Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

David O'Keefe and Dieppe Documentary

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    David O'Keefe and Dieppe Documentary

    I was wondering if any of you saw this documentary on History Channel and what you thought of it.

    Personally his claims of finding the TRUE reason for the Dieppe raid is stretching it quite thin.

    Firstly everyone knows that the Dieppe raid was a RECONNAISANCE IN FORCE. What did Mr. O'Keefe think that meant ??? Well I am not a "Doctor" but I am pretty sure it can be translated to mean a raid with the primary purpose of gathering intelligence.

    He claims the raid was mounted around a special section of 40 RM Commando sent to Dieppe by Naval Intelligence to snatch a 4 rotor enigma machine. Well it is widely known that that was actually part of the operation and that it was NOT the only aspect of intelligence gathering underway by SIS AS PART OF THE LARGER OPERATION.

    After all, what else would British Intelligence want from such an operation? ALL such military operations planned during WW2 had similar objectives. For example, just off the top of my head, the VAAGSO Raid in Norway was partially mounted to extricate Norwegian agents.

    I think it is stretching it all out of proportion to suggest that mounting such a large raid to achieve such a goal ALONE seriously hurts the credibility of Doctor O'Keefe as a MILITARY historian.

    I also think it is sad he is filling the heads of elderly veterans with such speculation as if it were fact.

    I think it would have been more beneficial to O'Keefe to simply do a documentary on the role of this detachment of 40 RM Commando as PART of the overall Dieppe raid. Much like the book Green Beach covers the efforts of a team to recover radar intelligence.

    For all we know there were other special teams at Dieppe. Possibly a plan to pick up or insert agents from France etc. etc.

    If all they wanted out of the raid was intelligence on enigma, I think the many SUCCESSFUL commando operations up till Dieppe could have been a less costly and more viable option.

    It makes no sense to land such a large scale of troops and equipment near DAWN to achieve such a goal. It is also rediculous to think 17 minutes would make such a big difference in the battle. Why did they not land a large commando force ( as orignally planned ) under complete darkness to do this "pinch" operation.

    The British were not that stupid. Previous successes and subsequent planning prove this. It would have been far easier to acquire the info they needed via complete stealth than to mount a full scale operation against a port completely protected at both flanks against an enemy that still held air superiority.

    It is my opinion these special units went along just in case the operation did succeed. They were NOT the complete reason for the operation.

    Even though Churchill convinced Roosevelt that North Africa should be the next target, both he and Stalin continued to pressure Churchill to do more. The only other plan at that time was Jupiter. This was already being poo-poo'd by those involved in planning including the review by General McNaughton. If TORCH did not go ahead, the US and the Russians would have pressured Churchill into an invasion of France. In order to take some of the heat off, Churchill promised both that a large scale operation would be mounted IN ADDITION to TORCH.

    IF Dieppe had been a success, how long do you think the US and Russians would have continued to support a landing in North Africa???

    Like JUPITER, the Dieppe operation originally started as a grandiose operation involving RM Commando's ( like the guys O'Keefe talks about ) Parachute troops, larger air screen and naval vessels with large enough guns to penetrate the casements around Dieppe and other beaches. Like Jupiter, the plan continued to be scaled back and options inserted that made little sense.

    While JUPITER was scaled back in order to keep it on the drawing table so it could remain a deception, Dieppe was revised so that it's chances of success were limited.

    If they really wanted the enigma and other intelligence, I am certain more planning and better safeguards would have been in place. In other words, rather than sacrificing the Canadians and some tanks, they would have made more of an effort and taken more risks with resources to make the operation work. That means stronger naval power, stronger air power, parachute troops, the use of fledgling local agents /underground forces and the inclusion of EXPERIENCED British Commandos as the main force landed under complete cover of darkness and not inexperienced Canadians with tanks landing at dawn.

    Anyway, I was not happy with the doc and feel it is going too far with its assertion.

    Ken

    #2
    .

    I have not seen it but i will try, but I have been watching this interesting thread too.

    http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.p...tml#msg1163299

    Regards,

    Pete

    Comment


      #3
      I also have not seen this documentary Ken, however your thoughts and observations seem valid. As yet the documentary is not being aired in the Europe. Regarding Bletchley Park, if there was any connection with the raid, is that it was the codes that were of interest, not the actual Enigma machine, which was very well known. In having said that it seems it was the Kriegsmarine four rotor Enigma, that had caused serious problems for BP, so may well be something in this. Whatever the truth is regarding the ill-fated Dieppe raid, it was a disaster with tragic loss of life.
      Last edited by seebee1; 08-20-2012, 05:40 AM.

