You've probably beaten Market Garden to death here

Actually Montgomery when insisted there should be a single ground commander in August 1944 he added he was gladly ready to work under command of Bradley. What he meant with a Single Ground Commander issue was basically saying to Eisenhower "You either have to choose me or Bradley as overall land force commander to determine axis of advance to Germany because there are not enough logistical resources to supply two army groups at once" As for Scheldt and Antwerp issue although he ignored and missed importance of Scheldt in September 1944 , German garrison in there was still too well enhanced anyway (and actually much better shape in September because most of 15th German Army was supporting them from south of Maas) So no matter what whether Scheldt peninsula causeway were cut after capture of Antwerp on 3 September is pointless. Clearing Scheldt no matter what was done after capture of Antwerp , was bound to be a slow and dirty business so until then Antwerp would be closed.

 

sacrificing many men and vehicles is not my idea of a great commander......if I'm not mistaken, Charnwood produced more Allied casualties, than German....that's a good plan? same as MG, the 1AB almost entirely gone, good plan? I would think, if he wanted to draw the enemy to a certain flank, there would not be that many casualties.....he's 'attacking', but he's not attacking?? he's drawing/luring the enemy to his flank? he's not trying to breakthrough with these operations?? is that it?
they were scheduled to take Caen, long before they did<>way behind schedule,[ when Monty was ground commander ] ,and Monty was not in charge when they reached the Rhine, ahead of schedule

 

If you consult US losses and compare them to German losses you might want to rethink the above.

 

Just a question here: Who is this R. Neillands and just what were the SEVEN panzer divisions IN FRONT of Caen? Last I knew only one Pz . Div. was in front of Caen (and not all of it) and that was Hitler Jugend. There were seven Pz. Divs. in Normandy-is that what he meant? (Apologies that this isn't totally on topic.)
.

 

Doubtful one that.

At what point in this thread have I "bashed" Montgomery? Your "junkyard dog" routine is equally as puzzling to me.

Odd, as I never "rolled back" or "rowed back" anything. Apparently, you have misinterpreted my explanation of an American vernacular as something other than it was intended. Thankfully, I made no mention regarding Montgomery and "to the victor go the spoils," or you probably would have taken it to mean that I wanted to throw spoiled meats, fruits, and vegetables at him.

The only things I cast are attached to a rod and reel...If I had wanted to asperate Montgomery's character, again, I would have done so, since he had quite a knack for making himself an easy target.

It wasn't an argument, it was a statement.

As to "factually incorrect"...That is, of course, based on your own experience, whereas my own experience has shown MacArthur to be the larger of the two hand grenades.

Seems that issue was left in the dust long ago...

 

I can not even begin to understand that.

Oh I see. Hmm.....who was in charge when Paris was taken ahead of schedule?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Neillands

If you want to be picky then use 'in the Caen sector'.
.

 

I suspect your puzzlement stems from the belief your carping criticism is completely valid and thus beyond any challenge.

 

That's the pot calling the kettle black...

 

Depends a lot on when you are talking about doesn't it though. Then there's the issue that if one person takes a public "swipe" at a bunch of well respected people he should rather expect a lot of it returned.

That certainly isn't the case in my experiance. Indeed the only reason that Monty may get more is that his defenders are more vocal. Mac on the other hand while he does have defenders they tend to be much more muted. This thread I think is a pretty clear case for much of the critism being as a result of your rather rabid defence of him.

 

Takao,

I would urge you to do what I do and pretty much ignore him. His habit is not to add anything positive to this forum but to criticize and heckle others. It all boils down to the old saying, "Never get into a pi$$ing match with a skunk!"

 

Rabid defence?
I see a group of people peddling some very ill-informed opinions and completely unable to deal with corrections to their factual distortions.
Posting an opinion invites a counter opinion. If you cant stand the heat..............

 

Another completely bogus claim.
Please provide a link that shows these 'more vocal' defenders of Montgomery.
Where can I see them?
Maybe you will be the first to actually back this claim?

 

In entire Caen sector from Orne Bridgehead to Bayeux total of seven panzer divisions gone into action against 2nd British Army (not counting two additional infantry corps) between June and July 1944 : Panzer Lehr (transferred to St Lo sector on July 16) , 1st and 12th SS Panzer Divisions commanded by Sepp Dietrich , 9th and 10th SS Panzer Divisions , 2nd and 21st Panzer Divisions were constantly in action one way or another.

 

Take a look in the mirror and then try and find someone as resolute in the defence of Mac.

 

You learned something. That though it is true that 7 Panzer Divisions were 'in Normandy' they were mainly concentrated around the 21st AG front. And that all the Tiger tanks were there as well.

Here is an extract from Buckley which gives some idea of tank distribution.

View attachment 22173

 

I think from what I have read in the past as well as this particular thread that Montgomery was going through a phase that can be normal for any commander/general who is a national icon for your country: hubris. Market Garden was a product of his overconfidence and pride that the war would come to an end and he was probably obsessed with the fact that it could be him who ends the war. That is my theory.

 

If I was discussing 'Mac' I might be interested. Until such time can you please provide the link to those 'more vocal' Monty defenders that everyone claims they are responding to. Where are they?

 

??? Haveing problems reading or just comprehending what you read?

 

Ahem entire Normandy Campaign was behind the schedule after D-Day because of concentration of 7th German Army and Panzer Group West in Normandy and their leave no ground orders from Berlin. That only made Allied victory even more total there bronks. No one claims Market Garden was a good plan. Charnwood casaulties were almost even. And After that although Operation Goodwood failed to secure Verseilles ridge German manpower casaulties were much heavier (4500 killed wounded captured compared 3200 British) And British Canadians although hard pressed could replace their losses especially in vehicles and material. Germans could not. What Montgomery followed as a strategy there was divert and fix enemy in one flank while leaving other flank at St. Lo open for breakthough. And even in Caen sector attrition was in Allied favour. (Rommel's last report to Berlin on 15th July warned that they could hold the front two or three weeks at most because they were losing men and material fast and not getting any reinforcements and replacements ) Depth of German defences was quite formidable there and despite that Montgomery had no option to conduct head on conventional offensive operations there to fix German panzer divisions there. And as I said up until last week of July Allies including Americans under command of Bradley were delayed everywhere. (St. Lo also supposed to be captured on D+1 instead fell on 17 July)