Armor Tactics

What are you on and where can I get some?

QUOTE: Originally posted by Michaelvk What are you on and where can I get some?

Yeah he realy has lost it

If you can't get it there...it doesn't exist.

So, you were talking to George ?

or


Was it one of his re-incarnations ?

Having a slow day?

slow? stationary by the sounds of things!!
so who do we all think were the best generals of WWII then, "pound for pound"?? ie not just the guys with the most tanks and men, but those who, given equal materiel, would be toughest to beat??
most of the literature i've read says erwin rommel by a street, but that's just me...
regards,
nick

This was just friendly payback directed towards Shermanfreak's 'Armor Tactics' he used to beat up my poor defenseless Tiger photo (If I took the pic from the front, the shot would have of course, been impossible!).
If this degrades into a serious discussion of Generals;
My humble opinion is Rommel with Von Luck were a pretty good combo, especially in France.
Patton was certainly the most feared on both sides....
Bradley was probably the most intelligent, total package...but was also, fortunately the winner.
Rommel would have been even more dangerous if actually listened to by the High Command.
It all worked out in the end, despite Monty.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Build22 So, you were talking to George ? or Was it one of his re-incarnations ?

He was wearing a Toga.

Let me guess you've seen Elvis too

this is my opinion but who thinks Monty was very very very very overrated

The generals eh...

Monty - Not a bad general, usually too slow and methodical for Americans but effective. Also pestered ike so much Patton was shorted on supplies.
Patton - IMHO the best American general, decisive and aggressive, could been in Germany by Sept. or Oct. if not for Monty (see above).
Ike - xcellent ambassador, not a great general (should have sacked Monty IMHO).
Bradly - Second only because he was not as decisive as Patton, probably caused by being stuck between Ike and Patton, When he finally backed Patton he went 100%.
Rommel - Excelent general, could have tied Monty up in NA for months longer if not for the Italian generals.
Model - Another excellent general (Germany had a lot of them) Could have made the invasion more expensive for us but Hitler sacked him.

QUOTE: Originally posted by claymore68 The generals eh... Patton - IMHO the best American general, decisive and aggressive, could been in Germany by Sept. or Oct. if not for Monty (see above).

But if it was up to him, he wouldn't have stopped in Berlin. He was ready to go to Moscow as well.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Build22 QUOTE: Originally posted by claymore68 The generals eh... Patton - IMHO the best American general, decisive and aggressive, could been in Germany by Sept. or Oct. if not for Monty (see above). But if it was up to him, he wouldn't have stopped in Berlin. He was ready to go to Moscow as well

I try to read mostly memoirs and others first-hand accounts from both generals and soldiers as opposed to historians.
With Germans, to a man, they all saw the war as an European fight against the Bolsheviks. Most claim the peasants treated them as liberators and eventually brought out religious artifacts and began to conduct church services and such. Even some hardcore Waffen SS dudes felt this way and all bound by their oath and comradeship carried on despite knowing that all hope was lost.
Even Otto Carius, who wasn't SS until unit redesignation at the end, was told in an US POW camp that we would soon by brothers in arms against Russia.
Please don't take this in anyway as a qualification for WWII and Germany, but the beliefs of the individual soldiers seem much different than the High Command, and too many say similiar things to be some type of cover story.

For my money Rommel, although he could be very impulsive. Monty is a bit overrated and had very lttle idea of public and personal relations. But give him his due he did what he had to do and he did it well. He helped get us out of Africa, into Europe and slow down the Battle of the Bulge.He wasn't the flashy, foot flat on the floorboard type of general (Patton and co ), but then not everybody can be.

wow!! you guys stateside really set me back!!
is "Anti-Monty 101" compulsory over there??!![:0]
i'm kidding (kind of anyway), but i'm starting to read "BATTLE OF NORMANDY 1944" by ROBIN NEILLANDS and it's an interesting re-appraisal of what is generally considered to be the "mainstream opinion" ie how the US has gradually airbrushed WWII (and before you guys start sending thunderbolts down my internet connection, let me say that i am pro-US, warts and all!!)...and i think the bad rap that monty gets is a good example of this: if enough people say he was a poor general, and tell there children he was a poor general, and write/read books saying he was a poor general, then slowly but surely he becomes a poor general.
now as i say, i'm no expert, but this Neillands chap is at least worth a read, if only so that a lot of you guys can say "yeah, i read that, but i still think he was a poor general", which if you do, then ofcourse fair enough.
finally, yes i do think that if they had played on "equal terms", Rommel would have kicked Monty's behind!! (just in case you thouht i was some stiff-a£sed brit living in some fantasy land!!)
this is all meant in good spirit by the way, and i wish to offend no-one; if i have then i apologise for not putting my point across eloquently enough.
kind regards,
nick

Nick,
I'm with you on 'to the victors' and all that , history is certainly written by the winner, but....When so much is at stake, The standard has to be excrutiatingly high. And for me, Monty's defining moment would have to be MARKET-GARDEN. But that's just personal opinion and trust me, nothing personal.

Yeah, monty really screwed things up at Market Garden. That's where I get my bad taste for him. Look at the Off Topic Discusions and find the worst generals poll. My response is the first one on the second page. It's pretty harsh, so be forewarned.

Montgomery wasn't a bad general. The Commonwealth had been fighting the Axis a lot longer than the US and had lost a proportionaly larger amount of men and material. The US was fresh, had a huge resource of men and material, and could afford to lose them in taking chances. Monty just had to be a little more cautious and use his resources more sparingly. The US definitely did not win the western theater by itself by a long shot. Everybody tries to blame Monty for not taking Caen fast enough, well, what about the US troops being delayed in the Bocage region by all those pesky hedgerows? It took forever. Patton was very good but not the end-all. And what about Creighton Abrahms? He was my favorite.

George, reincarnated a figure once, only it was a german volksgrenaidier so he went crazy and jumped off the workbench.

Rommel was a great tactician but really poor at the strategic level. Here's a guy who was bitching about not getting needed supplies when it was mainly his fault that half of supplies were being sunk on route to Africa during the latter part of 1942. The Italians were right to take Malta after Tobruk. Besides, the Germans really had no business wasting precious resource on the offensive in North Africa. Facing the allies who had much more resources, they had to divide and conquor and finish the Soviets. Rommel also made some pretty bone headed moves during the seasaw campaign in some of the battles, but the British were able to capitalize on them. Gazala could've easily turned into a route of axis forces if the British had greater command flexibility during the crucial phase at the Cauldron. He would not be the top 5 among German generals.

Rommel's biggest problem when facing Monty was his supply situation and that was the making of non other than Rommel himself. If Von Paulus had been in charge of North Africa, then the Germans would have been in a much better strategic situation!!!

On an operational level: Von Manstein (his plan for the invasion of France was brilliant) or Guderian
Tactically: Patton or Rommel

QUOTE: Originally posted by scubaboy99 Yeah, monty really screwed things up at Market Garden. That's where I get my bad taste for him. Look at the Off Topic Discusions and find the worst generals poll. My response is the first one on the second page. It's pretty harsh, so be forewarned.

Sure Monty proposed the plan but the final blame HAS to be placed on "Boy" Browning, commander of the Allied Airborne forces. It was a major cluster **** from the get-go, but the crowning blunder was his total disregard of the Dutch underground and the Dutch officers in the Allied forces.