Monty's Gamble: Allied Rhine Crossing 1945 

Where did you find that the Canadian divisions were "mostly British"? What is your source for that?

oh wow, do you know which unit he was in? Jesse's grandfather was in the Cameron Highlanders.

Your grandfather’s behaviour would be illegal in today Trudeau’s Canada… What an embarrassment 🙃

Respect, sir

For some reason the way I read that was like "My grandpa used to be black" and I was very confused for 0.3 seconds.

@@huntclanhunt9697 Like Michael Jackson? Hahah ;)

I hope you can upload it to FLICKR for everyone to read

Chimo!

We had a parade at Emmerich every year to commemorate the event. I am an Ex Royal Engineer.

My Great Uncle, Howard Burns, was in B Coy, The Lake Superior Regt (Mot), of the 4th Canadian Armoured Div. He also fought in the Hochwald Gap. My Orthodontist flew a Short Sterling bomber carrying gliders for Market Garden and Varsity.

we visited the region when we filmed the more extensive documentary about the fighting on the Niederrhein which is mentioned at the end of this video, one of the locations we filmed at was the old railway bridge, we also filmed near Rees, in the Reichswald and more.

...MAYBE THE GERMANS SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THE CONSEQUENCES BEFORE THEY ATTACKED POLAND-(?)

do u expect any pity?

@@daleburrell6273 Maybe we should consider the consequences before attacking Russia.

@@jonathanj.7344 ...I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT- DO YOU?!

Though as Montgomery wasn't appointed in North Africa until August 1942 it is unlikely that your father, if captured in 1941, would have served under him.

then he was lucky ans Both Generals in the desert won before Monty but churchill screwed them both. By the time he was stuck with monty he had to keep his mouth shut as he would come under scrutiny

Yes. The narrator deliberately cherry picked. Simpson was full of praise for Montgomery.

Sources? not that you two have a history of stooping to that *Armageddon - The Battle for Germany,1944-45 by Max Hastings,page 50Jack Reynolds and his unit,the South Staffords,* were locked into the long,messy,bloody battle.There was no continuous front,no coherent plan,merely a series of uncoordinated collisions between rival forces in woods,fields,gardens and streets. *That is when it got home to me.What a very bad operation this was The scale dropped from my eyes when I realized just how far from our objective we've landed.* We knew what even a handful of Germans could do - they were so damned efficient. As Bob Peatling of the 2 Para said Marshall Montgomery dropped a clanger at Arnhem *Maj. Freddie Hennessy* the operations officer of the Guards Armored Division which was in the vanguard of the push up the road, compared advancing sixty-four miles on a narrow highway over several major water crossings to “threading seven needles with one piece of cotton, *and we only have to miss one to be in trouble.”* *With Prejudice, by Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Lord Tedder, Deputy Supreme Commander AEF, Cassel & Co., 1st edition, copyright 1966 .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. *"Triumph in the West, by Arthur Bryant, Doubleday & Co., 1st American edition, copyright 1959. 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..." *Eisenhower's Armies ,by Dr Niall Barr ,page 415* After the failure of Market-Garden, Alan 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"*

General Gavin of the 82nd Airborne also had great respect for Monty as a general.

@@bigwoody4704 Oh no! Did someone praise Montgomery??? Can't have that eh?

@@32shumble congrats you see the forest for the trees 🙃. The British yes him - NO

Correct, but many are incapable of examining facts and prefer to believe Hollywood!

Its worth noting that the Americans had priority of supplies for five months and did little with it. They had priority of supplies and focus of attack in October, November and December 1944 and still never got anywhere near the Rhine, failing in the Lorraine, Hurtgen Forest and Operation Queen etc. Then at the end of December and all through January everything had to be put on hold to help the American retreat in the Ardennes. From the beginning of October 1944 to the end of February 1945, it was the American armies that were given prominence. The front barely moved.

The mission failed in its objective.

@@johnrussell3961 But so too did all the American campaigns that same autumn. Hurtgen Forest, Lorraine, Alsace, Vosges, Operation Queen etc. At least Market Garden took 100km of German held ground in just 3 days. It was still the fastest allied advance against German opposition in the entire September 1944 to February 1945 period.

