Al Murray on Bernard Montgomery and the Second World War STI outbreak - from RHLSTP 436 

Was just going to comment I’m stealing that 😀

I'm sure it was used in a James Bond film in the 90's. I think the upmarket hotel employee greets Pierce Brosnan and asks if he'd like any er...horizontal refreshment

I refer to it as horizontal folk dancing, but it's the same thing :D

Or in my regiment; horizontal PT.

I still use this phrase 😂😂

he was also most probably a pedophile.....

@@ads2686 he was also most probably a pedophile..... On what evidence?

Read the full monty both Lucien Treub and Nigel hamilton outed him. Or did you need it read to you

@@bigwoody4704 there are many other accounts of the extent of his difficult personality. If you want to troll someone find another victim you loser.

He was a former Royal Engineers Bomb Disposal Officer, and ended up as the head of the Psychology department in University College London.

Fantastic read, which also explains the incompetence of large corporations

My conceit, even as I was reading it, Peter, was that this was the antidote to the use of Sun Tsu's "The Art of War" in that very context. 😊

My goodness, I had forgotten all about that book, a bloody classic. My dad was also a Royal Engineer (Bomb Disposal) in WW2.

@@melancholiac I rewatch ‘Danger UXB’ every year or so. I was lucky enough to meet a few of the original generation of BDO’s not long after my own training. Gentlemen every one…

New Zealand had their own commander who was much better then Monty.. general freyberg V.C

@@davidbolton4930 HMMM, heard of Crete?

@@andywilson2406 yes I have multiple book on it you need to educate yourself on the battle of Crete we were never gonna hold that island and freyberg didn't want the new Zealand division to actually even stay their and he was ordered to defend the island as if he didn't know the Germans plans and he also didn't have any radios below the brigade level and the Germans had 300 plus aircraft freyberg had 20 odd

@@andywilson2406 he also had no tanks and no artillery at all the new Zealand government nearly fired him for taking the division to Greece and the Crete was only mean to be a staging area before they when to Egypt when freyberg go to Crete he was informed he was expected to defend the island which he refused to do for 3 days straight before accepting command of Crete Force blaming the fall of Crete on freyberg is a uneducated take no way he could have defend the island without any air support if you read stories from the kiwis on Crete they talk about never seeing a RAF aircraft

davidbolton4930 Freyberg much better than Montgomery? 😂 😂😂😂 Montgomery was the best general the western allies had in in the ETO and North Africa in WW2. Proved it many times.

micky mondo I'm not a gynecologist but I'll take a look.

Did he work a week in hand?

That is New Zealand general Bernard Freyberg who said that to him before final attack that caused mass Axis surrender in Tunisia. The sector Monty was interested to attack and breakthrough was very hilly and full of rock formations and Freyberg was blunt about their chances. Now Freyberg was not the best general of the world , he was a very good division commander but daft above that rank , losing Crete 1941. But as an infantry general Montgomery respected him and listened his advice especially in offensive operations which Freyberg was good and inspiring general. Therefore Monty switched axis of attack from his own 8th Army to 1st Army in further west and let go of any laurels he might get for final Allied victory in Africa. He could be humble and all business ans professional when he wished.

Brilliant comment. One tiny modification: Japan did care about casualties - they wished to die for emperor as a sort of death cult. Eventually, allies in Burma realised this and worked out that Japanese were suicidally brave but not actually good soldiers who could think on the ground. You could use that against them. My father was there after Kohima in mountainous jungle, then flat plains. Big admirer of Slim, US logistics, and Dakota pilots when he kicked supplies out to troops on the ground

Proud NZeder. Bill Slim was born in England. Served in British Army in WW1. Interwar in the Indian Army. WW2 in the British again. After the war he held the post of Governor General of Australia. A great man but he may never have been to NZ and certainly never lived or worked here.

@Retired Bore No worries Bill Slim would have made a great Kiwi.

The mouse general general Patton had it right he called him a bilious little bastard

@@Desertfox170 Patton was a fanny.

