¹

?Nb

Thanks for letting me know it sucks like Netflix.

L

Are you a queen...be honest I am a serious left winger....I am not predjudest

Nope

Rommel was a big loser haha, he somehow was always missing from the big battles

Rommel had more numbers at Alam el Halfa, but Montgomery won.

@@freefall9832 Rommel, a big loser? Is that why the Brits called him "The Desert Fox"?

@@grantsmythe8625 Rommel in North Africa was a sideshow that did nothing for the german war effort but drain resources. His career was a failure.

What quote would that be?

38:20 .....

@@nemiw4429 What quote from Patton is at 38 mins, 20 seconds?

I think you are correct. Monty was the supreme all arms army commander and not a one trick pony like Patton

you should judge resources vs strategic objective, it was a disctraction from germany nothing more!, uk had a victory and made much of it but 4 years until they ivaded euope!

He's a main character

I hope he thanked his guardian angel everyday of his life.

Actualy Monty never move i not understand his reputation like good tank comander. Tanks are for moving :D

Me too I loved it especially the beginning when that jeep jumps the sand dune and comes down with big 50 opening up man it was so cool the song hella cool too .

Opening scene definitely the best part, loved it as a kid just for that

@@freefall9832 dude i used to count the hours till 3pm after school .i made sure to be in front of our antenna tv for the opening the two jeeps with the big 50s and the music just too cool but it was mandatory to watch the very begining .those were the best days .

I had the Lunch Box and a Aussie hat.

true story: in '75 through tennis i made a friend who played a German soldier on that show, a non speaking minor role--a German fellow 20 years older than myself as i was 24--one day while going to a tennis court 'Eric' starts driving agressively, i ask him what's happening he says this is a stolen car and the owner is following us! it was a 1975 Cougar xr-7, i look behind and it's another "75 xr-7, so he's making evasive evasive maneuvers somewhere in Beverly Hills, but the amazing thing was that the driver behind us was a very familiar face, an actor you see a lot but don't know the name---he was the actor that always played the bad guy mastermind in shows like Mission Impossible, Mannix, and others--i couldn't believe that we were being chased by THAT guy! ultimately he evaded and we got away, needless to say our relationship slowly faded it was really unbelievable

he got medal rejected many times because he spoke up to some officiers how they treated pows. Good man

​@@yaboyflvckor456dude was literally a german version of oddball from kelly's heroes......dude was awesome.

Hey, he didn't have an alcoholic writer brother called Charles Bukowski 😁??? Nice to of seen those models. Wish they'd do a series from the Luftwaffe side, even a Hans Joachim Marseille film.

He was mediocre at best.

It was Alan Brooks' plan. Montgomery was tasked with carrying it out. Turns out he ended up carrying the can. Still, why bother with facts when you can bash an excellent field commander. Typical wereboo. Probably a yank too. Ffs

What 'colossal military debacles'?

@@thevillaaston7811 Market Garden.

@@thevillaaston7811 if Germany wasn't fighting on eastern front,then they would of walk all over england....Caen was a mess ... market garden was a mess....Monty was a puff

My Mum was a nurse (Theater sister} and when she came back from Burma after the war, she went home to her village in the Highlands (Ballater). She got an awful shock (!). Many of the boys she went to school with had been killed in N.Africa (51st Highland Div). Every time we passed the War Memorial, she would go very quiet and look at it. My Dad and Mum NEVER spoke of the war to the day they died.

@ScarInstinct11 Think MarketGarden, the Scheld, Caen, most of his N France operations, Sicily etc etc. Not only were these miserable but they very effectively halted the Allies as a whole.

Monty swept Rommels slate in North Africa haha rommel eventually suicides over it haha

Montgomery won Alam el Halfa, Alamein, Mareth, Sicily, Normandy, the Scheldt, the Northern half of the Bulge, the Reichswald and the Rhine. Eisenhower stoped the allies by his failure to concentrate resources in North Africa, Italy and at the Rhine.

@@freefall9832 Wow, you sure don't know history, do you?

