Customer Discussions > History forum

Western Desert and Attempts at changing the direction of slime

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-14 of 14 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Mar 3, 2013 5:31:00 PM PST
IGS says:
This is a bit of an attempt to clean up the garbage that has polluted this board of late by a number or posters, or more likely a few, posing as many. I even suspect some are paid to involve themselves in "pi$$ fights" .

The Question:

Western Desert

We have heard quite a bit about Monty and Auchinleck, but let me ask, would there have ever been a Monty or an Auchinleck if O'Connor (and Wavell) had been allowed to finished the Operation Compass campaign?

The Churchillian diversion into the fiasco in Greece was (in retrospect) a complete waste of effort. Had those energies been allowed to have come to fruition in early '42 (before the DAK arrived), does the Western Desert Campaign end right there?

No Monty, No Auchinleck, No DAK, No Rommel, No El Alamein, etc. I would say that both Wavell and O'Connor were a good deal more competent than Monty. How large would the reputation of these men been written if O'Connor not been captured, and no diversion to Greece? I am aware that this is all a crap shoot, but what are your thoughts?

I think that Monty could have been a good general ... if he had a babysitter. In France Ike was a poor babysitter.

"pi$$ fight"

And "pi$$ fight" is defined as any Neo-Nazi, pro-Israel, Anti-Israel, Neo-Nazi,Islamo- ... pro-Zionist, Anti-Zionist discussion involving Al, cattle prod, puppy, LAD, Ostrova, Kessler, Schwartz, and regrettably Rachel in right wing mode. There are other but can we give it a rest. I am going to add a bunch of these threads in the hopes a more interesting sort will, arrive!

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 4, 2013 7:58:41 AM PST
IGS says:
Bump, Holocaust, don't care, Nazism, don't care, ... hate speech and politics elsewhere please

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 5, 2013 1:04:00 PM PST
R. Largess says:
Enlarge upon this, IGS. You're probably more up on it than anyone else.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 5, 2013 1:39:57 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 5, 2013 5:21:34 PM PST
IGS says:
R. Largess

In September 1940, an Italian force of 150,000 men advanced across the North African Desert into Egypt driving all before it. All that stood between the Italians and the Suez were 30,000 UK soldiers, the British counterstrike by O'Connor and his Western Desert Force advanced 500 miles in two and a half months took 120,000 POW's destroyed or captured about 400 tanks and over 1200 artillery pieces and annihilated the entire logistics infrastructure in North Africa, before the British effort ran out of steam. At which point the Western Desert Force, re-armed, re-set their logistical arrangements, refit their vehicles, and so on and prepped for round two and went again. But just after starting Churchill put the brakes on it and diverted to Greece, all troops that could be spared. This eviscerated Wavell and O'Connor's force. Worse yet, while scouting avenues for continued attack, O'Connor was captured. This loss and forestalling enabled the arrival of the DAK and the rest is history.

I guess my musing was, if O'Connor had been given the opportunity, he probably would have driven the Italians out of Africa entirely. There would have been no Rommel, no Afrika Korps, and not Montgomery. Perhaps the big British General's of the war would have been O'Connor and Wavell. As to what that would have meant in the big scheme, I don't know.

I just think that the Western Desert Force stands as one of the great unappreciated mechanized war operations of the entire war. Outstanding. But the DAK and Monty get all the credit.

As for the slime, if I never here from Al, puppy, LAD and all their neo-Nazi types or their opposite numbers on the other end of it the fanatics like Kessler, Ostrova, Schwartz, and others, again, it will be too soon.

I just think their pointless forays should go the politics board or some other discussion of race motivated idiocy.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 5, 2013 3:03:34 PM PST
R. Largess says:
Didn't this end with a British armored strike across the desert which cut off the Italian line of retreat south of Benghazi?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 6, 2013 8:36:54 AM PST
IGS says:
It did, all that remained was to drive west to completely excise the the Italians

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 6, 2013 9:52:37 AM PST
R. Largess says:
Hm. It seems like an astounding victory, and it sounds like you're right, it would have been total if it hadn't been derailed by the Greece invasion. But what would the consequences have been for the Italians getting kicked out of N.Africa and British failure to support Greece? Maybe a German-Italian determination to drive the British fleet out of the Med., taking Malta and Crete?

