Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Would the war have been shortened

Discussion in 'WWII General' started by Riter, Jul 3, 2020.

  1. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    .....but, then you could say if Patton was in charge and not Monty, he would've ''pressed home'' the closure.....?
    ....Monty's in charge, would not he be the one to blame?.....I thought I read in Patton's Gap [ a purposely misleading title ] or a ''similar book'', it put the blame on Monty ---at the end of the book.....if I remember correctly--anybody else read that one?
     
  2. Frank Natoli

    Frank Natoli Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2020
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Warren County, New Jersey, USA
    Monty was in charge in the north, coming down from Caen.
    Bradley was in charge in the south, coming up from LeMans.
    There is much argument over who failed.
    In my opinion, take it for what you will, Monty was facing extremely heavy German forces since Day One.
    Bradley, with the Cobra Breakout on July 25, 1944, was sweeping east against collapsing German resistance.
    Thus there was arguably the "hammer / anvil" situation, with Monty in the north being the anvil, and Bradley in the south being the hammer.
    There is NO history of Monty ordering Bradley to NOT move north through Argentan to Falaise.
    The dominant history is Bradley saying "I want a stiff shoulder on the Seine and not a broken neck at Falaise".
    You'll also read about fears of blue-on-blue if the Americans pushed north past Argentan to Falaise.
    Yes, that was a risk, but to simply stop and wait for Monty, and let 50,000 Germans escape the pocket, was inexcusable.
    I must say again: Monty gave no order to stop but Bradley is on the record countermanding Patton's orders to Haislip.
    Bradley is the villain.
     
  3. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    26,461
    Likes Received:
    2,207
    I recall reading Patton read the enigma info and acted according it. Monty was suspicious of the info and trusted more what his instincts told him to do? Was this what happened?
     
  4. Frank Natoli

    Frank Natoli Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2020
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Warren County, New Jersey, USA
    Doubtless both were aware of Enigma/Ultra, but I have never read of Monty holding back in Normandy on account of Ultra information.
    All indications are that Monty fought as hard as possible, see Charnwood, see Goodwood, but the Germans were simply there in enough force to stop him.
    Patton, on the other hand, was countermanded by Bradley from fighting his way north through Argentan to Falaise.
    So one might argue that Bradley was worried about Ultra information but not Monty and not Patton.
    As a side matter, LeClerc was also an element in the failure to close the gap [though I repeat Bradley was overwhelmingly to blame].
    Haislip had ordered LeClerc north toward Argentan, skirting west of the forest just to the south of Argentan.
    American 5th Armored was ordered to skirt east of the forest.
    That way each armored division had its own roads to move on.
    LeClerc, an excellent commander but who took orders more as suggestions, decided to get there first he would drive west, through and east of the forest.
    He got tied down in the forest, and his movement east blocked the American 5th.
    As a result, the Germans got to Argentan first, and once the Germans setup defensive positions, it is very hard to dislodge them.
    Which is what happened.
    Allied forces didn't take Argentan, never mind Falaise, until it was much too late.
    But that fundamentally happened because Bradley ordered XV Corps east over Patton's objections.
    And Patton was still on probation over the Sicily slapping incidents.
     

Share This Page