Something that struck me in one of the discussions was the docks in Liverpool being set up to receive and process, say, three ships every day. The advent of the convoys meant that they then had to deal with twenty ships at once and then have nothing for three weeks. The headache for dock management was enormous. The whole history of the war is awash with similar aspects which I hadn't considered, and which are miles away from crash, bang, wallop and even more interesting.

Good generals talk tactics and strategy, great generals talk logistics.

Wise words there....education and science gives us progress and better lives.....religion, preaching and moralising leads to war and death. History proves this to be true.

I watched recently here on yt some excavations of burried german soldiers here in northern croatia, from ww2, mostly mass graves, i mean burried in close sequences in the cemetary, apparently there was a field hospital near by. Anyways just bones and an occasional dog tag, and condoms, huge amount of condoms that were rubber so didn't completely rot away.

Well, if you render yourself "unable for duty" of course they'll charge you. You failed at "protection and care of army inventory" :-D. I'm not british, and we have conscription, but there's an little booklet we all got (and had to write a test about) that would translate to "general service regulations" and there's a § in there with a title that translates to "protection and care of army property". Usually we would get reminded about that when someone would handle an issued item not according to plan. But when one of our plattoon fell over something during an exercise, the NCO shouted "§4 passage 5! " (which was exactely that§. ->any soldier is considered "property of the army". I was a little "luckier", when i slipped on mud, my NCO just said "Nobody gave an order to go prone".

That fits my general impression of Brits visiting the Mediterranean region - in peacetime. Drunk and with dreadful sunburns.. 😏

@@davebowman6497 I was serving with the UN actually, 2 days off the Green Line…no holiday I can assure you!

Listen to his and James Holland podcast We have ways been going for years now they have covered all aspects of WW2 in a fantastic way

@@simonback9335 thanks

I'm probably 1000 hrs plus of listening to him and Jim.

Same with Wellington, another austere general who tried to limit casualties vs. Continental generals who were very wasteful of their troops.

@@michaelwilkinson2928 yes your right I wonder if it comes from the British always being the smaller population

@@MrTangolizard you would choose wrong british fanboi Allied HQ blaming Montgomery *Alan Brooke's own words with Adml Ramsay chiming in* *"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. Admiral Ramsay brought this out as well in the discussion and criticized Monty freely....."* Monty later admitting it *The Guns at Last Light, by Rick Atkinson, page 303* *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 without 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. He 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* *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* *The Second World War by John Keegan p. 437* The Plan was the most calamitous flaw in the post Normandy campaign .It was more over barely excusable, since Ultra was supplying Montgomery's HQs from Sept 5 onward with intelligence .As early as Sept 12 Monty's own intelligence reported the Germans intended to hold out along the approaches to Antwerp. Monty - despite every warning and contrary to common military sense - refused to turn his troops back in their tracks to clear the Scheldt Estuary

@@bigwoody4704 well I wouldn’t choose wrong at all Monty was more cautious with the lives of his men simple as that

Hardly you really haven't researched much but you can start here *Montgomery in Europe 1943-45,by Richard Lamb pages 360-362 "British 6th Airborne had lost 30% of it's personnel killed and wounded;the Air landing brigade,which came in gliders had lost over 70% of its equipment The Army that needed to keep casualty count low lost over 3,100 men crossing the Rhine north of Wesel.* *The disparity between the number of lives lost at Wesel and the earlier American crossings is striking* Operation Varsity, for the northern route casualty figures tell a grim story. Into the industrial heart of Germany *The 6th Airborne had suffered 590 killed* and another 710 wounded or missing. Several hundred of the missing later turned up to rejoin their units, however. *The 17th Airborne had 430 killed,* with 834 wounded and 81 missing. Casualties among the glider pilots and the troop plane pilots and crews included *91 killed,* 280 wounded and 414 missing in action. Eighty planes were shot down, and only 172 of the 1,305 gliders that landed in Germany were later deemed salvageable. *Simpson's 9th US Army had to wait and cross with Montgomery;they suffered 491 casualties crossing south of Wesel.The US 17th Airborne Division lost 921 Paratroopers and 350 air crew(all with Montgomery's 21st Army Group)* *A total of 1,111 Allied soldiers had been killed during the day’s fighting. In comparison, the 101st Airborne Division had lost 182 killed and the 82nd Airborne 158 on D-Day. Operation Varsity, March 24, 1945, was the worst single day for Allied airborne troops* *Armageddon:The Battle for Germany,1944-1945,Page 368* by Max Hastings. The US Army relished to the utmost the spectacle of Montgomery preparing to "stage" a huge,formal military pageant ,more than 2 days after it's own soldiers had crossed 70 miles to the south.Patton's Army had crossed at night on 22 March - "without the benefit of aerial bombing,ground smoke,artillery preparation and airborne assistance," - all of which 21st Army Group(Montgomery) was employing on a prodigious scale!!! Hodges 1st US Army got across at Remagen with a *casualty count of 31 men Patton's 3rd US Army came across near Oppenheim "with the total loss of 28 men killed and wounded.* It still took Monty 6 months with the US 9th Army's help to move where he left off at the end of September.The Americans still advanced thru Lorainne,the Hurtgen,The Ardennes and across the Rhine in that time.

