Battlefield S2/E1 - The Battle for North Africa
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- I do not own, nor do I or intend to profit from this content whatsoever. "Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."
All right reserved to:
NBC Universal
Directed by Dave Flitton, Andy Aitken, James Wignall
Produced by Dave Flitton (series prod.), David McWhinnie, Ken Maliphant, David Rozalla
Written by Dave Flitton, Andy Aitken, James Wignall
Narrated by Jonathan Booth
Music by David Galbraith
Distributed by Public Broadcasting Service
Release date(s) 1996
Running time 6 116-minute episodes
Country USA
Language English
These battlefield documentaries are simply amazing. I watch all of them. Fascinating.
Andy Brennand I know right their simply so informative.
Indeed they are clear concise wonderfully narrated this and Mark Felton are my Favorite!
Amazing detail.
I wish I could find either a blu ray set or a dvd set
@@tulpfiction8920 Amazon has them
I’m proud of my father who went to North Africa as an officer in the tankers. They deprived the Nazis of the Middle East oil fields. His older brother went into France via the D Day invasion. His younger brother served in the US Navy in the South Pacific. Everyone came home. 🇺🇸
Absolutely amazing. I imagine you heard so many stories from them. I've always found the period of both world wars to be fascinating in terms of their tremendous historical staying power and insight into today.
The Whermacht wern't Nazis. As a matter of fact, most soldiers/memebers in the Whermacht didn't support the 3rd Reich. Just a pointer there.
@@mahmudii2081 the myth of the clean Wehrmacht is just that, a myth. The Heer as a quasi independent “state within a state” was gradually eroded during the late 20’s into the 30’s. The officer corps was largely aligned with the Nazi Party and its goal of militarizing Germany. By the 39 invasion of Poland the Wehrmacht leadership was fully aware of Hitler’s genocidal intent. Likewise, the myth of a clean Rommel has also been overstated. He was complicit in and supportive of rounding up Tunisian Jews for future extermination.
My great grandfather was in KDG and went out to North Africa.
You should write down the stories.... before they are forgotten.
My great uncle fought with the 93rd Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, 6th Battalion Anti-tank Regiment and was killed in Tunisia in 1943 in the Battle for North Africa. It's hard for my grandfather to watch this episode as he came home after his service. I'm so glad there are documentaries such as this.
Indeed, brave and committed. North Africa must have been an extraordinarily difficult place to fight. Weather conditions, dust, little cover... bad food, constant dehydration. A very special heroic group of men.
My heart goes out to you and your family
Fvffffffffrrfffffffffffffffrb3u
God bless your great-uncle! We owe our freedom and lifestyle to great men and women like him. It was incredibly challenging to fight there. It would be hard to be that tough. Thanks and God Bless.
Never forgotten chum.
With the well written script and a clearly spoken narration by Jonathan Booth, makes this series one of the best on TH-cam.
They’re also on Tubi. Makes it nice to have it on both. Really well done series, the best as far as logistics, basic statistics and overall experience of battles.
Yes in like 2-hour episodes on basically every battle you could ever 1, even some minuscule event like the balkans
Tim Piggot Smith is the narrator for this particular episode.
@delzworld2007 .....Tim Piggot Smith is the narrator.
One of, if not the best narrative individual battle documentary series ever produced. Excellent footage and maps, neutral presentation and Timothy Piggot Smith narrating...awesome. LOVE the soundtrack too; hate that they changed it in subsequent series.
I find it very interesting that they begin with a cursory treatment of Operations Compass and the destruction of the Italians, Brevity and then Battleaxe and the cascade of British commanders. Almost like they don't want to talk about the British defeats until there is a "happy ending" at El Alamein.While the real roll back of the Axis began at the second El Alamein, how they got into that position to begin with is an interesting bit of history and probably deserves more attention than it is given here. It just depends on the story you want to tell, and in this case, the victor writes the history.Not saying this is a bad episode, quite the opposite is true, but the presentation is neutral with a decidedly British twist. Or "edited for content and to run in the time allotted" as they say on US television.
Not really. If you look carefully you can find journals and histories from all participating groups in a conflict.
but those are only from those sides. What I want to see is a postwar commander's analysis.
Also, most of this series is being copyrighted and im wondering if anyone can tell me any other way to see these?
They are available on DVD from Amazon, but be careful to check that the format (NTSC, PAL, etc.) is appropriate for your region.
no bs videos, all footage came from the exact period.
powerful soundtrack too.
This is a great series for us WWII history nuts! Thanks for the uploads!
Excellent series. I remember watching this many years ago; it has certainly stood the test of time. Thank you for making it available.
Those were some brave men and determined men who fought in North Africa. God bless their souls.
This is how you make a military documentary.
Yes Luga has shown the way. Big upz Luges.
@@ludaheracles7201 he didn't make any of the documentaries on his channel.
@@sam8404 no but he did take the time to upload the whole series. Look up the other videos of the same, not nearly as good quality as these.
@@nimbusnimbus.IV. yeah I know. Just saying a lot of people think he makes all the documentaries on his channel.
I absolutely agree. I've never seen a more complete, and accurate documentary. Only reading a book would be more informative.
My Great Uncle Major. Ronald Anderson Gerrard D.S.O, fought and died in Tobruk, he is my hero and will be forever greatful for his services to keep are country and otheres alive. i didnt meet him, but he seemed too be a honarable decent man
He was fighting to preserve the British Empire.
coh3 africa korps gameplay-th-cam.com/video/A_MuDtmURwg/w-d-xo.html
I swear, I could watch these documentaries all day and never get tired of it.
I have and never gets boring
And yet nobody cares.
@@poliziagrammaticale9430 you need to start caring
@@poliziagrammaticale9430
Obviously you’re alone in that thought.
No, I find myself in agreement with my Grammatical friend. Anyone who gets tired watching documentaries is foolish and must be doing it wrong!
thank's great doc love these series fall a sleep with every night like the voice ( and the accent ) off the narater
I swear I learned more about WWII from these documentaries than I ever did in High School
My mother’s father was taken POW by the English on May 13, 1943, a day he never forgot. A 21 year old boy, changed forever by the horrors of that war. He didn’t return back home to southern Italy for almost 4 years. Wish I still had him around to hear his stories.
lol sucks to be a fascist
Yea it’s heartbreaking no matter the faction
@@FuZZy-ToAstY no it isn’t. it’s awesome when fascist scum pay the price for being fascist scum. just like it’s awesome when american soldiers met their end in afghanistan or iraq or vietnam. you invade a foreign nation who was no threat to you to kill their innocent people, then you deserve to pay the ultimate price for your evil deeds.
Much love to your family, from Britain.
THAT'S the real collateral damage that isn't considered.
I love this series. The first 2 seasons with Tom Piggot Smith narrating are the best.
