01-09-2007, 06:05 AM
|
#44 (permalink)
|
|
Military Professional
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Penzance, Cornwall UK
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemontree
In El Alamein, Montgomery had 230,000 men and 1,100 tanks facing Rommel's 80,000 men and 260 tanks. If one does not win with that amount of superiority then he is not worth his uniform.
After the failure of 'Op Market Garden', instead of analysing at the reasons for the loss, he blamed the disaster on Eisenhower, charging that the American commander had failed to provide his forces with enough material. When we all know that real reason was the slow progress of XXX Corps, and the bottling up of the British 1st Airborne Division by the Germans.
Monty was Churchhill's blue eyed boy, ever since his escape from Dunkirk with his division almost intact. No one worked harder at propagating his own legend than Montgomery himself. He has got more credit for EL Alamein than he actually deserved.
In Britain Monty is considered (by some) far more than just a general. He was a link to the fading days of empire and glory, the man who won the final battles before the eclipse of British military prowess by the rise of the superpowers.
|
You are entitled to your opinions. It does seem fashionable these days to bash historical figures. Are you also suggesting that he should have gone into battle unprepared and outnumbered? El Alamein was the most important battle in North Africa. After it the enemy, Germans and Italians were a declining force. In Russia the same year the battle of Stalingrad took place. Should we denigrate the Russians for being so unsporting as to have more men in the conflict?
__________________
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.
|
|
|