Walsingham

Xard, if Monty actually had ignored his intelligence reports you're right he would have been a fool. However, (and I know you said you hadn't read it yet) when you read my previous post you'll see that 1) The intelligence did not indicate the presence of the SS panzers in Arnhem. The intelligence sources indicating tanks were - A handful of aerial photos - Dutch resistance reports As I said above, the Dutch resistance had been thoroughly compromised. So thoroughly that the Abwehr were sending jokes about it through double agents. In such circumstances, and assuming the Germans were weak, what would YOU send through captured agents? I reckon you'd want to make the Allies believe you had tanks aplenty! Even if a handful of tanks had been present it would not have to alter events massively. Cancelling the operation on that basis would b crazy. 2) Sufficient combat power should have been delivered to avoid losing even in spite of the SS. But due to failed radios and bad weather, neither close tactical air support nor logistics got delivered properly.

Unless it were into some sort of overcomplicated airborne operation...

I don't know what's wrong with shotguns, to be brutally honest. I know if I had to choose a way to die myself, a double blast of 12 guage to the head would be high on the list.

I doubt I'm brilliantly smart, so I must be insane. Finally.

Montgomery did not 'screw' with MARKET GARDEN*. He took an eminently sensible gamble which didn't pay off. It failed to pay off for several reasons, but it may be wise to first quickly sum up for the unfamiliar. Strategic Summary Following the breakout from Normandy , and the capture of Paris, Axis forces were falling back as fast as possible into the low countries. Due to the nature of the terrain, and the short supply lines it was felt this would make good defensive ground. However, it also came at a risk, for behind this position, and across the Rhine lay the industrial heart of Germany. A breakthrough at this point would permit Allied forces to both seize crucial political ground, but more importantly to cut German supplies of war materiel. Without those supplies further German resistance would be futile, and therefore success of a breakthrough might end the war in Europe. Operational Plan Montgomery realised that the best hope of success lay not in a traditional offensive, but by striking at the entire depth of the Axis positions. I do not know if he was aware, but his plan echoed Soviet concepts of deep battle. The idea was to identify the key points necessary for success (the bridges at Eindhoven, Nijmegen, and Arnhem), and to assault these with airborne forces while simultaneously pushing conventional forces from point to point, linking up the airborne drop zones. The use of airborne forces was intended to prevent the Axis from destroying the bridges, but also to disrupt their defensive front line. Typical criticism Many historians criticise Montgomery's plan for two reasons: 1. The dropping of the paratroops into Arnhem, where they met two SS panzer divisions instead of the predicted poor quality infantry. 2. The axis of advance for the conventional force (XXX Corps) was along a single road. The first point makes no sense, as Military Intelligence had not identified the panzers in the area. Their only reference to panzers came from the Dutch resistance (who had been thoroughly compromised by the Abwehr, and a handful of aerial photographs. In any event, the paratroops were equipped with light anti-tank weaponry and might be expected to hold their own. The British had, after all, possessed tanks in Crete, and it hadn't stopped the Germans. The second point is fair to raise. However, in my opinion such criticism fails to take into account the fact that every single operation ever planned occurs in the context of glaring problems. It is the job of soldiers to overcome them. In this case it is entirely possible that the Allies would have come up with a technical fix, as they did in Burma, and during OVERLORD. But it was decided that moving quickly was better than more confidently on this occasion. Given the German capacity for constructing defences they were probably right to move before the opposition could dig in. More Likely Causes of Failure The crude reason the operation failed can be summed up as **** happens. All war is a gamble. However, to illustrate this, consider some examples. 1. Of only a handful of gliders, the first shot down contained jeeps of a reconnaissance squadron. These would have helped capture the bridge quicker, and come in handy later, with communications, ammunition supply, and carrying the wounded. 2. The radios didn't work. This was probably the single biggest problem. Without the radios, the paratroops couldn't communicate with each other (the jeeps might have come in handy here. But more importantly, the paratroops couldn't coordinate with Allied airpower and Allied resupply. It was the lack of effective air support, and lack of supplies which allowed the Germans to beat them in the end. 3. Bad weather in England held up reinforcement and resupply by the Polish paratroops, and regular drops. Again, had these been on time, and effective the paratroops coudl have held out longer. These points are significant, because although XXX corps arrived late, they should have been able to punch through teh remaining distance and link up with the bridge at Arnhem, had it not been for Frost's paratroops finally being overrun. In other words but for some bad luck we'd remember MARKETR GARDEN, and Monty as the man who won the war. Indeed, had we been able to force a German surrender in 1944 it cwould have been considerably easier to prevent the Soviets from taking as much of Europe as they did. *http://www.army.mod.uk/para/history/arnhem.htm** **British operational codenames are traditionally all capitalised to distinguish them from normal text. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Also Montgomery cultivated the cult of his personality for one simple reason: it helped win the war. He was in fact a very private man, whose every letter and lecture illustrates that he had only one desire, and that was to be a part of a war winning machine. His cult of personality helped because it gave the men confidence in him, and in the battles he organised. A fact my own relatives can attest to. It is also worth pointing out that on the Allied side a great many generals tried to foster cults of personality. Alexander, as you say was not one of them. But place Monty near Patton, MacArthur, Clark, or de Gaulle and you may feel more relaxed.