+mrichar9 YOU ARE RIGHT....MUCH BETTER....
Yeh gotta love the pig.
+mrichar9 Yes i agree whole hearetedly! A masterpiece.
what?
Not enough to spell his first name correctly apparently.
Thank you, Vasile Luga, for the video uploads...excelence.
Cheers Luges
Absolutely.ThankYou,VasileLuga
All of these wwll documentaries heavily remind me of my Grandad and my GreatGrandad , they were both full-time professional Army officers in the Greek Royal Army. Miss you guys❗
GOAT of military documentary series.
Incredible Documentary. Great footage, objectively narrated, and exceptionally well organized. 5 stars.
Hats off to Luga for this
A Pour le Merite winner, Rommel was an outstanding infantry commander of WW1. This fact tends to be overlooked sometimes because of his fame in the desert but for anyone interested, a study of his exploits in the Great War will give you whole new appreciation of his ability.
Best WW2 series of them all, thank you for sharing!
If you have Tubi, the Field of Operations series is available and it’s as excellent as this.
I love the sound of wind in the documentary as they focus in.
believe me, i have watched plenty of these ww2 stuff. This series is the best! Every part of it makes you feel that era
If you are interested here is my channel where my father discusses his first hand experiences in North Africa. th-cam.com/channels/b89K58ISJdEYEuPrj2cTqw.html?%5C=
Thank you so much for posting all these
I too enjoy this Battlefield series, well made and narrated, with only rare mis-quotes of the facts (some WW2 documentaries are so riddled with wrong information to be un-watchable) , Thanks for posting.
Timeless in its excellence!!!! Amazingly well executed production!!
The Battle of Kasserine Pass reminds me of the Battle of the Bulge: armored penetration of a quiet front, panicked Allied reaction, and then frustration of the overambitious attack.
The 1941 Seige of Tobruk needs a video of its own. It's a fascinating event in WWII.
So happy to find this! One of the best sleeping video. I've tried to watch it more than 10 times but never passed 5 min
I remember watching this as a kid found it fascinating
Still is Mr Casserly
Thank you for the video
It helps me to look up links and read about other stuff
The iron law of logistics.
The 2nd New Zealand Division in battle formation in the desert,during the later stages,it covered an area 78 sq km's.
My dad was an Ack Ack gunner in WWII, he was in N. Africa and Anzio, I wonder if he ever shot down any German planes in N. Africa. I have a wonderful pic of him and his buddies in Italy eating a spaghetti dinner, a nice woman invited them in to eat and she fed them all! He said it was the first 'real meal' he'd had in 4 years. I have his Purple Heart, he was wounded twice but they sent them right back out once they bandaged them up. He had shrapnel in the back of his legs for the rest of his life and he had to have the lower part of his right lung removed from being blown forward from a mortar right into the recoil of the Ack Ack he was manning.
History channel is great though if you wanna learn about Yetis & how Aliens built the pyramids.
😂😂😂
Oodlepoodle Puke Shitty copy and paste comment about the history channel ✅
This is the kind of thing the history channel used to air...
Excellent professional and accurate historical accounts
Yeah, I’ve always wondered why the Italian army was so bad. I truly think they just really didn’t want to be in the war.
Many of the soldiers didn't want to be there, yes, but they also weren't equipped to fight a modern war the way the Germans and the Allies were, during WW2 if you didn't have good tanks and a modern/efficient air force you basically couldn't be a major player.
If WW1 taught us anything it's that when fighting under simular circumstances all nations perform more or less equally well (or bad, depending on the viewpoint).
These efforts paved the way for the Sicily Invasion, which my grandfather was a paratrooper with the 101st Airborne.
The US was on the wrong side in both world wars.
We should have allied with Germany against the real threat.
What? The Irish Free State?
@@thevillaaston7811 The Soviet Union was the only threat to the British Empire.
The Irish Free State had ceased to exist in 1937.
@@MarkHarrison733
So glad that the Soviet Union not invade any part of the British Empire.
So glad that the world knows that DeValera's Irish State was pro Nazi.
@@thevillaaston7811 The Soviet Union destroyed the British Empire from within.
Germany did not invade any part of the British Empire.
I remember it was great when I was a kid. When it was actually about 'History'. I think those were the days when MTV still had music videos ;) American TV, I mourn thee.
I'm so old I remember when MTV only played videos without any commercials!
Madonna posing as a 13 y.o. girl rolling around on the floor after raiding her mom's lingerie drawer...
I remember when The Andy Griffith Show had new episodes.
the hawker hurricane is the sexiest aircraft design of all-time, if youve seen every design ever made. but i guess it depends on your personal taste ;p
I like them too.
They look reassuringly solid and able to take punishment.
I prefer the macchi 202 and 205. But ok.
@@zenoist2 lots of solid cloth
It is interesting how international British 8th Army in North Africa then later in Italian Campaign was. As well as Brits there were Australians , New Zealanders , Indians , South Africans , Free French , Free Greeks etc...
Half this documentary focuses mainly on Al Alemain.
There are several battles completely omited here.
And several other important factors
Yup. America was punched in the face. Knocked down, and trash talked. Then the bell for round 3 rung and it was all allies from there.
Early offense wasn't Americas strong suit. But setting up defensive lines and well established supply routes (not trying to keep up with Patton) was what the army in early 42 was good at.
Interesting! I never knew that the Allies had to fight French resistance in the Med other than Churchill's toughest decision to attack the French warships when the French had Surrendered to Germany.
That was another war crime.
but the Vichy french hadn't surrendered to Germany, even sections of the free french were obstructionist and difficult to deal with. I can't see that Churchill had any other options. People like Laval handing over the french gold reserves and large industrial complex's was further proof of their treachery. Later in Syria/Lebanon and Madagascar the allies had to fight the Vichy french, what a waste of lives and resources. Plus there was fighting during the Operation Torch landings.
@@markharrison2544 liberating your grandparents was the war crime.
@@SG-ug9xj keyboard hero...
This series is so well done I love the introduction it builds up a suspense.. it's one of the best historical documentaries on war ever put out.... Thanks
I would suggest reading the Romel Papers to gain insight into what Romel was struggling with as he attempted to reach Cairo. An excellent read.
In trying to choose the best commander on the German side, keep in mind that panzer corps work better in concert with each other. Also Romel was able to operate with more independence in North Africa than most of the commanders in Russia.
I believe that Romel was better at corp commander level, as opposed to panzer army command. For that, give me Guderian.
Model and Manstein were the best.
