Listening to this on a rainy late December afternoon ....complete bollocks - FIFY

Monty was born in London.

he was born in England but his ancestry was Ulster Irish, Inishowen in Donegal was his ancestral home

She did indeed, but she did it in Kennington, south London/Surrey. Monty was of Protestant, Irish Ascendancy ancestry. I doubt very much he'd take kindly to you removing London from Londonderry.

Damn strait.

My 2 favorite Commanders.... MacArthur and Monty.

Amen!

As an Army commander in the ETO... Yes. Read up on Truscott and Devers. Great commanders so underrated. I have a low opinion of Clark and Bradley but hey they were Ike's buddies

Hardly ever, from D-Day onwards. Montgomery was higher in rank, in a different army, in a different part of the front.

Monty got schooled on Sicily,sat in Italy,got smacked around at Caen with clear advantages in naval and aerial ordince being shot. Let the Germans out of the bag at Falaise Dieppe and Market Garden got good men killed as he wasn't there. Much of the praise/adulation of this guy is unmitigated horse hooey Churchill removed the wrong guy and stuck with a mistake rather than dare admit he made one. Monty was fortunate to be on the side of two rising World Powers

Why should the most successful Western Allied ground commander of WW2 by some way mention a bit part player.

@@lyndoncmp5751 Just think... Para Dave (Aka Big Woody), spends his life being consumed with hatred for someone (Montgomery) who was dead 25 years before he was born...

As you two knobs belittle a world power that came 3,500 miles to your aide after Britain getting bounced out of Norway,Netherlands,Belgium,France,Dunkirk ----------------------------- This from a New Zealander: Andrew Brown, my new favorite poster as Geronimo got tired of you juvenile dweebs YAWNING this makes me sleepy,More Englishmen turned and ran than any other point in the war. I know it hurts - the truth often does. The Poms are next to useless whenever there is an armed force oposing them that is perhaps even half as strong in men and material. The poms' most glorious land battles have been historically fought agains tribesmen with spears. A more cowardly bunch of whinging endemic losers has never taken the field.Shameful - but expected. Evidently armies that don't use spears proved irksome to you Poms. But if the US was bad, then the British should have stayed home and saved a bunch of Englishmen.🤣 Montgmery was an uppity little nothing who thought rather too much of his own position in things. He was about as important as a soviet latrine digger. You've just read too many crowns own comics.Britain served as an unsinkable carrier for the French invasion - and that's about it.You seem to think that Britain was important to WW2 and that people like Montgomery were important characters. Wrong. Had Montgomery never graced a battle field the result would have been the same. The reality is that the UK and commonwealth played a very very small role in the whole war. You don't want to see it because history is not important to you. You want to watch rousing movies that make you think you won the war when in reality you barely had a part in it. ------------------------------- Andrew Brown telling it like it is

Not according to the Germans...

