The Battle of Gazala: Rommel's Greatest Victory

Подписаться 16 тыс.

Просмотров 8 тыс.

50% 1

From May to June 1942, the fighting was really hot in the North African desert as Rommel's Afrika Korps and his Italian allies swept around and defeated an incompetent British commander's simple strategies. This battle was so lopsided that it showed Rommel at his best and the British at their worst. Even though the Axis armies were outnumbered, many Allied tanks were destroyed, Tobruk taken, Allied supplies lost and the British were pushed off the field of battle in a humiliating defeat that Churchill agonized over for a long time. The British were in danger of losing Egypt. Watch this exciting video and find out so much more!
If you enjoyed this video, then you may also like:
German Jets Over Normandy?
• German Jets Over Norma...
Manstein's Backhand Blow -- World War II
• Manstein's Backhand At...
Deep Battle Part II: German Surprise At Nancy
• Deep Battle Part 2: Ge...
Birth of the Constitution of Japan After World War II
• Birth of the Constitut...
#ww2 #wwii #afrikakorps
The Battle of Gazala: Rommel's Greatest Victory
TIK Mark Felton WW2 WWII MHV Military History Visualized World War 2 World War II

Опубликовано:

1 янв 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 37

@user-qt7nq5xl1m 6 месяцев назад

I cannot imagine being sent to war to fight for my life and country in a desert of worthless sand. Very informative commentary and research. Good job

@EmersusTech 6 месяцев назад

user-qt7nq5xl1m, thank you for your compliment and for watching!

@thomaswayneward 27 дней назад

It was what was under the sand that was important, then and now.

@markholmphotography 3 месяца назад

What Rommel did is called “defeat in detail”. Defeat in detail is a military phrase referring to the tactic of bringing a large portion of one's own force to bear on small enemy units in sequence, rather than engaging the bulk of the enemy force all at once. This exposes one's own units to a small risk, yet allows for the eventual destruction of an entire enemy force.

@EmersusTech 3 месяца назад

Mark, yes, I appreciate that you broke what Rommel did down! For this, you get a heart!

@3idraven714 Месяц назад

It seems the Brits milked there forces in piecemeal, Rommel would have been crushed at Sidi Mufta (At least the DAK, the Italians might have slither away) had Brits concentrated their forces on him, just like Rommel lucked out at his "Drive to the Wire" during Op. Crusader. The whole Desrt Campaign and Rommels reputation is based in significant part to Brit incompetence in Leadership, all the way up to the High Command (Armored/Infantry tactics woefully outdated) to the Div./Corps/Army commanders.

@Powerofriend Месяц назад

What Rommel did was concentrate his force and push the British southern flank with his armour. To his good fortune the British had Intel to expect a frontal push against their line. Even when their southern most positions reported German panzer formations encryption aching on upon their positions the British HQ replied that there were no such for es in that area. During the battle British infantry divisions stayed put in their positions and armored regiments and brigades acted on their own engaging three times their number of axis armor without infantry and artillery support. Rommel was a good general but the incompetence pf his adversaries made him "Great"

@thomasfsan 7 дней назад

Also of note, he used Napoleons “central position”. Breaking in, taking one side, then the other.

@EmersusTech 6 месяцев назад

If you enjoyed this video, then you may also like: German Jets Over Normandy? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pA0mFKVyRJI.html Manstein's Backhand Blow -- World War II ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-FJOfLm2jFdU.html Deep Battle Part II: German Surprise At Nancy ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-uh_NHDkukmY.html Birth of the Constitution of Japan After World War II ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-soPPUJFWs1c.html

@eliech7112 Месяц назад

Thanks for great video

@EmersusTech Месяц назад

eliech7112, I appreciate your appreciation! Thanks for watching and for your comment!

@jamesabernethy7896 5 месяцев назад

I watch history stuff anyway but randomly came across your What do the British think of the American soldiers and visa versa. I'd heard some of it before but they were really nice videos that covered language, culture and strategy. Really interesting.

@EmersusTech 5 месяцев назад

James, thank you very much for the compliment! I appeciate it! You get a heart!

@philcleary2660 4 месяца назад

From personal knowledge, there is great respect between US and British military, with them having fought shoulder-to-shoulder on many occasions. But there's also a lot of banter, as you'd expect between different sections of the military, particularly over the disparity in kit. An uninformed observer of these exchanges might conclude that there was some bitterness but that would be incorrect, as when the fighting starts, they would see that the US and British military are brothers-in-arms, willing to risk their lives for each other.

@OverNine9ousend 4 месяца назад

Hey mate, thanks for the video, i wanted to check out Battle of gazala deep dive, and well here i am. Thanks! Small tip, intro is kinda long and dragged out like Spanish soap opera, but hey thats just my 2 cents! Again, thanks for video!

@EmersusTech 4 месяца назад

OverNine9ousend, thanks for the tip, but I like the way my intros are and intend to keep them. I appreciate that you liked this video as I spent a very long time doing research and creating this video. It was definitely a labor of love! You get a heart for your comment! Check out my other videos on my channel!

