Why Germany Lost the Battle for North Africa (WW2 Documentary)

10 місяців тому

Get Nebula with 40% off annual subscription with my link: go.nebula.tv/realtimehistory
Watch 16 Days in Berlin: nebula.tv/videos/16-days-in-b...
The North African campaign of WW2 is one of the most famous ones. The almost mythical story of the British "Desert Rats" defeating Erwin Rommel's Afrika Korps. But why did Rommel loose in North Africa?
» SUPPORT US
/ realtimehistory
nebula.tv/realtimehistory
» THANK YOU TO OUR CO-PRODUCERS
Lisa Anderson, Brad Durbin, Jeremy K Jones, Murray Godfrey, John Ozment, Stephen Parker, Mavrides, Kristina Colburn, Stefan Jackowski, Cardboard, William Kincade, William Wallace, Daniel L Garza, Chris Daley, Malcolm Swan, Christoph Wolf, Simen Røste, Jim F Barlow, Taylor Allen, Adam Smith, James Giliberto, Albert B. Knapp MD, Tobias Wildenblanck, Richard L Benkin, Marco Kuhnert, Matt Barnes, Ramon Rijkhoek, Jan, Scott Deederly, gsporie, Kekoa, Bruce G. Hearns, Hans Broberg, Fogeltje
» SOURCES
Barr, Niall "Rommel in the Desert, 1942" in Beckett, Ian F.W., Rommel: A Reappraisal, (Barnsley : Pen & Sword Books Ltd, 2013)
Beckett, Ian F.W., Rommel: A Reappraisal, (Barnsley : Pen & Sword Books Ltd, 2013)
Cernuschi, Enrico & O’Hara, Vincent P., “THE OTHER ULTRA: Signal Intelligence and the Battle to Supply Rommel’s Attack toward Suez”, Naval War College Review, Vol. 66, No. 3 (Summer 2013)
R.I. Cunningham, "Turning Point - 3rd July 1942: An Eye-Witness Account", Military History Journal, Volume 6, Number 5, (1985)
Kitchen, Martin, Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943, (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2009)
Klein, Hans, “Hans Klein Recalls His Time in Erwin Rommel’s Afrika Korps”, History Net (www.historynet.com/hans-klein...)
Lewin, Ronald, Rommel as Military Commander, (New York : Barnes & Noble Books, 1968)
Nickerson, Hoffman, “Portrait of a German General: Rommel's Papers Reveal a Great Tactician and Strategist”, Ordnance, Vol. 38, No. 200 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1953)
Roy, Kaushik, Fighting Rommel: The British Imperial Army in North Africa during the Second World War, 1941-1943, (London : Routledge India, 2019)
Sadkovich, James J., “Of Myths and Men: Rommel and the Italians in North Africa, 1940-1942", The International History Review, Vol. 13, No. 2 (May, 1991)
Scianna, Bastian Matteo, “Rommel Almighty? Italian Assessments of the "Desert Fox" during and after the Second World War”, The Journal of Military History, Vol. 82, No. 1, (2018)
Watson, Bruce Allen, Exit Rommel: The Tunisian Campaign, 1942-1943, (Westport, CT : Praeger, 1999)
»CREDITS
Presented by: Jesse Alexander
Written by: Mark Newton
Director: Toni Steller & Florian Wittig
Director of Photography: Toni Steller
Sound: Above Zero
Editing: Toni Steller
Motion Design: Toni Steller
Mixing, Mastering & Sound Design: above-zero.com
Research by: Mark Newton
Fact checking: Florian Wittig, Jesse Alexander
Channel Design: Simon Buckmaster
Contains licensed material by getty images
Maps: MapTiler/OpenStreetMap Contributors & GEOlayers3
All rights reserved - Real Time History GmbH 2023

КОМЕНТАРІ: 2 300

@realtimehistory 10 місяців тому

Get Nebula with 40% off annual subscription with my link: go.nebula.tv/realtimehistory Watch 16 Days in Berlin: nebula.tv/videos/16-days-in-berlin-01-prologue-the-beginning-of-the-end

@thralldumehammer 10 місяців тому

Thank you for the link, new member😊

@richardivonen3564 10 місяців тому

The British had broken the Italian and German Naval codes used in the Mediterranean and this enabled the Royal Navy to intercept and destroy the supply convoys that Rommel depended on for reinforcements, weapons, amusement, food, and fuel. Without adequate logistical support, Rommels campaign ground to a halt.