Posted on Mar 7, 2013 3:55:23 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 7, 2013 3:56:15 PM PST
patrick says:
I typed out a long detailed response yesterday, which then just frikking disappeared, I hadnt thought to save it in case as often happens on this idiotic site its just GONE to the Andromeda Galaxy, but..

I dont think they had much choice, re Greece. Im not sure if they foresaw at all what cats they were letting out of the bag by not just wrapping up what was left of Grazianos army, securing the North African shore Libya-Suez and effectively locking out the Germans and avoiding the entire 8th Army Vs DAKs campaign, including the Torch and Tunisia campaign..
But morally and politically, they HD to go to Greeces support, even though they must have known there was little chance of stopping the Germans with what they sent..
And theyd have avoided too the disaster which was nearly a triumph, in Crete..

but if they had just looked the other way and Greece fell under the Nazi boot with no attempt to aid them, what would we now be saying about THAT decision?

that was of course, the militarily ruthless and smart choice, aided just a little by perfect hindsight also.

Posted on Mar 7, 2013 3:59:12 PM PST
patrick says:
I do perhaps naively ask, that if the North African campaign had been wrapped up and the Italian Axis position there completely terminated, if it was feasible that the Germans could have still used French North Africa, Algeria/Tunisia as a staging point for their own campaign there?
Id imagine its unlikely ..

Posted on Mar 7, 2013 5:26:03 PM PST
IGS says:

They may have tried it. It's still a longer drive to suez from Algeria. It would be interesting to see how the British countered that. There is a lot of sea between Marseille and Algiers and the RN in between. One wonders whether the UK would ask Spain for permission to use Mallorca just to make it a little rougher on the Axis. But I sense that it would be done once the Italians were driven off.

Posted on Mar 7, 2013 6:47:50 PM PST
R. Largess says:
In "Panzer Leader" Guderian says:"It seems to me, then, that we could ensure peace in the near future by advancing, first of all, to the mouth of the Rhone; then having captured the French Mediterranean bases in conjunction with the Italians, by landing in Africa while the Luftwaffe's first-class parachute troops seized Malta...It would plainly have been more advantageous to make a German-Italian landing in North Africa in 1940 than it was in 1941, after the initial Italian defeat in that theater." In other words Guderian is saying that instead of negotiating a peace with the French, the Germans should have proceeded to a complete occupation of mainland France and an invasion of French North Africa and then Egypt as a means of expeditiously imposing defeat on the British.

Posted on Mar 7, 2013 10:35:40 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 7, 2013 10:37:47 PM PST
patrick says:
I imagine that with Tripoli blocked to them, although another start further West on the shore was not impossible, without that relative convenience the Germans and Hitler just cant muster even the half-hearted interest and effort that they at first entered the campaign with...the British (would have) already had their filip of --at last--outright field victory against one Axis partner and --at last--destruction of one large/significant Axis force, with the further bonus of even doing it with a smaller that result and headline event cannot be undone, even if it can be reversed afterwards.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 8, 2013 5:33:21 AM PST
R. Largess says:
Yes - one can imagine Hitler feeling the need to bail out and reestablish the Italians, like he did with Greece, but on a large scale. Capture of Malta, establishment of air superiority everywhere the Luftwaffe could reach over the Mediterranean, and a powerful German force landed in Tunisia? So the climactic battle of WWII is not Russia, but for Egypt, with Britain fighting alone?

Posted on Apr 9, 2013 8:18:26 AM PDT
IGS says:

!7 threads on Israel, Jews, and Zionism, interesting topics to be sure ... but 17

I think one and all. it is time to stop responding to Al (Bundy), Woodruff (puppy), LAD (A-Ƕɷɩɇ). and their venomous spleen filled ilk on the other side. It is time to cut them off, and simply not respond. C'mon guys! Don't play the game.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  3
Total posts:  14
Initial post:  Mar 3, 2013
Latest post:  Apr 9, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions