Monty is criticized for Caen,yet Dempsey was in charge at Caen.

Montgomery was in charge of all allied forces in Normandy (including Americans).

Strategic plan was Eisenhower" s pigs bum it was it was'nt monty whoe came up with it...but Eisenhower

Anybody making the argument that Monty or any other allied commander wasn't all that good is a pretty easy conclusion to come to. Look at the brilliant minds on the opposite side. By comparison, very few allied commanders would even rate at all. Good thing the allies had overwhelming numbers.

That said, I can say that I'm definitely not greatly impressed with Monty.

The man was just to unimaginative (as all allied minds were) he won mearly by brute force, which, In my book their is nothing wrong with, but certainly he won the battles he should have won, and not the ones he should have lost.

On the Eisenhower question: it comes down to who made the decision to go on D-day. His was the final decision: his was the responsibility for the triumph, or the goat for the failure. Thats what they get paid the big bucks to do.

on Montgomery: you are only as good as the staff hat supports you. His was very very good, so he was good. but when they were bad..he was in deep doo doo.

shaggydog, General Eisenhower commanded the Allied Forces landing in North Africa in November 1942; on D-Day in1944, and he was Supreme Commander of the troops invading France. However, these are strategic commands not operational or tactical commands. Now no matter how you slice it, he was the principal architect of the successful Allied invasion of Europe during WW-II. Furthermore, Eisenhower rise to fame during World War II was very impressive especially when you consider he went from a lieutenant colonel in 1941 to a five-star general in 1945. As supreme commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force, let’s also not forget that he commanded the most powerful force ever assembled under one man. He is one of the few generals ever to command major naval forces; he directed the world's greatest air force; and other than Generals Schwarzkopf and Franks, Eisenhower was the first man ever to command successfully an integrated, multinational alliance of ground, sea, and air forces. Despite these accomplishments, I think his greatest trait was his diplomatic ability to juggle egos and hold together the Allied units and their commanders through the entire European campaign that followed, concentrating everyone's attention on a single objective..........the defeat of Nazi Germany.

Did Eisenhower ever see Frontline action in his military career. I was under the impression that he had not?

It always seems to come down to arguing by nationality. Thing is that when Saving Private Ryan mentions Monty once 'I don't really rate him' it gets the Brits backs up.

Eisenhower was top dog at Overlord, but the next three, Ramsay, Monty and Lee-Mallory were all Brits. In the end we were all fighting for the freedom of Europe and every General/Field Marshall makes errors as well as brilliant flashed of genius. Look at MacArthur, by Korea he had well and truly lost the plot.

Revisionist history loves to knock its heros, Bomber Harris and Monty are the two on this side of the pond. Monty beat Rommel whatever the excuses giving us our first land victory, he had charisma and since GB had been at it since 1939 understandably felt a bit put out when Dwight was appointed above him.

Thing is Dwight, Monty, Patton, Bradley, Dempsey and the rest all combined to reach Berlin within a year of landing at Normandy. It was a team effort and a hell of one ayt that

Well if you are bothered by somebody saying that Montgomery was a poor commander, but you have no facts to argue the point, then just do some research.

If it makes you feel better, IMHO none of the Allies in the European theater would even rate in the top ten for military brilliance.

If someone could please help, Montgomery did some great (defensive) work at the Battle of the Bulge. His group did include some American forces but can't remember who they were and the actual sector Monty was operating in.

Never spoke against Monty's ability to defend, but that's all he was terribly good at. Overall, he was lousy on the attack. To rate as a "great military leader", I feel that demonstrating a level of brilliance on attack is essential. Monty's attack settings: Mediocre, Poor and Blunder. I can't think of any outstanding successes of his. In Africa, he went on the attack much later and more hesitantly that he ought and won with overwhelming numbers and supplies. Not much of a brilliant military leader needed to pull that off. He was an obstacle for Eisenhower to launch Overlord. His love of hesitating is shown. Market Garden was a operational catastrophe. That was his baby.