Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "The Second Battle of El Alamein | Monty's Masterpiece" video.

Might I take this opportunity to apologise to your late father on behalf of my late father, whose guns (4.5 inch mediums, of 69th Medium Regiment) helped to make some of the noise.
15
@rodsmith3911 Mine was at Alamein, Mareth, and later Saleno, before being transferred to the military police and, oddly, ending the war outside Dunkirk. As he was a Manchester lad, I never quite worked out how he ended up in a Welsh artillery regiment ( 69th was the Carnarvonshire and Denbighshire Yeomanry).
9
@richardthelionheart6924 I think he really means the 83,305 US troops which actually landed as part of Operation Torch. At least, that is what the orders of battle of the US forces involved say. Almost a week after the end of 2nd Alamein, by the way.
7
Good heavens! A general who assembles superiority in men, equipment, supplies, and intelligence, before embarking upon a campaign. How utterly shameful.
6
@jerryware5749 No. Lee/Grants :- 170 Stuarts :- 117 Shermans :- 252 Crusaders :- 294 Valentine :- 194 Churchills :- 8
3
@kenmazoch8499 'market garden had, by british records, over 17,000 losses. also, huertgen forest lasted 3 months, market-garden only 9 days. i am done. leave me out of your revisionist history.' Are you really saying that 55,000 casualties are more acceptable than 17,000 casualties, providing that they are more spread out? Too right, you are done.
3
His war record rather suggests that he wasn't.
3
Results rather prove otherwise.
3
Well? I understood the the US and the UK were allies. Was I wrong?
3
@rickhobson3211 Which situations might they have been? You don't think that part of the reason for Market Garden's failure was inept planning by the staff of the Airborne Army, in particular where drop zones were concerned?
3
Montgomery was the army commander.
2
@kenmazoch8499 Sorry. I am a great support of The Auk, and have argued in debate at military colleges about his role in WW2, both in North Africa and later in India. In particular, I believe that Alam Halfa was his battle. However, I cannot accept that he had much input into Second Alamein.
2
Montgomery was a disgrace, shamefully using intelligence information in order to ensure victory. I assume you understand what sarcasm is?
2
You don't think that battles such as Mareth or Wadi Akarit were relevant? Or the fact that Montgomery was Ground Forces Commander for the successful Overlord landings?
2
1). Auchinleck was far from defeatist. 2). I don't care what you think.
2
'Strafer' Gott would have been a disaster in command of 8th Army. Why would you criticise a general who assembled a superiority in men, machines, supplies, and intelligence before embarking upon a campaign?
2
Silly me. I thought that D-Day was an allied victory. Thank you for correcting me.
2
@davidpowelson4817 'Battle of Caen during Operation Overlord.' You mean when the British & Canadians faced 8 Panzer Divisions and 3 independent Tiger Battalions, almost all SS, and fought them to a standstill? That Battle of Caen?
2
What 'later blunders?'
2
Odd, then, that men who served under him thought the world of him. My father attended every Alamein reunion until they ended. Equally odd, also, that people who shout about Market Garden are strangely silent about Patton's shambles in Lorraine, or the finest hours of Hodges and Bradley in the Hurtgen Forest. I wonder why that might be? Exactly how skilful is a General who allows himself to be over-extended, when knowing his difficult supply situation?
2
Montgomery had been appointed commander of British First Army in Operation Torch before being sent to North Africa. I rather think he did know something about it.
2
@thevillaaston7811 Sorry, but that isn't either fair or accurate. I can only say that I know a number of current American historians who disagree strongly with the 'Monty was a Moron' school which exists within some elements of American society. Generally, the less someone actually knows or understands, the more extreme and simplistic (or, frankly, plain wrong) their views are likely to be, though at the same time the more eager they are to express them.
1
Doubtless, from your comfy chair in front of your lap top, pontificating sagely 80 years after the event, you would have done far better?
1
Image using intelligence information to boost your chances of victory. The man must have been utterly shameless!
1
'Any general with that superiority of equipment, manpower, and supplies would crush the germans.' A shame that Bradley & Hodges are no longer around. You coud discuss events at the Hurtgen Forest with them.
1
@albowie1486 Why do you think that Chink hand anything to do with Gazala? That was entirely Ritchie's battle. Dorman Smith acted as the Auk's Chief of Staff from 25 June, when Auchinleck took personal command of 8th Army, and played an important role in the exploitation of Ultra intelligence, which enabled Auchinleck to plan a series of counter-attacks on the axis forces, generally against Italian formations, resulting in the victory that was First Alamein.
1
@dougamundson6836 Gee, what would have happened in the Pacific if Japan had had the industrial power of the US, and the US that of Japan? What ifs are generally pointless. What is a fact is that Rommel was never able to defeat Montgomery, whereas he was defeated by him on more than one occasion.
1
@dougamundson6836 'Do you have ANY idea what happened in Sicily?' Do you mean what actually happened, or what the 1970 comedy movie claimed happened? The imaginary 'race to Messina' for example? You really shouldn't confuse George Patton with George C. Scott.
1
@dougamundson6836 'What ifs' are NOT always pointless. Japan didn't. As you haven't answered my comment, I wonder if you might explain why Rommel was 'so much better' instead? You might start by explaining the tactical brilliance of the 'Race to the Wire' which led to Erwin's defeat by the Auk during Crusader.
1
@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- You might be being a little unfair about Ritchie, who was more a capable Corps Commander promoted beyond his capabilities than a bad leader, as his later performance in command of XII Corps in NW Europe suggests. Ritchie was originally intended by Auchinleck as a temporary appointment until a suitable commander could be found, but, after Churchill had announced him in Parliament as the new 8th army commander in Parliament, without any reference to the Auk, or to the temporary nature of the appointment, in fact ended up commanding the Eighth Army for nearly seven months.
1