login   |    register
History Club
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Hosted by Frank Amato
What is we didn't listen to Monty
drewgimpy
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Utah, United States
Joined: January 24, 2002
KitMaker: 835 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2002 - 04:23 PM UTC
This sight has not only got me working on armor models, but watching the history chanel. I have heard a few situations where Monty dragging his feat or bad plans drug the war on and caused many problems. What would have happened if Ike didn't hold Monty's hand during the war in a tactical sense, not political which would have caused problems with England.
RufusLeeking
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ohio, United States
Joined: January 18, 2002
KitMaker: 330 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2002 - 07:42 PM UTC
Many folks believe and I do too. The war would of been over in September of 1944.
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
AeroScale: 287 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2002 - 09:09 PM UTC
Monty's main problem, like most of the world in the 1940s, is that our military was not a "professional army". We could raise an army of millions in the span of a few months, but the world looked at us as a bunch of soft sissies. Our officers didn't come from military dynasties that went back centuries. Farmers' kids or other "lower-class" people could rise to the officer ranks. It was the underestimation of the American military that is the downfall of many enemies. Monty is no different. He refused to believe that our Army and the lowbred leaders could match a European army on the battlefield. Even when it became apparent that we were winning, he tried to lessen our achievements by make statements that our actions were all a part of “his” grand scheme all along.

Plus, he knew the British forces could not afford the casualties that the Americans could handle and he wanted to remain in the fight. If he had fought the bold battles the US wanted, the British Army may have been become combat ineffective and he would have been sidelined. A Field Marshall with no Army, he sure as heck wouldn’t be given any American troops to command.
RufusLeeking
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ohio, United States
Joined: January 18, 2002
KitMaker: 330 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2002 - 09:58 PM UTC
Great point Rob, it amazes me how many leaders back then thought like that about the american soldier. Here is this country less than 200 years old, made up of misfits from every country. How can they ever match up with the great European nations. Today people still under estimate the american people.