@nedkelly9688 10 місяців тому

Rommel was already worn down from 1941 Rats of Tobruk beating him. disgusting USA even claim they are the reson for his defeat when was defeated before this. USA known for waiting for other's to wear down a enemy before finishing it and claiming the win.

@briandurham1804 10 місяців тому

That war

@Didymus20X6 10 місяців тому

WE ARE THE PANZER ELITE ALWAYS COMPETE NEVER RETREAT GHOST DIVISION LIVING OR DEAD ALWAYS AHEAD FED BY YOUR DREAD GHOST DIVISION - Sabaton.

@rpgbb 10 місяців тому

After the American fiasco in Tunisia in 1943, Rommel was inspecting the American POWs. One of them had a box, inside a cake his mother baked for him. Americans had the logistical power to send a cake from the US to North Africa. According to the legend, Rommel muttered that there was no way Germany could win the war

@BERNTRR 10 місяців тому

@@idontthinkso2861 well spottet sherlocke 😄

@BERNTRR 10 місяців тому

@@idontthinkso2861 okay?😆

@Jaxck77 10 місяців тому

@@idontthinkso2861The true facts. It’s incredible how much of what people think of the war is just regurgitation from the British press of the 1940s.

@TDL-xg5nn 10 місяців тому

@@idontthinkso2861 Average? With a German corp he drove an entire British Army across Africa and almost off the continent. The British were only able to defeat him with Ultra and American logistics and supply.

@Spectification 10 місяців тому

@@TDL-xg5nn almost? Rommel was very far away from total victory in Africa. Rommel would not be able to do anything without Italian logistics and merchant marine. Rommel was indeed average, as was shown in Normandy.

@evananderson1455 10 місяців тому

Listen.. I've been a fan of Rommel since i was a teenager. I've spent 2 decades reading several books and watching countless videos about his life and military career. He was an above average commander, able to recognize when oders needed to be disobeyed in order to capitalize on changes happening in real time. His drive through France, his drives through North Africa.. they are undoubtedly impressive. Its important to note, however, that these impressive drives only occurred against commanders who, often, were unwilling or unable to adapt to a changing battlefield. When he was up against a prepared enemy with competent commanders his successes were greatly diminished. As others have pointed out, it was in the best interest of Allies (particularly the British) to exaggerate his prowess in order to downplay their own failings and elevate their own victories against him.

@mikeat2637 10 місяців тому

Rommel's biggest advantage in North Africa for the largest part of the North African campaign was the information gotten from the interception of the reports filed by US Army Col. Bonner Fellers, the military attache in Cairo. His reports to the US military command were read by Italian and German intelligence and gave them a wealth of tactical and strategic intelligence that greatly influenced Rommel's amazing success. That ended in June-July of 1942 after being discovered by Allied intelligence, with some erroneous information also being distributed. That caused the debacle at Alam el Halfa and led to the British Victory at 2nd Alamein, in spite of Montgomery. Rommel's prescience was more of a result of this information and signals intelligence interception by the organic unit of the Afrika Corps. That drastically was reduced when the unit was virtually wiped out in July of 1942.

@nedkelly9688 10 місяців тому

Lol he was useless in 1941 and couldn't win against mainly Australian Rats of Tobruk and tried again after knowing those Australian's left to fight Japanese from invading their homeland and you would know this if read his diaries as you so claim. He was worn down from 1941 and lost a lot of men then and as always USA came in late thinking they did it all when as always someone wears the enemy down before that for them to claim all victory.

@mitchverr9330 10 місяців тому

"When he was up against a prepared enemy with competent commanders his successes were greatly diminished." - The phrase I often use on this is "Rommel used dash to the wire, its super/not very effective" depending on which commander he was facing at the time. EG in France, super effective, vs the Auk in Operation Crusader, nope.

@evananderson1455 10 місяців тому

@@mitchverr9330 I see that you are a man of culture. I like it lol

@mitchverr9330 10 місяців тому

@@evananderson1455 Yeah, he is like a pokemon, he had like 2-4 actual tactics and that was it, the main 1 being dash the wire. Whenever he actually had to fight a battle at the level he got promoted to he really couldnt do much more. Very much promoted above his capability imo.