Rommel which who becoming a hidden person which who was behind Operation Valkyrie the doing in of Adolf Hitler which who wasn't killed by the time-bomb explosion And that poor guy which who given the choice of a People's court and the complete destruction of his family The other choice which who was to take poison to preventing the complete destruction of his family He was if he was surviving he could of being teaching in a oversea military college and maybe writing about his life and serving in the Imperial German Army and the Wehrmacht in the two world wars and which who was being the most commander of the famous Afrika Korps
It was corps level command - roughly
Australia was given very little credit for their contribution to the success of the North African campaign
Hitler used to wear pink panties under his uniform and secretly went by the name Alice, Alice Hitler.
The Digger giving a wink at 15:55 shows that all is not lost!
Sebastian Haffner is correct regarding Hitler's role in decolonisation.
So in El Alamein Montgomery had more men, planes, tanks (with newer models), equipment, fuel, time, etc. and wins? Big surprise.
The only thing that is surprising is the fact he is able to do this dispite initially using WWI tactics.
Most of his victories were set up by his predecessors. When left to his own devices, without a MASSIVE superiority, Caen and Market Garden, for example he falls flat.
To say he is overated, is to still give him too much credit.
@B Whit He's also the reason why the entire German 10th army was able to withdraw northward, Clark wanted to take Rome so he could get in the newspapers.
I love these series, wish some day we will have better quality.
(2 part) "Even in the air, the British could now count on greater superiority than ever before. Sir Arthur Tedder, the commander-in-chief of the Middle East Air Force, now had 96 operational squadrons at his disposal, including 13 Americans, 13 South Africans and 1 Rhodesian, 5 Australians, 2 Greeks, 1 French and 1 Yugoslav. In total it was more than 1500 fighter planes. Of these, 1200, based in Egypt and Palestine, were ready to support the attack of the 8th Army, while no more than 350 German and Italian planes were available in Africa to support the Panzerarmee. This air superiority proved invaluable in hindering the movement of the Panzerarmee and the regular influx of supplies to its divisions, as well as in protecting the supply columns of the 8th Army from similar interference. But by far more important in determining the outcome of the battle was the indirect and strategic action that, together with the British navy submarines, the air force carried out to block the maritime supply routes of the Panzerarmee. In September almost a third of the ships carrying supplies for Rommel's forces sank while crossing the Mediterranean, while many ships were forced to return to their ports of departure. In October the action of the English planes and submarines became even more intense, and less than half of the supplies destined to Rommel reached their destination. At one point the Germans were so short of artillery ammunition that they could do little to respond to the British artillery fire. The worst blow for the Germans, however, was the sinking of the tankers loaded with fuel, none of which reached the African coast during the weeks immediately before the English offensive; so it was that when the battle opened the Panzerarmee found itself with only 3 "full" of fuel, instead of the 30 that were considered the minimum necessary reserve. This very serious lack of fuel had almost paralyzing consequences for the Germans' ability to counter manoeuvre, forcing them to distribute their mobile forces in a fragmentary way, preventing their timely concentration at the points of attack and even immobilizing them as the fight continued.
The inadequacy of food supplies contributed significantly to the spread of diseases of various kinds among the troops."
According to aussie after action reports the italians put up a good show at bardia.
loved watching this show when i was a kid
Such an excellent series. I absolutely love Tim piggott Smith as a narrator. I watch these when I need to relax or decompress, so soothing.
Stop dissing Luga - after all the effort he has put in...
This is a superb series!
Wife's Father was in North Africa in the 82nd Army Airborne until wounded in Sicily and sent to England to recover, later was part of the new 101st Airborne Div.
why is the South African 8th Army division hardly mentioned ? They to fought hard and lost many men. I am interested as my father fought in North Africa....
Check out the channel TIK. Best military history channel onTH-cam I believe he has a video or two about the South African forces in North Africa
Excellent narration by Tim Pigott Smith, unencumbered by excessive and barely intelligible British brogue... Great explanation of the battles and aftermath.. and the importance of Malta in both defense and attack...
Why was he not prosecuted for child abuse?
British Empire was incredible in ww2. Thank God for Britain and Churchill. Roosevelt would have stayed out of the war if not for pearl harbor and the world would be mostly german owned today god forbid
WE ALREADY LIVE IN A POLICE STATE. YOu're a typical westerner who's apathetic and degenerate. I'm not surprised. That's why EXTINCTION is in your future.
England lost the British Empire after the war, and then decided on a biological level to start replacing their population with the 3rd world. Yes, that war was for nothing, but a hollow victory which expanded Communism.
Italy's failure in north Africa was in part due to inadequate armaments -- a result of the equipment lost by Italy during its conquest of Ethiopia (1935-1936), its involvement in the Spanish civil war, and Italy's invasion of Egypt (1940).
Had Montgomery not had the benefit of the British breaking the German codes, North Africa would have been far more costly to the British and taken much longer. Montgomery was able to plan his attacks with exact information on how the German defenses were set up. Without this, there would have been far more casualties for the British. Montgomery's over-optimistic planning, poor strategy, and poor leadership were evident throughout the war. Nothing proved this more then his Operation Market Garden plan where his ineptness as a planner was responsible for killing many men needlessly and delaying the final victory. The failure at Arnhem meant that any planned invasion of Germany had to be delayed. The Germans, although they had lost ground, were able to establish a strong defensive line delaying the war. In total, the Allies had suffered some 15,000 casualties and had many thousands more taken prisoner. Montgomery was a glory seeker and was determined to be the first into Germany even if it meant killing thousands of allied troops in the process. Why he ended up be glorified is beyond me. Had ANY general had inside information he did in Africa they could have easily defeated Rommel. And his total failure as a planner with Operation Market Garden proved he was not the glorious general and the tactician the media and his government made him out to be.
Rommel would have beat Montgomery if he had the same level of resources and intel. Of course hitler over expanded/attacked on to many fronts.
@ Mark Mai
A chimp could have succeeded in Saint Monty Pythons shoes. While the British and others worship him I don't like him anymore than Patton did. We gave him tanks by the hundreds an inexhaustible amount of supplies and fuel all the while just sitting there defying Churchill's orders to get off his ass and attack. He only moved after bankrupting his country and outnumbering Rommel four to one. General Alexander would have been a wonderful choice instead of St Monty Python.
Mark Mai
Your words in 'single quotes'
‘Had Montgomery not had the benefit of the British breaking the German codes, North Africa would have been far more costly to the British and taken much longer. Montgomery was able to plan his attacks with exact information on how the German defenses were set up. Without this, there would have been far more casualties for the British.’
The same intelligence was available to Montgomery’s predecessors at 8th Army, Auchinleck and Ritchie.
‘Montgomery's over-optimistic planning, poor strategy, and poor leadership were evident throughout the war.’
Really? When? Montgomery performed with distinction as a single division commander in trying circumstances in 1940, won against the odds at Alam el Hafa, won at El Alamein, The Mareth Line, Sicily, Normandy, the Northern half of the Bulge and the crossing of the Rhine.