@ Sam Radowick That is not fair. I rarely defend Monty, but the criticisms on the posts here are way overdone. It is true that Mobty was cautious. I agree too cautious which may have slowed the Allied advance. But the Allies could not lose in any protracted struggle of attrition. But over-aggressive campaigns could bring defeats. And simply put, the Germans were better at war than either the British or Americans. It is why Ike cg=hosde a broad-front campaign. One not often mentioned issue.: Monty did not have an endless pool of manpower back home to replace losses like the Soviets and Americans.

Same with Michael Whitman

Saw something that during the invasion of Iraq we copied his tactic's and one captured Iraqi solider got in the back of a Bradley which had a picture of him in it and he was confused to why the American's had a picture of an enemy in their vehicle, ur comment made me think of that!

@@kendallfach7020 The aftermath of 73 Easting.

@@ultrajd yessir!!!

BLETCHLEY PARK.. code breakers, were reading the German military codes and passing on the info to Montgomery. So Montgomery had the upper hand. 👍🏻

Actually, Patton led the first tank attack in WW1. Granted, Guderian built on his experiments and benefitted from intrawar technological advances, but the origins of blitzkrieg came from cavaliers who didn't lose their faith in mobility over defense during WW1

@@theomnisthour6400 You are in fact both wrong. The first major tank attack of WWI occurred before any American troops even entered the European Theatre of Operations, the Battle of Cambrai in November 1917. Patton was neither unique, nor the first to recognise the *potential* for a tank to be an offensive weapon, however the technology at the time in WWI did not allow it. Early tanks were slow and unreliable in the extreme. A tank battalion could expect to lose approximately 20% of their tanks per day through mechanical breakdown. That's *without* losses to enemy action. This is illustrated by the Battle of Amiens in 1918 where over 400 tanks started the battle, by day four there were 35 running. And no, Americans were not involved in the Battle of Amiens either.... The only person claiming that Guderian invented Tank Warfare was Guderian himself in his autobiography. That he was somewhat blowing his own trumpet is putting it mildly. While he *did* have some influence, especially in the development of half tracks for the movement of infantry alongside the tanks, he was by no means the sole architect of German Armoured Doctrine he claimed he was.

@alganhar1 As a descendant of Maarten Harpertzoon Tromp, I know better than most how silly these "who was first" nonsense arguments are. Truth is, both Patton and Guderian will both be better known than whatever second rate genius first used them in an attack in WW1

@@alganhar1Guderian never claimed that he “invented tank warfare”. Actually, he gave cred to others such as Liddell Hart for influencing. His first experience with real tanks was in Sweden. What he did do was that he modernised the old military principe of penetration and “break through”. And to accomplish a brake through meant it necessary to concentrate not only tanks and armoured vehicles but also motorised infantry supported by artillery and close air support on one specific area in the enemy line, preferably where the enemy was weak and hopefully not expected an attack. Guderian considered a truck just as important as a tank. And in his military background as a cadet and later during ww1, he early recognised the huge importance of radio communications. Guderian didn’t “invent” very much at all. Instead he modernised and refined some ideas by others before him.

They missed all the great tank commanders. This is a list of popular generals most laymen have heard of... Patton is the only real tank commander on the list... bad history really...

Not really cause you lost and many of your comrades died 😂 so maybe they would want to be alongside Patton!

@@Architect1ful they lost but the casualties were funny considering yours haha

Rommel wasn't a tank commander. Rommel was an infantry general first and foremost.

Any greasy rat who fought with rommel should have been deeply ashamed of being part of the worst crimes that have ever been committed.

North africa and yugoslavia and greece drained material and men from the main effort in ussr, germany made the fatal error of engaging ina multi front war with inadequate resources and manpower for the task, war was a possible win if uk had entered into a deal with germany in1940 and if stalin had been deposed in 1941, big ifs in each case neither occurred, , stalemate at best for germany after the usa lend lease program suppport for uk and ussr, defeat inevitable after usa entered war. Had grrmany negotiated a deal with uk and ussr in early 1942 ussr wou ld have rebuilt its military but not been materially strong enough to attack germany. Uneasy likely short term truce until germany had rebuilt enough to attack ussr again with uk material support and manpower for an anti communist crusade?

