Dieppe 19 August 1942.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by mahross

To pick up on these points as they are inherently linked. The COS do give approval to the relaunch of the operation on the day before RUTTER is due to go ahead. Mountbatten is told that if the operation is cancelled he should make moves to re-launch it a the earliest possible oppurtunity. So Mountbatten assumes nothing. There is also several other minutes, that the various official histories mention and Henshaw, where Mountbatten makes that COS well aware of the operation. the first of these is the appointment of Hughes-Hallett as Naval Force Commander. Something that Mountbatten had to do for all planned operation. This is dated 16 July. There is also a proposed minute in Portal's files that details a proposed inclusion into the COS minutes about the operations re-launch on 17 July. All of this is done a full month before the operation occured. Thus, claiming this was an unauthorised action is quite wrong.

I think Villa's point was that the COS approval to re-launch meant that he would have to work uo all the details & then come back for final approval, which Villa claims the minutes do not show.

However, as I said earlier, I don't think that I can buy into his theory about that point, and even if I did I don't really think it makes much difference, as I believe that even if the COS didn't put it on paper they gave tacit authorization.

All of that aside, I found his analysis of the politics behind the scenes very interesting, and goes a long way to explain why the rather dubious plan came about in the first place. I think that the claim about "lessons learned" is a bit of a face-saving measure too.

What do you think about his criticism of the commanders of the operation? (Roberts, Leigh-Mallory & Hughes-Hallett) I know from other sources that his portrayal of the Canadian army's problems (with inactivity) are true, I think Villa is right when he says that for this reason it would have been very hard for Roberts as a rookie commander to bring up objections to parts of the plan.

Do you also agree with his assertion that most of the later blame on Roberts is unfair?

Should Hughes-Hallett & Leigh-Mallory be given blame for not pushing for more Naval & Air support? I also don't have a great opinion of Leigh-Mallory. (for his actions in the Battle of Britain & later) Villa states that their failure to push for more support doomed the chances of the operation. (2,700 casulties)