This is coolbert:
Yet more comment to the blog:
"Devers always thought that Americans provided the most to the war effort in terms of resources, including men, equipment and know how . . . Devers continually won arguments with and got his way over Eisenhower with the explicit backing of Marshall, Roosevelt and the War Department."
Indeed, prior to Eisenhower there was Devers. Jacob Devers. Commander of ETOUSA [European Theater of Operations U.S. Army]. That most senior American military officer in all of Europe.
"Devers arrived at ETOUSA Headquarters, 2 Grosvenor Square, London, May 10, 1943. As Commanding General and the ranking American officer in the European Theater, his wide range of duties would include everything from overseeing preparation of detailed planning and estimates of men and materials needed for OVERLORD (formerly ROUNDUP), to making public appearances at ceremonial and morale-building events."
At least by late 1944 about 2/3 of the allied war effort in the European theater American. Men and material both.
So it was reasonable that an American would be in the most senior command of allied coalition forces on the western front during WW2.
6th Army Group as commanded by Devers up unto the end of the war the conventional history books seem to give scant coverage to.
Devers commanding at an echelon [army group] at least equal to that of a Montgomery or a Bradley. But doing so only with the rank of a Lieutenant General. Normally command of an army group rates a minimum of four stars and in the case of the English a Field Marshal rank.
That Devers Plan if implemented having the potentiality to shorten the war in Europe by at least four months? Forestalled the German Ardennes Offensive [Battle of the Bulge], crossing the Rhine before Christmas as planned not an actuality until the subsequent March!
Devers also an able practitioner of coalition warfare, his army group consisting of mixed American and French troops. The role of the 6th Army Group generally under-rated, under-valued, and under-reported? To the detriment of history?