I remember this. When asked why they had a picture of an old enemy. The reply was he was the best tactician in the German army.

It's not "alot" but "a lot." Similarly, it's "a bit" not "abit."

The Invasion on France (Fall Gelb) in 1940 was his plan.

Manstien was a genius

well, once a British unit captured a German radio headquarters unit. The British found out that the Germans had all the British plans and where all the British units were located and what they were doing. It was a case of very poor intelligence control by the British and outstanding intelligence gathering by the Germans. Rommel always had a big advantage because he knew what the British were doing, and what they were going to do. .

You hit the nail on the head! Couldn't have explained it any better myself!

If I could give your comment two likes then I would, but I can't so one shall do

@@rickyjones3754 Thku for your kind remarks.

@ Chuck Liebenauer Absolutely correct about the scale of the Eastern Front. But it is important to recognize that one reason that the Red Army prevailed in the Ost Krieg was that the Germans had to use much of their industrial effort to fight the War in the West. The great bulk of H=German MANPOWER was committed to the Ostkrieg, but German industrial production was primarily oriented toward the War in the West,.

@@dennisweidner288 You might be correct but the video was about military commanders and combat. Western production both German and Allies did not become a factor until the US entered the war. Germany did not go into wartime production until 1942 when it was already too late. 1943 was the killer year for the Wehrmacht. Starting with losing 250k at Stalingrad, 200k in N Africa and then the total failure of Zitadelle. All of those battle trained men and equipment was so great they could never recover but that would be for the next video to explain.

@ Jbf53176 Absolutely correct. Of course, a lot of Red Army commanders are not mentioned because Stalin murdered large numbers of them in the Great Terror of the 1930s.

Monty was a good commander but he wasn't A great tank commander. But because of Churchill his Exploits we're played up for propaganda purposes. Just Look at what happened at Remagen with the AIRBORNE ATTACK IN OPERATION MARKET GARDEN, WHERE HE HAD THEM JUMPING RITE INTO THE MIDDLE OF A GERMAN DIVISIONS REST AREA. IT WAS A COMPLETE AND UTTERLY UNNECESSARY WASTE OF MEN AND MATERIALS

@@bruceperkins7253 Why 'because of Churchill'. Every country made heroes out of major commanders. Britain did have many land victories. They needed a hero. We did the same, just look at MacArthur. I can assure you, it was;t because of Roosevelt or Marshall.

'Patton absolutely deserves to be there' How so?

BLETCHLEY PARK.. code breakers, were reading the German military codes and passing on the info to Montgomery. So Montgomery had the upper hand. 👍🏻

Detroit and the Great Lake freighters bringing iron ore down to Lake Erie to the Pennsylvania steel mills.....they don't get the recognition....but back then in United States, everyone contributed.

@@marysullivan3326 Yea, while in Britain, everyone just sat on their hands.

@@thevillaaston7811 i certainly have no idea where thats coming from. ...feeling unappreciated as a country?.....Remember "you" (no you PERSONALLY), but the country of Britain asked the US of A to join in the fight. Its truely the last war we ever should have been in.

@@marysullivan3326 'i certainly have no idea where thats coming from.' It just pours out of the USA on a conveyor belt...Films, TV programmes, books, lectures, KZfaq comments...All full of America this, America that. Let us be absolutely clear, Britain was the only major power to fight from the first day, to the last day of the war. Britain fought in every major theatre of war, it was only country to fight Germany on its own. Britain was the only major power to go to war on behalf of another country (Poland) - all the others either attacked other countries, or were attacked by other countries. Britain out-mobilized every other country (even Russia). Relative to its circumstances, Britain out-produced every other country. On its own, Britain out-produced Germany. All this from a country that was uder air assault, a sea blockade, and for four years had the enemy 21 miles away. As far as who did what in the Second World War is concerned is concerned, we rule. 'Britain asked the US of A to join in the fight.' When did that happen?

@@thevillaaston7811 Keep drinking the Kool-Aid.....or for you Brits, Tea.