      Comment


        #4
        Dieppe

        Thanks for the comments guys. I hope you get to see it. Regardless of his claims that it was the purpose for the raid, his info on the 40 RM detachment ( later to be 30 AU ) is still interesting.

        Just another note : If they were so intent on getting the codes etc. I am sure they could have found a less protected and complicated target to acquire that info.

        I just think he overstepped the good info he had and made a claim that he is not proving with solid evidence.

        I think ALL military historians writing about WW 2 should have to take a training program in how to research "intelligence" records. You cant get tunnel vision. It seems unfortunately that a lot of, especially, Canadian historians that graduate from university have no clue how to go about solid research. While this fellow did the right thing by looking into intelligence files specifically on Dieppe, I think he should have gone further up the chain. There is a myriad of intelligence info available from Churchill on down. That said, historians also have to realize that a lot of decisions at the top and very VERY sensitive SIGINT info was passed by word of mouth and immediately destroyed. ALL Ultra posts were equipped with furnaces to burn material that they did not wish to be "archived".

        What I always found suspicious about Dieppe was the lack of comment in Churchill's wartime memoirs. He likes to go into some detail in some places but with Dieppe you draw a complete blank. The comments that Churchill does make all surround the fact that should Dieppe had succeeded, it would have meant more unbearable pressure from Uncle Joe and Roosy! In one comment direct from Churchill's lips he almost implies it was delibrately botched or set up so that it would not be an overwhelming success.

        Ken


        Originally posted by seebee1 View Post
        I also have not seen this documentary Ken, however your thoughts and observations seem valid. As yet the documentary is not being aired in the Europe. Regarding Bletchley Park, if there was any connection with the raid, is that it was the codes that were of interest, not the actual Enigma machine, which was very well known. In having said that it seems it was the Kriegsmarine four rotor Enigma, that had caused serious problems for BP, so may well be something in this. Whatever the truth is regarding the ill-fated Dieppe raid, it was a disaster with tragic loss of life.

        Comment


          #5
          Hi Ken, Doug B here - FSSF guy ;-) - I saw the documentary last night and I think the point was it was a key driving force behind the raid but not the reason d'être, and this driving force was until recently kept under wraps. As you have stated there were many other small sub units attached with the goal of extraction of intel. Overall, I liked the documentary but am watching it again after I PVR it, and am awaiting his book on the subject matter. Quite interesting regardless and I enjoyed it. I do believe it was dumbed down quite a bit to fit into an hour.
          Cheers
          Doug

          Comment


            #6
            the enigma enigma

            Still, I would think if they did get their hands on the four rotor enigma,
            The Germans would eventually change to a different system. I mean
            we kept the three rotor under wraps for so long. Why would we let the
            enemy in on it. Didn't Blecheley park develop the first univac computer
            To decypher the 4 rotor later on anyway?

            Peter at point

            Comment


              #7
              I think it was well done and explains a lot previously unknown. Hard to argue with declassified documents that have never seen the light of day until now.

              Arm chair Quarterbacks can argue till the light of day ... but unless you go back in time and put yourself in the position of the planners, we likely will never know for sure.

              Comment


                #8
                I watched most of it. Unfortunatly I fell asleep during a commercial and missed the last 1/4 or so.

                What I see had me asking myself, so what did you expect? Nice to see some of the documents, but honestly, to me the whole show sort of belittled?? If thats what I am thinking, the whole operation and those who took part.

                I have always thought of Dieppe as a large scale raid. Why do we raid? Intel and testing strengths.

                I do plan to watch it again to see what I missed, maybe my attitude toward the show will change.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Dieppe

                  The problem is Darrel, the documents were NOT declassified until now. The point was that no one had bothered to look into that aspect of the raid yet. Probably because it was botched !

                  None of this is new information apart from the personalities involved.

                  The planners called the raid a "Reconnaisance in FORCE" what did O'Keefe think that meant?? They were not there to stay. They were there for a tidal period and then they were to leave. So to say it is NEW info to suggest the raid was mounted for intelligence is nonsence. It should have been OBVIOUS from the begining.

