallace brought back the second excited patrol, also without
                    casualties, and the Highlanders now knew the high ground behind
                    Nissoria was loaded with Germans-and with tanks.  He reported
                    a modest 4 Germans killed and others wounded. Cpl. Male swore the
                    toll was at least 10 Germans, with 6 dead.
                      That blue uniform with yellow facings was important news; it meant
                    that observers, or an advance party of the 1st Parachute Division were
                    on the Adrano Road. Two regiments of the 1st Paras, one of Hitler's
                    best divisions, composed of fanatical Nazi youths, had been flown to
                    Sicily from France, one jumping near Lentini, the other northwest of
                    Catania.

I would say that our guys were pretty damn good.

 

[Art Johnson]

From Dileas by Kim Beattie:

As for the superb fitness of the new 48th Highlander, go with him
        on a 1942 assault run: in smoke, explosions and rattling machine-guns,
        he crawls tunnels, swims or wades rivers, leaps trenches, vaults barb-
        wire by using planks, corrugated iron or another Highlander for a mat,
        negotiates trestles, walks wire, hand-climbs cables, scales 20-foot walls
        without rope or 100-foot cliffs with one and, when the unfit would be
        shaking with exhaustion fires 5-rounds rapid with remarkable steadi-
        ness.
          He had also gone through The Bloody-Minded Course-knew how
        and where to disable by a kick, a gouge, a slash or a blunt blow; how
        to pierce the mastoid, slice the spinal cord, or scrape an Opponent's
    shin-bone from knee to ankle, and then to stamp till the arch cracks.
        He could take out a sentry without a sound. He could handle a
        revolver like an expert at the Calgary Stampede, a Tommy-gun like a
        Chicago gangster, and could clean out an enemy-occupied house like
        a killing terrier. He seemed to enjoy tank-stalking and stealth patrols.
          Such was the 48th Highlander of 1942. His social graces had not
        been polished lately, but it would be wiser to have him on your
        side in a quarrel than against you. He had been intent for months
        on learning to fight, and kill, and to take care of himself in a grim war
        where his life would be at stake. He was ready for the supreme
        test now."


And they got tougher as the as time progressed.

 

[Bfalcon.cf]

Alright Michael, i would now like to use a common debating cliche. Your argument had more holes than swiss cheese, and i will now refute,

Of course they did, hence the specialized training.

Well sir-you have been saying the whole time that there have been no differences in training and that they were ALL as well trained as the other, bs in my opinion. As you have so aptly stated, "specialized" implies special, implies specialized!

Before D-Day, all troops in the Canadian Army went to displays by Demonstration units, who wore German uniforms, used German weapons, and did mock attacks using German tactics, in order to familiarize the Canadians with what they would look like in action. I'm not sure how much hands-on training was done, but really, how often did that become useful? For either the Paras, SSF, or regular units?

Again sir-your 4th word in the last sentence answers your question-elite units, especially paras, and not withstanding sf's, worked behind ENEMY lines. often with not too much ammo. so...eg, at arnhem they eventually ran out of ammo so they would have had to learn how to use enemy weapons. if you think its not important to learn enemy weapons training, i dare you to question socom as to y it gives special forces troops today major courses in enemy weapons handling. say, eg, a paratroop gets seperated from his group and is behind enemy lines, he gets pinned down and manages to kill a few germans, but, all of a sudden, he runs out of ammo (not unlikely) and has to grab the guns of the men he killed. wut would happen if he did not know how to use it, or b proficient on it?  :skull: Another key word is "displays" they were NOT trained in these guns, just saw them in action-taht doesnt help most of the regualar forces!

What is your source for this?

That was answered by art

Ummm....what is more than stupendous, exactly?

r u insinuating that it is not possible to find an adjective better than stupendous. hows this-superstupendous, or incredible. They did go through more intense training dude, face it, i suggest u read the time/life book "commandos"

How often were they issued with explosives? Every Canadian infantry battalion had a pioneer platoon, and each division had Field Squadrons of the RCE available to use demolitions.

the paratroops would have. and quite often actually from wut i've read for 1st ssf. plus wut happens if pioneer platoon was wiped out, which i'm sure happened

There was snow on the Canadian front in NW Europe for about 4 weeks in the winter of 44-45 if I remember correctly, and the winter stalemate lasted from November to the beginning of February - patrolling was the main activity during this time. It was the same in Italy - operations tended to slow down in the winter months.

read sum books on the battle of the bulge, and the cases of cold weather deaths, frostbite, etc. the 1st paras were with the americans at bastogne? i think it was, according to the book "airborne" a history of the 1st Canadian Para. Battalion

Remetanea and la Difensa. Admirable feats of arms. The Hasty P's performed a similar feat at Assoro, on a smaller scale. I would agree that this operation, however, probably necessitated specially trained troops. I'd also say the mission was a rarity - why do you think the Force was disbanded in December 1944?

it still came in handy. i'm not quite sure, ask a politician or a general. i think they still could have been useful

No, I'm insinuating that you didn't need ski, mountain, amphibious, parachute trained specialists to hold the perimeter there - just aggressive soldiers like the SSF. I think they also outperformed "regular" Canadian units in this instance, as Canadian units were not known for being aggressive in their patrolwork - though they were certainly competent enough.

exactly, still is it rong to be better than regulars? plus your statement just admitted that 1st ssf were better.

My point was, and is, that Canadian troops were no better or no worse than British and American troops. All had their strengths and weaknesses, and I think all learned to use well the tools they had - artillery especially. Canadian troops were criticized postwar for lack of aggressiveness, but US and British divisions were also war weary by late 1944. I think my main point is I don't see the point of pitting them against each other - they were all good enough to get the job done, with some notable exceptions.

plz name sum strengths and weaknesses. and sum exceptions

As for the German Army, all I can say is I'm very glad they lost.

me 2 bud, me 2

 

[Infanteer]

B Falcon, your posts will be much easier to read and much more clear if you try to use proper English instead of resorting to lazy internet-speech (wuz, sum, rong).

 

[Michael OLeary]

Btw, where were canada's regulars at this time (eg, ppcli)?

If you want to conduct a simple comparison of war records to identify the major activities of units, you may want to start by comparing battle honours. The 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion was authorized the following battle honours for the Second World War:

Monte Camino (5-9 Dec 43)
Monte-La Difensa--Monte La Remetanea (2-8 Dec 43)
Monte Majo  (3-8 Jan 44)
Anzio (22 Jan - 22 May 44)
Rome (22 May - 4 Jun 44)
Advance to the Tiber (22 may - 4 Jun 44)
Italy 1943-44
Southern France (15-28 Aug 44)
North-West Europe, 1944

Awards pubished in Canadian Army Orders Issue No 559, 2 Sep 57
Dates from Canadian Army Orders, Issue 503, 10 Sep 56

Comparative battle honour lists for active infantry regiments may be found on my site here:

http://regimentalrogue.com/battlehonours/rcic.htm