Thanks for your observations Nickdfresh.
Does Montgomery deserve to be in a high pedestal together with the great commanders of WWII?
Don’t think he can be compared with Eisenhower, Patton, Rommel, Guderian, McArthur, Zhukov, Nimitz, Donitz, etc.; although I don’t have that much knowledge of WWII I think he was just at the right place and at the worst time for Rommel. Together with de Gaulle they are way too overrated.
No offense, but I’m not sure as to what you are saying or asking…I kind of have an idea what you’re getting at. But can we work on our diction and spelling when starting threads like this?
Monty was a good leader,being in charge of an british unit,he should of done better though.
This is comparing apples with oranges.
How does one compare those land and sea commanders with all their different operations?
Why attempt a comparison of Montgomery with MacArthur , let alone Nimitz and Doenitz and leave out Spaatz, Harris, Le May and even Goering, and countless others? What about the Japanese commanders, and others?
WTF did de Gaulle do as an operational commander at the level of an army, corps or even divisional commander that puts him in the same class as any of the English speaking Allied or German commanders mentioned, let alone Zhukov?
With the possible exception of Guderian as a theorist, none of the German land commanders mentioned were of unique significance in real military operations as distinct from in the popular mind nowadays, when viewed against the scale of German operations and campaigns during WWII. Rommel’s activities in North Africa provided plenty of impressive propaganda footage for the Nazis, but North Africa was a sideshow compared with the Eastern Front and, for that matter, the U boat war under Doenitz as far as Germany’s strategic aims and weaknesses were concerned.
If the comment “I think he was just at the right place and at the worst time for Rommel” refers to Monty in North Africa, the only reason it was the worst time for Rommel was because Rommel was a gambler and gambled badly beyond his LOC capabilities, which shows he was either a bad general or less lucky than O’Connor who did rather better in similar circumstances of a calculated gamble against the Germans. O’Connor would run rings around de Gaulle and would have done a lot better than MacArthur in defending the Philippines, as would just about anybody else who didn’t spend the first day of the war in the Philippines in a funk, MacArthur being the only commander among American, British, and Dutch forces who managed that.
These sorts of comparisons are impossible and silly.
Particularly when dismissing Monty as not at least as good as Patton when Patton was running an imaginary army in Britain while Monty was commanding in the field in Normandy.
How?
In which campaign?
Not the greatest commander of his time…but he was very good.
His main drawback was his personality, there wasn’t anybody he couldn’t offend 
I know he was too soft,They should of put Rising sun as commander
He have the time of his life,hes a bullie and he suits being commander and hes dominate,and hes rude,and hes not scared of offending people.
Well he was good,he had too go against the germans with crapper equitment,
and he did and all right job.
And wast he in charge with an unit at one point in the desert and lost too rommel,when rommel was powerful at the time.
What about Europe?
I know I missed other commanders and was not my intention to forget the Japanese; but a great commander is a great commander regardless if he belonged to the air force, army or navy.
In regards to Rommel in Africa, it is my understanding; he did not get the backup he really needed from Berlin, which did not help him in the North Africa Theater.
If Rommel was just a gambler, why was he so respected even by his enemies? Guess they all swallowed the German propaganda.
According to the comments in regards to Patton running an imaginary army in Britain, how do you explain it was difficult to supply Patton’s army because he was always ahead of were he was supposed to be. In a political move, the high command restrained Patton from entering Berlin before the Russians.
GREAT COMMANDERS > montgomery, de gaulle
I know all this…Rommel was respected on both sides,seen it on the history channel so many times,I actually know more about him than english commanders. You can learn alot about german army ww2,then any other army.
Perhaps, but who won in North Africa?
Not Rommel, but most people would be struggling to name one, and certainly two Allied commanders who defeated Rommel.
There is a whole range of reasons for Rommel losing, and not all of them his fault.
How about using this as an exercise to start to get a grip on thinking like a serious military historian?