                  What you guys have not clued into yet is the FACT that he states the raid was mounted because of the 40 RM detachment. That is a stretch he NEVER proved ONCE in the documentary using any documents.

                  Does it not make you wonder why they would include a untested 2nd Canadian Division / Calgary tanks and US Rangers in this plan?????

                  It is my opinion that it is simply rediculous to suggest such a raid would be mounted using such a complicated array of inexperienced troops against such a solid objective ( ie. a completely and well defended port )
                  solely for the purpose of acquiring SIGINT.

                  He did not prove once that these intelligence gathering groups were not added to the overall plan. That plan was to appease the US and Russians for Churchills decision to invade N Africa. If you read the "Declassified" records of Churchill's secret circle and the Combined Chiefs you will realize that even though N Africa became the target, Stalin for one, continued to badger Churchill to do more. Dieppe was part of that agreement along with plans such as PLOUGH. To strike at the enemy in France and Norway WHILE and invasion of France was being prepared. In my opinion Dieppe was a sacrificial lamb. Churchill himself eludes to that in his memoirs. It also makes me sick that people blame the British for Dieppe. The Canadians saw the plan. They were made aware of the scaling back of the operation and they did NOT have to mount it. Just like Jupiter. Just as much blame falls on the Canadians for not speaking up as it does the British. Maybe this was delibrate! Maybe the British were hoping that the inexperienced Canadians would feel obligated OR not know enough to stop such a disasterous plan. A plan that others might refuse.

                  Remember that RUTTER originally involved a large scale landing of Royal Marine Commandos under the cover the darkness. Would that not have done the task of acquiring naval SIGINT better than infantry units of the Canadian Army? esp with tanks tagging along??? He also completely forgets to mention the other half of the raid to the west of Dieppe.

                  No, these intel groups were ADDED to the raid. The raid was not specifically mounted for the purpose of acquiring German naval codes. If it worked, they might get lucky but I dont think they were holding their breath. The main purpose was to get the Ruskies and the Yankees OFF Churchills back.

                  To test this educated opinon, just ask yourself. What if it was a resounding success? With the US Chiefs of Staff still bitter about TORCH and Stalin going back and forth on Africa, how long do you think it would be before they demanded a full scale invasion of France ( possibly at another port named CHERBOURG ) in 1943. That probably would not just kill a Division of Canadians but thousands more and set back invasion planning for years. Not only that, British intelligence was just getting going organizing French resistence. A large scale invasion in 43 would mean NO help from the natives.

                  Anyway if he presented hard evidence that the raid was mounted BECAUSE of the 4 rotor or German naval SIGINT, fine. But he did NOT do that.

                  Ken


                  Originally posted by pylon1357 View Post
                  I watched most of it. Unfortunatly I fell asleep during a commercial and missed the last 1/4 or so.

                  What I see had me asking myself, so what did you expect? Nice to see some of the documents, but honestly, to me the whole show sort of belittled?? If thats what I am thinking, the whole operation and those who took part.

                  I have always thought of Dieppe as a large scale raid. Why do we raid? Intel and testing strengths.

                  I do plan to watch it again to see what I missed, maybe my attitude toward the show will change.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by force136 View Post
                    ...

                    It is my opinion that it is simply rediculous to suggest such a raid would be mounted using such a complicated array of inexperienced troops against such a solid objective ( ie. a completely and well defended port )
                    solely for the purpose of acquiring SIGINT. ....
                    Ok, so what reason would there be for mount a raid with such a complicated array of inexperienced troops against such as solid objective?

                    What WOULD make any sense? Seems rather foolhardy for ANY reason is you ask me.

                    If you think this was to appease Stalin or practice for future amphibious operations ... that would be more ridiculous than an INTEL reason. Geez .. I wonder what will happen? I would give the planners a little more common sense and reason for a raid than that.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Dieppe 2

                      Ok Darrel - whatever. I suggest you read Churchill's memoirs. It is common knowledge and a fact that Dieppe was mounted as part of the July 1942 agreement between Britain and the US to mount Operation TORCH opposed to mounting a full scale invasion of France ( Cherbourg ). It is a fact of history that in order to appease the Americans, Operation JUPITER ( invasion of Norway ), an even more outlandish plan than Jubilee, became a deception plan, Operation TORCH would be mounted and any aspiration by the US and Soviet Russia to push for an invasion of France in 1942-43 would be put on hold. That agreement meant that combined operations against the French coast would continue and that, if found necessary, a LARGE SCALE RAID would be mounted in order to relieve pressure on the Russians. What was happening in Russia during the summer of 1942??? It is a FACT of history that Dieppe was mounted as part of this agreement. After all, hear of any other large scale raids against France in 1942-early 43 ???? Several operations and deception plans were instigated in order to draw enemy forces to protect the Atlantic wall. SIGINT proves that after the JUPITER deception and operation against Dieppe, substantial enemy resources were realocated to Norway and the Alantic wall. Forces previously deployed to Russia or were intended for Russia.

