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.
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.