Alan Brooke's own words​ *"Triumph in the West, by Arthur Bryant, From the diary of Field Marshal Lord Alan Brooke, entry for 5 October 1944:Page 219" During the whole discussion one fact stood out clearly, that access to Antwerp must be captured with the least possible delay. I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault, Instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the first place. Ramsay brought this out well in the discussion and criticized Monty freely...."* Or Bernard himself after the War admitting it ​ *The Guns at Last Light, by Rick Atkinson, page 303* *Even Field Marshall Brooke* had doubts about Montgomery's priorities *"Antwerp must be captured with the Least possible delay" he wrote in his diary Admiral Ramsey wrote and warned that clearing the Scheldt of mines would take weeks, even after the German defenders were flicked away from the banks of the waterway" Monty made the startling announcement that he would take the Ruhr with out Antwerp this afforded me the cue I needed to lambaste him.......I let fly with all my guns at the faulty strategy we had allowed* *Montgomery would acknowledge as much after the war, conceding "a bad mistake on my part"* *From a PHD at King's College who also notes Ramsay/Brooke warned Monty about the Scheldt Estuary* *Eisenhower's Armies ,by Dr Niall Barr ,page 415* After the failure of Market-Garden, Eisenhower held a conference on 5 October 1944 that not only provided a post mortem on the operation but in which he reiterated his strategy for the campaign. Alan Brooke was present as an observer, noted that IKE's strategy continued to focus on the clearance of the Scheldt Estuary, followed by an advance on the Rhine, the capture of the Ruhr and a subsequent advance on Berlin. *After a full and frank discussion in which Admiral Ramsey criticized Montgomery freely, Brooke was moved to write, I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault,instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the 1st place....IKE nobly took all the blame on himself as he had approved Monty's suggestion to operate on Arnhem* *How about Air Marshall Tedder* *With Prejudice, by Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Lord Tedder, Deputy Supreme Commander AEF, Page 599"* *Eisenhower assumed, as he and I had done all along, that whatever happened Montgomery would concentrate on opening up Antwerp. No one could say that we had not emphasized the point sufficiently by conversation and signal* *How about Monty's Chief of Staff* *Max Hastings, Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45 Freddie de Guingand Monty's Chief of Staff telephoned him saying the operation would be launched too late to exploit German disarray. That XXX Corps push to Arnhem would being made on a narrow front along one road,Monty ignored him* *How about IKE's/Allied HQ Chief of Staff Bedell-Smith* *Max Hastings, Armageddon: The Battle for Germany,1944-45* The release of the files from German Signals by Bletchley Park conclusively showed that the 9th & 10th Panzer Divisions were re-fitting in the Arnhem area. With their Recon Battalions intact. *Yet when Bedel-Smith(SHAEF) brought this to Monty's attention "he ridiculed the idea and waved my objections airly aside"* *How about IKE's Private Papers?* The Eisenhower Papers, volume IV, by Edward Chandler* *By early September Montgomery and other Allied leaders thought the Wehrmacht was finished . *It was this understanding that led Monty to insist on the Market-Garden Operation over the more mundane task of opening the port of Antwerp. He ignored Eisenhower's letter of Sept 4 assigning Antwerp as the primary mission for the Northern Group of Armies* *And of course Admiral Ramsay who knew a deep water port was needed* *From Ardennes 1944,By Sir Antony Beevor, page 14* Sir Bertram Ramsey ,Allied Naval commander-in-chief had told SHAEF and Monty that the Germans could block the Scheldt Estuary with ease. *The mistake lay with Monty, who was not interested in the estuary and thought the Canadians could clear it later* *Try looking up Churchill's biographer Martin Gilbert who took over 20 yrs to finish the 8 volumes on Winston's life* *Road to Victory, Winston Churchill 1941-45,by Martin Gilbert* A British War cabinet memo suggested that the appointment of Monty was from the point of view of it's reception by public opinion. *Apparently that clinched the War Cabinet's vote for Montgomery; based strictly on military accomplishments, the case for him was very weak*

Montgomery was the most successful Western Allied ground commander of WW2 by some way. He took more ground through more countries while facing more quality German opposition than any other Western Allied ground commander of WW2. The war would have dragged on longer without him. He got the allies out of Africa, into Italy then across France. It was Eisenhower who was a hindrance to the allied war effort when he dictated ground strategy after Normandy. His Broad Front decision was an absolute failure. It got nowhere for six months, suffered hundreds of thousands of casualties and the Americans ended up in retreat in the Ardennes. Thank goodness for Monty. He was the only one who actually knew what he was doing.