‘Nothing proved this more then his Operation Market Garden plan where his ineptness as a planner was responsible for killing many men needlessly and delaying the final victory. The failure at Arnhem meant that any planned invasion of Germany had to be delayed. The Germans, although they had lost ground, were able to establish a strong defensive line delaying the war.’
Total rubbish. Market Garden delayed nothing. The allied armies had already stopped before Market Garden was proposed (10th September, 1944). That is why it was proposed. Unlike Montgomery in Normandy, Eisenhower had no workable plan to attack Germany to the frustration of Montgomery and one of Bradley’s subordinate commanders, Patton.
‘In total, the Allies had suffered some 15,000 casualties and had many thousands more taken prisoner.’
Nope. That 15,000 included killed wounded and taken prisoner - see any history of the battle. That number should be compared to US failures at Aachen (20,000), Metz (40,000) and the Hurtgen Forest (55,000).
‘Montgomery was a glory seeker and was determined to be the first into Germany even if it meant killing thousands of allied troops in the process.’
Really? His plans were shaped by British (and for a while, US) manpower constraints, Britain’s financial situation and, in the case of Arnhem, by the need to deal with V Weapons being fired at Britain and Belgium.
‘Why he ended up be glorified is beyond me. Had ANY general had inside information he did in Africa they could have easily defeated Rommel.’
But other generals (Auchinleck and Ritchie) with the same level of intelligence did not defeat Rommel.
'And his total failure as a planner with Operation Market Garden proved he was not the glorious general and the tactician the media and his government made him out to be.
'
Market Garden was undone by US forces at Nijmegen, not by prior planning. As it was it took the allies 64 miles to the end of the Siegfried Line and should be compared to the dog’s dinner that was Eisenhower’s strategy that Autumn.
Come back if you wish. I would advise against it.
@@IrvinGisher
Do you want some?
@@kercchan3307
Do want some?
Supposedly the italians had pasta in their rations instead of other carbs, which meant they had to use water to cook their meals, this was a big problem in the middle of the north african desert during a war...
Everything exept the most important detail is mentioned, Rommel had lost his "little Feller's" and the broken ENIGMA code, all axis fuel tankers in late1942 where sunk!
For the first thing, nothing to say; about the second, however, that's not true, and a statystical analysis proves it.
Of all the liquid fuels sent from Italy in 1942 and 1943 to Lybia (599.337 metric tons) the 80% arrived (476.703 metric tons).
About the liquid fuels sent in Tunisia between November 1942 and May 1943, out of 132.522 metric tons sent, some 94.472 metric tons arrived (71%).
Source : Giorgio Giorgerini, "La guerra italiana sul mare", Mondadori 2001
It's true that by that time the Allied offensive on the sea concentrated on the fuel tankers, but that doesn't mean that all of them were sunk, nor that little to no fuel arrived from Italy.
What the allies did succeed at is sinking all of the submarine fuel tankers. The germans built submarines to refuel their u-boats, the problem being that both had to be on the surface for over an hour to refuel. They were sunk by aircraft because they couldn't dive quickly while refueling.
Daniel Meyer That may have been an influence in the Atlantic, but in the Mediterranean and for the North African theater that wasn't a factor at all.
historynerd88 Ya, I was just trying to clarify if that was what he was talking about
***** Well, if that's your opinion, you can simply forget about it; the data I mentioned is that one, and there's nothing you can do about it. I gave you the source, and the source is the data of those who sent it and those who received it.
The problem was not just the sheer quantity of fuel arriving in North Africa; at El Alamein the problem was also getting it to the front (it was some 1100 miles on road), so a large quantity (at times almost half) of it was needed just to keep supplies arriving. Then, some of it arrived safely but was destroyed by Allied air raids.
I'm not saying the fuel tankers could cross the sea safely; they were priority targets by 1942, and so they didn't have an easy life. But that doesn't automatically mean every single one of them was sent to the bottom.; many of them, but not all of them.
thank you for uploading this series...
54:53 Is he cooking an egg on the tank?
Yes, he is. The cooking spot was cleaned, then drizzled with olive oil (of which there was plenty in North Africa) or lubricating oil and the eggs would be fried up after the late morning sun turned the metal very hot.
Yes
Very good . Appreciation for history,,, I especially like the soundtrack
Excellent documentary!! But, why say Rommel was held out of Tobruk for 8 months but neglect to mention it was the Australians that repelled those German attacks with clever tactics. Although heavily outnumbered and gunned the Australians were responsible for the Germans first battle loss in WW2
South African's and Kiwi's were there as well. South Africa's 2nd Infantry battalion took part there.
they can't get into every damn detail or this will be a 3 week documentary.
I'm from the USA,, and couldnt agree MORE.
@@raubi1549 The South African troops were filtered in during the last 2½ months of the siege. It was Morshead's 7th Australian Infantry Division that did the bulk of the holding down the fort at Tobruk with Lavarack's 18th Australian Brigade of the 7th Aust. Division in reserve. In the fighting at Tobruk and in the withdraw from Cyrenaica that preceded the siege of Tobruk, Rommel came to view the Australians and a short time later the New Zealanders as the best of the Allied soldiers he faced.
Gami bei
I'll say this and I will not disturb anymore :Malta was very crucial for the British because without this country, the Axis forces could've strangle the supply lines, vital to the British in North Africa.
So Italy should have taken Malta at the beginning when Benny started?
@@Ktsquare2008 Yes but I don't know if they would have succeeded.
The unit doubled in size yet again and an LRDG private air force was added in the form of two WACO monoplanes purchased from an Egyptian pasha, which aided communication with HQ and evacuation of the wounded. From this time until the end of the North African war at least one patrol of the Long Range Desert Group was always behind enemy lines. The LRDG guided and carried commando units far behind the front to carry out daring raids. With its unrivalled travel and navigation abilities the LRDG could place espionage agents at the very gates of Axis-held strongpoints almost anywhere in North Africa.
Their steady war routine was beating up Axis supply convoys and mining roads hundreds of miles behind the front, but LRDG patrols also razed airfields in daring nocturnal raids, destroying hundreds of aircraft on the ground between 1940 and 1943. The LRDG set up road watch patrols, often lying within earshot of the enemy and reporting every vehicle, weapon, and tank that passed by. This precise intelligence of Rommel’s supply position was one of Montgomery’s vital tools in the ultimate defeat of the Desert Fox. When Rommel’s deputy Ritter von Thoma was captured in the Battle of Alam Halfa just before El Alamein, the German general was shocked to learn that Montgomery knew more about the supply status of the Afrika Korps than he did. Most of this information had reached Montgomery via LRDG road watch patrols.
The patrols continued to penetrate Axis territory pretty well as they chose. In the immensity of the desert their vehicles were rarely spotted. Bagnold’s original concept, his detailed development of it, and his far-seeing organization had transformed the inner desert from a textbook defensive flank into a serious liability for the enemy.