@oledahammer8393 10 місяців тому

My Uncle was killed in action at the battle of El Guettar. 9th div, 47th regiment, company B. He was 19 years old. Thank you for your sacrifice Uncle Earl. May you rest in the arms of the Lord of all eternity.

@GoozaWoW 10 місяців тому

@@gutewasser5900 Patton was right

@TheKeule33 8 місяців тому

What Lord?

@scottjoseph9578 8 місяців тому

He died stopping evil scum. May his magnificent soul rest in peace.

@JoshNicotine 8 місяців тому

He died for our freedoms. It was not in vain

@brim-skerdouglasson 6 днів тому

@@TheKeule33 Edgy

@jebbroham1776 10 місяців тому

His Afrika Corps was completely abandoned by Hitler and OKH when Operation Barbarossa began. I don't think anyone in Berlin realized how crucial the war in North Africa was to the eventual defeat of Italy in 1943, but they certainly would after Sicily when it was far too late.

@daveweiss5647 Місяць тому

Absolutely, and they could have won it quickly if they had sent much more much sooner... also, the Italians could have easily taken Malta in June 1940 and completely dropped the ball amd that would have made it all moot and the campaign would have been much easier.

@gathasofpersia6432 26 днів тому

Late to the party, but spot on. The loss of Africa gave Churchill the edge he needed to convince the Allies to attack the "soft underbelly" (Italy) of the Axis powers. The whole war was a clusterfuck. Generals with the heads up their arses and the politicians 'grandstanding'. The only person who knew what he was doing was Stalin.

@mortimersnerd8044 12 днів тому

Well it isn't so much that Rommel was abandoned as it was that the British were consistently braking the German codes and dispatching the Royal Navy to sink his supply ships. The ULTRA code braking remained a secret until 1974, so historians had to find other explanations for Rommel's poor supply situation.

@andrewb1921 10 місяців тому

The 2 pounder gun used in the Matilda *could* use both armor piercing and high explosive rounds. British quartermasters only issued them armor piercing, though. Because their job was to engage other tanks, so it was felt that giving them a round that couldn't penetrate tank armor was a waste. Matilda tank crews hated this, because their biggest threat was German antitank guns. Which couldn't be taken out using armor piercing rounds, but were fairly easy to destroy using high explosive rounds

@roninsct7017 10 місяців тому

..false , the only anti-tank gun that could penettrate the Matilda A12 was the Flak 88, which far out ranged the 2 pdr that it wouldn't have mattered . British tactical inferiority was due to poor tactics and failure to use combined arms and concentration of force. The British armor, infantry, and artillery would all do their own thing instead of working together. Don't charge anti-tank guns with armor use artillery to suppress it, 2 generations later, the Russians are still making the same mistakes with the same results..

@chrisg3517 10 місяців тому

OQF 2pdr guns fired only a solid shot round. A high explosive round was only developed in 1942, but by October 1942 most Matildas had been lost in action

@julianshepherd2038 10 місяців тому

@@chrisg3517I think there an H E round but it was so bad as to be useless.

@_ArsNova 10 місяців тому

2pdr HE would have anemic performance at best anyway. There simply isn't enough volume for sufficient explosive filament.

@dovetonsturdee7033 10 місяців тому

No. Although a HE shell was available, the bursting charge was so small as to make it almost useless. Actually, the Matilda II was an infantry support, or 'I' tank, rather than a cruiser tank, and the primary role was to operate as part of an Army Tank Brigade in support of infantry, rather than as part of an Armoured Brigade. In fact, for the 'I' tank role, the Matilda II (CS) tank was better. CS standing for 'close support.' These were armed with three inch howitzers.

@jeffreyestahl 10 місяців тому

When I studied the African campaign some 40 years ago, I had constantly heard about how the Italian units were cowards and lackluster. However, I read one document of an analysis of the Ariete Division's nearly single stand against almost the entire British 8th Army after 2nd El Alamein in order to cover the PAK and XX Corps withdrawal, fighting down to the point where it was assumed the entire division was destroyed (about 4 vehicles, 2 of them tanks, survived and rejoined Rommel west of Benghazi). I had to think, if a single division armed mostly with Semoventi (self-propelled assault guns) and with just 2 companies of M14 tanks (roughly equivalent to the earlier British Cruiser tanks) stood off better than 20:1 odds for almost an entire day, THAT was courageous, not cowardly. My analyses since then have resulted in my view that the primary problem for the RE (Regio Esercito - Royal Army) was 3 fold: 1) Poor Equipment, 2) Poor Leadership, 3) Poor Logistics. There was nothing at all wrong with the Italian soldiers in the field.