@@lyndoncmp5751 . Monty took two USA armies across the Rhine . That meant the USA had 4 armies across the Rhine. And their roles where different. Those in the north with Monty turned south into the Ruhr. The bulk of the supplies went to the two armies in the south. They drove deep into central and southern Germany . One of which was Pattons. Monty’s war had largely ended.

Probably more dangerous in the east, as the Japanese had basically, no morals. At least if captured by the Germans, he'd have a decent chance of getting home after the war, but with the Japanese? Unlikely.

❤beautiful ❤ what a wonderful sense of humour

I said to my Cousin that if your Dad didnt lose an eye in Africa/1st Alamein he well could of perished in New Guinea from Malaria, dysentery and the Japanese

yeah, because his content is the exciting part of history

@@touristguy87 In part...but it's also how you sell it - and what's interesting for you might not be interesting for me.

@@ericgrace9995 the problem here is not about marketing, it's about your stupid comment

I find modern history very interesting...the only one I can think of who doesn't like it is Philomena Cunk.

History isn't boring. But neurotic, narcissistic phonies like Monty are.

Bullcrap so did others - it was always his excuse for putzing,Monty didn't show up as many were killed and captured during Market Garden. Also he got 1100 paras killed in one day while crossing the Rhine - the only thing Monty cared about was Monty and his headlines

You do realise that many of these troops had been born in Great Britain and most had close relatives there!

Do you realize your royals left them to there own devices as they served in Burma and the Desert. But Churchill the chode try keeping them there as the Japanese had taken Raboul, most of New Guinea and had Port Moresby surrounded as the were bombing the northern Aussie Port of Darwin. No worries the emerging World Power traveled 9400 miles to do it for you. Ask them the word they use is POMS I believe

When the Brits have a success, it is 'oh irrelevant' or 'Allies united!' When the Americans have a success: 'We are the greatest'. The strength of American propaganda initiated an incredible hubris that would have its reckoning in SE Asia in the following years.

@@jimmyhillschin9987 You are talking about the news media. The American people know better, at least most of them back then. PS - The US military has still never lost a war. We had pulled all our combat troops out in 1973, two years before the South Vietnamese Army lost to the North.

​@@Mondo762 You pulled out because the domestic antiwar movement had grown to such huge proportions that this illegal invasion of Vietnam eventually became politically unfeasible. Then you went on to lose in Iraq and Afghanistan. But you did once manage to defeat about 300 Cuban construction workers in Grenada. That's your only win since 1945.

@@davidbouvier8895 As I said, the US Military has never lost a war. It has always been the politicians that start and stop these engagements. Also, the US was invited into Viet Nam. We never invaded. Get your facts straight.

@@Mondo762 Nonsense. You were not 'invited' into Vietnam. As with the non-existent Iraqi WMD, a totally spurious excuse for invasion was generated. Look up the Gulf of Tonkin incident. In 1954, an international agreement was signed called the Geneva Accords. This provided for a plebiscite vote to unify the north and south of Vietnam. Because of the corrupt nature of the puppet government in the south, it became clear that the Communists would win that vote. The US manufactured the phony Tonkin incident, and went into South Vietnam to top up its puppet régime to prevent this from ever happening. "If we don't fight them in Vietnam, we'll have to fight them in Long Beach" was the ludicrously hysterical slogan of the time. Finally, years later, after a huge number of Vietnamese, a great many of them civilians, had been killed, the American public grew weary of their sons coming home in body bags and forced the government to withdraw its troops. Sure, the US military was not definitively defeated in the field. It was a political defeat. Still, a loss is a loss. You need to get YOUR facts straight.

I am also Canadian and my grandfather was in that army. For Op Veritable many British units were assigned to the FCA, hence the designation mostly British for that operation.

My father was also in 4th. Cdn. Armoured. I wouldnt say they were mostly British although for this operation I believe a large number of Brits were absorbed as they were otherwise cut off from their command and supply lines in the south.

