The first quote makes one question?? What was the Russian numbers?
I think the first part of the following may be open to debate and I also think we all know or at least probably agree the second part of the following is also probably accurate?Pg. 35.
“Each American soldier in Normandy received six and a quarter pounds of rations a day, against three and a third pounds for his German enemy……. German small-arms ammunition scale for a rifle company was more than double that of its American equivalent, 56000 rounds to 21000”
German leadership at corps level and above was often little better than that of the Allies, and sometimes worse. But at regimental level and below, it was superb. The German army appeared to have access to a bottomless reservoir of brave, able and quick-thinking colonels commanding battle-groups and of NCOs capable of directing the defence of an entire sector of the front.
American research showed that, in many regiments, only 15 per cent of riflemen used their weapons in any given action
And many more quotes could be made.Pg.188.
“The Germans ….. mortar “stonks” ….. responsible for an extraordinary high proportion of casualties -75% …… The Allies ….. never mastered the art of concentrating them……
the excellent Panzerfaust, the finest infantry anti-tank weapon of the war. Gavin’s paratroopers seized and employed as many as they could capture.
This book like most starts with pre-invasion history ending with the Falaise gap. There is a section called casualties - gives a clear picture of the extent of its impact. Also Hastings is more Montgomery friendly than others I have read it is hard to determine whom is more objective on the subject though I am inclined to fall into the non Montgomery group - Hastings does make me have a little sympathy to his contribution.