@claudiograssi1037 10 місяців тому

Just take in consideration also the Folgore paratroopers division. A desperate resistance in el Qattara depression up to their almost total disappearance

@topanlazuardi9251 9 місяців тому

The problem wtth italian that time is Mussolini favor his closest subordinate to become his comander without looking his competance its like a teacher who favor his smartest Student to run marathon instead his not so smart student but from Gymnastic club

@paulmryglod4802 9 місяців тому

My grandfather said the same thing. The Italians were brave, strong fighters with the command and support lacking.

@claudiograssi1037 9 місяців тому

@@paulmryglod4802 There is a story that says: the italian soldiers were happy to be commanded by Rommel instead of the italian commanders

@paulmryglod4802 9 місяців тому

@@claudiograssi1037 cool to know. Thanks!

@user-rs9bc4qr2s 10 місяців тому

As an Australian I want to add that the stopping at Tobruk for such a long time basically exhausted the Germans and caused their inevitable defeat from their. We call those troops the Rats of Tobruk, outnumbered and outmanned. They dug in and gave it everything for as long as they could. Edit: they pulled out eventually, they didn’t lose. Then they went to Australia to stop the Japanese invasion with the rest of our troops, and won there as well.

@markinglese3874 8 місяців тому

Don't forget, brother, only America won the war. The fact that everyone was suffering from exhaustion means nothing. When you show up fresh and a limitless military supply of men and equipment. Our men did fantastic I too am a very proud Aussie.

@user-rs9bc4qr2s 8 місяців тому

@@markinglese3874 we were the first to stop both the Germans and the Japanese advance. We punch much higher than our weight that’s for sure.

@markinglese3874 8 місяців тому

@@user-rs9bc4qr2s Absolutely we did and still bloody well do too.

@scottjoseph9578 8 місяців тому

@@markinglese3874Oh, I think the Aussies did, too.

@xxJacket 8 місяців тому

Aussies are a hardcore bunch. That’s known

@kevinquinn7645 10 місяців тому

I feel you need to acknowledge the strong correlation between Rommel's success and his access to British intelligence. The German's had broken the American codes and were able to monitor reports from the US liaison about British plans. On top of this, Rommel had developed effective signals intelligence and was able to monitor British communication to British units and action the reports faster than the British were themselves. Once these leaks were plugged, denying Rommel access to British intentions, he was far less effective.

@spamdump4459 10 місяців тому

Wish I'd read your post before making mine.

@bigwoody4704 10 місяців тому

Rommel was agreat commander the allied advantages in everything beat him,monty just dithered

@Salty-Unggoy 9 місяців тому

Most people tend to perform less effectively without knowing what the enemy is doing.

@bigwoody4704 9 місяців тому

ULTRA was reading the Wehrmacht's mail on the front in real time. The British weren't comprimised - excuses for Monty not moving. The GIs at the time were not operating anywhere around the 8th Army and didn't know Monty's directives .Look at the massive advantages in men an material. The Afrika Korp had no answer for Complete air supremecy or their own lack of resupply because ULTRA kept the Royal navy and RAF posted on any of their movements and time

@lelandnanny967 8 місяців тому

The loss of his ability to read US messages was key to his victories and his down fall when he lost that ability.

@johnfoxe2000 10 місяців тому

There is an interesting article (2010) from the BBC's programme From Our Own Correspondent titled "Lethal landmine legacy from battle of El Alamein." As the title states, even today the effects of the battle are still present. Even today people are maimed and killed by land mines in and around the area of the battlefield called "The Devil's Garden."

@AlaskaErik 10 місяців тому

Before the war, the local men always walked in front, leading the way. Once the minefields were laid and killed a few men, they made the women walk in front.

@brooksroth345 10 місяців тому

South East Asia as well.

@robert23456789 10 місяців тому

Can't we just use those mine proof APV To drive over the mines blowing up the mines or did they forget were they put them all ..... Ok just get 600 pedos and force them to run around areas there could be mines can't use anyone useful for that job 😊

@kumasenlac5504 2 місяці тому

Even now, an average of one farmer a year is killed by WW1 ordnance along the Western Front.

