Was General Montgomery really overrated in WW2? - Page 46




 
--
 
August 19th, 2009  
MontyB
 
 
Umm are you counting the Italians in those Axis numbers?

If so I am sure that you are aware that the only threat the Italians posed was in cluttering the roads as they surrendered emasse.
August 19th, 2009  
BritinAfrica
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Umm are you counting the Italians in those Axis numbers?

If so I am sure that you are aware that the only threat the Italians posed was in cluttering the roads as they surrendered emasse.

One of my uncles who served in North Africa stated that he had a lot of respect for Italian Artillery. As I wasnt there I cannot confirm or deny, but yes I agree the Italians did surrender in their thousands.

Cisco makes a number of fair and reasoned points regarding the abilities of Monty. In my opinion, Monty was a very good Commander, as was Rommel.
August 19th, 2009  
Panzercracker
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkenny
What a coincidence. The main Monty-hater has to leave the thread because he made unsupportable claims and a brand new poster with the very same outlook registers to carry on the fight!
I didnt leave the thread i just stopped responding to you since you lied in virtually every post (btw i checked there's no passages that you quoted, they dont exist, i sort of expected it given your previous blunders but hey).

You're a liar buddy.
--
August 19th, 2009  
cisco
 

Topic: Now there


Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Umm are you counting the Italians in those Axis numbers?

If so I am sure that you are aware that the only threat the Italians posed was in cluttering the roads as they surrendered emasse.
we have something we can agree about
August 19th, 2009  
mkenny
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panzercracker
I didnt leave the thread i just stopped responding to you since you lied in virtually every post (btw i checked there's no passages that you quoted, they dont exist, i sort of expected it given your previous blunders but hey

You're a liar buddy.
It exists. There is only 1 liar in this thread. If only your brain was as big as your mouth............


You were completely wrong with your numbers and you just have not got the courage to admit it. Here it is again. Note there are 4 sources not one. You claim that they all are fabricated!

1. Date: 7.11.1943 (situation of 15.10.1943)
East: 3,900,000
Finland: 180,000
Norway: 315,000
Denmark: 110,000
West: 1,370,000
Italy: 330,000
Balkans: 610,000
Sum: 6,815,000
Source: Materialien zum Vortrag des Chefs des Wehrmachtführungsstabes vom 7.11.1943 "Die strategische Lage am Anfang des fünften Kriegsjahres", (referenced to KTB OKW, IV, S. 1534 ff.)
---------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 5.5.1944 (situation likely of April 1944)
East: 3,878,000
Finland: no figure given
Norway: 311,000
Denmark: no figure given
West: 1,873,000
Italy: 961,000
Balkans: 826,000
Sum: 7,849,000
Source: "Strategische Lage im Frühjahr 1944", Jodl, Vortrag 5.5.1944. (referenced to BA-MA, N69/18.)
--------------------------------------------------------
From Müller-Hillebrand, Heer 3, p. 173:

"Ration strength in the West", 1. March 1944 (referenced to OKW War diary)

Army (obviously both field and replacement army, M.): 806,927
SS and Police: 85,230
Foreign volunteers, mainly Eastern troops: 61,439
Allies: 13,631
Luftwaffe (air force): 337,140
Kriegsmarine (navy): 96,084
Wehrmachtgefolge (auxiliary civil personnel): 145,611
Sum: 1,546,062

-----------------------------------------

. From the MGFA’s "official" campaign history (within the WW2 series, Vol. 7, p. 476/477, referenced to a ration strength report from Hgr. B/OQu., 1. March 1944 at BA-MA)

Army (obviously both field and replacement army, M.): 865,180
Luftwaffe (air force): 326,350
Marine (navy): 102,180
SS and Police: 102,610
Sonstige: 91,110
Wehrmachtgefolge (auxiliary civil personnel): 157,210
sum: 1,644,640

-----------------------------------------------
Summer 1944

West: 1,370,000

East: 3,878,000
August 19th, 2009  
mkenny
 
To help you out panzerknackered:
Note that one source is given as

"From the MGFA’s "official" campaign history (within the WW2 series, Vol. 7, p. 476/477,"

This page explains what 'MGFA' means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...esearch_Office

Are you saying they are liars too?
August 19th, 2009  
Panzercracker
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkenny
To help you out panzerknackered:
Note that one source is given as

"From the MGFA’s "official" campaign history (within the WW2 series, Vol. 7, p. 476/477,"

This page explains what 'MGFA' means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...esearch_Office

Are you saying they are liars too?
In other words still no scans? Of course you wont have them because while you quote an existing source the content is your pure invention
August 19th, 2009  
mkenny
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panzercracker
In other words still no scans? Of course you wont have them because while you quote an existing source the content is your pure invention
I thought you had access to the original book?
Müller-Hillebrand, Heer 3, p. 173:

Show us what is really on page 173.

And tell us again the figures you have for the Eastern Front and The West.
August 19th, 2009  
Panzercracker
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkenny
I thought you had access to the original book?
Müller-Hillebrand, Heer 3, p. 173:

Show us what is really on page 173.

And tell us again the figures you have for the Eastern Front and The West.
Wait, i have to prove Your claims?! It gets better with each your post
August 19th, 2009  
mkenny
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panzercracker
Wait, i have to prove Your claims?! It gets better with each your post
Let me get this right.
You say I am lying.
You PERSONALY checked the book.
You say he information is NOT on page 173

Having this 'proof' you then decline to post it and thus 'expose' me as a fraud?
Yeah right. I believe you.!!!!!!!!
I can't understand why you insist on making a bigger ars* of yourself. If you just let it lie you could sneak back later and start bullying others. All you have done is confirm your calumny.

Did you forget to post the 'real' numbers by the way?
Where are they?