Was General Montgomery really overrated in WW2?

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" :shock: s pigs bum it was :lol:it was'nt monty whoe came up with it...but Eisenhower :lol: :lol:
 
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.

:D
 
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.
 
godofthunder9010 said:
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.
Click to expand...


Monty could'nt attack? :shock: :? :lol:

That's why they put him in charge of the biggest amphibious operation in history.
Monty's original plan for the Battle of Normandy decreed that crossing of the Seine would be the official end of the battle.This was set for D plus 90,it took place on D plus 75.
This ,Thunder, is an 'outstanding success'

It's funny Monty bothers Americans so much.Why is that?
 
Because we've watched Patton one too many times and if we gotta put up with a primadonna it's gonna be our Primadona not one from across the pond. :lol:
 
Was D-Day planned, conceived and organized by Monty? Was he in charge of all forces landing? I was under the impression that Eisenhower and his staff had a lot more to do with the planning of D-Day.

What I'm looking for is an offensive operation that was HIS OPERATION that was a brilliant success. If you know of a good example, please do share.
 
godofthunder9010 said:
Was D-Day planned, conceived and organized by Monty? Was he in charge of all forces landing? I was under the impression that Eisenhower and his staff had a lot more to do with the planning of D-Day.

What I'm looking for is an offensive operation that was HIS OPERATION that was a brilliant success. If you know of a good example, please do share.
Click to expand...

Normandy was'nt concieved by Monty,but by Lieutenant General Frederick Morgan,he was the original planner of Operation Overlord, the Allied invasion of Europe. It was changed by Monty,and yes Monty was in charge of the 21st army group.

The 21st army group consisted of the U.S first army and the British second Army (surely you knew this?).

Monty commanded the whole operation in Normandy till the end,and I consider ths an offensive battle,and very successful.
 
Hm

I, for one, get a little tired with the Monty bashing from (mainly) the USA. Incidentally, I am not anti-American by any standards having served alongside US forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkans and erm Alaska, but there seems to be a lot of revisionist type history produced in the US
Monty was not a bad general full stop, end-ex, period, no questions allowed.
He was, of course, arrogant, opinionated (Patton anyone?) with a monstrous ego. However comma Monty was a product of the carnage of the 1WW and he was equally aware of the limited manpower resources that Britain and her Empire could deliver in anyone theatre.
Monty demonstrated at El Alamein that perhaps he wasn't the greatest exponent of manouevrist warfare but he delivered a crushing blow that proved a turning point in the war and, perhaps more significantly, improved morale back home.
Yes, Monty altered the OVERLORD/D-Day plan and, yes, he was the overall Land forces commander for D-Day. Eisenhower didn't take over until afterwards.
Montys plan at Caen was brilliantly executed and he drew in tremendous German reserves which allowed the US to exploit the gap further south.
Monty also commanded 2 US Army Groups (I need to check but 2nd and 9th ring a bell) during the Battle of the Bulge and played a major part in crushing the German offensive (And I agree, he shouldnt have showed off after the event).
Arnhem was a dreadful failure but it was a bold initiative that even the participants agreed was a worthwhile risk.
Monty was a cautious but careful commander who was loved by his men and loved by the Americans who served under him during the Ardennes offensive. Rude, conceited also but a brilliant man and one of the finest generals of WW2
 
Re: Hm

spymaster said:
I, for one, get a little tired with the Monty bashing from (mainly) the USA.
Click to expand...
I can start bashing "great" American generals just as easily. Want me to?

I'm not making the case that Monty was a BAD General, but very few Allied Generals and Field Marshalls managed to achieve victory in the face of having the numbers and circumstances stacked against them. The two most important secrets of D-Day success were: Hitler being a moron again and the misdirection of German forces thinking the invasion would be at Calais.

I probably should clarify my position on things. I don't believe that there were ANY Allied military commanders in World War II that could be considered among the greatest of all time. Bull Halsey and ... I can't think of his name, but the man who pulled off the miracle for the RAF in the Battle of Britain ... those two are MAYBE exceptions. I can't think of any other allied commanders to beat the odds stacked against them.
 
Yeah, that's the one! Anyways, Allied commanders vs German commanders ... well the Germans are at a whole different level. If you had a brutally honest list of the top 20 battlefield commanders in World War II, you'd be hard pressed to get any allied commander to land on that list.

EDIT: Allow me to elaborate on the above. Take the best and brightest generals from wherever you like in World War II and give each of them 100,000 men, 1,000 tanks, 1,000 aircraft and 3,000 artillery pieces. The following Generals would never lose to ANY allied commander under such circumstances:
Heinz Guderian
Eric Manstein
Fedor von Bock
Erwin Rommel
Sepp Dietrich
Walter Model
Herman Hoth
Hans von Kluge
Ewald von Kliest

naw, there's just too many to list, I give up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top