@erikdefibaugh9348 10 місяців тому

I would just like to say, this is one of the most informative UKposts channels for history. I was first introduced to this channel watching the 6 hour long franco-prussian war documentary and it's been a rabbit hole ever since. Between the presentation, the host, and the level of knowledge displayed within this channel without a doubt make it the definitive historical UKposts channel. I cannot thank this channel enough for their unyielding knowledge, and masterful presentation. As a history enthusiast; to watch and be apart of this channel is nothing short of an honor. Thank you for all you do and I always look forward to the next video!

@realtimehistory 10 місяців тому

thank you Eric, glad you are on board and I am going to take a screenshot of your praise and send it to the team, they will appreciate it.

@courtjester7778 10 місяців тому

I also came to this channel for the Franco-Prussian War documentary. I agree with everything said above. My favorite parts of your work are the care taken to present perspectives from as many different parts of society as possible, the precise attribution of quotations, and (for the FPW documentary) the reading of letters in the authors’ original languages. I have never felt so connected to the humanity of the past. Well done!

@Spanner249 10 місяців тому

@@realtimehistorythank you for continuing this project. I’ll never fully understand why Indy decided to leave but frankly the team has improved the content since his departure.

@paulryan5150 8 місяців тому

Of course the opposite is also true. Allied success against Rommel was dependant on Ultra. If you add to the mix all the supplies that Ultra was responsible for sinking in the Mediterranean, Rommel might very well have taken Egypt.

@saechabashira8380 10 місяців тому

One of the most crucial moments in the North African campaign was the rout and regroup of the British 8th Army. Routed by Rommel and having him on their rears, they were given two weeks to regroup and fortify thanks to the 1st Free French Brigade of General Koenig, which held back 35000 Italians and Germans personally led by Rommel, at Bir Hakeim. The respite the British got allowed them to build effective defenses and it'd allow them to eventually win the Second Battle of El Alamein.

@CharlesDeGoat 10 місяців тому

exactly, he could have annihilated the 8th british army if the 1st free french brigade didn't held so long, allowing them to refrom the front. And most impressive is that the first free french brigade escape despite being surrounded and heavy outnumbered. this is one of the most impressive battle of this north african campaing;

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- 10 місяців тому

But Rommel was already stopped by Auchinleck before Monty, reinforcements and new equipment arrived.

@jayharper3491 10 місяців тому

Bir Hakeim was part of the Gazala line defences, not the El Alamein defences.

@fredericdeloffre6644 9 місяців тому

Bir Hakeim not mentioned is foolish

@michaelram3411 9 місяців тому

If %100 of the german troops,fighting on the eastern front, had been in north africa,the glorious german army would have scattered the allied troops to million pieces

@joxyjoxyjoxy1 10 місяців тому

Awesome production. Really informative and specific. Love the quotes. Great narration, too.

@prazcuray1388 10 місяців тому

I love your content and presentation, I truly appreciate the hard work y’all put into making these. Please keep producing this excellent work.

@andrewclayton4181 10 місяців тому

Rommel was fortunate in the timing of his attacks. When he arrived in Africa in early 1941, a number of British divisions had been withdrawn and sent to shore up Greece. A year later in early 42, troops had been withdrawn and sent to the far east to counter the Japanese advances. Notably a lot of the Australians.. The British also had to deal with other threats in the middle east. Italians in Etheopia, Vichy French in Syria, and pro axis rebels in Iraq. These distractions don't get a lot of attention, but they were all successfully dealt with by the British middle east command.

@user-wu2hu3us6x 10 місяців тому

I would argue the Germans were more distracted than the British, they did have this small country to the east called Russia... Jokes aside, Rommel's only real objective in Africa was to buy time which he did a phenomenal job of, nobody should think of him getting pushed out of Africa as a defeat, he did exactly what he was there to do probably better than any other German officer could have done with the same resources. German command fumbled the Eastern front but Rommel's stalling gave them at least the time to try and win it.