Best is subjective and opinion. Montgomery was the most successful Western Allied ground commander of WW2 by some way. He won more battles and took more ground through more countries while facing more quality German opposition than any other Western Allied ground commander in WW2. This is fact.

Agreed, my father was a 'Don R' RC of S attached to the 8th Army (severely wounded 9/05/43 just days before the German surrender) and had the utmost respect for the man.

Two words for Monty: Market Garden.

@@johnglenn30csardas yes a 90% successful campaign, 2 of my uncles fought in that one. Uncle Jack with the airborne in Arnhem and uncle Tom in 30 corps. Let down by Gavin and then Patton refusing to halt in his sector taking up resources.

@@johnglenn30csardas My uncle Ron at Arnhem and was decorated for escaping from behind enemy lines and making his way back to his unit over the course of three days. He had nothing but admiration for Montgomery, until the day he died. Market Garden's ultimate lack of success wasn't just down to Monty. It's far more complex than that.

@@tonyjedioftheforest1364 With sincere respect to your heroic ancestors, the past few decades of military history have been unkind to Field Marshal Montgomery. Sir Antony Beevor, for example. I don't know how you can begin to call Market Garden a 90% successful campaign. That just flies in the face of history.

Thanks Gaz.

Go on then!

@@PhilipTimm i did and i'm saying it now! Back off Brussels!!!

Not as funny as The Saturday Night Armistice though.

The Germans did it. Even landing ON fortifications. The only reason it's seen as doomed to failure is because it did. But most of it was successful

In military strategy, a choke point (or chokepoint) is a geographical feature on land such as a valley, defile or bridge, or maritime passage through a critical waterway such as a strait, which an armed force is forced to pass through in order to reach its objective, sometimes on a substantially narrowed front and therefore greatly decreasing its combat effectiveness by making it harder to bring superior numbers to bear. A choke point can allow a numerically inferior defending force to use the terrain as a force multiplier to thwart or ambush a much larger opponent, as the attacker cannot advance any further without first securing passage through the choke point.

But they actually got up that road. XXX Corps did 80km in just 42 hours. It wasn't the road, it was the bridges not taken by the paratroopers. Had the bridges been taken then XXX Corps would have reached Arnhem on the 3rd day.

Is that what Putin Faces?

My son asked me what I though of him joining the military. I said "you play chess. What happens to pawns?" He said 'they get sacrificed to gain position." I told him if he was clear about the goals of the military and it involved being treated like a pawn then by all means enlist. He decided to do other things.

I just finished Omar Bradley's book a General's Story and I did not get the impression that he respected him.

@@JR-bj3uf You deprived him of what could have been the most interesting few years of his life. Its not 24/7 of 'officers feeding you into the combat wood-chipper!'

@@georgeholbrook1886 But it's a possibility that you have to consider.

There’s a website with the videos. Chris Evans not that one will send you a link and password in a few days. If not let him know chris@gofasterstripe.com

What's happened to the full episodes on YT? Have they moved?

@@rgp101 Filming is now being paid for by Acast, but you can watch them all for about 60p an episode (usually 8 videos a month) by joining the top tier of Acast Plus here plus.acast.com/s/rhlstp Loads of other benefits too.