I imagine you floating listlessly at the bottom of a twelve foot bottle of tequila, with an enigmatic smile on your face.

Anyway, back on topic. WW2 generals? My favourites have to be Montgomery and Kesselring.

Ok, that makes a bit more sense. However, as Steve points out, you're talking about regions where drugs and time and money aren't going spare for people. It's a matter of opinion, but I think it's totally unreasonable to demand care for animals when people are getting worse. A bit surprised not to hear from Guard Dog on this one.

I'm afraid I cannot possibly rejoice about a third rater getting another series when Firefly is still off the radar.

There's not a lot of information about Goners that I recall other than it being a supernatural thriller he was working on. Universal has the option on it and AFAIK has yet to see a draft they liked enough to green-light it (Joss has been - movie wise - in draft hell with this and the now dead attempt to do Wonder Woman). Tim's not had a lot of success with non-Joss shows, it seems, having had several cancelled (Wonder Falls, The Inside, Drive) without filling out their run. I quite liked Wondferfalls. But i like oddball comedy. Did you watch Dead Like Me? I think you'd enjoy it thoroughly if you liked Wonderfalls. They were both (co-)created by Bryan Fuller. I haven't seen Dead Like Me. I tend to rely on friends buying the DVDs.

I am, actually. But I see your point.

How often do you see a small unimportant town make headlines around the globe? There are so many bad taste comebacks to that. Which we won't make because that would be wrong.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7284753.stm This story made me extremely angry. I haven't been to Srinigar, but I've been to several countries where stray dogs roam uncontroled for lack of controls on their populations. The animals are revolting, disease ridden, and suffer from a host of problems, from maggots in their living flesh to missing fur and rabies. They shamble around alternating enacting violence on passers by and collapsing in pain and hunger. Killing such animals can only be a kindness. But here are some dimwitted animal righst groups insisting that a cull is cruel! If anything is cruel it is the avoidance of a cull. Am feel very strongly about this and would like others to join in suporting the cull against the ignorant do-gooders, but mention it here also in case I've got the wrong end of the stick.

I suppose you folks noticed that Skynet is the name of the British military command information system?

As usual we're basically freeloading off you. Aren't I a useful asset, then. Not you personally. Unless in some way you're an astronaut.

As long as I don't get reanimated I'm good.

Diary of the Dead. 1. After Cloverfield precisely which fething genius thought handheld footage would work? 2. Call me old fashioned. 3. Just call me old fashioned. 4. Also explain what the point is of a film which does absolutely nothing new? 5. Please also explain the purpose of protagonists who are so ball-twistingly annoying you actually want them to die? Why can't we have believable and likeable characters?

How about getting a company to build for you? I used Novatech, and it seems more or less acceptable.

All advice much appreciated.

Pfah. Real men enjoy a good explosion.

As I study some linear algebra, I say thanks for this! Hehe. Finally someone gets the lovely joke. EDIT: "grab a large iron skillet" I'm not sure if he's being racist or gluttonous.

You get power crazd when you're given a propelling pencil. Pyoo! Pyoo!

As usual we're basically freeloading off you.

I like the idea that Garfield is entirely hallucinatory.

I sometimes wonder what Hollywood and the games industry woud do without the Germans.