​@@lyndoncmp5751 From Para Dave (aka Big Woody) Part One: ‘Alan Brooke's own words “Triumph in the West, by Arthur Bryant, From the diary of Field Marshal Lord Alanbrooke, entry for 5 October 1944:Page 219" During the whole discussion one fact stood out clearly, that access to Antwerp must be captured with the least possible delay.I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault, Instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the first place. Ramsay brought this out well in the discussion and criticized Monty freely...."’ Notice that this diary entry is from after the conclusion of Market Garden, and thus this opinion is hindsight. The whole period of MARKET GARDEN is covered by Alanbrooke in his work, ‘Triumph in the West’, chapter 8, ‘Lost Opportunity’. Notice the chapter title. Alanbrooke was in the Americas from the time before MARKET GARDEN was agreed, to a couple of days before it ended. Notice the words ‘for once is at fault’. What else could anyone infer from that other than Alanbrooke considered that Montgomery’s judgement had been fault free up to that time. After five years of war (two and two thirds years for the USA), and with Montgomery having been an army / army group commander since the middle of 1942. That will do nicely… Or Bernard himself after the War admitting it ‘The Guns at Last Light,by Rick Atkinson,page 303 Even Field Marsahall Brooke had doubts about Montgomery's priorities "Antwerp must be captured with the Least possible delay" he wrote in his diary Admiral Ramsey wrote and warned that clearing the Scheldt of mines would take weeks,even after the German defenders were flicked away from the banks of the waterway"Monty made the startling announcement that he would take the Ruhr with out Antwerp this afforded me the cue I needed to lambaste him.......I let fly with all my guns at the faulty strategy we had allowed Montgomery would acknowledge as much after the war,conceding "a bad mistake on my part"’ Wrong… Montgomery’s words "a bad mistake on my part" was about his belief at the time that the Canadian Army could clear the Scheldt. Unlike US commanders, Montgomery was prepared to own up to his mistakes. Montgomery did not state that an attempt on the Rhine before the Scheldt had been cleared was a mistake. Perhaps Rick Atkinson should have stopped polishing his Pullitzer Prize and checked back instead. From a PHD at King's College who also notes Ramsay/Brooke warned Monty about the Scheldt Estuary Eisenhower's Armies,by Dr Niall Barr,page 415 After the failure of Market Garden, Eisenhower held a conference on 5 October 1944 that not only provided a post mortem on the operation but in which he reiterated his strategy for the campaign.Alan Brooke was present as an observer,noted that IKE's strategy continued to focus on the clearance of the Scheldt Estuary,followed by an advance on the Rhine,the capture of the Ruhr and a subsequent advance on Berlin. After a full and frank discussion in which Admiral Ramsey criticised Montgomery freely,Brooke was moved to write, I feel that Monty's strategy for once is at fault,instead of carrying out the advance on Arnhem he ought to have made certain of Antwerp in the 1st place....IKE nobly took all the blame on himself as he had approved Monty's suggestion to operate on Arnhem Now how does this Neil Barr add to the subject?, Alanbrooke’s words have been available to read since the late 1950s. No one disputes that Alanbrooke stated what he stated. By including his extract, Para Dave is merely duplicating the quote. Why would anyone think that this Dr Niall Barr (who was born decades after the war), and his PHD, would bring anything new to the subject? ‘How about Air Marshall Tedder With Prejudice, by Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Lord Tedder, Deputy Supreme Commander AEF, Page 599" Eisenhower assumed, as he and I had done all along, that whatever happened Montgomery would concentrate on opening up Antwerp. No one could say that we had not emphasized the point sufficiently by conversation and signal’ Tedder should have checked back when wrote this stuff. ‘With Prejudice’ was published in 1966. All he had to do was to look at Eisenhower’s memoirs, which were published in 1958, which included this statement: ‘At the September 10 conference in Brussels Field-Marshall Montgomery was therefore authorised to defer the clearing out of the Antwerp approaches in an effort to seize the Bridgehead I wanted.’ His words.

