I'm glad to hear both Osprey readers and staff like the idea of a book about operations that never happened. I'm also glad that there's other people who have suggested it before therefore it doesn't sound too off-the-wall. Personally, I'd rather have the focus mostly on historical facts of the plans. Why were the plans developed and why they weren't implemented? (For example, plans for an US-UK invasion of the Balkans was developed to seize the German control of oil fields and to prevent the USSR from dominating the region, but the plans were dropped in favor of Operation Dragoon.) I'm not sure how I would feel about speculation of the plans. Oh, and it would need maps, maps, maps! As I mentioned before, I'm not sure if it should be one or two General Military books. Because of the various plans during WWII could probably be split into two books: Axis planned operations and Allied planned operations. Heck, I might be underestimating the number of known campaign plans developed in WWII, not to mention the numerous planned raids. I'm also not sure if there is enough information known about plans developed in other wars--such as American Civil War, WWI, Cold War, etc.--to be worth exploring for more books.
Report this comment
The latest love-ins between French and US "historians" over their "revolutions" would support the return of Naps as it fell away maninly due to the US disliking the "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" and seeing the modern real thing on their TVs every night. There was certainly a n upward swing for 09, although it was too late to get much new written, but 12 and the peninsular should help.
The French however do seem to be into the revolutionary material, rather than the dictator himself. So, you should focus more on the Rev period .
Report this comment
PS: Don't take much notice of TMP - too many self-apptd idiots idiots on there.
Report this comment
For the "Operations of WWII that Never Happened" book I would separate it between the European and Pacific theaters. My idea is to only focus on the proposed operations that actually had specific military units assigned to it before it was called off. Each chapter would have a specific operation that would describe the battlefield situation at the time, why the operation was proposed, how it would have been carried out, who supported it, who was against it, why it was shelved, what actually happened instead, and a concluding paragraph that offers some "what ifs" if the operation went forward.
Some operations that come to mind would be the German invasions of Gibraltar, Malta, and the occupation of Rome by the 82nd Airborne in September 1943.
Report this comment
I am eagerly awaiting the Fortress titles on Colditz, the Great Lakes forts, and Spanish Forts in North America and I have my fingers crossed for a Campaign title on Fallen Timbers sometime in the future as well.
Report this comment
I beleive that GI Gene has best described how any book about "Operations of WWII that Never Happened" should be structured. I'm not sure which way the split the books (if it is need) is best: Axis and Allies operations or European and Pacific operations. I can see arguments or against either one. I guess the theatres of operation would be best, if the operations are presented chronologically. -- I want to add one other thing. I can understand why Fortress might not be the best selling series, but I also believe it's one of the more interesting. I'm looking forward to Colditz Castle. I'm hoping this is the beginning of a series of books that might be a bit of a touchy subject to cover: POW camps, internment camps, gulags, and death camps.
Report this comment
Thank you for your praise for the Fortress series – in addition to the titles that Richard mentioned, we are publishing a book on Hitler’s command bunkers next year, which you may find interesting.
Report this comment