                      Ken



                      Originally posted by Darrell View Post
                      Ok, so what reason would there be for mount a raid with such a complicated array of inexperienced troops against such as solid objective?

                      What WOULD make any sense? Seems rather foolhardy for ANY reason is you ask me.

                      If you think this was to appease Stalin or practice for future amphibious operations ... that would be more ridiculous than an INTEL reason. Geez .. I wonder what will happen? I would give the planners a little more common sense and reason for a raid than that.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        There you go. Everything explained. No more questions from me. How can you argue with the guy that knows all the answers.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Dieppe 3

                          I dont know all the answers, I just research what I am talking about before I open my mouth. Note : I told you where to find this info in print, DONT take my word for it.

                          Originally posted by Darrell View Post
                          There you go. Everything explained. No more questions from me. How can you argue with the guy that knows all the answers.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Read

                            If you want to READ the opinions of the British, US and Russia regarding the period of June 1942 - November 1942 I suggest you get Winston S. Churchill THE HINGE OF FATE pgs 509-511 (Dieppe), 129-628 (Torch). In fact read the whole thing, esp Stalin's reaction to British/US decisions. Stalin even outright calls the Western Allies cowards for not attacking France.

                            Ken



                            Originally posted by force136 View Post
                            I dont know all the answers, I just research what I am talking about before I open my mouth. Note : I told you where to find this info in print, DONT take my word for it.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Reconnaissance in force, fake invasion to placate the Russians, test for tactics needed to storm an enemy held beach in advance of the real invasion, a propaganda exercise for a country and an army who'd spent 3 years training and never fired a shot in anger, a chance to snap up German technology and secrets and 'all of the above'. Pick one, some or all and you'll be at least partly right. Many large military operations have a several purposes of differing value!

                              The real question is not 'Is what the film says true?", as any real discussion will quickly conclude that it's untrue. The real question is 'Why did the good Doctor say that?' And the answer, almost certainly in my view, is 'Because it makes better TV." I have had some very small involvement with 'war docs' - my field is the War of 1812, 200 years gone this year - and invariably the producers want a 'sexy' hook to hang the film on. What better than 'recently revealed 'secret' information'?

                              Haven't seen this film but I have seen a number of others and without exception they have cooked up some 'mystery' to explain to the viewing public why their film is new, exciting and worth watching. And please remember that producers almost all feel that the audience breath through their mouths and drag their knuckles on the ground as they walk!

                              As an example, a recent film on the US attack on York [now Toronto, Ontario, Canada] was hung on the 'mystery' of how so many US troops were killed, and why, when the British blew their magazine before abandoning Fort York. Simple answer: 1) The door of the magazine faced west because it was built into the front face of the earthworks on the lake side of the fort and the choices were east or west. 2) The Americans attacked from the west. 3) The magazine went 'Boom!" The film examined how the magazine blew, complete with a scale model built by a friend of mine and a larger scale model filmed in a quarry in northern Ontario. A really neat examination of how a large gunpowder explosion would have behaved, narrated by a mining engineer explosives expert and several military historians but with a bunch of totally gratuitous comments by a completely clueless lead narrator with absolutely no historical credentials and one unfortunate historian whose reputation will now suffer, INHO, because he parroted some really silly lines about this 'mystery'. The whole thrust of the show, which trivialized it, again IMO, was due to the producers selling it to the network as a 'mystery'. Oh, and that the death of the US troops accounted, all by itself, for all subsequent bad behaviour by US troops in the rest of the war! And this rot is passed off as 'serious historical analysis'.

                              Nuff said. Apologies for the soap box.
                              Peter
                              Last edited by peter monahan; 08-23-2012, 07:25 AM.

                              Comment

                              Users Viewing this Thread

                              Collapse

                              There is currently 0 user online. 0 members and 0 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 8,717 at 11:48 PM on 01-11-2024.

                              Working...
                              X