@@lyndoncmp5751 From Para Dave (aka Big Woody) Part Two: ‘How about Monty's Chief of Staff Max Hastings’ Major-General Sir Francis De Guingand was Montgomery’s Chief of Staff, was he not? Max Hastings, is that bloke with the Hank Harvin glasses that they call the ‘golf club members bar bore’, who thinks he knows more about the history of warfare han the rest of the world put together. ‘Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45 Freddie de Guingand Monty's Chief of Staff telephoned him saying the operation would be launched too late to exploit German disarray.That XXX Corps push to Arnhem would being made on a narrow front along one road,Monty ignored him’ OPERATION VICTORY MAJOR-GENERAL SIR FRANCIS DEGUINGAND K.B.E., C.B., D.S.O. HODER AND STOUGHTON LIMITED PUBLISHERS LONDON 1947 P416 ‘I had unfortunately been away sick in England during most of the period of preparation, and only arrived back on the 17th. So I was not in close touch with the existing situation. It was undoubtedly a gamble, but there was a very good dividend to be reaped if it came off. Horrocks was the ideal commander for the task, and morale of the troops was high.’ How about IKE's/Allied HQ Chief of Staff Bedell-Smith Max Hastings,Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-45 The release of the files from German Signals by Bletchley Park conclusively showed that the 9th & 10th Panzer Divisions were re-fitting in the Arnhem area.With their Recon Battalions intact. Yet when Bedel-Smith(SHAEF) brought this to Monty's attention "he ridiculed the idea and waved my objections airly aside" Max Hastings should have checked first: 1st Para Brigade Intelligence Summary No 1. 13.09.44: ‘the area might contain 15,000 enemy troops of which perhaps 8,000 would be concentrated in Arnhem. A reported concentration of 10,000 troops SW of Zwolle on 1st September may represent a battle scarred Panzer Division or two reforming’ SHAEF Intelligence Summary, 16.09 44: ‘the enemy has now suffered, in the West alone, losses in men and equipment that can never be repaired in this war….No force can, then, be built up in the West sufficient for a counteroffensive or even a successful defensive.’ The ‘Recon Battalions intact’ was actually identified as a single battalion, the training and reconnaissance of the Hermann Goering division. Bedell-Smith did not advise that MARKET GARDEN should be cancelled, he advised that one of the US Divisions should be moved up to Arnhem. That change hardly seems likely to have been acted on by the US General Brereton, who was the head of the FAAA. 'How about IKE's Private Papers? The Eisenhower Papers,volume IV,by Edward Chandler By early September Montgomery and other Allied leaders thought the Wehrmacht was finished . *It was this understanding that led Monty to insist on the Market-Garden Operation over the more mundane task of opening the port of Antwerp.He ignored Eisenhower's letter of Sept 4 assigning Antwerp as the primary mission for the Northern Group of Armies' How many more times?.. Eisenhower did attempt to contact until 5th September, and due to him being located Ranville, 400 miles behind the frontline, his message to Montgomery did not finish arriving until 9th. Meanwhile, Montgomery received an urgent message from London, asking what could be done about V2 attacks on London from the Western part of the Netherlands.from Montgomery immediately asked for a meeting with Eisenhower, which took place on the 10th, at Brussels Airport. As a result of that meeting, Montgomery was given the go ahead to plan MARKET GARDEN, as Eisenhower later testified: ‘At the September 10 conference in Brussels Field-Marshall Montgomery was therefore authorised to defer the clearing out of the Antwerp approaches in an effort to seize the Bridgehead I wanted.’ His words. ‘And of course Admiral Ramsay who knew a deep water port was needed From Ardennes 1944,By Sir Antony Beevor,page 14 Sir Bertram Ramsey ,Allied Naval commander-in-chief had told SHAEF and Monty that the Germans could block the Scheldt Estuary with ease. The mistake lay with Monty,who was not interested in the estuary and thought the Canadians could clear it later’ Rubbish, from a chancer who crashed in on the Second World War history scene decades after the war ended, with nothing new to add to the subject. ‘Monty,who was not interested in the estuary’ How is Beevor supposed to know what Montgomery was not interested in?.. The Scheldt could be blocked with ease in September, October, November, and so on. Taken together, both banks of the Scheldt were 100 miles long, and the Germans were still in strength of the south of the estuary in September 1944. Even if Montgomery had turned the entire 21st Army onto the Scheldt, it is hard to see how Antwerp could be used before the end of October. Meanwhile with no attempt on the Rhine, and with V2 rockets hitting London, the Germans continue their recovery after their defeat at the hands of Montgomery in Normandy. ‘Try looking up Churchill's biographer Martin Gilbert who took over 20 yrs to finish the 8 volumes on Winston's life Road to Victory,Winston Churchill 1941-45,by Martin Gilbert A British War cabinet memo suggested that the appointment of Monty was from the point of view of it's reception by public opinion. Apparently that clinched the War Cabinet's vote for Montgomery;based strictly on military accomplishments,the case for him was very weak’ This no use whatsoever, there is no way of knowing what were the words in the War Cabinet memo, and what words were Martin Gilbert’s opinion. This is what Churchill stated in a note to Rosevelt: WINSTON S CHURCHILL. THE SECOND WORLD WAR. CASSELL & CO LTD VOLUME V CLOSING THE RING 1952. ‘Prime Minister to President Roosevelt 15 Dec 43 9. Turning to the “Overlord” theatre, I propose to you that Tedder shall be Eisenhower’s Deputy Supreme Commander, on account of the great part the air will play in this operation, and this is most agreeable to Eisenhower.’ The War Cabinet desires that Montgomery should command the first expeditionary group of armies. I feel the Cabinet are right, as Montgomery is a public hero and will give confidence among our people, not unshared by yours.’ Not a word about Montgomery’s military accomplishments’. Why do people not check first?..