[Howard Jarvis Admirer]

Recommend reading the “Blitzkrieg Myth” and other books by Mosier on WWI and WWII for an fresh view of those wars. I did not agree with everything Mosier opined, but he did change my mind on Monty’s value in WWII. Per Mosier, the Allies succeeded on D-Day because of Monty’s advice and changes to the original D-Day battle plan - which was based on his past victories fighting the German Army.

[Spktyr]

Mosier has been discredited on a number of issues, as well as getting caught out on primary sources; this is why he no longer has a complete bibliography in any of his books and instead has an “essay” on his sources - making it impossible to trace back to the real source materials.

Any “historian” that ‘forgets’ to do proper footnoting or at least full disclosure of primary sources in what is supposed to be a scholarly tome is instantly suspect.

[PAR35]

Montgomery was good at planning the set piece battle, and was successful when it developed according to plan. He was not, however, particularly successful in adapting to a dynamic situation - when things started to go wrong, he couldn't adjust on the fly.

Patton, on the other hand, was excellent on a dynamic battlefield, but his attempts at set-piece assaults (Nancy and Metz, as I recall).

Montgomery was almost always willing to let the Commonwealth troops bear the brunt of the fighting, being more judicious in his use of British troops.