In action against the Axis forces in North Africa from first to last the LRDG proved to be the most original, boldly conceived and brilliantly organized private army of the war. The success of Bagnold’s patrols helped break down official opposition to those commando-type formations, specialist units and private armies that fulfill novel and essential roles for which orthodox forces are neither trained nor equipped. The commando idea had been current for half a century or more but its modern potentialities under special conditions had never been seriously considered. Those at the top seldom possess the special knowledge and experience to judge the probability of success. Luckily for the Allies and perhaps for the world, Wavell was willing to take risks, because without the stunning success Bagnold achieved it is doubtful that some of the later private armies would have been authorized.
Unfortunately for Ralph Bagnold, the modernizer of this kind of auxiliary warfare, the modus operandi of his unique force had to be concealed in wartime from the enemy. Security blocked all details of its size and capabilities. Writing about the LRDG was initially forbidden and later heavily censored. For this reason the LRDG was far less well-known in wartime than other auxiliary forces such as Carlson’s Raiders, Wingate’s Chindits, Stirling’s Parashots or even German Colonel Otto Skorzeny’s glider and parachute commandos, all whose leaders became world famous.
Bagnold shared the anonymity of the LRDG in wartime. He left the unit in the summer of 1941 to become Inspector of Desert Troops1 and shortly afterwards deputy signal-officer-in-chief with the rank of brigadier. He was decorated for his achievement in forming the LRDG with the Order of the British Empire - an exceedingly modest award for his unique contribution to the security of the Middle East and the defeat of the Axis. As he left the LRDG in 1941 his name ceased to be associated with it thereafter, except for those who knew the true story. Later writers tended to assume that the colorful LRDG had come into existence as though grown on a bush. Bagnold’s personal indifference to publicity helped hide him to history, and he was already half-forgotten when his LRDG brought off the classic climax to its career.
From his vantage point on the staff Bagnold saw the LRDG trigger the end of the North African war, just as it opened the Allied account in 1940. At Mareth in Tunisia where Rommel made his final stand, a left hook was smashed home against the German forces that ended Axis hopes in Africa forever. This devastating knockout blow was delivered through country marked impassable on military maps. Leading the pulverizing stroke was Major General Sir Bernard “Tiny” Freyberg, who had given Bagnold the first troops for his patrols back when Bagnold was known in Cairo for his wild ideas. Freyberg followed a route through impassable country found for him by a patrol of the LRDG.
After the war Brigadier Ralph Bagnold retired from the army for good, the green tranquility of the Kentish countryside substituting for the golden wastes on which he found high adventure and fulfillment such as comes the way of few men. A busy and respected member of the British scientific community for decades, his fascination with the mysteries of natural physical processes was endless. He was a longtime consultant in the movement of sediments, beach formation and the like. In the words of Bill Kennedy Shaw: “Dry sand being difficult of access for him, he deals with wet mud.”
Although unknown in the United States outside professional circles, in 1969 Bagnold became the first recipient of the G.K. Warren Prize, awarded by the National Academy of Sciences of the USA. The prize recognized his contributions to fluvial geology. In 1970 he was awarded the Penrose Medal of the Geological Society of America. He was further honored by the Geological Society of London with its Wallaston Medal in 1971, and the International Association of Sedimentologists recognized his achievements with its Sorby Medal in 1978. Bagnold died in London on May 28, 1990.
Bagnold’s contribution to the Allied victory remained but little known or understood even in his native England, which showered honors and historical affection on other desert commando heroes. He could rightly be called the Allies’ hidden hero of the North African conflict, because without his mosquito columns events of 1940-41 could have unfolded very differently. The mind boggles at the consequences of the seizure of the Suez canal in the autumn of 1940 by Graziani’s massive army. Rommel’s army was only a third as large when two years later the Desert Fox nearly took Egypt and the canal.
With the slenderest resources Bagnold and Wavell - each a visionary in his own way - aborted the disaster of Egypt and the Middle East being lost in 1940. In modern military history there has rarely if ever been a bluff of such magnitude. Certainly there has never been one pulled with such elegance and finesse as Bagnold’s bluff, invested as it was with the conquering power of an idea whose time had come.
Note
1
Prewar companion and pilot Guy Prendergast relieved Bagnold as commanding officer (CO) of the LRDG and happily flew half the unit’s air force, one of the two WACO monoplanes. In the Bagnold tradition Prendergast was the most mobile CO in the North African theater.
________________________________________
Author’s Note
Bagnold’s Bluff is a lightly edited version of a chapter of my book Hidden Heroes, published in 1971 by Arthur Barker, Ltd. (London). This was during the Vietnam War when military men were widely disdained in America, soldiers sometimes even spat upon. The US market for military history was poor and I went on to other things. Thus Ralph Bagnold remained in the obscurity to which wartime security originally consigned him. The story of his remarkable strategic bluff in the fall of 1940 has therefore remained essentially unknown in the United States and this essay is presented here to an American readership for the first time.
In August 1940 more than 200,000 Italian troops were massed on Libya’s frontier with Egypt, poised to seize Cairo and the Suez Canal and thereby threatening the loss of the entire Middle East to the Axis. The strategic and geopolitical consequences of such a loss would have been incalculable. Nothing better points up the appalling weakness of the British defenders at that time than the fact that when Bagnold drew weapons for his patrols from the available supply he found just three Vickers machine guns remaining as the total reserve for the entire Middle East. General Wavell used more guile than guns when he sent Bagnold’s mosquito columns to raise hell on Graziani’s supposedly secure right flank. History has certainly credited Wavell fairly for his February 1941 defeat of the Italians, but it was Bagnold’s Bluff that caused wavering, apprehension and irresolution in the Italian command, despite the overwhelming numerical and material superiority of its forces.
The story of Ralph Bagnold strikingly points up how individuals can and do critically shape events of world importance and thus make a real difference in history. This extraordinary man has never been given proper public credit for his enterprising role in keeping Egypt and the vital Suez Canal from Axis hands and thus altering the entire course of the war, because during the war years the story of Bagnold’s dune-crossing route to inner Libya had to remain secret. And while his patrol force was successively expanded in 1941, Bagnold himself was promoted away to a lower-profile post and thereby lost to history. While Wavell received well-deserved acclaim for his victory over the Italians, Bagnold’s key role in Wavell’s strategic deception remained veiled.
In writing this piece, I am grateful above all to Ralph Bagnold himself, with whom I had extensive correspondence. My long research on the Long Range Desert Group convinced me that the most fascinating of the many stories the unit generated was that of its creation from absolute zero in beleaguered 1940. As a retired Brigadier Bagnold kindly assisted me with illuminating detail which has appeared nowhere else, about this crucial startup period. A gentleman of formidable intelligence, he kindly vetted my drafts of Bagnold’s Bluff and provided valuable additions.