@philcleary2660 5 месяцев назад

Great video, thank you. However, Rommel's 'genius' at the Battle of Gazala has since been called into question, as he had access to British battle strategy and tactics, their dispositions and repositioning, supplies/lack of supplies and the state of morale of the British troops before and during the battle. This was provided to him by US Colonel Fellers (German code name 'Good Source'), who, being the US Liaison with the British and an ally, was allowed full access to British plans which he then passed on in detailed reports to his senior command in Washington DC*. But, due to sloppy security procedures, German crypto-analysts had broken the US 'Black' Code (on 12 December 1941**) and were passing it on to Rommel. Consequently, he knew beforehand where all the weak spots were; and the British defensive plans and the 'likely attack', hence the so-called 'genius manoeuvre' in creating an 'anti-tank screen' and installing a 'fresh minefield' right in the path of the approaching British tanks. The British Generals were increasingly amazed and confused, their tank commanders seemed to always be up against the lethal German 88m anti-guns which had an unerring knack of being in the right place, at the right time. It was although Rommel knew they were coming. He did, as the Americans had told him (unintentionally). * Deac, Wil (May 2008). "Intercepted Communications for Field Marshal Erwin Rommel". World War II Magazine. ** Jenner, C. J. (April 2008). "Turning the Hinge of Fate: Good Source and the UK-U.S. Intelligence Alliance, 1940-1942". Diplomatic History. 32 (2): 165-205. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7709.2008.00688.x

@EmersusTech 5 месяцев назад

Phil, yes, Rommel did have access to British intelligence, not just in this battle, but in 1941 also. British radio operators tried to speak "in the clear", but using British lingo that they believed Germans wouldn't understand, however the Germans were very clever and understood more than they thought and could piece a lot of it together. I agree that Rommel had help, but battlefield intelligence can be a double-edged sword. A case in point: In this video, one of the British armored brigades was sent south based on faulty intelligence and did nothing but waste gas in open desert. A general also has to keep in mind that the good source today, could be a turned source tomorrow, with truth and falsehood mixed together. Thanks for your comment!

@Dilley_G45 2 месяца назад

Yes but the British could intercept and destroy half of Rommels supplies over sea cause they could read Enigma and it was just never seen as a possibility. The whole German signal traffic was basically available to the Allies most of the war

@JuergenGDB Месяц назад

So yes Rommel did his job used said information and won the day. Wow.. no kidding, the Allies did the same all the time, you going to take those victories from them as well?

@philcleary2660 Месяц назад

@@EmersusTech Agreed but radio intercepts were one thing (and the Afrika Korps’s Company 621 were particularly good at it) but being provided with a complete breakdown of British dispositions, battle plans, strengths and weaknesses in a detailed report BEFORE the battle is another, I am sure that you will agree. Presidential Roosevelt was so embarrassed by the fact the American intel sloppiness was the cause of so many British deaths that he countermanded his Generals wish to focus on fighting the Japanese and ordered them to invade North Africa first (Operation Torch). But out of this debacle came some good, as the British and US intelligence services worked together more closely, resulting in the creation of the 5 Eyes intelligence organization that still exists today. Thanks, you’ve produced a a great video. 👍

@thomaswayneward 27 дней назад

That is part of the battle, isn't it?

@briankorbelik2873 5 месяцев назад

Quite honestly, the Brit commanders in North Afrika were universially bad. The only reason Monty ever won anything, is because he always had twice what the Germans had, and could read their "mail". In a halfway fair fight, Monty's knickers would always be down. I realize what's being discussed here is pre-flappers. (Monty)

@EmersusTech 5 месяцев назад

Brian, yes, Monty always made sure that he had way more material and victory was almost assured by overwhelming supplies/force before he thought about moving in the enemy's direction. I have some theories about this, but I don't want to give them away because I might make a video about it. Thanks for your comment and for watching!

@papaaaaaaa2625 3 месяца назад

Utter nonsense. First of..."fair fight"? War isn't fair. Germany never fought "fair" by any means. Second...General O'Connor. A awesome General who lead the forces during Operation Compass. He defeated 150.000 Italians with only 36.000 own troops and drove the Italian invasion force back to were they started. Field Marshall Archibald Wavell. He was commander in Chief for ALL of the Middle East, West and East Afrika and later also for Greece...he commanded FIVE Operations simultaneously in the meantime. And blaming Field Marshall Montgomery for preparing his Operations in Africa is at least stupid. And Rommel? Rommel had more luck than anything. Both, General Crüwell and Oberstleutnant Bayerlein, saved Rommels Operation more than once. Rommel ignored the Operation Crusader because he believed the British weren't able to attack. It were those two officers that prevent a complete defeat in Africa in 41, not Rommel.

@cwolf8841 3 месяца назад

The American diplomatic code had been broken, so the Germans could read British status and positions.

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- 2 месяца назад

Auchinleck and Richard O Connor were not “universally bad”

@jacoblongbrake8230 Месяц назад

TIKhistory has better Detail in theories on that.

@thomaswayneward 27 дней назад

Great video and explanation of the battles. The photo of FDR and Churchill shows the two men most responsible for WWII. The US and Britain did not belong in what was a continuation of the battles that had been going on for centuries on mainland Europe. FDR thinking that the "Russian way" was the way of the future, caused communism to spread out all over the globe after Germany was defeated.

@EmersusTech 15 дней назад

Thomas, thank you for your compliment! Think about what would've happened if Great Britain hadn't joined WWI -- it wasn't strictly necessary. They could've saved a generation and then a later one in WWII -- if there had even been one. FDR thought that he understood Stalin (and Stalin played along...)