(March 28, 2016 at 12:42 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote: [quote pid='1233049' dateline='1459049428']

*Bernard Law Montgomery was the Lord Ronnie Rust of British generalling, a man whose reputation and arrogance was far in excess of his actual ability.

[/quote]

He was a successful leader who won battles regularly. He had a different approach to the Americans who went at things hell for leather and threw resources at problems but he was no slouch. I would argue that your view is coloured by the side of the atlantic you sit on.

(March 27, 2016 at 12:01 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(March 27, 2016 at 2:02 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Can we all agree that Hitler was a dummy?  He thought he was fighting a 19th Century war. He should have played with toy soldiers.  Maybe he would have won.

I don't think it was a lack of intelligence that did him in, but rather his obstinancy in both standing by decisions no matter how badly they turned out, and holding territorial gains that should have been rationalized.

I don't think there's any way Germany wins that war once it attacks the USSR. Period.

There's no way Germany wins the war after Hitler sacks Schacht, because it is at this stage the last hope for the resuscitation of the German economy goes out the window. From the sacking of Schacht onwards, industry was increasingly geared towards furnishing the army, to the detriment of the general economy and German people.

In terms of economic management, military planning, and many other areas, Hitler was as much use as a wet paper bag in a hurricane.

(March 28, 2016 at 3:50 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote: There's no way Germany wins the war after Hitler sacks Schacht, because it is at this stage the last hope for the resuscitation of the German economy goes out the window. From the sacking of Schacht onwards, industry was increasingly geared towards furnishing the army, to the detriment of the general economy and German people.

In terms of economic management, military planning, and many other areas, Hitler was as much use as a wet paper bag in a hurricane.

Schacht only resigned as president of the Reichsbank in 1939. Long after the economy started to fuel the war engine, as is obvious, given the date. He resigned from his post as minister of economics in 1937, again, long after the economy started to fuel the army. He did so because he was one of the select few, who saw that Germany couldn't keep up running debts without going bankrupt.

That only made occupations and ultimately the war more inevitable, since Germany fed like a vampire of the occupied territories. It did nothing to influence the outcome of the war. That, as I said earlier, was down to several reasons. Militarily as well as economically. Basically because 32.000 kilometers of frontlline couldn't be held and supplied by roughly - give or take -10 million soldiers, and an industry that was largely dependent on raw materials coming from abroad.

wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait guys

godwin's law

(March 28, 2016 at 12:47 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(March 28, 2016 at 12:42 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote: [quote pid='1233049' dateline='1459049428']

*Bernard Law Montgomery was the Lord Ronnie Rust of British generalling, a man whose reputation and arrogance was far in excess of his actual ability.

He was a successful leader who won battles regularly. He had a different approach to the Americans who went at things hell for leather and threw resources at problems but he was no slouch. I would argue that your view is coloured by the side of the atlantic you sit on.
[/quote]

Look up Market Garden some time. Montgomery was told that what he wanted to do would be a disaster without the proper preparations, yet he went ahead and did it anyway, simply because he wanted to burnish his reputation by being the first allied general across the Rhine.

(March 28, 2016 at 12:47 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(March 28, 2016 at 12:42 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote: *Bernard Law Montgomery was the Lord Ronnie Rust of British generalling, a man whose reputation and arrogance was far in excess of his actual ability.

He was a successful leader who won battles regularly. He had a different approach to the Americans who went at things hell for leather and threw resources at problems but he was no slouch. I would argue that your view is coloured by the side of the atlantic you sit on.

Like any general, he had his flaws. He was not at his best in a war of mobility.

Also, I thought Dorfl was Irish?

(March 28, 2016 at 4:18 pm)TheRealJoeFish Wrote: wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait guys

godwin's law

Nope, in this case it is apt. Drumpf is literally using the same tactics politically that Hitler did. Using fear of everyone else and scapegoating everyone else and promising to put the Nation back to it's former days of glory. Now the better argument is our system strong enough to withstand it, and are voters wise enough to reject it. I think so. 

It is the same political playbook. It would be laughable if he were some moron shouting on a street corner in need of being committed to a mental hospital, but he is running for office. His rhetoric is very dangerous.

(March 28, 2016 at 5:32 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Nope, in this case it is apt. Drumpf is literally using the same tactics politically that Hitler did.

That's not saying much now, does it? Hitler wasn't the first one to use them and there are a lot of Dumps out there doing the same. Appealing to the most primiitive instincts, resentments and fears of any given people, always was a slam dunk to garner at least some support.

These people inevitably fail, since they've got nothing to show for other than fear and hate mongering. Hitler did in the most spectacular way possible. Leaving almost 60 millions of casualties in his wake. Let's hope that Dump doesn't get a chance for a second helping. Of all the rightwingers, he's the most dangerous on a global level. Not because he's special, but because he stands a very real chance to lay his hands on nuclear devices. All the others, and there are many of them, are only dangerous to their own people and to what we call civil liberties and common decency.

Quote:Hitler used tactics other people had used successfully.

Funny that the Western Allies failed to see that.  No.  Give Hitler his due.  He weeded out the old Prussian war horses and let the younger officers (Guderian, Rommel and, perhaps most of all Von Manstein) who had impressed him with their ideas have their head.  Manstein's initial plan for Fall Gelb was rejected by the staff officers but Hitler backed it. 

Napoleon did not develop the tactics that La Grande Armee used either... but he used them to their utmost.

(March 28, 2016 at 6:52 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Funny that the Western Allies failed to see that.  No.  Give Hitler his due.  He weeded out the old Prussian war horses and let the younger officers (Guderian, Rommel and, perhaps most of all Von Manstein) who had impressed him with their ideas have their head.  Manstein's initial plan for Fall Gelb was rejected by the staff officers but Hitler backed it. 

But he already intervened in 1940 when he forbid Guderian to push for Dunkerk. Luckily for the world, it was only the first major mistake in a long row of disastrous tactical interventions.