@mohamedelghoul4198 10 місяців тому

not luck but brilliance of command justify humiliated defeats for just lucky timing is not appropriate and underestimate great effort of afrika corp remember that German forces were out gunned and numbered even Italian forces fighting at its backyard supported German forces in soviet union more than it supported its own troops in Africa or as Mussolini stated " to show fascist solidarity beside even if Rommel attacks were when his enemies were most vulnerable in timing as you allege initative

@garythomas3219 10 місяців тому

The Germans didn't invade Russia until June 1941

@skibbideeskitch9894 9 місяців тому

@mohamedelghoul4198T here is plenty of luck involved in war, and Churchill stripping Wavell of his strength in 1941 was very lucky for Rommel indeed. Acknowledging that is not a slight against Rommel or the Afrika Korps.

@ChipCheerio 8 місяців тому

@@mohamedelghoul4198Rommel wasn’t so much brilliant as his opponents were incompetent. Once Montgomery rolled in Rommel had to pack up and call it quits since Monty didn’t fall for the same tricks his predecessor had.

@Beowulf-eg2li 10 місяців тому

My great grandfather (who was also half german/half british and born in germany but emigrated to the UK before the war) served as a tank driver in the desert rats! There's a video of him marching in front of Churchill after El-Alamein! Can't believe my great-nan threw away his beret after he passed

@garymoore2535 7 місяців тому

It probably didn't fit her ? 😂😂😂

@freemarketjoe9869 5 місяців тому

That's a killer. I was given a genuine German Pazershrek bazooka, model 1943 with face shield, by a neighbor, when I was 11 years old. My mother hated it, and started her own campaign to get rid of it. She finally cooked up a phony tag sale, with a couple of other things...and my bazooka, for sale. 5 minutes after we opened, a guy driving by slammed on his brakes, jumped out, and rushed over, buying my precious bazooka for $5.00. My mom has passed away, and I am still mad at her for doing that!

@pevebe 3 місяці тому

@@freemarketjoe9869 That hurts me just reading that

@apropercuppa8612 Місяць тому

@@freemarketjoe9869I am sorry for your loss.

@tokencivilian8507 10 місяців тому

Logistics, logistics and logistics. The army that had the supplies and reinforcements generally had the advantage. Great episode Jessie and company. IDK if I'd want to intern for you given that outtro. LOL.

@stevebarrett9357 10 місяців тому

I observe that the (ground) distance between Tripoli (the main supply port) and Tobruk is almost the same distance as between Warsaw and Moscow. The invasion of Soviet Union was accompanied by repair and re-gauge of Soviet railroads over which supplies, reinforcements and replacements could assist further advances. There was no viable railroad from Tripoli so all supplies, etc., had to be moved forward by truck which expended petrol otherwise needed by the front line troops. The invasion of Soviet Union had its share of logistical problems despite the repair and utilization of railroads so I am not surprised that the Axis in North Africa would also have such problems.

@hazchemel 10 місяців тому

yes ... a study of both side's logistics shows the accounting side of the Allied victory.

@ronlackey2689 10 місяців тому

Don't forget those supplies had to cross the Mediterranean first before being trucked anywhere. A goodly number still sit on the bottom of the Med today.

@brooksroth345 10 місяців тому

It didn't help that the British controlled the ports mainly tobrok.

@toms9864 10 місяців тому

When the allies were moving toward Tripoli they would have the same supply problems.

@gicubashkan5065 10 місяців тому

@@toms9864 not necesarily. if they had the port facilities (since the Allies had naval superiority, not total control), the Allies could be supplied easier. Not by all that much, but still easier.

@dynojones 17 днів тому

amazing content, your style of communication is really engaging - thank you!

@adamlewis8518 8 місяців тому

Very engaging account, loved the concise, clear style.

@bhut1571 10 місяців тому

A local fellow here in Northern Ontario served with the 8th. His only kit was shorts and a great-coat for the cold nights. You might consider doing a thing on Poopski's Private Army.

@hemmydall 10 місяців тому

I've read a few books on this topic. Its absolutely insane what his corps accomplished with what little he had, and the tl;dr of the eventual defeat was just getting out manned and out produced.

@lionstigersbearsohmyanimal6741 10 місяців тому

His troops probably on meth…. Just a thought

@uriustosh 9 місяців тому

He accomplished nothing. He was a loser, a poor tactician and a fascist pig.

@markkeller9378 10 місяців тому

Great high quality video. Well done! Will have to look into Nebula! Great content.

@jonathaneffemey944 10 місяців тому

Thanks for posting.