Yeah I thought the exact same thing, he has the nerve to call us mostly British?

@@danielvanhattem3483 For Operation Veritable it was. And I am one of "us."

As I have said before: the british think they are so great. Same thing: they always (still now) "forget" what the Indians did in the CBI theatre, what the Dutch, Danish... did on the ships in the Atlantic, and so on.

Yes! I heard that line in Saving Private Ryan. Totally superfluous and unwarranted. And historically ignorant.

Yes, a ridiculous immature and unnecessary comment.

And to cap it all the dialogue claims "you gotta take Caen before you can take St Lo" . What utter nonsense. The two towns were separate objectives of two different armies and were in completely different directions. Even more nauseating, the film then steals one of the real life German units that was keeping Montgomery out of Caen and shows the Americans stopping them. The 'Tiger' that comes across the bridge towards Tom Hanks has the unit markings and turret numbers and colours of a 2nd Kompanie Schwere SS Panzer Abteilung 101 Tiger. This was Michael Wittmanns unit. It fought the British at Villers Bocage. It wasn't fighting the Americans in the Cotentin Peninsula by the Merderet River. Hollywood BS.

Kasserine Pass. Kesselring was a Feldmarshall of the Lutwaffe also known as "Smiley Albert"

Monty was over-rated. The UK. forces were absolutely critical in the defeat of Germany. It was the American logistics though the won the war in the west and Soviet numbers in the east. Also the Soviet provided little if any help against Japan. The US and the UK won that theater as well.

My dad was in the 164th Combat Engineers at Remagen.

What a nonsense. He had all the resources, absolute air superiority and superiority against a downed enemy. In Africa and 45 on the Rhine. That was the only way he could win.

​​@@Dackeldomteurand yet another Wehraboo sticks his head up. battles are won with intelligence and logistics.

​@@Dackeldomteur ....what an uneducated muppet!!!

When the odds were even Brooke and his buddy Bernard got Dunkirked. Germans were 30 miles from them and they RUNAWAY (must be a Monty thing) 3000 miles away into a desert. BRILLIANT,said no one ever

@@bigwoody4704 ...huh, you American!!!?

when we filmed there, we heard that some farmers still have glider pieces in their barns. Hard to confirm or track down, but wouldn't be surprising.

Did he take them prisoner 😂?

I always think glider pilots must have been complete lunatics. You are basically smashing a very delicate wooden aircraft which is designed to be broken in half into the ground, with no runway in sight, just whichever field looks the least likely to kill everybody on board, often in the dark. From what I understand, british glider pilots were also expected to join the fight when they landed

@@Ukraineaissance2014 There was a shortage of Glider Pilots after Arnhem, so they approached the RAF, my Dad was a Lancaster pilot and bombing was scaled back a bit, so he volunteered. After he landed, he just made his way back and then got some leave at home. He wasn't expected to fight as he wasn't a soldier. After that he joined Transport Command until he was demobbed in 1947. It was a VIP squadron flying passengers in Douglas Dakotas and Avro Lancastrians, a Lancaster bomber converted for passengers.

@@Ditka-89 Yep, they just marched in front of him. They also carried another pilot with a broken leg.

Yep, Patton showed at Metz that he was completely out of his depth in anything that resembled tactics that didn't involve chasing an already fleeing enemy!

@@gabriel_swift8847 He refused to go to War at first. So the Gestapo said we will take the 2 younger brothers then to his father. So he showed up to save them and he was send to posen they atacked poland at first. He was on a hors like in 1 World war sended there. After first fight they lost all horses. So they had to march in direction moskau on feet. He said they made 400 km with Equipment in 2 weeks. Fight movement. The 2 younger brothers was sended to russia in 1942. So they also sended them to War. We just can stop a war by nobody going there.

Monty gambled wrong many times. All with lives of allied soldiers and citizens in the countryside.

My great uncle died 18 MAR 1945 during this operation. 1st ID 18th infantry brigade US Army. RIP uncle John.

thank you!

Lol 🤣 if you say so

@@BT-qs7id Just look it up. Caen and the position of German forces in Normandy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Overlord#/media/File:Allied_Invasion_Force.jpg

@@BT-qs7id Yes i do say so and so do the facts.

@@paulaction9874 Monty Python facts 🤡

@@BT-qs7id what is it like being an Ignorant fool.

When did Payton use human wave tactics besides Metz?

I may be wrong, but doing a bit of research suggests the Algonquin Regiment was part of the 10th Infantry Brigade, which served as the organic infantry component of the 4th Division. And as far as I can tell the infantry battalions didn't have any tanks directly assigned to their TO&E; they did however operate a number of Loyd and Universal carriers, as well as the usual assortment of bikes, motorcycles and trucks. If you haven't already, you might perhaps be able to find further info about your great uncle from Library and Archieves Canada; you may be able to obtain his service file, or at least some of the battalion's records.

@@Warspite1 Thanks! This is actually helpful. It's been hard figuring out what exactly he went through, he said he drove a tank during the war, but whether or not that means a Sherman or some kind of tracked vehicle we don't know, and he said he fought with the Algonquin regiment, but whether that means attached alongside or as a part of, no idea. We know when he landed and that he shipped back to Canada in '46, and he wasn't wounded but that's about it. Other family members who fought in the war we have a much clearer picture of what they did and went through, but Uncle John just didn't talk about it. He must've seen some things.

@@angry_wizard I'm glad I could help! It could definitely be the case that he'd been assigned to another unit of the 4th and on occasion been attached to the Algonquin Regiment. If he was a tank driver then he'd likely have driven either a Sherman V (M4A4) or VC (an M4A4 with 17pdr gun). If he was in one of the divisional support units he may have even driven the M5 Stuart, or one of the specialised Crusader AA tanks. If he used "tank" in a more inclusive term he may even have operated the M10C tank destroyer, or the Sexton SPG.

@@angry_wizard - The 4th Armoured division had three brigades. An Artillery brigade with two Regts of self-propelled 25 pdrs, an infantry brigade with three infantry Regts, which included the Algonquin Regt, and an armoured Brigade, with three armoured Regts and a permanently attached Motorized infantry Regt, The Lake Superior Regt. My Great Uncle, Howard Burns, was in B Coy, of the Lake Superior Regt. This Regt was supposed to be equipped with Half-tracks, but they may have had trucks instead. Howard's original unit was the Rocky Mountain Rangers (he was from Golden).

That's absolutely hilarious so funny guy do tell then why the British forces were being "evacuated" from 1940 Norway,Netherlands, Belgium and France,Dunkirk 1941 Greece, Crete,Hong Kong and Libya 1942 Tobruk and Dieppe,Singapore Or why the GIs had to cross 3500 miles of ocean so monty could cross a 30 mile channel - after 4 full years that is. If the US was bad, then the British should have stayed home and saved a bunch of Englishmen - after having already using the colonials as sandbags that is. Monty lost a lot. What he won he won with overwhelming superiority in men, materials, and air support. Then barely.. and poorly.

@@bigwoody4704 lilwoodyWhittaker..stick to licking windows

It was actually a German who described the Americans as “your Italians”.

​@@bigwoody4704Wow, you have a child's view of history. A child that has been fed a lot of weird anti-British propaganda. I can never understand what's wrong with people like you. It is just genuine American exceptionalism? You can't accept anyone else getting any credit or any slight criticism?

I think you meant "compliment". Montgomery's talent was in painstaking preparation and bringing superior forces to bear on a weaker foe, achieving victory with minimal losses. The one occasion he bucked trend was Market Garden, and looks how that turned out. Arrogant, self aggrandising, but possessed of great organisational abilities and clearly capable of discharging the duties allotted to him. The British could and would not accept the casualties that the U.S. forces were able to tolerate and that had a real effect on battlefield tactics.

thank you

And Montgomery moved faster than Patton and took more ground.

The competence of generals is not demonstrated by achieving high casualty levels!