The Virgin Soldiers,1968.

@@leebritnell2405 Of course - Thanks

Innit though, likes seeing Murray being himself and Dick brings it out.

I think you’re right, he was a huge annoyance to Churchill because he wouldn’t attack until he was ready, ironically, auchinlec however you spell it his predecessor was a huge irritant to Churchill for this reason also, he kept piling up supplies before launching a North Africa attack so was replaced by Montgomery, but by then most of the supplies had been accumulated for him so he could claim the glory for successful El alemain

But did he care about them as human beings or as tools? Because a tool will unavoidable break if used long enough. A good craftsman wil take care of his tools and use them properly to prolong their lifetime. But he will not stop using until they are useless and then he will discard them. If you care about the soldier as a human, you might not want to use him at all in battle. And Al Murray claims Montgomery was good at taking care of his tools. Passchendaele was a huge waste of tools both for the armies as the nations as a whole with little to show for. But it's hard to proof without a doubt Monty cared about his soldiers because they were humans or they were tools. Because in the end even his inner arguments would be mixed and the reasons presented to the outside world might not reflect Monty's inner thoughts and feelings. It's better to you you want to save your tools because you do not want to widow their wifes and orphan their children, then to say you do not want to lose your tools.

@@barthoving2053 Tool.

All this tells me is that the Aussies and Kiwis were the least repressed when it came to diagnosis and reporting.

@@throwback19841 It would be nice to think so, wouldn't it! However, the regular routine of "short arm inspections" carried out my MOs was well-established throughout the British and Dominion forces, and this is where most cases were discovered. The ANZAC's general disciplinary record was, as is well known, atrocious (much to the chagrin of their government who went to great lengths to prevent a repeat in WW2) and their embarrassing disrespect towards both prostitutes and the local civilian population in Egypt resurfaced at times on the Western front as well. This included the gang-rape incident at Bouzuncourt in 1917 and the sacking of brothels on Boulogne in 1918, but is also reflected in the APM records of arrests and court martials. Australians nowadays laugh it off as the "good old cobber" from the bush "fighting hard and playing hard" and getting one over on the stuffy Poms. The truth is that most ANZACS were either themselves born in Britain, or their parents were (as many Birmingham and cockney accents amongst the ANZACS as Australian!), and in truth they were city dwellers as much as the native British. The difference was largely lack of effective leadership and example at NCO level, which took until 1917/18 to partially correct, and it wasn't fully sorted out until after the war.

Most homosexual, obvs!

Yeah, well the yanks weren't there long enough were they?

​@@mikeycraig8970exactly

So the attitude never changed blame the women and not the men.

@@davidcollins-xs7wz 100% her fault

please PLEASE TELL ME THE UNIT ??? !! was it Folkstone ??/// I was duty medic at Strensal camp near York - I know your pain !

​@@Rockhopper1 But she obviously got it off a man,so how can it be 100% her fault,unless she was born with it.

@@bwilson5401 self inflicted wound 1st charge, affecting the working strength contrary to the army act 1955 2nd charge, contravene part 1 orders contrary to the army act 1955 3rd charge, knowingly endanger lives army act 1955, conduct unbecoming 4th charge, ,

You should probably check out the work of spike Milligan -for starters.

+1 Spike Milligan. And also George McDonald Fraser.

As if you’ve never made light out of a dark situation. Yes wad is horrible, but comedy is about making people laugh and cheer people up. Quite frankly if you don’t enjoy this kind of humour then don’t watch it. Maybe I have misinterpreted what you are saying so if i have then please ignore me

@@scotsbillhicks The best war biography ever, better than his Flashman series....

They must have forgotten by 1939. NZ’s infection rate was second only to Aus in WW2.

That's why penicillin was so important during the war. One jab and they'd be back on their feet in a day or two. Much tut-tutting from the chemists. "This is not what we made it for."

And he had the bloody cheek to calm that Market Garden was a 90% successful operation. Dropping air borne troops into a hot zone, that can only fight with the weapons, ammunition and equipment you drop with them, whilst waiting for 30 Corps to travel some 30 odd miles down what was basically a single track road beggars belief.

