| REVIEWER | RATING & REVIEW |
 | cecilthepaladin (3)
12/23/2006 | As "netwiz" stated, the only reason Montgomery was able to be victorious against Rommel was because he had a superior number of troops and Rommel was never reinforced with what he needed or resupplied. The only reason Montgomery is seen as a hero is because he is British. To be honest, he was a failure.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | irishgit (150)
12/20/2003 | A generally conservative ego-maniac, who was saved from disaster in North Africa by good intelligence work and enemy supply problems. His Market-Garden plan was a piece of arrant folly that butchered thousands of elite troops to no real purpose.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | BIGBABY (11)
06/14/2003 | This man was really a weak General only put in charge until the Brits could find a real General. Eisenhower and Patton replaced and him and were both much better.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | netwiz (0)
01/11/2003 | I agree with Wiggum but give Monty a bad rating. True he did beat Rommel (one of the most gifted generals in any army during WWII) on manpower and supply superiority, but the thing that really tilted the advantage in his favor was that the British could decode EVERYTHING the Germans were encoding using the 'Enigma' machine. In other words: not only did he have numerical superiority, he knew what, when and where his enemy would be at all times. His terrible performance as a tactician in operations market Garden and Goodwood exemplify a man who should have not been promoted past the rank of major yet wanted (on several occasions) to be the supreme commander in the European theatre of war, a true megalomaniac. I live in Brusels and they have a square named after him with his statue, I shudder every time I drive by it.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | gopman79 (2)
01/04/2003 | Monty sucked, and he found that out when Patton showed up in Messina before he did.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Shukhevych (1)
12/01/2002 | Overrated, pompous British SOB... he should've known that Patton was his superior- North Africa, Sicily, and Europe!
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | john davies (2)
02/01/2002 | Although probably the finest and certainly the most famous British field commander since Wellington,and whose decisive victory at El Alamein was a morale-boosting turning point for the British (in the year the tide turned on all fronts),like Wiggum,i consider Monty rather overrated.He was certainly a fine motivator,a "Soldier's general" ,and superbly rescued British operations in North Africa(against the superior military genius Rommel).However,his later contributions to the War campaigns were less distinguished and decisive.I remember my history teacher praising his ability te read the mind of Rommel,but in truth this was due in no small part to Britain having cracked the Enigma codes!Still,he played a significant part in the overall victory and merits at least 3 stars.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Wiggum (17)
01/31/2002 | I'm not the biggest fan of Monty. Everything I've read (including Churchill's accounts of WW2), makes Monty sound like an overly conservative, whiny prima donna. He did end up beating Rommel in North Africa, but apparently Rommel's numerical inferiority and lack of supplies had far more to do with that than Monty's skill as a general. And it sounds like Eisenhower practically had to beg him to be more aggressive while fighting in Europe after Normandy. On top of that, Market Garden (Montgomery's baby), was a bust. Maybe I'm being too rough on him, but I'm just not aware of any examples of Montgomery doing anything other than a mediocre job.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| 1-8 OF 8 | View All |