Think what some of the reasons for Rommel’s failure might be.
Starting with why the Germans went there in the first place.
Then what problems they faced in being there for a while.
And why they didn’t stay there.
Ignore the Allies and the battles etc in considering those aspects. Many battles are lost outside the battlefield.
I knew that rommel lost, but why did the germans go to south africa?
Thank you for improving the quality of your posting. I hate to be the nanny-prick here, but I think we have the right to expect a certain quality level as we take ourselves way too seriously as a history site.
Or didn’t seem to hate…
A lot of American warbuffs sadly think that Monty was anti-American. The truth seems to be that Monty loved Americans, as long as he outranked them. Monty also dearly loved his Tommies; but he was Anglophobic regarding his superiors.
Ah Monty. What you have to do is separate the man from the myth. Sure, he was a pain in the Arse for many. Sure he was self promoting and bombastic.
However, his achievements stand for themselves.
Monty was given D-Day, he took a plan and expanded it, tweaked it, changed it. Determined the strategy and plan of attack for the first 90 days.
The Dday campaign from 6 Jun until 31 Aug was Monty and he didnt make many mistakes. His biggest mistake was his big mouth, but his planning and execution was well thought out and throughout the campaign he didnt lose sight of his goals.
Would others have done as well, possibly, but his plan beat the Nazis and this is what counts in the end. Eisenhower wasnt so much a great commander as a great diplomat, gelling the Allies together. Is very easy with hindsight to forget that Monty was in charge of all Allied strategy from D day and credit Ike. Patton couldnt have done what monty did at that time and although Monty didnt do himself any favours and made some stupid statements at times, he was the architect and winner of the battle for Normandy.
Monty had plenty of good equipment and was receiving a lot of American stuff just prior to the US entry into the War. He, largely due to the efforts of his RAF commander Air Marshal Tedders, gradually had complete air superiority and enjoyed a huge logistical advantage as Rommel’s supply lines were ground down by the Royal Navy and RAF during the Battle for the Mediterranean…
Monty was a very good field commander, and he had great strengths as an intricate planner and someone that was able to reform and retrain his army to increase their overall effectiveness. No one can take that away from him. He was indeed pompous, self-promoting and a bit of an ass at times. He also, like MacArthur, had a penchant for taking credit from others.’ I often think that Claude Auchinleck would have made a fine 8th Army commander if he had been demoted to the position and Alexander placed in his position, effectively removing the great weakness in his command, which was drama. I’m not sure how possibly this was, but I do think Monty gets some credit for the very changes that Auchinleck began instituting as such and it is virtually forgotten that it was Auchinleck that won the First Battle of El Alamein and was able to instill a confidence in his troops and exposed Rommel’s key weaknesses such as overrunning his supply lines and exposing his Afrika Korp to counterattack and battles of attrition…
I once read on Wiki that Eisenhower’s second, RAF Air Marshal Sir Aurthur Tedders, really didn’t like Monty and lobbied for his removal from command during the Normandy campaign after the two butted heads during the Normandy planning prior to D-Day (Tedders is responsible for much of the excellent tactical air support planning and for forcing the US and UK “bomber generals” to use their assets in support of armies and the strategic air campaign was temporarily halted.) Does anyone know any specifics on this? Anyone have any good reading on Tedders?
I knew allies commanders were fighting amongst each other more than the axis.
No sorry ,no good readings on tedders,im sure the other members will give you a whole page full.
Why did other allied commenders dislike monty?
I think you will find that the Axis commanders were just as good at bitching, backbiting and complaining about each other, their Commander and Allies as anyone on the other side. Read Panzer Leader by Guderian, he had plenty of gripes about his superiors in France and Russia.
Yes but i said the Allies fought amongst each other MORE than the Axis.
Meaning the Axis fought amongst each other but less.
And comanders being Jealous of each other-Monty and Einsinhower,im not sure about other comanders being jealous.