@@anthonycollingridge970 Yes. But. There were other pressure. The UK's declining manpower for one. The hope that they could end the war in 1944. And there were two plans - one Market Garden - the northern thrust into the Rhur and a southern assault under Patton - but the Allies only had the resources for one. The northern thrust was chosen. I am not saying that Montgomery was not flawed - he was - and the intelligence failures around the knowledge of two Panzer Divs being re-fitted near Arnhem, and making the drop zones so far from the bridge are all really unforgiveable.

@@anthonycollingridge970 It was 90% successful. But then, a ship with a hull that is 90% waterproof is still going to sink.

I don't know whether your comment is being positive or negative. Positive: 'a film where every character is played by someone who could do that character justice Montgomery’s character doesn’t appear' = seems positive. 'His name got one mention in the film the veterans all booed at that one mention. That’s how popular he was.' = seems negative, but could also be positive i.e. they were upset because he wasn't in the film and only got one mention.

@@TransoceanicOutreach the film deliberately left him out to protect his reputation the veterans they booed him because they knew it was a futile waste of their lives

seems pretty clear to me. Try again. All the best.

I think you need to read up on the back seat driving by Churchill .....

@@remko2 Not in the same league as the little tashed one.

Shot down in his a/c, second pass killed him and many as they tried to escape…Gott was a capable General if I’m correct?

Thank goodness it was Montgomery.

Unless you were infantry during the War on terror, but of peace keeping, big of trying to physically make some peace

Which public schools has signet rings? (Al went to Bedford.) That's far more likely to be from his family. His dad, btw, was a Para Engr Lt Col who served in Suez.

No doubt, Asperger's would be a very good brain for planning massive battle details. Being able to ignore other voices to make decisions also a plus.

Right on Sven. No doubt he was difficult at the interpersonal level though. Cheers!

My stepfather was in North Africa, El Alamein I and II. So he walked to Alexandria and back, as he put it. Compassion? That had nothing to do with it; they all knew that if it was necessary, they would be ordered in to die. He was very clear, they admired Monty because he stood up to Churchill. He refused to move without a three to one advantage over Rommel, both in men and materiel. That told the ranks that they were being given the best possible chance to win. Winning meant not only surviving but also going home at the end of it, not being left in a prison camp to rot. Above all, they had no time for Churchill, because he was seen as a warmonger. There's nobody hates war more than a soldier. On the other matter, he told me that the "ladies of the night" in Cairo liked the British soldiers because they were clean. I thought he was talking about soap and water!

He cared for his troops but he certainly had no compassion. Everybody who ever talked with Monty said something along the lines of: "This guy is weird. He got no social skills and zero empathy."

Making sure your guys are fit enough to die fighting the enemy is not compassion its common sense.

@krautreport202 Er so why did the American commander of XVIII US Airborne Corps Major General Matt Ridgway, write this to Montgomery after the Battle Of The Bulge: "It has been an honor and a privilege and a very great personal pleasure to have served, even so briefly, under your distinguished leadership. To the gifted professional guidance you at once gave me, was added your own consummate courtesy and consideration. I am deeply grateful for both. My warm and sincere good wishes will follow you and with them the hope of again serving with you in pursuit of a common goal" Explain?

Patton was far from being a brilliant general.

Monty has characteristics that go with having Aspergers.

​@@johndawes9337 Same could be said for Montgomery

@@vicripoll really? Monty never lost a battle, Patton never won one and before you shout MARGET GARDEN that was not Monty..look at Brereton,Browning and Williams for planning it and Gavin for cocking it up

@@johndawes9337 The idea of an airdrop was Monty's. And 17 consecutive drops had been canceled as ground forces overran the objectives with unexpected ease. When the time came Monty made himself absent from planning, the very thing that had made his name in the first place. Browning may have to shoulder the blame for a load of the bad planning decisions, such as dropping 1st Airborne too far from its objective and concentrating on the basically valueless Groesbeek Heights, but Monty was the manager and he didn't manage. There was one thing Patton was unequivocally brilliant at, a skill he shared with the Commander, South-West Pacific Area.

That about sums him up, but he wasn't a psychopath.

