Was General Montgomery really overrated in WW2? - Page 36




 
--
 
April 19th, 2008  
errol
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeEnfield
My regiment lost 8,000, the one thing the Allies did not do well was the pincer movement. Both the Russian and Germans did this rather well and apart from Falsie we never tried to do any thing like this
I would have doubted the Russians were good at the pincer movement. They certainly had overwhelming numbers to batter away at the Germans. Their tanks were better (the T34) but I have doubts about their tactics.
April 19th, 2008  
LeEnfield
 
 
errol...........You say that the Russians were not good at the Pincer movement, well try telling that to the Germans at Stalingrad and the Crimea and a number of other places. They would sweep around the Germans trapping them and wiping them out. The Germans poured some 200.000 men into Stalingrad and of of that total just 5.000 returned to Germany and they were not returned till the 1950's
April 19th, 2008  
Del Boy
 
Le - my impression at the end of WW11, when the desert rats etc., returned was that Montgomery was very popular amongst his troops; would you endorse this view or not?
--
April 19th, 2008  
LeEnfield
 
 
Del Boy..............Yes he was very popular with his troops, but just how much of his popularity was to his leadership and how much was due to his publicity machine I would not like to say.
April 20th, 2008  
Del Boy
 
Le - All the guys were coming back with smart little moustaches - I'm still trying to decide whether their model was Montgomery or Errol Flynn!

I always thought it was surprising that he was popular - from distance he seemed an unlikely prospect for that.
May 31st, 2008  
errol
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeEnfield
errol...........You say that the Russians were not good at the Pincer movement, well try telling that to the Germans at Stalingrad and the Crimea and a number of other places. They would sweep around the Germans trapping them and wiping them out. The Germans poured some 200.000 men into Stalingrad and of of that total just 5.000 returned to Germany and they were not returned till the 1950's
Yes, the Russians certainly encircled them at Stalingrad after the Germans were held in a very static position for several months.

I am refering more to the Russians ability to move their tank divisions quickly through and around the German lines when things were very fluid in say the period 41-43. I have never read consistent evidence of this ability. The Russians had an endless supply of tanks that they were able to keep throwing at the Germans. The Russians were certainly able to punch holes through the German lines more easily as the war was turning in their favour. I don't think they ever had the skill shown by the German Panzers in pincer attacks.
May 31st, 2008  
LeEnfield
 
 
The Russians surround many of the big German units in Eastern Europe and then destroyed them, Also they did it at Berlin
June 7th, 2008  
errol
 
 
The Russians certainly did surround the Germans in Berlin but I have read accounts where it was a bloody free for all amongst the Russian divisions. The Russian casualties were a lot higher than they should have been.

None of you have addressed the question of the skill (or lack of) that the Russians used their tank formations in conjunction with the other armed services with regard to pincer attacks on fluid German tank formations eg Kursk, Karkhov etc.

They had overwhelming forces 1944 onwards so it was easy for the Russians to punch holes through the German lines (when they had not over stretched their supply lines).

I would say the Germans had exhibited far more skill with their Panzers when the sides were more even.
June 7th, 2008  
LeEnfield
 
 
The Russians wiped out a German army in the Crimea, they cut of a destroyed a large number of Germans along the Baltic coast, and if you want to read about one spectacular campaign by the Russians read about there assault on the Japanese in China, they wiped them out in a matter of weeks, yet Japanese were supposed to be tough fighters
June 8th, 2008  
errol
 
 
I think we are talking about two different things.