testtest

How the Battle of Hurtgen Forest became one of the biggest US losses

Talyn

Emissary
Founding Member
The Allies were eager to breach the German border defenses, cross the Rhine and push into the Reich, but barring the way was the Rur and the woodland south of Aachen.

Stretching from mid-September 1944 to mid-December 1945, the Hürtgen Forest Campaign was part of a drive by Lt. Gen. Courtney Hodges’ U.S. First Army to cross the Rur River and capture its vital dams.

The aim was an attack on the Aachen-Cologne axis, designed to close on the Rhine, as a first step toward the envelopment of Germany’s Ruhr Valley. The fighting was bitter because the two dams within the forest controlled the level of the Rur flowing north, and the Allies could not launch a broad assault across the Cologne plain to the Rhine as long as the enemy could threaten to flood them out.

1763666248282.png


The attack corridor was narrow and ill-suited to large-scale maneuvering. Yet Hodges and VII Corps commander Maj. Gen. J. Lawton Collins decided it was necessary to clear the Hürtgen Forest.

1763666337804.png


Four compact woodland tracts formed the Hürtgen, 11 miles long and 5 miles wide in all.

For generations, forest masters had meticulously pruned undergrowth and managed logging, leaving perfectly aligned firs as straight and regular as soldiers on parade, in what one visitor called “a picture forest.” But some of its acreage grew wild, particularly along creek beds and in the deep ravines where even at midday sunlight penetrated only as a dim rumor. Here was the Grimm forest primeval, a place of shades. “I never saw a wood so thick with trees as the Hürtgen,” a GI later wrote. “It turned out to be the worst place of any.”


1763665995732.png


 
20251120_145300.jpg


Approximately the same time this happened. With the unit Slovik was assigned to participated in the Battle of Hurtgen Forest right about the time that he deserted
 
View attachment 98261

Approximately the same time this happened. With the unit Slovik was assigned to participated in the Battle of Hurtgen Forest right about the time that he deserted

Be that as it may, the deed was done......

His sentence was WAY over the top compared to others who transgressed in much, MUCH worse ways.
But, there's no going back or undoing it.
 
Be that as it may, the deed was done......

His sentence was WAY over the top compared to others who transgressed in much, MUCH worse ways.
But, there's no going back or undoing it.

I recommend you read the book. It gives a very good explanation of the Army politics that lead to the execution.

Norman Cota (Commander of the 28th Infantry Division) was the first officer to confirm the order for Slovik's execution. He was in command of the unit that Slovak deserted from (109th Infantry) and said that he could not commute Slovik's sentence and look the guys that actually went into the battle in the eye.

The general consensus was that Eisenhower's Command Staff decided that an example had to be made to deter other desertions and they picked Slovik because of his (petty) criminal record.

I actually did a thesis on this in college.

48,000 US soldiers were convicted of desertion and face of the enemy during World War II. Many much more grievous than what Slovik did.

Slovik was the only soldier executed only for desertion.

By the time he deserted the general consensus was that if you deserted you'd be sentenced to a military prison and you would very likely be released shortly after the end of the war.

And Slovik already had a record. One more charge wasn't going to change that.

My thesis was that by routinely commuting death sentences for desertion to life in prison the Army itself created the atmosphere in which Slovik didn't think he was in danger of actually being executed.

I also contended that if they had actually shot the first few guys that deserted they wouldn't have had 48,000 desertions over the course of the war.
 
Last edited:
The Allies were eager to breach the German border defenses, cross the Rhine and push into the Reich, but barring the way was the Rur and the woodland south of Aachen.

Stretching from mid-September 1944 to mid-December 1945, the Hürtgen Forest Campaign was part of a drive by Lt. Gen. Courtney Hodges’ U.S. First Army to cross the Rur River and capture its vital dams.

The aim was an attack on the Aachen-Cologne axis, designed to close on the Rhine, as a first step toward the envelopment of Germany’s Ruhr Valley. The fighting was bitter because the two dams within the forest controlled the level of the Rur flowing north, and the Allies could not launch a broad assault across the Cologne plain to the Rhine as long as the enemy could threaten to flood them out.

View attachment 98250

The attack corridor was narrow and ill-suited to large-scale maneuvering. Yet Hodges and VII Corps commander Maj. Gen. J. Lawton Collins decided it was necessary to clear the Hürtgen Forest.

View attachment 98252

Four compact woodland tracts formed the Hürtgen, 11 miles long and 5 miles wide in all.

For generations, forest masters had meticulously pruned undergrowth and managed logging, leaving perfectly aligned firs as straight and regular as soldiers on parade, in what one visitor called “a picture forest.” But some of its acreage grew wild, particularly along creek beds and in the deep ravines where even at midday sunlight penetrated only as a dim rumor. Here was the Grimm forest primeval, a place of shades. “I never saw a wood so thick with trees as the Hürtgen,” a GI later wrote. “It turned out to be the worst place of any.”


View attachment 98249

Two GI’s with a captured MG42 nest in the pic….
 
I recommend you read the book. It gives a very good explanation of the Army politics that lead to the execution.

