| I think that Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery was Great Britain’s counterpart to America’s General Douglas MacArthur. And for my thoughts and feelings about General Douglas MacArthur, please go to Who was the worst American general or battlefield tactician? in this forum.
In other words, he was extremely egocentric and was very likely a narcissistic personality disorder. Despite these personality flaws, his wartime failures, and need for the spotlight, for the troops he commanded [like in the case of General MacArthur], he was the best. In short, his warriors loved him. Although most narcissistic personality disorders can sell themselves very easily and are well liked (and the press also love them as much as they love the limelight), the significance of a leaders connection to his troops on the battlefield should never be overlooked.
General Dwight D. Eisenhower was an excellent diplomat [though not a good strategist] and devoted a great deal of his time constantly protecting many of the ally generals like Montgomery from bruised egos, but I am sure that Eisenhower’s efforts were fruitful as he saw the rewards in having commanders like Montgomery in general and Patton in particular. With this being said, on the battlefield I do not think Field Marshal Montgomery was nearly as clever as Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, dashing as Field Marshal Harold Alexander nor half the motivator as General George Patton. Although I do think he is still to this day overrated on the battlefield, Field Marshal Montgomery planned all his battle assignments very well [and especially wanted those that would bring him the most success] and his troops loved him – two factors that may be just as important on the battlefield as a leader’s tactical abilities. |