'Montgomery had an unlimited supply of men and machines.' When did that happen?

No.

15th and 21st panzer, 90th Leichte Division

Because he read his competitors book

Who did Patton beat?

Guderian is far more a theoretician, but need to be here, as well as…? Others for sure, and Monti a grand commander ? Just successful by the weight of numbers, just the most skilful of the English commanders. Call one other famous British tank commander…Right…nobody…

@@dirkusmaximus9268 I raised my eyebrow at the inclusion of Monty as well. I would've included Soviet tank army commanders, such as Rotmistrov, Vatutin or Koniev over a highly overrated light-weight such as Monty.

But they have Monty on the list? HAHAHAHA

This is a list that's incomplete at best and a Bunch of b.s. at worst. But it Also sparks a healthy debate over who was and wasn't included in the video..

New here but I love your outlook on truth my friend 👊🦁👍

What about superior tanks ?

As a German: sey totally nailed it! Se next war we're going to start is against sis stupid "th"

I believe Russia's T34 was the top tank .it had some of everything speed,maneuverability ,penetrating power,sloped armor, wide tracks .the tiger 1 was UNDERPOWERED ,had no sloping armor, had narrow tracks the worst for snow but when the king tiger came out it had a stronger engine sloped armor and extremely important had wide tracks but even so I believe the T34 is the pound for pound best tank of ww2.

Being part of a tank crew is an amazing experience. The bond between a crew is second to none. When you spent days at a time living on top of each other without touching dirt, there are no boundaries between you. As for the best tank, that's impossible to say. Apart from which period of the war you mean (the rate of development was astounding) each tank had strengths & weaknesses in mobility, fire-power, protection, range, reliability, cost, etc.

@@wfranceschi3606 Actually the tigers tracks were so wide they had to remove the outer road wheels and put special thin tracks on so the train would fit through tunnels. Same engine powered the Panther, Tiger I and II, The1st T 34's weren't all that good the transmission broke down, only 2 men in the turret and no radio during Barbarossa 100's were knocked out. The T 85 was much better 3 man turret.

The Ronson wasn't around until after the war.

The Sherman was known to the Germans as the Tommy Cooker.

Witman and his crew where not gemany top ace and crew, that goes to Kurt Knipsel, but because he was not with the ss and i believe strike a ss man he was not good for the german propaganda, and because Witman was with the ss he was perfect for the propaganda, dont get me wrong Witman was good, but Knipsel destroyt a lot of more enemy verhicles and tanks

'Didn't Monty know how the Fox operated?' Who can say?... CRUSADE IN EUROPE DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER WILLIAM HEINEMANN LIMITED 1948 P282 ‘Knowing that his old antagonist of the desert, Rommel, was to be in charge of the defending forces, Montgomery predicted that enemy action would be characterized by constant assaults carried out with any force immediately available from division down to a battalion or even company size. He discounted the possibility that the enemy under Rommel would ever select a naturally strong defensive line and calmly and patiently go about the business of building up the greatest possible amount of force in order to launch one full-out offensive into our beach position. Montgomery’s predictions were fulfilled to the letter.’ 'He would draw the tanks onto his gun line every time! Either he flanked the Brits or drew them onto his 88's. It's not a sophisticated plan.' What should he have done instead? 'Why didn't Monty use his airpower better? Montgomery did not command any 'airpower' 'Don't send brave men into mine fields to be hammered by 88's! Poor General ship.' So, you send cowards there instead? 'Rommel was a great soldier. Brave and would take chances! Monty was slow and cautious. Relied on overwhelming kit.' Rommel got himself stuck at the end of an extended supply line. A mistake that Montgomerey did not make. 'Even with Bletchley Monty was slow.' what has Bletchley got to do with it? 'Patton had balls!!' No doubt, most males have them. Got any more gems for us?..

