Monty, I know that if you give anyone everything they need in any particular campaign they would be successful, but thats not what I meant with Rommel, in Rommel's case all he needed was supplies and some sort of air or naval protection because otherwise with the Italian navy losing control of the Mediterreanian sea and the few planes the German air force made available to that theater unable to hold air superiority against the Allies Rommel would be cut from Europe from the air and sea.

In order to fight a modern war like WW2, no one can win without supplies, air cover and or naval cover. Rommel lacked these in order to win in North Africa because his Italian allies and Hitler failed him. The Italian army performance in North Africa was horrible the Italians also failed to hold the Mediterreanian sea against the allies, Hitler also failed to compensate Rommel for what he lacked because of the faliure of the Italian military.

Even if it is argued that Rommel overstretched his own supply lines, the same would have happend if he even stayed in Libya because as the Italian and Germans began to lose air cover and control of the Mediterreanian sea he would have slowely depleted his supplies anyways, so his best chance was to rush the British into defeat as early as possible and conclude the operations to gain Egypt before the allies cut him of from the air and sea and the Americans entered; this I think was smart than waiting like Saddam did in the First Persian Gulf war till the allies buildup enough force to easily beat him.

Rommel was given a mission that was doomed to faliure from the onset due to many short commings, this made him seem less talented than he really was. I truely believe he was a great tactician and better General than Montgomery.

Originally Posted by Somalia

Even if it is argued that Rommel overstretched his own supply lines, the same would have happend if he even stayed in Libya because as the Italian and Germans began to lose air cover and control of the Mediterreanian sea he would have slowely depleted his supplies anyways, so his best chance was to rush the British into defeat as early as possible and conclude the operations to gain Egypt before the allies cut him of from the air and sea and the Americans entered; this I think was smart than waiting like Saddam did in the First Persian Gulf war till the allies buildup enough force to easily beat him.

One of the longest run-on sentences I have ever seen in this forum... but more to the point, is Saddam a hero of yours? This part of your ramblence seems to betray some sort of affinity for Saddam and perhaps a wish that he had attacked and killed my brothers in arms. Do tell young man.

Originally Posted by bulldogg

One of the longest run-on sentences I have ever seen in this forum... but more to the point, is Saddam a hero of yours? This part of your ramblence seems to betray some sort of affinity for Saddam and perhaps a wish that he had attacked and killed my brothers in arms. Do tell young man.

Anyone seen that troll spray?

Seriously if you can't be bothered taking the time to comprehend his comment why bother to respond?
As the saying goes, better to remain silent and be thought a fool... etc.

Originally Posted by Somalia

Rommel was given a mission that was doomed to faliure from the onset due to many short commings, this made him seem less talented than he really was. I truely believe he was a great tactician and better General than Montgomery.

I don't entirely agree, even his performance in France when put under pressure during the Arras counter attack wasn't exactly top class where he reported being attacked by "hundreds of British tanks" which turned out to be 58, there was a story that Rommel's 7th Panzer Division (In France) was given the title "Ghost Division", because no one knew were it was, including the German High Command and Rommel's staff.

Don't misconstrue this as me saying he was a bad commander but I do believe that the DAK would have performed as well and in some cases better under the command of almost any of Germany's more able commanders.

Bulldogg I am amazed at how much you failed to comprehend what I had to say. Tell me were in my sentence that I say i have a affinity with Saddam?

I was merely drawing a contrast between his performance and Rommel's. You totally miconstrued my point and tooked it in whole different direction than I was going. Also please clearify were I said I wanted Saddam to kill more Ally soldiers?

Are you just making blank assumptions and trying to goad me into saying something because thats what it seems to be. You couldn't be more wrong about my statement, maybe you should read carefully or ask a third party to read for you because you seem to be clouded by some sort of prejudice.

Anyone who reads my last statement will see that I was merely drawing a contrast between Rommel's performance and Saddam's, and how it was best for Rommel to act instead of waiting.

And Monty at least I am glad you understood what my point was and what I was trying to say. Because Some people here would rather jump the gun, assume and misconstrued than read and let it sink in for a minute in order to comprehend. But I am glad at least I can have a civilized and intellectual conversation with you without childish remarks being made like some people.

Thank you for your point.

Originally Posted by Somalia

Anyone who reads my last statement will see that I was merely drawing a contrast between Rommel's performance and Saddam's, and how it was best for Rommel to act instead of waiting.

This is untrue or I wouldn't have posted the query to you. Thank you for clarifying your position. Earlier comments you made in a previous thread regarding the "occupation of Palestine" have put you on my list for lack of a better phrase and I'm sensitive to any comment you make regarding muslim nations and their interactions with the rest of the world. We've had terrorist sympathisers and recruiters on this site before, I pray you are not one.

And MontyB... wasn't talking to you and I'd daresay Somalia isn't your spouse so I can bet you know my response to you that will go unposted. Fancy coming up to HK this summer mate??