Norman Cota (Commander of the 28th Infantry Division) was the first officer to confirm the order for Slovik's execution. He was in command of the unit that Slovak deserted from (109th Infantry) and said that he could not commute Slovik's sentence and look the guys that actually went into the battle in the eye.

The general consensus was that Eisenhower's Command Staff decided that an example had to be made to deter other desertions and they picked Slovik because of his (petty) criminal record.

I actually did a thesis on this in college.

48,000 US soldiers were convicted of desertion and face of the enemy during World War II. Many much more grievous than what Slovik did.

Slovik was the only soldier executed only for desertion.

By the time he deserted the general consensus was that if you deserted you'd be sentenced to a military prison and you would very likely be released shortly after the end of the war.

And Slovik already had a record. One more charge wasn't going to change that.

My thesis was that by routinely commuting death sentences for desertion to life in prison the Army itself created the atmosphere in which Slovik didn't think he was in danger of actually being executed.

I also contended that if they had actually shot the first few guys that deserted they wouldn't have had 48,000 desertions over the course of the war.

I've read quite a bit on his execution, as well as documented examples of desertions that were much worse than his.

The simple thing is, it was too little, much too late. Setting an example that didn't need set.

But that's just my uneducated take on it.
 
I've read quite a bit on his execution, as well as documented examples of desertions that were much worse than his.

The simple thing is, it was too little, much too late. Setting an example that didn't need set.

But that's just my uneducated take on it.
He wouldn't have had an issue had he not deserted. I don't feel sorry for him /shrug. I do think all deserters should have been treated equally though. They all deserved the rope imho. Bergdahl comes to mind...
 
He wouldn't have had an issue had he not deserted.

I think you need to read the book and get the whole story.

Slovik was one of 48 thousand people who deserted. Enough guys to populate a small city and he was the only one they shot. That's not Justice.

Slovak was a petty criminal. His one felony conviction was being in a stolen car that somebody else was driving.

At the beginning of the war he was classified as 4F. The government said they wanted no part of him.

3 years later when he was married and expecting a kid if they changed his classification from 4F to 1A and drafted him.

The first 45 days he was in Europe he served in a rear area and by all accounts he was a good soldier. He kept his mouth shut, he did what he was told, he tried to be helpful when he could.

But the very first time somebody shot at him he panicked and he froze.

I'm not trying to excuse his behavior.

He deserred, he did so flagrantly. He wrote a detailed confession and he told his Company Commander that he would not go out on the line. He said he would rather go to prison.

He absolutely deserved to be convicted of desertion. But was it really Justice to shoot only him out of 48,000 guys who deserted? Some of whom snuck all the way back to America and we're running around downtown Chicago telling their buddies that they were war heroes.
 
Makes me wonder which is worse, desertion in the time of war or cheating to avoid service that shifts the burden of war to others. Both are equally cowardly.

Desertion puts fellow members at greater risk which is why the punishment is much greater, but never being there to defend your fellow citizen does pretty much the same thing.

No coward who cheats to avoid military service should ever hold any political office, much less that of Commander-In-Chief!
 
Makes me wonder which is worse, desertion in the time of war or cheating to avoid service that shifts the burden of war to others. Both are equally cowardly.

Desertion puts fellow members at greater risk which is why the punishment is much greater, but never being there to defend your fellow citizen does pretty much the same thing.

No coward who cheats to avoid military service should ever hold any political office, much less that of Commander-In-Chief!
lemmie guess you suffer from tds? LOL
 
Sooo…
Back to the OP.
Read the article. Got intrigued and went down a rabbit hole late night of web pages on the battle from many sources. Stayed up waaaayy to late.

The General in charge Hodges, was a meathead that was in over his head and was a poor leader without tactical insight using a WW1 up the middle “over the top” tactic. To summarize
 
Did you serve?
4 years enlisted, was not drafted, I was 4F, exempt from the draft and joined Regular Army in '71, then 7 years commissioned, then civil service.

IMO, we should never allow anyone to be Commander-In-Chief without having served in the military!

Further, I believe everyone should have 2 years government service of some kind after high school or college, We'd have fewer problems in our society if that were the case.
 
Further, I believe everyone should have 2 years government service of some kind after high school or college

I don't disagree but I'm pretty sure it would be logistically impossible.

We'd have fewer problems in our society if that were the case.

Disagree, we live in a fallen world. Plus I remember the people I was in the Army with. If you have no character when you show up at the reception station you will have no character when you leave.
 
As far as the battle goes it was a tragedy it had to occur at all. Not often mentioned, but Monty and Patton agreed on a key issue (surprise!) and that was the Ruhr was the center of gravity for the German war machine. Patton wanted to swing NE and come from behind (from the east) and cut the area off. Monty would then swing SE and take up Patton's AO. The date was August 29, 1944 when the decision could have been made by Ike. Instead, Operation Market Garden was given the go ahead and we all know how that turned out.

I think Ike was an extremely effective administrative leader and kept the coalition together when lesser men might have faltered. As far as battle acumen, he lacked the drive and experience. I remember US senior leaders as late as the 70s remark that the Hurtgen should have been bypassed. But, hindsight is 20/20 and despite faults, Ike led us to victory.
 
Back
Top