Murray made a big mistake saying Montgomery was in charge of D-DAY .When everyone knows it was Eisenhower.

sharonprice42, Eisenhower was just a figurehead. To all intents and purposes, Montgomery dictated the battle.

@lyndoncmp5751 Eisenhower was supreme commander, it was always going to be an American in charge due to the equipment they supplied Britain and Russia with and the amount of men they had the only person Eisenhower had to answer to was the President of the US everything Bradly , Monty or Patton did had to go through Eisenhower he was the supreme commander and he wasn't to happy with how slow Monty was with Market Garden. The Americans liberated Paris and were the first to the Elbe to meet the Russians. Remember the Americans were also fighting and beating the Japanese at the same time .Britain had surrendered Singapore and Hong Kong to the Japanese

@@lyndoncmp5751 IWM "General Dwight D Eisenhower (1890-1969) was appointed Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Forces (SCAEF) for Operation 'Overlord' in late 1943 and headed SHAEF (Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force), which oversaw the entire liberation of Nazi-occupied north-west Europe. Eisenhower was in charge of making all final decisions relating to the invasion and although he is sometimes criticised for focusing too heavily on politics, he was a skilled administrator known for his tact and diplomacy. He tried to ease tensions between members of SHAEF and to place the needs of the alliance above national interests. He also took his responsibility for the lives of his men very seriously. In the days before D-Day, he secretly wrote a message to be released if the invasion failed, in which he accepted full blame." A Who's Who of D-Day page

Enlighten us then.

What the fuck are you talking about

Racist bilge.

The British are multi racial you plonker ! .@@northernhound3899

No he wasn’t. He was born in London to an English family.

you should listen to his podcast "we have ways of making you talk" you'd be surprised how much he actually knows about military history.

@@ads2686 he has read the same books as I have, that's how much he knows

​@@wstevenson4913 He read modern history at Oxford, his father was a Lt Col in the Parachute Regiment (RE), his grandfather was in the SOE and he is a relative of the Duke of Atholl, who has the only private army in Europe. I think he's a little more sophisticated and educated than you.

@@Tourist1967 Try reading the comment again.

@@wstevenson4913 Why? Your sneering and ill-informed intent was clear.

All the shows are available free wherever you get your podcasts. The shows cost £2000 to film and we have given away hundreds for free (thanks to the generosity of kickstarter backers) but if we carry on doing that we will quickly go broke. Acast are now paying for the filming so it's fair enough that you have to pay a tiny amount to them to see the filmed shows (it's about 62p a show which is not bad value) and we're still giving away a nice 10 minute chunk for free for those who can't afford to pay. I have given out endless free content for 15 years now, for the greatest part injecting most if not all money raised back into making new content (as it's now practically my only job I do pay myself a wage, generated by podcast adverts, but we're still using a lot of that money to make stuff). I don't see anyone else giving out as much stuff as I do for nothing. I think there might be other businesses you want to question before coming down on this one at least. The videos never made us any money, still only cover their own costs and in fact deny of us of revenue as it takes downloads away from the audio podcast. I don't expect thanks for this, but I think it's a little harsh to get criticism.

@@Herring1967 it’s a little tone deaf at a time people literally can’t eat unless it’s from foodbanks despite working full time. RU-vid as a platform demonstrates that it’s possible to produce popular content without resorting to external pay to view entities. Presumably where you have live audiences in attendance at recording, they aren’t there for free either. It’s your prerogative to choose to charge what you deem appropriate, but, as wildly out there as it may sound, many people don’t have 62p. I don’t think you realise how bad it is for many people who love your shows, but through no fault of their own, are (and their families) are absolutely on their knees, in the time of 13 years of tory governments and the biggest wealth redistribution of the last hundred years. 🤔

@@pakelly99 i put the podcasts out for free and have done for 15 years. There are 100s of free videos on here. I’d be giving away £2000 a week. Sorry that I don’t have £100,000 a year spare on something that is very much an extra luxury for people who want it. I am trying to run a business and even then, unlike most businesses I plough a huge amount of money into making more free content. Seems weird to be haranguing me when so much of my content costs nothing and loads doesn’t generate any money at all, but looks like you’ve made up your mind on this. I do at least agree that it’s terrible that the country is in this situation and understand that your heart is in the right place.