Originally Posted by Somalia

Monty, I know that if you give anyone everything they need in any particular campaign they would be successful, but thats not what I meant with Rommel, in Rommel's case all he needed was supplies and some sort of air or naval protection because otherwise with the Italian navy losing control of the Mediterreanian sea and the few planes the German air force made available to that theater unable to hold air superiority against the Allies Rommel would be cut from Europe from the air and sea.

In order to fight a modern war like WW2, no one can win without supplies, air cover and or naval cover. Rommel lacked these in order to win in North Africa because his Italian allies and Hitler failed him. The Italian army performance in North Africa was horrible the Italians also failed to hold the Mediterreanian sea against the allies, Hitler also failed to compensate Rommel for what he lacked because of the faliure of the Italian military.

Even if it is argued that Rommel overstretched his own supply lines, the same would have happend if he even stayed in Libya because as the Italian and Germans began to lose air cover and control of the Mediterreanian sea he would have slowely depleted his supplies anyways, so his best chance was to rush the British into defeat as early as possible and conclude the operations to gain Egypt before the allies cut him of from the air and sea and the Americans entered; this I think was smart than waiting like Saddam did in the First Persian Gulf war till the allies buildup enough force to easily beat him.

Rommel was given a mission that was doomed to faliure from the onset due to many short commings, this made him seem less talented than he really was. I truely believe he was a great tactician and better General than Montgomery.

I guess you should ask yourself why Rommel was given command of DAK in the first place instead of someone like Guderian or Hoth. In February 1941 Hitler was finalising the plans for invading Russia and if Rommel had been deemed that important I'm not sure he would have been funnelled off to what Hitler thought of as a side-theatre of war. Certainly Rommel appeared to enjoy a closer relationship with Hitler than was usual but if Rommel really was thought of as that good he would have been given command of one of the 4 Panzergruppes earmarked for the invasion of Russia, or at the very least a Korps command. He recieved neither. Instead he was given an initial Panzer regiment plus some other smaller formations when he was sent to Africa. Guderian by contrast ended up as the commander of 2 full German armies (2nd Panzer Army and 2nd Army) with multiple Korps when the final assault on Moscow was taking place.

Originally Posted by bulldogg

And MontyB... wasn't talking to you and I'd daresay Somalia isn't your spouse so I can bet you know my response to you that will go unposted. Fancy coming up to HK this summer mate??

Don't really care what your response is, this part of the forum has to date managed to avoid the inane political clap trap you spout and I suspect people would like to keep it that way. So unless you have something on topic to add can I suggest following another old maxim and "don't go away mad just ..."

Originally Posted by Doppleganger

Certainly Rommel appeared to enjoy a closer relationship with Hitler than was usual but if Rommel really was thought of as that good he would have been given command of one of the 4 Panzergruppes earmarked for the invasion of Russia, or at the very least a Korps command. He recieved neither.

Oddly enough I have long wondered whether he wouldn't have done a lot better being let loose in Russia where his attacking flair could have been managed and supported better, army group south may have been the ideal spot for him.

Originally Posted by MontyB

Oddly enough I have long wondered whether he wouldn't have done a lot better being let loose in Russia where his attacking flair could have been managed and supported better, army group south may have been the ideal spot for him.

Actually I wouldn't have stuck him in AGS under Paul von Kleist, who was not really an armour man and wouldn't have known how to handle Rommel. Any of the other 3 Panzergruppes would have been fine as they were commanded by experienced armour men who understood how to use armour properly. That said, there would be no way that Rommel could just thrust and thrust without any concern for either his flanks or his logistical supply in Russia. The numbers of enemy forces in Russia were several orders of magnitude greater than those found in North Africa and flanks had to be safeguarded. To do otherwise would have been operational suicide.

Rommel had a big ego, communicated poorly with other divisions and services and recklessly gambled on occasions. His strategic sense was poor as well. However, in the early part of the war fortune favoured the brave so he had much success. During May 1940 he commandeered a neighbouring divisions equipment to supply his own something which proves he was not a team player.

Originally Posted by Doppleganger

Actually I wouldn't have stuck him in AGS under Paul von Kleist, who was not really an armour man and wouldn't have known how to handle Rommel. Any of the other 3 Panzergruppes would have been fine as they were commanded by experienced armour men who understood how to use armour properly. That said, there would be no way that Rommel could just thrust and thrust without any concern for either his flanks or his logistical supply in Russia. The numbers of enemy forces in Russia were several orders of magnitude greater than those found in North Africa and flanks had to be safeguarded. To do otherwise would have been operational suicide.

I am not sure he needed someone who understood armour as much as he needed someone that understood a strategic plan, as I understand things (and I may be wrong) AGS was the more mechanised of the groups which meant that it would have been easier to keep up with his armoured thrusts.

Army Group North I think would have been the worst option for him due to the more contained nature of the terrain but I think he would have been ok in either Centre or South.