My good fortune, also as a young writer in the 1960s, was to become a correspondent of William Boyd Kennedy Shaw, former Major and LRDG Intelligence Officer. His book, Long Range Desert Group, published in 1945 by Collins (London) remains the basic work on the subject. An archaeologist and Arabic scholar, Shaw was one of Bagnold’s dependable companions on the prewar expeditions into the Libyan sand sea and beyond which completed the primary exploration of that region. Through this ineffable gentleman I was able to contact former Major Pat Clayton, another member of Bagnold’s prewar exploration group who later helped him organize the LRDG, as well as retired Captain Richard Lawson, former LRDG medical officer who kindly loaned me his precious photo negatives of the period.
I am indebted to all these late gentleman for their generous and heart-warming aid.
________________________________________
About the author:
Trevor J. Constable, born in New Zealand in 1925, has an international reputation as an aviation historian. With Colonel Raymond F. Toliver, he has authored a number of successful works on fighter aviation and ace fighter pilots. He has lived in the United States since 1952, currently in southern California.
________________________________________
Source: Reprinted from The Journal of Historical Review, vol. 18, no. 2, p. 6.
Alt History: "Rommel wins in North Africa"
November 11, 1942- the Second Battle of El Alamein- General Bernard Montgomery launches a large scale attack on General Erwin Rommel near the coastal city of El Alamein. The attack results in total failure and thousands of British soldiers die.
November 15, 1942- the loss at El Alamein forces the USA to postpone Operation Torch and the landings in North Africa. The British people begin considering surrender and Rommel is promoted to Field Marshal.
December 27, 1942- Rommel pushes the British and takes over Cairo and the port of Alexandria. Montgomery flees to the Middle East.
January 5,1943- Rommel capture the Suez Canal.
My grandfather and great uncle fought in North Africa and Italy... I would love to visit the places that they were stationed in... El Alamein, Monte Carlo, Naples...
My great grandad was in North Africa for 3 years then went to Italy and Greece.
i agree. this documentary is outstanding!
Yes Luga has put a lot of work in to producing these documentaries ❤️💛💚🇬🇭❤️💛💚
A little tip: When the narrator gives the actual number and designation of british forces its british troops, but when he says british forces without specification it means it was french free forces and french colonial troops (morrocans senegalese algerians etc etc).
When is that?
A pity it couldn't give credit to the ANZAC forces that took part in these campaigns. The use of the term 'the British' is like calling the Americans 'Canadians' and doesn't acknowledge the sacrifices made by New Zealanders and Australians including my father. I have all the letters he wrote from there and he details everyday life at the time.
At the time, the British 8th Army was made up of Brits, Irishmen, Poles, ANZAC, Indian, South African and Free French troops. They all fought under the leadership of the British. It would be up to the respective nations to honor these troops, although the British military does honor them by unit. It is the history books that don't.
Amazing how the tough fighting in the north of el Alamein was Australian, New Zealand, Indian, and Scottish troops!
Most ANZACS were in fact British ex-pats.
These episodes first appeard.on PBS in the early ninties
The Battle of North Africa and Kesselring's name isn't mentioned once?
It discusses more of battle of El Alamein, than the other battles, that happened in North Africa.
Montgomery's victories are when he out numbers the other side 2 to 1 and the other side has no supplies.
Rommel was know for doing wonders and he was always out numbered in everything.
If Rommel ever was in a position like Monty with more men and tanks than the other side it would be a slaughter.
;'Montgomery's victories are when he out numbers the other side 2 to 1 and the other side has no supplies. '
Not at Alam el Halfa. Montgomery was outnumbered 6-4.
Like Wavell and the British did to the Italians with operation compass....Rommel had local superiority in tanks with nearly all his successful offensives - when british strength was low or diverted elsewhere and their lines of communication were over extended...he was only able to push the british out of Lybia because forces were overstretched and diverted to greece... a campaign which also delayed barbarossa nicely. So Rommel got to rampage past tobruk but the wehrmacht was stopped before Moscow 😢😅
@@simonrc179 Russia being big is is a defence in itself , long supply lines .
Look at Russia today struggling to supply a army today that just over the border right next door Ukraine 600km away .
Imagine Putin trying to supply a army invading Germany that's 5400 km away today ?
Montgomery wasnt the most popular General but he got results!
Rommel , one of the finest generals of WWII
The Battle of El Alamein resembled World War I -- defenses consisting of mine fields, barbed wire, pill boxes, artillery; attacks employing artillery barrages, sappers, etc.
It really wasn't like WWI
Its also indicative of the type of battle that Montgomery ("Monty") was best at: A battle where he had plenty of time to plan and prepare. Field Marshall Montgomery really seems to have been an excellent commander when on the defensive.
So i guess its strange that El Alamein and most of MOnty's victories were on the offensive
Only after extensive preparation that in some cases required weeks if not months of planning. El slamming was a defensive battle and for the most part the offensive failed. When the breakthrough finally came up was due as much, maybe mire, to the exhaustion of the German and Italian troops. Minty was well known for in depth planning to the point where he knew where every soldier was and what they were going to do. Yet his offensives failed time and time again.
With that said within time needed to plan he could defeat even Rommel. But Rommel was still capable of out fighting Monty time and time again.
Montgomery was not a failure but he was most definitely not the General he has been built up to be. Not as bad as General MacArthur but still not a great general.
Vagrant Turtle
lol what? Go read some books you idiot.
2nd El Alamein was an offensive battle. The defensive battle that Montgomery led was the battle of Alam el Halfa, months before El Alamein, which saw Rommel with more tanks, planes and infantry being defeated and having to withdraw back to their line. That battle made possible for Montgomery to build up his army for his own offensive, which was the 2nd battle of El ALamein.
In El ALamein in 10 days the british advanced, made the germans and italians enter a battle of atrition which they suffered more casualties, then broke through. Advancing non stop, capturing Tobruk, Benghazi, destroying Rommel yet again El Aghelia, and finally capturing Tripoli.
Then continuing their advance, once again humiliating Rommel in Medenine, which saw him for once and for all leave for europe, then continuing and bypassing the mareth line.
Montgomery advanced close to 2000 miles in 3 months. in ALL of the 2nd world war, not a single advance, be the germans, soviets, americans, or other british forces, saw such a rapid advance, SPECIALLY where the infrastructure was VERY limited.
Montgomery offensives failed time and time again? He didnt lose a single battle in north africa, be offensive or defensive.
In fact his only real defeat was Arnhem, which saw him advancing 90 miles in 4/5 days. That in a period where PAtton was stuck in Metz and would continue so for 3 months, while in Hurtgen forest the germans were defeating Bradley. In both the americans received 35.000 casualties.
In the whole market garden garden operation the allies received 14.000.
So make the math.