IRAvermin.

Montgomery was the kind of guy who never switched off and always wanted to talk about the job - especially after his wife died and buried himself in his work to cope - he didn't really have any recreational activity besides physical training and military education, so its understandable why his peers in the Army might have considered him a bit of a bore.

The panzer faced the brunt of massive allied bombing and naval guns 12 miles away. Monty they had thrown off the ciontinent before. It was the Russians and Amercans that were now pounding them

He won all but one campaign he commanded. A General who does that cannot be considered a "poor" one. War is a results business and Generals are good or bad depending on whether they win, and Montgomery was a winner.

Losing 10,000 men as a field marshal is pretty low figures to achieve strategic victory in a war costing millions of lives a year

Most successful people Surgeons CEO etc are psychopaths. This is how the separate emotion with getting the job done.

That actually implies that he was a realist. You cannot fight a battle without losing men, potentially thousands of them. That’s just a fact. You will still lose men even if you are doing nothing and just holding the line. As a commander, whatever decision you take will lead to men dying. Montgomery for obvious reasons knew this. He also knew that the longer the war went on, the bigger Britain’s manpower shortage would become, and that he therefore had to husband his slowly dwindling resources - his men. What Montgomery meant by that claim that you heard, was that he would rather fight a battle plan where he would lose 10-15,000 men, than a battle plan where he would lose far higher numbers than that. There are no prizes for coming second in a total war against nazi Germany.

unlike the US Military Leaders you would say we 100 thousand young men at home i do care with we lose 20 thousand taking that position

@@daniellastuart3145 Noble sentiments. Feel free to explain how you would set about winning a war without taking any casualties.

Yeah, wasn’t anything to do with Monty…Operation Comet was. And he scrapped it. Try again.

@@ScrubbersGhost was ‘comet’ scrapped or just added to with US troops? Anyway shall let’s try ‘Scheldt’?

@@djlewis5149 again, what has Monty to do with Market Garden?…you said it so explain it. And going that far into enemy territory and liberating Dutch towns and villages seems like a worthwhile thing to me. So again, explain what your complaint is.

@@ScrubbersGhost Monty’s egomania was directly responsible for Market Garden. If Eisenhower had not deferred to Monty on the idea of a ‘grab’ for the Arnhem bridge across the Rhine and concentrated on clearing the Germans from the Scheldt the allied supply chain would have been greatly improved. Liberating Dutch towns at the cost of the men and materiel was ultimately pointless

@@djlewis5149 In his memoirs, Eisenhower makes clear that he was definitely in favour of a single thrust. "I not only approved, I insisted upon it. What we needed was a bridgehead across the Rhine. If that could be accomplished, I was willing to wait on all other operations." The official wartime history of SHAEF (too long to quote here) details the many reasons the top brass considered first Operation Comet, later Market Garden, were strategically sound and desirable. Nothing to do with Montgomery's ego! And to repeat - Comet was Montgomery's idea, but he shelved it. Eisenhower later ordered other generals to build upon the concept. It was they, not Montgomery, who planned and executed Market Garden. He was just a convenient scapegoat for the Americans to blame, to disguise their fatal failure at Nijmegen bridge. And so the Monty myth was born.

Source?

Germans were fooled into it by allied propaganda - making his 'ghost army' seem like an actual threat. Troops serving under Patton knew better. US troops detached to serve under Montgomery during the Ardennes counteroffensive (Battle of the Bulge) came close to mutiny when, having experienced command under a proper general, they were put back under the thumb of that incompetent clown Patton.

nonsense.

only when they were trying to get consultant jobs with NATO after the war, he's someone notably missing from contemporary paperwork

No German general ever claimed that Patton was the best Allied general, though a couple did name him as the best American general.

Citation pls.

Maybe YOU should read Al Murray's book. Can you name a single Allied commander in the ETO who won more, more significant battles, against more of the enemy than him? No, because there aren't any.

Let me guess your American

@@enright13 Zhukov

@Nick Danger Zhukov wasn't in the ETO, and neither the British nor the Americans would have tolerated anyone who was so careless with their men's lives.