|
HMSWarspite -> RE: Patton V. Montgomery (10/4/2015 9:43:45 AM)
|
I wouldn't disagree with you there. Whilst Patton and Monty both have their misleading sources, all the WW1 Allied generals get coated with the universal tar brush of 'donkey'. There were some brilliant commanders (even on the Western Front). The 'donkeys' were just not brilliant, and could not get past the defensive superiority that machine guns created. Read up the British offensives from after Amiens to the end of the war. Absolutely text book (in fact were the text book for 1939!) and very successful.
The problem with objective accounts extends to RN commanders as well. We could start a Jellicoe vs Beatty debate, and have just the same effect as a typical Monty/Patton. The only difference is you need to go to a naval site to get the depth of discussion ;)
For the record I think Jellicoe was very capable and (necessarily) conservative - he had to be as he couldn't win the war but he could certainly lose it. Beatty was a self centred opinionated arrogant egotist who was sloppy and lazy. Now, who does this remind you of? [8|]
|
|
|
|