In fact, for Rommel managing to "out fight" Montgomery, please enlighten me how he di so, since he didnt win a single victory against Montgomery, with Monty defeating him at what, 5 main engagements and completely routing his army while the british suffered less casualties?
And the "Oh but the british had more men and tanks!"
Not at Alam el Halfa, oh yeah the very first battle between the two saw Rommel, having proclaimed for his forces that he would take Cairo and Alexandria and soon the suez, fall back to his line completely defeated.
Comparing Monty to McArthur: Sorry mate, but Eisenhower is much more of a comparission, or even PAtton.
The best US general was Bradley. Though worse than Monty indeed.. after all.. battle of the bulge eh? But he was good, and made a very good team with Monty in the normandy campaign, alongside Miles Dempsey.
As for the battle of El Alamein, the English military historian Sir Basil Henry Liddell Hart (1898-1970) writes in his book "Military history of the Second World War" (1 part):
"The British took advantage of the long break to ensure an even greater numerical and qualitative superiority than ever before. Those who had reasoned, as was customary, in terms of divisions could only conclude that there was a perfect balance of forces between the two sides, since both the British and the Germans had 12 "divisions", 4 of which were armoured. However, the ratio of forces in terms of men was quite different: while in fact the fighting forces of the 8th Army amounted to 230,000 men, Rommel had less than 80,000, only 27,000 of which were German. Moreover, the 8th Army had 7 armored brigades for a total of 23 armored regiments, against the 4 battalions of German tanks and the 7 Italians of Rommel. The difference in the number of tanks was even enormous. When the battle began, the 8th army had a total of 1440 tanks equipped with cannons, 1230 of which were in combat conditions, while in the event that the battle was prolonged it could draw on the escort of another thousand tanks that for the moment were safe in the warehouses of the bases or were being repaired. Rommel had only 260 German tanks (of which 20 were in repair and 30 were light Panzer II) and 280 Italian tanks (all of which were outdated). Only the 210 average German tanks equipped with a cannon would have really counted in a direct clash between armored forces; in reality, therefore, the English left with a superiority of 6 to 1 in terms of tanks in combat conditions, also being able to count on a capacity far greater than that of Rommel to replace any losses.
Even more overwhelming was the English superiority in terms of quality, since the Grant type tanks were now flanked in increasing numbers by the most modern and powerful Sherman tanks coming from America. At the beginning of the battle the 8th Army had more than 500 Sherman and Grants (and others were on the move), while Rommel had only 30 - 4 more than Alam Halfa - of the new Panzer IV that, with their 75mm high speed cannon, were the only ones able to withstand the comparison with these new American tanks. In addition, Rommel had lost his previous advantage with regard to anti-tank guns. The number of Rommel's "88" had been increased to 86 and although these had been reinforced by the arrival of 68 "76" captured by the Russians, his standard 50mm anti-tank guns were not powerful enough to drill, if not from close range, the armor of the Shermans and the Grants, or the Valentines. This obstacle was all the more serious because the new American tanks were equipped with explosive bullets that allowed them to put out of action the anti-tank guns of their opponents from a considerable distance.
Typical British bias. The Italians didn't lose 4 battleships, they lost zero. The ones sunk in port were refloated and returned to service. And it was the Ramcke Parachute Brigade, not the 22nd. Edit: Should be the Trento Division, not Trentino.
Conte di Cavour salavage and repairs never completed before Italies surrender, Littorio out of action for four months and Dulio seven.
Neither when returned to service were ever really used aggressively again and never modernised like the American battleship at Pearl cause Italy didn't have the industrial base to build new stuff and modernise its equipment.
@@DarkSitesChannel Wikipedia lists a lot of action for Littorio and Duilio post-repair. Lack of aggression was due to lack of fuel oil, not lack of ships or courage.
This recognition of Malta, its defense, and the terrible toll taken by the convoys that attempted to resupply it, is due. So many merchant ships were sunk trying to get to Malta! God bless them.
Malta was only under siege because it was being occupied by the British.
If it weren't occupied by the British, it would have been occupied either by the Italians (followed by the Germans) or the Germans all along, given its strategic value. Choose your besieger and besieged. That the British were the occupiers highly benefited the Allied war effort.
The Axis would have bypassed Malta. The North African Campaign only happened because Britain and France were occupying most of Africa.
The North African theater happened because Mussolini's imperial ambitions there suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of the British. Libya was an Italian colony, and from it the Italians struck east to British-controlled Egypt. The DAK arrived to rescue the Italians, and it was then the war there escalated. Malta was a knife pointed at the flank of the Axis supply lines. They would never have bypassed it for that reason. That was have been an obvious strategic blunder.
Mussolini was right to expel the British from Africa and the Mediterranean. British forces in Egypt crossed the border in June 1940 to attack Italian forces in Libya. The Italians should have liberated Malta in 1940.
My dad was with the 1116th mp division in North Africa as well as being in india, southeast Asia burma and China. I remember the stories he tells me of his service then.
Really Amazing Mr Elliot with him doing all through WW 2 He should of wrote about his adventures it would be interesting in print
50:56 I hate sand...
I'm surprised the M4 Sherman tank and the M7 SP 105mm howitzer wasn't mention as both were making their combat debuts at El Alamein.
I'm not, it's british propaganda
I'm sorry for the many posts. I kept getting a message saying it had not been sent despite multiple tries, which all somehow showed up. I then cut the story into five parts and posted it. Sorry again, but the story I think is worth reading.
the italians should have stayed home to sing opera and bake bread
+Walter Moriarty WTF very insulting and how the fuck did you get all those likes! Very disrespectful to the ones that died.
***** I agree with you, he is a idiot and the Italians helped capture torburk in june 1942
most of afrika korps was in fact italian
CastelDawn so true
the Italians fought the British allies in North Africa so that their German friends could safely retreat to Sicily.
4:39 '...the British abandoned any attempt to defend Benghazi...' 70 years later, how things don't change
I still cant believe that mussolini thought that he could win against the alies. Italy was nowhere near full military capability, low morale, awful tanks, bad generals, not enouph planes....only the navy was adequate. The best he could do was to be neutral like spain.
early seasons of battlefield are better calmer, later seasonmms have narrator too young too fast, and too much music. the whole point of this british armchair general excersize is to get to calmly discuss a war and not have to fight ptsd distractions
When I see the faces of soldiers in the battlefield I wonder if a son or grand son is watching him right now, is a terrible feeling if he didn´t come bak from the war.
