Erwin Rommel(Desert Fox)
-
I just dont think Monty was good enough to command anything more then a division. I mean come one, his conduct of most of this campaigns were pretty much won by numbers.Originally posted by Shotgun:The USAF did not exist back then. It was still under the USAAF. Army Air Force.
In anycase, the Americans only adopted "dive" bombers much too late. Prior to that, the allies also believed the Strategic bombers to be unstoppable. That en mass, they could defend themselves against attacks. Of course, we now know it wasn't true, and that the only reason allied bomber losses were reduced was cos of the introduction of the Mustang.
And the P-51 mustang was not really a late war invention. The first model of the mustang was already in service in 1941. The RAF used it as a recon plane, and the US as dive bombers. It was only much later that they replaced the allison engine with the famous merlin that they realised their solution for long range figther escorts was actually staring at their faces all this while.
Back to the sherman thing. Now, why did the British became smart enough to re-arm their shermans with 17 pounders. Why not the Americans? Somehow, I feel it had to do with Montgomery's experience in the Desert with Rommel. He was a cautious commander that didn't really apprieciate the "Blitzkrieg." Of course, that was why a lot of ppl felt that he wasn't really suitable to be an armored commander. -
He was a cautious commander. Thats all I can say. He never really totally bought the daring armored thrust thing. He tried it once at market garden but screwed it up cos he didn't compensate for time his land forces took to move across difficult terrain.
-
Yeah. Despite his differences from the Allied, he is really one of the best generals Germany has to offer in World War 2. If not for General Patton, he would have overrun America out of Africa.Originally posted by fallin:Man...I really respect this fella. A real modern day knight. An anti-Nazi too. Too bad fightin for the Nazis. Haiz~ -
Monty, a prima donna.Originally posted by |-|05|:I just dont think Monty was good enough to command anything more then a division. I mean come one, his conduct of most of this campaigns were pretty much won by numbers.
-
Actually, Rommel's success in Afrika was seriously hampered by the eastern front. Resources were mostly channeled against the Russians. Rommel recieved almost zero air support, and few tanks.
-
Yes. After the DAK's defeat at El Alamein and the Torch landings, Hitler suddenly "found" that he could spare reinforcements to Africa after all, including the 10th Panzer Division. Moreover, these were shipped over and supplied under conditions of overwhelming Allied air and naval superiority.Originally posted by Shotgun:Actually, Rommel's success in Afrika was seriously hampered by the eastern front. Resources were mostly channeled against the Russians. Rommel recieved almost zero air support, and few tanks.
If these reinforcements had been sent to Rommel half a year earlier (mid-1942) he would certainly have ruptured the British defenses in Egypt, taken Cairo and the oilfields of the Mideast.
If Hitler didn't have such a landlocked mindset, and sent four or five adequately supplied panzer divisions with air support in 1941, Rommel would have struck the British Empire a decisive blow in the North Africa/Mideast theater. -
Seriously, the assault on Russia was utter stupidity on Hitler's part. It really didn't make much sense for him to attack Russia other than the fact that he hated the Russians and regarded them as 'subhuman'. Sure, capturing more land in Russia also meant more 'Lebensraum' (living space) for the Germans, but it doesn't make sense to own a lot of land if you can't really live off it due to Stalin's 'scorched earth' policy as the Soviets retreated.Originally posted by Moltke:Yes. After the DAK's defeat at El Alamein and the Torch landings, Hitler suddenly "found" that he could spare reinforcements to Africa after all, including the 10th Panzer Division. Moreover, these were shipped over and supplied under conditions of overwhelming Allied air and naval superiority.
If these reinforcements had been sent to Rommel half a year earlier (mid-1942) he would certainly have ruptured the British defenses in Egypt, taken Cairo and the oilfields of the Mideast.
If Hitler didn't have such a landlocked mindset, and sent four or five adequately supplied panzer divisions with air support in 1941, Rommel would have struck the British Empire a decisive blow in the North Africa/Mideast theater.
