Wikipedia is blocked in China and its not a vetted source, but thanks anyway.

Let me rephrase.
First land defeat in the 1939 to 1945 war against the western Allies.
I'm sure you've heard of Milne Bay Stanford, and you'd not be one to dispute it as the first decisive defeat of the Japanese in the pacific campaign.

G'day AussieNick,
That works for me mate!
Cheers
ST

Gen. Lloyd R. Fredenall's complete misuse and poor command of US forces in Tunis

KC72 you forgot to mention that he did build a Bunker 60 feet deep while Rommel was attacking to make sure he stayed safe. Ike fired him after that and replaced him with Patton.

KC72 you forgot to mention that he did build a Bunker 60 feet deep while Rommel was attacking to make sure he stayed safe. Ike fired him after that and replaced him with Patton.

What a freakin' disgrace.

Originally Posted by bulldogg

Wikipedia is blocked in China and its not a vetted source, but thanks anyway.

Hey, at least we have seen some progress recently in the unblocking (likely with heavy restrictions) of Google in China.

Wikipedia is blocked in China and its not a vetted source

It is vetted by its own members which appears to be sufficient in most cases. There is a problem when there is a specialist subject in which only one or two members have any knowledge. Neither does it provide any privilege to an experts view, although in some cases perhaps that could be an advantage. The big advantage of Wikipedia over most other sources is its rapid rate of updating. A new piece of information about a subject can sometimes appear within minutes of a piece of research being released.

Nature compared Wikipedia to the Encyclopedia Britannica in a wide range of topics. The journal found just eight serious errors, such as general misunderstandings of vital concepts, in the articles. Of those, four came from each site. They did, however, discover a series of factual errors, omissions or misleading statements. All told, Wikipedia had 162 such problems, while Britannica had 123.

Market Garden as a Brit paratrooper I agree it was failure, but had it been launch a few days earlier then it could have been an overwhelming success. What really mucked up was a Panzer Division had been pulled out of the Eastern front and stationed at Arnhem for re-equipping, so it makes hind sight a wonderful thing
Now what about the American General Mark Clark who ignored his orders to push across Italy and deal with the German troops being pushed out of Monte Casino, but decided instead to take Rome at let the Germans escape and cost the life's of thousands of Allied troops who then had to fight the troops they could have caught in open but were now in prepared defensives position.

Originally Posted by LeEnfield

Market Garden as a Brit paratrooper I agree it was failure, but had it been launch a few days earlier then it could have been an overwhelming success. What really mucked up was a Panzer Division had been pulled out of the Eastern front and stationed at Arnhem for re-equipping, so it makes hind sight a wonderful thing
Now what about the American General Mark Clark who ignored his orders to push across Italy and deal with the German troops being pushed out of Monte Casino, but decided instead to take Rome at let the Germans escape and cost the life's of thousands of Allied troops who then had to fight the troops they could have caught in open but were now in prepared defensives position.

I agree totally about Market Garden. My great uncle was one of the surviving paras from Arnhem, so I have a lingering personal interest in the campaign. I believe that tactically it could have been an outstanding success. It was a gamble, and the commanders knew this. But as Ike said it was "the gamble we had to take".

If it had worked, then it would have placed a British armoured element with a clean run to Berlin. It could have been a very different end to the war.