Quote:
|
Your statement about how all his success was due to British huge disaster is completely bogus.
|
No, my statement is that his successes were due to the simple fact that he used the enemy's mistakes and flaws for his own benefit. He correctly saw this and acted to exploit his own advantages. That's what any good general would have made. It doesn't take a military genious to do that. And Rommel was certainly NOT a military genious.
Quote:
|
You could say that about all the German losses too - Atlantic Wall fell because the Ost Division was defending it (Poles, Russians, Japs who really didnt want to fight and old men and young boys, but the Allies sure came close to loosing).
|
An important factor, without a doubt. But the Allies had the battle won before-hand. They had won the buildup and strategic campaigns. Only the Channel could make them fail. But that's another discussion.
Quote:
|
Rommel, throughout his entire campaign in North Africa, was out-manned, outgunned, and undersupplied.
|
Even if his forces were not large and his supplies always were limited, there were many times in which he was in a far better position that the British. And it was precisely in these occassions when he overcame his shortcomings and 'exploited [the enemy's] weaknesses', you said it yourself.
He did well against the British when they had over-extended supply lines, when units from the VIII Army were withdrawn to other theatres, when full supplies and reinforcements came from Italy, thanks to the temporary neutralisation of Malta and the increase of air support, when he had better tanks, guns and tactics than the enemy…
But there was a limit to what Rommel could do with his resources, and he failed to see or understand that more than once. He never realised about how important Malta was for him and that doomed him.
Quote:
|
took risks (who was wounded by shrapnel on one occasion when his tank was hit)
|
This happened during the Battle of France, not in North Africa.
Quote:
|
And he managed to lay seige to and conquer Tobruk - theres no outmaneuvering a City like that!
|
And he did NOT managed to understand the simple fact that with his 1 and a half Panzer divisions in 1941 it was impossible to take a fortified port with 2 Australian divisions in it. Only the next year, when these divisions were fighting the Japanese and when he had more forces, he took it.
Quote:
|
Al Alamein played into the Defenders hand - had Rommel and Monty switched positions, Monty would have lost.
|
Why? Sun Tzu's main principles for victory were the British's, not Rommel's. Auchinleck chosed the battlefield and Monty chose the time and tune of the battle, not Rommel. Besides, if I do remember correctly, it was the British VIII Army the one that ATTACKED in November 1942.
Rommel was not good in the deffensive and didn't perform as well as always at El Alamein. He fell in all Monty's traps and let himself be dragged to the former's game.