Just trying to understand the situation a little better. Dunkirk was a shiney for Mongomery. Africa is a shiney but because he ran a defensive WWI strategy then with overwhelming troops over came Rommel? So he is repeating Africa, waiting for overwhelming troops? But England does not have the troops, not being critical, it was a long war for England.
His reputation started to decline when he was put in charge of D-day. His men liked him evidently, what else was going on that changed things with his assignment to D day?
I did find the following humorous, the need to include “by others” as opposed to by himself?
“His command abilities were first appreciated (by others) during the retreat to Dunkirk,....”
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/people_montgomery.html
Abrasive, difficult but successful British General during the Second World War. Montgomery had served on the Western Front during the First World War, and remained in the army between the wars. In 1939 he managed to get command of the 3rd Division. His command abilities were first appreciated (by others) during the retreat to Dunkirk, where his division covered the rest of the retreated army. Montgomery showed an ability to stay on top of the details under pressure that suggested he was suitable for high command.
In August 1942 he was appointed to command the Eighth Army, facing Rommel in the Western Desert. In a war so far dominated by movement, Montgomery reverted to First World War tactics, forcing Rommel to attack a strong defensive line. With this victory behind him, Montgomery was able to stand up to Churchill, refusing to go on the offensive until he had been reinforced. When he finally went on to the offensive at El-Alamein (23 October-5 November) his army massively outnumbered the Germans and was able to inflict a crushing defeat on Rommel, one of the first suffered by the Germans. This made Montgomery a national hero in Britain, and helped to mark the turning point of the Second World War (along with the siege of Stalingrad).
Montgomery and Leigh-Mallory during Overlord
Montgomery and
Leigh-Mallory
during Overlord
In December 1943, Montgomery was recalled to Britain, where he took control of the planning for Operation Overlord. He was in direct command on D-Day (6 June 1944), but his reputation now started to decline. German resistance away from the beaches was greater than expected, and when the breakthrough came it was in the American zone. His relationships with his American colleagues were increasingly hostile, especially after Eisenhower took over direct command of the army. Montgomery was promoted to Field Marshal in the aftermath of the breakout from the beaches.
The biggest blot on Montgomery’s record is Operation Market Garden, the attempt to capture the bridge over the Rhine at Arnhem. However, bad luck played a significant part in this defeat – a crack German division was recovering from the Eastern Front in the area, and victory at Arnhem could have dramatically shortened the war.
Montgomery was a very capable general, who played a key role in the allied victory, both in Africa and on D-Day. Moreover, he was careful with the lives of his men, and won his victories without suffering huge casualties. His ability to irritate his colleagues should not be allowed to distract from his reputation.
I wonder, was he as careful with the lives of Americans, Canadian, Poles, and Australians?
One can’t read “careful with the lives of his men” without thinking of George McClellan. When General A is very careful, General B’s men pay the price, as I think is clear when we look at the Italian campaign
Slowness may save some lives, but it takes others. Look at what’s going on in Nazi-occupied Europe, as we see in Bro JoeK’s posts. I’m not saying the Allies would have relieved Central Europe faster if Montgomery had acted differently: we can’t know that. But every action or inaction has consequences beyond the immediate decision-maker and his subordinates.