Monty had 4 full yrs to cross his crummy channel.....after getting driven into it. Why with his empire couldn't they do it? That's right a faltering empire had to ask a former colony they enjoyed manipulating and subjugating their Imperial whims on to cross the ocean and do it for them - you're welcome

​@@bigwoody4704 Well, the Germans couldn't cross it. Neither could the Americans, without 80% British and Canadian naval support.

don't even start within 3 months there a million GIs on the continent. We had a much bigger ocean in the Pacific. And quit lumping your self together with the canadians. Why did the US give Britain 50 destroyers then or Lend-lease for that matter? Do you really want to run down who supplied what? There is a reason Churchill came knocking and it didn't resemble your carnival barking

That's a fairly silly suggestion. There would be next to nothing that would translate from Varisty to invading Japan.

​@MagpieOz You have forgotten that the British 14th Army was still fighting in Burma at the time, and had Malasia and Singapore to contend with.

@@robert-trading-as-Bob69 Yes there was a landing planned for August 1945 in Malaya I seem to recall.

@@tomriley5790Part of 298 Squadron equipped with Halifaxes were sent out to India to prepare for glider operations against the Japanese. They took part in Varsity.

Wars are won at the front lines but months of planning and logistics and Training disappear when the fighting starts @@MagpieOz

The truth unfortunately does not gel with the American propaganda version of events in NW Europe.

The Battle of the Bulge would, I suggest, not have occurred if Monty's strategy had been adopted. Eisenhower's description of Monty's idea as a "pencil like thrust" is ridiculous. A 40 division attack cannot be described as "pencil like".

Eisenhowers broad front strategy was a complete failure all through autumn 1944. Montgomery's concentrated northern thrust with 40 divisions would have ended the war sooner. Basic military doctrine when the enemy is reeling is to deliver a powerful knockout blow. Instead Eisenhower preferred tip toeing and giving the Germans breathing and recovery time. All effort should have been placed on a concentrated advance to the Ruhr not messing around in the Lorraine and Hurtgen etc. The Germans agreed with Montgomery.

Nick Jung, Indeed. The Ardennes retreat occurred PRECISELY because of the wasted men and material in the Hurtgen Forest folly, which was part of Eisenhower'broad front mistake. On 28th November Montgomery actually warned Eisenhower about this weak, thinly held sector of the front. Eisenhower didn't listen.

Lot of Monty worshippers here

His predecessor also knew supplies where important. El Alemein was his plan. Churchill sacked him becuase it was taken too long to get all the supplies in place, Monty turned up just as the last supplies did.. He took all the credit for the success of some else’s plan.

@@johnrussell3961 Great observation nice to know someone actually read in depth history. Monty only won when he couldn't really lose. O'Connor and Auchinleck were much better commanders and had Churchill not interferred with them things would have closed up much sooner *The Rommel Papers by B.H.Liddell-Hart page 521​ Montgomery was in a position to profit by the bitter experience of his predecessors .While supplies on our side had been cut to a trickle ,American and British ships were bringing vast quantities on materials to North Africa .Many times greater than either his predecessors had ever had.* His principle was to fight no battle unless he knew for certain that he would win it. *Of course that is a method which will only work given material superiority - but that he had. He was undoubtedly more of a strategist than a tactician. Command of a mobile battle force was not his strong point* British officers made the error off planning operations according to what was strategically desirable ,rather than what was tactically attainable."

I was really struggling watching this, to see what the point of the airborne assault was, after all they had already successfully crossed the Rhine in several places, had put in temporary bridges and had moved tanks across. They didn't need to drop highly specialised but vulnerable airborne troops to help them do what they had already achieved. Seems like a waste of elite allied soldiers to me.

​@@catinthehat906 Hodges had already crossed the Rhine in the center at Remagen after finding an intact railway bridge. And, I think, Patton, had already crossed in the south w/o airborne troops.

@@bbbabrock Montgomery's 21st Army Group was way to the north of Remagen. Nearly 200km north. He needed a secure crossing in the Lower Rhine area otherwise everyone would be tripping over each other to get across.