Sure, there were the oilfields in the Caucasus and the grain in the Ukraine, but resource-wise, it still didn't make sense. Had Rommel been properly reinforced from the very beginning, it's not much of a stretch to say that he could have captured the Suez Canal at one end and Gibraltar at the other. They could then continue rolling on virtually unopposed towards the Persian Gulf.
As everyone knows, the oil in the Caucasus is peanuts compared to what the Persian Gulf has to offer.
Heck, they could go all the way to India if they wanted to, coordinating the assault with the Japanese. Imagine this: India invaded from the West by the Germans, and from the east by the Japs.
I know that this is all a lot of fanciful thinking, but I can't help wondering. I got all this from an interesting book I once read about the most stupid mistakes made by Hitler in WWII.
Any comments, people? -
I too believe that a properly equipped (4-5 panzer divisions) and supplied Afrika Korps could have kicked the British out of Egypt and taken the Mideast/Persian Gulf area.Originally posted by fudgester:Seriously, the assault on Russia was utter stupidity on Hitler's part. It really didn't make much sense for him to attack Russia other than the fact that he hated the Russians and regarded them as 'subhuman'. Sure, capturing more land in Russia also meant more 'Lebensraum' (living space) for the Germans, but it doesn't make sense to own a lot of land if you can't really live off it due to Stalin's 'scorched earth' policy as the Soviets retreated. [/quote]
Don't have the source handy but I remember reading that the Germans actually received more resources and raw materials from Russia during 1939-41 (courtesy of their non-aggression pact) than 1941-44, when they controlled large tracts of the Soviet Union!
That said, even if Hitler didn't hate the Russians and communism as much as he did, I find it hard to believe that two such diametrically opposed totalitarian systems would not have clashed sooner or later, if not in 1941 then perhaps a few years later, when the Soviet Army had completely recovered from Stalin's purges. With Hitler and Stalin at the helm, I just don't see them staying peaceful let alone friendly to each other.
[quote]
Sure, there were the oilfields in the Caucasus and the grain in the Ukraine, but resource-wise, it still didn't make sense. Had Rommel been properly reinforced from the very beginning, it's not much of a stretch to say that he could have captured the Suez Canal at one end and Gibraltar at the other. They could then continue rolling on virtually unopposed towards the Persian Gulf. As everyone knows, the oil in the Caucasus is peanuts compared to what the Persian Gulf has to offer.
Heck, they could go all the way to India if they wanted to, coordinating the assault with the Japanese. Imagine this: India invaded from the West by the Germans, and from the east by the Japs
There were indeed some advocates in the Japanese Army that wanted to strike into India and link up with the Germans, but in the end the Tokyo raid (April 1942) put an end to that and the Navy got its way (Midway). Had the Japanese concentrated on pushing into India in early 1942, with a neutral Russia, the Axis powers would've dealt the British Empire a near mortal blow. It might even have caused Churchill's government to collapse. Conceivably a new British government might be persuaded to seek terms with Hitler, and the outcome of the war would've been totally different.
Of course, that's IF the Germans and Japanese don't start backstabbing each other ...
-
I don't think the Japanese would have been able to take India, Kush and Afghanistan.Originally posted by Moltke:I too believe that a properly equipped (4-5 panzer divisions) and supplied Afrika Korps could have kicked the British out of Egypt and taken the Mideast/Persian Gulf area.
There were indeed some advocates in the Japanese Army that wanted to strike into India and link up with the Germans, but in the end the Tokyo raid (April 1942) put an end to that and the Navy got its way (Midway). Had the Japanese concentrated on pushing into India in early 1942, with a neutral Russia, the Axis powers would've dealt the British Empire a near mortal blow. It might even have caused Churchill's government to collapse. Conceivably a new British government might be persuaded to seek terms with Hitler, and the outcome of the war would've been totally different.
Of course, that's IF the Germans and Japanese don't start backstabbing each other ...
-
Wow.... what's the name of the book that suggested that? I wanan go read it...