Talk:Remagen

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. Once references have been added, remove the `\|unref=` from this template.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

German decision not to destroy the bridge

I would like to know why the soldiers in charge of destroying the bridge decided it was "senseless"....especially if it was supposedly worth its weight in gold to the americans. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.4.74.65 (talk) 19:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

nor offense but that seeming worthless seema like a little bit of hollywood B.S (Esskater11 00:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

oh yeah and they did try and destroy the bridge, the explsoives didnt work right and only fataly damged the bridge, thats what caused its callaps 4 days later i think (Esskater11 00:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I believe that the Germans attempted to destroy it after the capture by the US 1st Army using V2 rockets. The V2 accuracy was not sufficient for a hit. 129.188.69.129 (talk) 04:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know why no mention whatever has been made of the POW camps set up (one was in Remagen) in post WWII Germany for surrendering German soldiers, later determined by the Americans to be Disarmed Enemy Fighters instead of Prisoners Of War, and as such without Geneva protections. The Leopard has not changed it's spot??

The above is a curious comment considering the German record during WWII.

I think this was done by Eisenhower after he discovered Germany death camps that part of Germany's Final Solution. See Wikipedia article on Eisenhower. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starrymessenger (talk • contribs) 04:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Germans tried to destroy the bridge several times before it was conquered by units under General Patton. I'm a local born after the war, but other locals told about attacks by V2, Stukas, divers and other ways to blow it up. The brigde collapsed after being conquered for 11 days. Among the dead soldier have been people on the tanks and engineers trying to repair the bridge. All in all some 90 people were injured or lost. Everybody who knows the speed of Patton's units knows that he units often lacked sufficient support. Now, when you are in war your first priority is to support your own soldiers and less emphasis is given to the POW. It is regrettable, but it is that way. I accept that as a German. War is always a bad situation - for anybody. BTW Thomas Gottschalk is not living in Remagen anymore. His house was sold and he moved away. -- 2A02:810B:B40:11C8:381B:4A0F:801E:A834 (talk) 17:47, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Poles cutting the fuses

The article of the Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza which forms the basis of this (mis-)conception of why the bridge was not completely blown up is the only report of the two Poles having cut the fuses, and it was first published in 1993! There are no documents of the Wehrmacht showing that Silesian Poles ever belonged to a unit stationed around the bridge at Remagen! If you read the headline of the article in the Gazeta (Small state and a gerat victory) you realize what the aim of the article was. And have a look at the lemma of Gazeta Wyborcza as well, so you know what kind of paper it is - certainly not a respectable one! In addition to that have a look at this article: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1144&dat=19450313&id=QDwbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Ck0EAAAAIBAJ&pg=2898,1475749 - so who is to be praised? :-))

I just cancelled the reference, because I sonsider it to be pure invention to enhance Poland's importance. --Ruggero1 (talk) 22:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media section: No mention of "A Bridge Too Far"

seems a major omission... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.55.151.77 (talk) 21:41, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]