As an Italian, I tell you that there are some false myths that the British like to boast about. The first false myth is that the British are convinced that they have won the WW2 alone. They do not say that 80% of the Axis forces were destroyed by the Stalin Soviet Union not by the Allies. During WW2 against Germany, Italy and Japan fought not only against the British but also against almost the entire world. Together with the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Soviet Union fought two gigantic industrial and military colossi, compared to which Germany, Italy and Japan were almost nothing. Alongside the United Kingdom during WW2 (in addition to the US and the USSR) they fought India, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa. It would be enough to remember only these states, their industrial power and their energy and mining resources to make anyone pale. During WW2 they fought together with the Allies also China (another colossus) and almost all the countries of Central and South America (Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay, Ecuador) And I mentioned only a few states because the list of states that were part of the Allies would be too long In the final stages, Turkey was added to the Allies. The second false myth to which the British likes to boast is Operation Compass. Operation Compass was the victory of England along with Australia and India against Italy.
It is undoubtedly true that, during Operation Compass, there were 150,000 Italian soldiers against 36,000 enemy soldiers but it was not a fight fought only among infantry. First of all the infantry were not British, but Australian and Indian, in the 5th Indian Infantry Division and in the 6th Australian Infantry Division. The Italian troops were in charge of totally inept, mediocre and incompetent Italian generals who believed they were fighting the First World War. The 10th Italian Army was composed of a huge mass of footed infantry, with many pieces of field artillery (not counter-tank artillery) entrenched in cornerstones and isolated from each other. The L3 and M11 wagons, classified as "tanks", were in fact the equivalent of the British armored cars. Italian L3 and M11 could be stopped with any anti-tank rifle. The weight, armor and armament of the Italian L3 and M11 were not even remotely comparable to real British tanks such as Matilda, Cruiser and Valentine. The 7th English Armored Division (Mice of the Desert), the 6th Australian Infantry Division and the 5th Indian Infantry Division were totally motorized. Without decent tanks and pieces of anti-tank artillery, scattered over the whole of Cyrenaica and isolated from each other, this huge mass of Italian footed infantry had virtually marked destiny. With what could the English tanks Matilda, Cruiser and Valentine have been able to stop? With the rifles? With machine guns? With the pieces of field artillery? I recognize that it was however a great and important English victory and an overwhelming and heavy Italian defeat whose real bearing on the field of battle is indeed very different from what the official historiography tells us.
First of all, there are plenty of episodes that cover the Soviet side of the war, this episode isn't about them, it's about North Africa.
Secondly, us Canadians along with Australia and India were all part of the British Empire at the time, so yes we were all "British".
Also, who cares that Italy was against the rest of the world, that's a good thing. I couldn't imagine what this world would look like if we all didn't defeat hitler. Your country "lost" to the allies because they were under equipped and lead by a bunch of incompetent "leaders" who didn't deserve to be where they were, like you said. Importantly though, most of you Italians didn't truly believe in Hitler and Mussolini and had the courage to eventually revolt against them, unlike some other minor countries that were part of the Axis. Nobody blames the individual soldiers of the Italian army for losing these battles, they stood no chance from the beginning and it was probably very hard for them to fight hard for a cause they likely didn't believe in. Have some pride in that
@@AC-xq4hh I basically agree with what you wrote.
I have said that it is a historically verified fact that almost 80% of the Axis forces were destroyed by Stalin's Soviet Union.
The Soviet Union had 10.4 million dead soldiers, Germany 5.318.000 dead soldiers, China 4.100.000 dead soldiers, Japan 1.930.000 dead soldiers.
The United States of America 405,000 dead soldiers, Romania 317,000 dead soldiers, Hungary 300,000 dead soldiers, the United Kingdom 272,000 dead soldiers, France 210,000 dead soldiers, Australia 39,400 dead soldiers, Canada 39,300 dead soldiers, l India 36,000 dead soldiers, New Zealand 12,200 dead soldiers, South Africa 6,800 dead soldiers.
All these dead soldiers seem to me to be deeply respected.
Italy had 319,200 soldiers dead and frankly I don't know that at that time there was a surge of suicide among Italian soldiers.
I wrote this because it almost seems that the Americans and the British have won the WW2 by themselves which I think is a historical strain to use a euphemism.
This post was published in response to the contemptuous and superb tones used almost certainly by some American or English versus Italian soldiers.
Italy won the First World War together with the English, the Americans, the French, the Canadians etc. but nobody in Italy would allow themselves to mock and mock the defeated Austro-Hungarians.
Certainly it is not true, as many Italians want to show, that all Italian soldiers were like those of the divisions "Folgore", "Ariete", "Littorio", "Giovani Fascisti", Italian Waffen SS, Decima MAS, "Trento", "Trieste", "Centauro" etc. but it is not even historically true that all Italian soldiers were as they are described by the English and Americans (who among other things also had Italian origins in their army).
In addition to the absolute ineptitude of all the top Italian officials, and the poor quality of the weapons and equipment, the truth is probably in the middle, given what you have rightly said, unlike the First World War fought on Italian soil, many Italians they could not understand the sense in which they had to fight and die for a fascist war unlike the convincingly fascist Italian soldier who continued to fight until the end in the Italian Social Republic of RSI
The German soldiers on the contrary, were almost all imbued by Hilter with a profound political-ideological fanaticism.
Excellent !
Monty was a pompous, self-righteous ass. He believed that because his troops had held back Rommel's advance at El Alamein and eventually forced them to retire he was some kind of war god or something. His plans never took into account ANY problems that might arise from such operations, owing largely to the fact that he had the utmost confidence in any plan he devised and that they couldn't possibly fail. The final end of his arrogance streak came at Arnhem nearly 2 years later when he sent in his boys to be massacred by the SS panzer divisions he ignored during the reconnaissance phase. Hardly the "old men on bicycles and children" he so arrogantly proclaimed stood in their way.
Montgomery's victories are when he out numbers the other side 2 to 1 and the other side has no supplies.
Rommel was known for doing wonders and he was always out numbered in everything.
If Rommel ever was in a position like Monty with more men and tanks than the other side it would be a slaughter.
Too right, Rommel made the impossible happen on numerous occasions with patchwork forces that nonetheless still managed to snatch victories in the face of almost certain defeat. How they did that is astounding, and a true testament to Rommel's true qualities as a battlefield commander.
@@Crashed131963
'Montgomery's victories are when he out numbers the other side 2 to 1 and the other side has no supplies.'
The same applies to every single US victory against the Germans.
Which do you want?
no it doesn't Gremnas outnumbered the GIs 250,000 to 80,0000 at the beginning of the Bulge
We fought the wrong enemy.
Its not that you fought the wrong enemy. Its just that England, germany ,japan russia Usa was all about greed. Germany and Japan throw the first punch and all the others gang up on them... and after the fight the victors quarrel
@@Mizonoob Judea had declared war in March 1933.
I've read that the biggest thing that contributed to an allied win was Montgomery ordered a lid put on crapholes and proper sanitation washing of hands cutting down on flies, it cut losses from disease 3/4 where the German army was riddled with dysentary who did not use any sanitation at all.