@@catinthehat906 Why is it a waste to use elite paratroopers for exactly the kind of missions they have been training long and hard for? I.e paratroop drops down on German held areas? I'd say it was a waste to use, and lose, thousands of elite well trained paratroops for standard infantry jobs such as defending in the Ardennes. The 82nd and 101st were used as standard infantry in the Ardennes. There were enough infantry divisions in the US Army. Only paras, on the other hand, can perform parachute drops. Makes sense to use them for what they are supposed to be used for and not just throw them away in regular infantry jobs.

@@lyndoncmp5751 Idk about the 82nd. But the 101st were sent to Bastone, which would soon be surrounded for a time. As their NOP was to fight behind enemy lines, they were trained for and used to fighting while being surrounded until relieved. So, in the case of the 101st, they were fighting to their strengths.

Did any of it matter ? Russia was on a unstoppable march to Berlin since 5th July 1943 - 23 August 1943 battle of Kursk. Hitler was going to be dragged out of his bunker even if D-Day never took place .

That is true, however the capture of the bridge was more a embarrassment to the allies as it of course not in their plans and so recieved little support...i think

The Americans had 6 infantry divisions and 3 armoured divisions across the Rhine, with multiple Bridge s before this operation even began! They went straight into the heart of Germany!

If u look at the topographx, I have to disagree. A really tough spot to break out of it. Compare it with the Oppenheim area, flat as a pancake. I live between both and could cycle there, Remagen was partial luck, Oppenheim an obvious choice

It seems fate repeatedly robbed Monty of his glorious left hook into the German heartland. He tried flanking the main German defences in the ill advised Operations Market/Garden. Even after that failure Montgomery was tapped to be in charge of a single thrust across the Rhine and theoretically race gloriously to Berlin, however, Eisenhower had a change of heart after the Ardenne offensive and ok’d a second Rhine crossing by the Americans south of the Ruhr. The plan was further muddled when Hodges’ 1st Army found the intact bridge at Remagen and quickly established a bridgehead on March 7. Though Omar Bradley felt a breakout was within reach he was ordered by Eisenhower to consolidate the bridgehead in order to draw off reserves from Montgomery’s crossing later in March. Patton also crossed the Rhine with relative ease on the night of March 22. Montgomery’s set piece crossing finally started on March 23.

@@raywhitehead730 yes they did.

Always better to have the Americans in front then behind

Yes because there was a bridge at Remagen, and the Rhine is narrower down south. It's wider around Wessel and there were no bridges left. Bridges are few and far between in the northern Rhine anyway.

He was on the winning side Britain had much better commanders - MUCH

Eh? You've named multiple successes in your list lmao.

Sicily success, Caen success ( taken on July 19th in Charnwood and Atlantic) Market Garden takes 6 bridges and 60 miles of German territory Antwerp captured on Sepember 4th 1944. Fixed it for you.

MOnty had better gone to Germany solely and not liberated the North of Netherlands. It wrecked the provinces there, cost many 1000 lives and sent the West of Netherlands in famine costing 10.000s of lives. Leaving the germans more time to root to rampage the West. Also many women got raped all of sudden after liberation. Which had the germans refrained from during the occupation.

when we filmed Rhineland 45 we passed Kevelaer often since we stayed in Geldern and filmed in Uedemer Bruch and the Reichswald.

And at salerno he moved with the deliberation of an overweight elephant he never moved fast anywhere , the one time he did in market garden he ignored intelligence reports that said an ss panzer division was there for r & r

Market Garden was not Montgomery's operation it was Brereton USAAF, Williams and Browning. It was in fact an American led operation

Thicko he fessed up to it after the war.When you are done cleaning your teeth with your finger try flipping thru some history books with it

@@bigwoody4704 . Stick to Hollywood redneck!

@@jamesloring7186 - so that’s about the same speed as Patton in the Argonne and Lorraine.

Too true. If anything, it was just another example of Montgomery's plodding style. Nothing remarkable about it.

In his own mind.

​@@22nolaand insecure British people

He had a history of putting himself in danger. He even wanted to land in Normandy on D-day. Fortunately the King was able to stop that. The last thing the landing forces needed to do was protect the PM.

