![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Of course Montgomery's incidental connection to the Dieppe raid pales when
compared to his other failures like not getting his D-Day onbjectives, failing to clear the approaches to Antwerp and Market-Garden. Which pale beside his achievements. Montogomery like Patton was a prima-donna, a pain in the arse and an excellent field commander. Like all generals he made mistakes but got things more right than wrong. Keith Montgomery has no -real- achievements. His "victory" over the Afrika Korps at El Alamein came only after he had overwhelming superiorty and the Germans ran out of gas. Montogmery's ideas advanced not one whit from 1918 until the day he died. "I think it true that Montgomery was completely formed as a soldier at the end of the First World War. He did not grow after that. He became increasingly efficient, but he did not absorb a new idea. At fifty he was the same man he had been at thirty." --"Churchill and the Montgomery Myth" p. 92 by R.W. Thompson Thompson continues: "He read everything he could lay his hands upon that was relevant to his profession, but some things appear to have been against his nature. Outstanding among these things was his failure to grasp the theory of the 'expanding torrent' expounded by Liddell Hart. His whole essentially tidy mind liked the 'set-piece' attack, and all went well until the breakthrough demanded exploitation. Again and again his senior military friends hammered home the vital necessity of swift exploitation of the breakthrough. He accepts it but he cannot --think-- it, and he cannot do it... [Montgomery wrote in 1924] "I have not mentioned exploitation anywhere. Perhaps I should have done so, and if I ever get out a revised edition I will do so. I was anxious not to try and teach too much. The first thing to my mind is to get them to understand the elementary principles of attack and defense. But I think you are probably right, and exploitation should have been brought out." Thompson continues: "Seven years later Montgomery was still fighting shy of exploitation and the expanding torrrent. His draft for the new Training Manual was sent to Liddell Hart for criticism by Brigadier Fisher, Chief of Staff to General Sir David Campbell, G.O.C- in C. Again the problems of exploiting success were not dealt with. Liddell Hart sent his detailed comments and Fisher wrote: 'September 7, 1930 I had a long talk to Montgomery and we went carefully through your criticisms with the new Infantry Training--with the result that the great majority of them are being incorporated in the final proof. The importance of the expanding torrent are being specially emphasized...' Yet when the new Training Manual appeared the problems of exploitation were neither neither emphasized nor understood. Indeed by omissions of passages from the old manual and the substitutions of new, the tactics of the First World War were preserved." --"Churchill and the Montgomery Myth" pp 90-91 by R.W. Thompson. "Montgomery's failure to destroy the enemy at Alam Halfa must be a measure of his capacity as a general. Alan Morehead, writing soon after these events, is as emphatic as Horrocks about Montgomery's intentions: 'On one matter the C-in-C was especially emphatic. This was to be a static battle. Except in the fluid gap in the south no-one was to budge an inch in any direction. It did not matter if the enemy were routed; there was to be no pursuit. Everyone must stand fast. The enemy must be beaten off and then left alone. The reason for this was that the real conflict with Rommel was going to follow later on when everything was ready.' -"Churchill and the Montgomery Myth" p.103 by R.W. Thompson So Montgomery later generated 13,000 casualties when he didn't have to. Had he hit the Afrika Korps in September, before it had a chance to prepare defensively, he might have spared many of his men's lives. His combat power relative to the Axis in this time frame was not likely to grow enough warrant a delay. But if your mindset is stuck in World War One, and you feel you personally must control as much as possible of everything that happens, then a delay might be indicated. Also consider: "The British had such superiority in weapons, both in quality and quantity, that they were able to force through any and every kind of operation... For the rest, the British based their planning on the principal of exact calculation, a principal which can only be followed where there is complete material superiority. They actually undertook no -operations- but relied simply and solely on the effect of their artillery and air force." --Erwin Rommel Montgomery is the most overrated general of all time. Walt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Army ends 20-year helicopter program | Garrison Hilliard | Military Aviation | 12 | February 27th 04 07:48 PM |
Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...) | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 0 | December 7th 03 08:20 PM |
French block airlift of British troops to Basra | Michael Petukhov | Military Aviation | 202 | October 24th 03 06:48 PM |
Ungrateful Americans Unworthy of the French | The Black Monk | Military Aviation | 62 | October 16th 03 08:05 AM |