"We regarded general Patton extremely highly as the most aggressive panzer-general of the Allies. . . His operations impressed us enormously, probably because he came closest to our own concept of the classical military commander. He even improved on Napoleon’s basic tenet - activité, vitesse - vitesse." -Gunther Blumentritt

The German general Von Manteuful described Patton as a cautious and incompetent general after facing him at Metz

[Citation needed]

@@McShaggswell it is called google

@@McShaggswell Try Harry Yeide for a start or the US Army Historian

Probably talking about relative firepower. Guns that might have been effective at the beginning of the war became less affective against newer tanks with better armor

That would be because the narrator doesn't know the topic and was given a script that was in error, and no one during the editing process had the knowledge to pick it up and correct it. These documentaries aren't put together by historians, they're made by entertainers

@@roxYt346 Nothing to do with relative firepower, it was always a low velocity gun who ever wrote the script was wrong

'Montgomery waited until he had superior numbers of men and equipment, so Alamein was not mark of brilliance.' Montgomery with 4 divisions defeated Rommel' six divisions at Alam el Halfa. 'And then came Market Garden where Monty gambled to win fame' On what evidence to make this claim? Did Montgomery tell you this?

@@thevillaaston7811 lets see the equipment of those divisions, also they werent all german, there were Italians amognst them, and we all know how they fought

@@trivunkonjik7413 Ok, Rommel had 500 tanks many of them new, Montgomery had 450 tanks, 370 of them Matilda and Valentine with the 2 pounder gun so very much out gunned, Rommel had 700 aircraft, Montgomery 500.

British fanboys always cry when Monty gets criticized. A commander like Rommel or Patton was respected by combatants on both sides. Only Brits stick up for Monty, what does that tell you?

@@Spacehog1981 The Germans had never heard of Patton until the end of the war.

Its so well done that i hope they didnt pay the person that did the research.I turned off around 6:20 when they showed the German Mark 3 Special...

This show was originally aired on the History Channel back in 2010 and ended in 2013. I loved watching this show and Dogfights when I was younger.

@@benpurcell4935 That was when the History Channel still had an occasional program about history.

@@dennisweidner288 I know right.

I agree about the pows German and the west. However it should be mentioned that Stalin treated pows as bad or worse than the Germans. In the East.

Alos remember it was the British who took our Sherman and turned it into something that could destroy the Tiger and Panzer, adding the longer barrell

The Soviets were also human vermin, with Stalin being the head rat. He killed millions of his own people. These two brutal regimes absolutely deserved one another.

The Tiger was too heavy and the bombers made sure the production was limited it was too late as was the jets and rockets but we took the brain trust and became the military power to check the Soviets

@ the celt Rommel was not a great strategist. If he was, he would have: 1) focused on Malta and 2) not gone so deeply into Egypt. He was a brilliant tactician.

@@dennisweidner288 one mans strategist is another mans tactician . i think your splitting hairs mate lolz

@@thecelt4807 I suggest you open your dictionary. And mull over the fact that the Germans, including Rommel, won a lot of battles, in large measure because of brilliant battlefield tactics, but catastrophically lost the War. That is hardly splitting hairs.

I believe they had broke the American code and he was privy to that as well. Just like the Americans w Japan and the Allie’s later on w the German codes.

Yes thats what I, somehow, just learned recently: that Rommel had been privy to the Allies' communications in Africa and what a significant role that played in his appearance of superiority. Once we learned of this and stopped it he subsequently stopped winning battles. From what I remember anyways.

'a big ego jealousy was a big feature' How so?

BLETCHLEY PARK.. code breakers, were reading the German military codes and passing on the info to Montgomery. So Montgomery had the upper hand. 👍🏻

@@Petal4822 That information was available to all senior allied commanders.

@@Petal4822 Rommel also had access to the UK's military plans as the plans where leaked by a US Military Attache at the embassy in Cairo because the codes being used for this information had been cracked by Germany - it's no surprise that after Rommel stopped getting this information he stopped being able to anticipate what the British where doing, he often relied on attacking the weakest parts of the UK's lines in Egypt, losing that intelligence he lost the ability to attack altogether because he didn't know where to deploy his troops. So for the first part of the war is was Rommel who had the upper hand.

good old rts vibes

Are you sure? I mean this was the first real tank war.