what were the strategies for both sides, in the battle of saint mihiel (world war 1)?

Question

and how did the landsacpe affect the strategies of this battle

Answer 1

I have to warn you: this is a VERY lengthy Answer. If you don’t want that, read Wikipedia or something similar. Or, since Oscar wasn't kidding around this time, go with his trenchant overview.

[A] MAPS

To understand the strategy underlying any land battle, you need to look at a map or two. But in Yahoo! Answers I can’t illustrate my remarks with any maps. So, my first 2 sources listed at the bottom are links to a couple of maps.

Source [1] is a modern road map of France, focused on St.-Mihiel, about 120 miles east of Paris. Using the zoom feature, you will be able to see that St. Mihiel lies on the river Meuse, south of Verdun. The Americans’ dreamed-of objective, the city of Metz, lies on the river Moselle due east from Verdun. Note the light green shaded areas on this map: they are wooded hills – features which helped the defender in WW1 battles. The German-held hills were higher and more formidable in the northwest of the St-Mihiel battle sector, which is why Pershing designated the southern part of the sector for his main attack.

Source [2] gives a sketch map of the American / French lines of attack for the St-Mihiel battle. Other than one hilltop village, Montsec in the southern sector, it gives no hint of the topography. But it does show the lines of attack of the Allied units.

[B] THE GERMAN SALIENT

In September 1914, during their initial advance into France, the Germans had tried to surround the old fortress city of Verdun, enveloping it from both the northwest and the south. The southern arm of the envelopment (Detachment Strantz) thrust forward and reached the Meuse at St. Mihiel. This formed a 15-mile-deep salient bulging out from the main German lines, which severed France’s rail line along the Meuse into Verdun. But then, in this sector, the Germans dug in and stayed on the defensive for the next four years, content to use their artillery to keep the rail line to Verdun closed. As so often elsewhere on the Western Front, the Germans enjoyed the luxury of choosing ideal positions for their defense lines in the St-Mihiel sector.

[C] PERSHING’S GRAND STRATEGY

By August 1918, the German armies were being pushed back on other sectors of the Western Front. The Allies had the initiative and could scent victory. Pershing was anxious to commit his newly formed First American Army to decisive battle. His ultimate objective was the city of Metz: the Germans relied on this rail hub to supply a huge section of their defensive front. The first stage of that campaign would be to eliminate the St-Mihiel Salient.

[D] FOCH’s STRATEGIC REVISION

By the end of August, Pershing’s detailed plans for the St-Mihiel attack were well advanced. At that juncture, Foch (the top Allied commander on the Western Front) intervened. Foch did not want the Americans to attack in the St-Mihiel sector south of Verdun. Instead, he wanted them to attack in a sector 60 miles further northwest, between the Meuse river and the Argonne forest, aiming for the city of Sedan (much more strategically vital to the Germans than Metz.

[E] STRATEGIC COMPROMISE

The outcome of the Foch-Pershing argument was a compromise. The Americans could carry out their planned attack at St-Mihiel. But once they had pinched off the Salient, they must halt and immediately switch their strength to the Meuse-Argonne sector. There was a good argument for eliminating the St-Mihiel Salient prior to a larger attack in the Meuse-Argonne, to remove a flanking threat to American communications. But compromise plans rarely work well in war. In the event, the Americans were to find it impossible to prepare thoroughly for the Meuse-Argonne offensive so quickly following the St-Mihiel battle.

[F] AMERICAN REVISED STRATEGY FOR ST-MIHIEL

Pershing intended his St-Mihiel attack to be a surprise for the Germans. He used disinformation to try to convince the Germans that his attack would fall far away in the Belfort-Mulhouse sector, near the Black Forest. To some extent, the Germans swallowed Pershing’s bait: but by no means entirely.

The St-Mihiel Salient was normally held by 7 German divisions on the line, with 2 more in close reserve. Pershing’s attack force consisted of 4 French divisions and 9 American divisons on the line; with 6 more American and 4 more French divisions in reserve. American divisions were approx. twice the strength of French or German divisions. Pershing would have massive numerical superiority for his attack. Moreover, his infantry would be assisted by 267 light tanks; 3,000 pieces of artillery; and 1,500 airplanes.

The main attacks, conducted by the 7 American divisions of the First and Fourth Corps, would be against the southern edge of the Salient. Fifth Corps would attack from the northwest edge of the Salient, using 2 American and 1 French divisions. Meanwhile, 3 other French divisions would try to pin the German defenders at the tip of the Salient, around Saint-Mihiel itself, to hold them in place to be trapped as the American thrusts cut into their rear.

[G] GERMAN STRATEGY FOR ST-MIHIEL

Despite Pershing’s disinformation efforts, the Germans knew almost exactly when and where the St-Mihiel attack was to fall. Swiss newspapers had published an accurate outline of the plan. In the light of this knowledge, the Germans decided that it was no longer worthwhile for them to try to hold onto the Salient. Abandoning it would shorten their defensive lines, freeing up scarce troops for deployment elsewhere. And they already had a well fortified line of defense, the “Michel Stellung” prepared in rear of the Salient, ready to continue defending Metz.
So, the Germans began to pull back from the Salient. The first stage of their withdrawal involved relocating their artillery (slow to move) to the rear. Then the main infantry units began to move back, leaving light screens of riflemen and machine gunners to hold the trenches and strongpoints within the Salient.

[H] WEATHER

Weather had an enormous impact on WW1 battles. Fog or mist could greatly help an attack. Dry weather with dry ground helped reduce the problems of advancing heavy equipment (such as artillery) over ground impeded with trench lines and chewed up by artillery barrages. What an attacker least wanted was soaking rain.

For his St-Mihiel attack, Pershing got 6 days of soaking rain in a row. This slowed down his troops, and especially hampered the forward movement of his artillery as the battle progressed. The only benefit of the rain and mud was that it also slowed down the German withdrawal from the Salient: if it had stayed dry, they might all have pulled back before the attack commenced.

[J] THE ATTACK

Preceded by a four-hour bombardment, Pershing’s attack rolled in at 5 a.m. on September 12th 1918. The German heavy defensive artillery had already withdrawn to their rear, so there could be no effective counter-barrage.

Although slowed down by the wet conditions, within 30 hours the Americans/French had eliminated the Salient (a 15-mile advance at its greatest point). The Allies lost about 8,000 men in the attack. German casualties are not known, but probably light in dead and wounded, on account of their withdrawal. The Germans did, however, lose about 14,500 prisoners (including one Austro-Hungarian regiment that deserted en masse), and 443 light field guns and mortars.

[K] AFTERMATH

There was not much of value, other than as a baptism of fire, for the Americans to learn from their St-Mihiel attack. Thanks to meticulous advance planning; to massive artillery, armor and air support; and to the German withdrawal; victory at St-Mihiel had come too easily for the Americans own good. None of these factors would apply to the imminent, and much bloodier, Meuse-Argonne battles.

Answer 2

It became into stated as the conflict of the St Mihiel Salient, it is because of the fact the German Salient became right into a bulge sticking into the allied lines. The Germans ought to cram the Salient with artillery and fireplace in the back of the trenches. The allies had to shrink the salient with a view to straighten out the lines and take that income from the enemy.

Answer 3

~The strategy of both sides was to win. The landscape was changed by the myriad of artillery shell holes and miles of trenches with which each side defaced the land. The landscape dictated the location of troop concentrations and artillery placement, and, as a consequence of that, where the major fighting, attacks and counter-offenses would occur. Duh