RE: Patton V. Montgomery

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Patton V. Montgomery

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the West >> RE: Patton V. Montgomery

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Patton V. Montgomery - 10/3/2015 10:37:06 PM

mariandavid

Posts: 297
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline

Fair enough - I should have cited my sources for my comment. And perhaps "Patton or Simpson' or 'Montgomery or Slim' would be more reasonable speculations that would at least avoid the national acrimony(not present here) that has poisoned the Monty/Patton debate.

Mind you I am a heretic in these matters - I think a dozen of more World War One generals had harder tasks and achieved greater generalship than either!

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 31

RE: Patton V. Montgomery - 10/4/2015 9:43:45 AM

HMSWarspite

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

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?