Overwhelming force.

badum tss

Fascinating, thanks for sharing.

Exactly, at this time, there were five Canadian divisions plus two armoured brigades.

Genuinely sad how offended Canadians get over the fact that, certainly for this operation, it was mostly British.

He was slow because he was an impediment and thought the colonials and allies would get it sorted for him so he could come in at the end and carnival bark how he did it all

French 1st was in fact stationed in and around Strasbourg. So was Patton and his US 3rd. French drove Patton nuts.

Crickets? Googly?

Name the British Corps commander who gave that US General permission to ignore the bridge based on his staff's bad intelligence.

General Gavin was actually full of praise for Montgomery. It was Brereton and Williams who screwed Market Garden by insisting on dispersed drops over three days. That is what killed Market Garden.

RedAUG Browning did not order Gavin to ignore the Nijmegen bridge, and in fact Gavin had full permission and authorisation to strike for the bridge immediately after dropping if the situation was manageable, which it was. It was a mix up in communication within the 82nd Airborne that prevented a move on the bridge. Gavin said he ordered Lindquist to move without delay on the bridge after assembly post drop around 3.00 pm. Lindquist didn't. Gavin then ordered him to delay not a second longer around 6.00 pm. However by the time a move on the bridge got underway it was 8.00 pm and too late. 5 hours had been wasted. I'll repeat, Browning never ordered Gavin to ignore the bridge.

@@lyndoncmp5751 I didn't say Browning ordered Gavin to ignore the bridge. I said Browning gave Gavin permission to ignore the bridge in favor of protecting the landing zone based on shared concern that German reinforcements were being staged in the Reichswald forest area. Just like how Mark Clark never ordered Lucas to halt progress on the Anzio beachhead, but was enabled to do so anyways because Clark suggested he "don't stick his neck out".

Thanks for highlighting that, I had to Google it to find out what that was. I guess you learn something new every day. 👍

Must be Market Garden.

ya right that's why 1,100 men don't come home to assuage Monty's desire for a headline and IKE let them do it. Both should have been bucked down

​@@bigwoody4704 if you are referring to Market Garden, Eisenhower said "if Monty hadn't suggested it I would have ordered it"!

Indeed, and his combined British 2nd Army and Canadian 1st Army casualties in the whole of the Netherlands and Scheldt campaigns of autumn 1944 came to just over half that of Patton's 3rd Army casualties in the Lorraine.

Um no IKE went all in as both Brooke and Tedder mentioned he covered things up at the top to avoid either the Germans or Soviets knowing there was indeed a weak link in the alliannce.

@@lyndoncmp5751 'Um no IKE went all in as both Brooke and Tedder mentioned he covered things up at the top to avoid either the Germans or Soviets knowing there was indeed a weak link in the alliannce.' Para Dave. Total rubbish, as usual.

in fact, a great many American soldiers owe their lives to Montgomery's intervention in The Bulge, as they would have been sacrificed by the decisions of Hodges and Ridgeway. Clarke & Hasbrouck both sang Monty's praises afterwards.

Bull it was an excuse for the sorry state of his leadership and plodding. Too bad you two weren't stuck in the POW/Labor camps slowly starving to death while monty dithered. Wouldn't have to listen to the bollocks if you were

@@bigwoody4704 well if you want an example of aggression, monty wanted a huge thrust led by the British empire forces after the breakout of Normandy into Belgium and across the Rhine. He argued that supplying a spearhead in summer 1944 could smash across the Rhine and win the war. Patton and Eisenhower wanted a broader offensive. This allowed the Germans to reform and eventually the allied advance stalled in September 1944 because of the lack of supplies for a broadfront offensive. Historians argue that in this case monty was right and he'd have been rolling into Germany with very little organised German resistance as they still hadn't regrouped after the battle of Normandy.

And how much faster did the Americans move on the Hurtgen Forest, Lorraine, Alsace and Operation Queen? Didn't they also go backwards in the Ardennes?

@@lyndoncmp5751 yea American troops were slow and often got beat when they didn't have their air support

Mainly British