@tibsky1396 10 місяців тому

The Free French of General Marie-Pierre Koenig were also able to give respite to the allies at El-Alamein, by holding the Axis forces for two weeks at Bir-Hakeim.

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- 10 місяців тому

@tibsky1396 Yes the FFL put up a brilliant fight there

@cheriefsadeksadek2108 10 місяців тому

that's Not True After The Germans Overran The Free French At Bir Hakeim they Inflicted a Heavy Defeat Of the British 8th Army At Gazala and Captured Tobruk within 24hours Capturing Tons Of supplies, Ammunition,Trucks and Fuel, and 33k British POWS, El Alamein Didn't Happen Until Like 5 months after Bir Hakeim and Gazala

@enalb5085 10 місяців тому

@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- more of a fight they put up for their own country lmao

@tonydevos 10 місяців тому

@@enalb5085not true. They fought as hard as the British and the Russians in the first few months of Barbarossa

@tibsky1396 10 місяців тому

@@enalb5085 After the siege of Lille in 1940, the Germans gave the "Honours of War" to the French defenders who held out for multiples days at 1 against 10. This was one of the reasons Operation Dynamo was a strategic success.

@_ArsNova 10 місяців тому

Another phenomenal video. I really hope you will cover some more of the early-mid war campaigns! Would love some more in-depth coverage of the invasions of Norway and France especially.

@oldman1734 10 місяців тому

It’s actually rubbish. See my comment.

@michealohaodha9351 10 місяців тому

Norway would be amazing!

@rexpayne7836 8 місяців тому

Great content and presentation.

@carminethewolf 8 місяців тому

Brilliant documentary, excellent viewing.

@johnharrop5530 10 місяців тому

My dad was a rat of Tobruk with the Australian 2/2 machine gun battalion ,he mowed down hundreds of them ,he had survived 1003 days in combat during the war he was in it from start to finish

@chrisrace744 8 місяців тому

What a legend.

@anthonyeaton5153 8 місяців тому

@@chrisrace744if true, hundreds are you certain.

@garymoore2535 7 місяців тому

The war lasted six years...... 6 X 365 is a lot more than 1,003 days 🤔

@Marlene-ou5ol 7 місяців тому

1942: "The entire battle of Gazala and siege of Tobruk cost the Germans around 3,360 casualties (at least according to their records), but this did include 300 officers."

@devinerentalsltd8708 6 місяців тому

@@garymoore2535He said 1003 days in combat. You get days off even in a war!

@331SVTCobra 10 місяців тому

That bit about being outnumbered 20:1 was a contributing factor.

@craftycurate 6 місяців тому

This is excellent and very well produced.

@patrickdurham8393 3 місяці тому

First time I've seen your channel and I am now subscribed. Excellent work!

@realtimehistory 3 місяці тому

welcome to the channel

@kungfuchimp5788 10 місяців тому

Another great installment.

@robertglennienz 10 місяців тому

A British Prisoner of War Desmond Young wrote Rommel's biography in the early 1950's. He interviewed a range of people including officers who served with Rommel in Africa, his wife, son and those who tried to get him involved in the plot against Hitler. Samuel Mitchum wrote another book called Rommel's Desert War which goes into great detail about the material strength of the German and Italian forces in Africa and includes excerpts from his clashes with Goering and Hitler over strategy in North Africa. No disrespect intended here, but this is ground well covered.

@KTcherassen 10 місяців тому

Thoroughly enjoyed this episode!

@joelpless4214 10 місяців тому

Well done. Very interesting.

@Supercopperhorse 10 місяців тому

Enigma code breaking is why Rommel lost. The British were able to intercept Rommel's supplies and reinforcements. However the British used Enigma information sparingly so as not to alert Germany their Enigma code had been cracked.

@007ndc 10 місяців тому

That was instrumental to saving Malta which was the key for communications for the British and they used it to attack German supplies

@oldmaninshorts1 10 місяців тому

the enigma enabled the British to condect 3 operations that denied Rommel resupply, one a bridge destroyed, another the shooting down of the Giant (pronounced gee ahnt) aircraft full of supplies and the sinking of several transport ships. Explained well in Anthony Brown's book " Bodyguard of Lies". It looks to me that you are very familiar with it.

@cp4512 8 місяців тому

It was actually Rommel’s intelligence breaking that had brought him so much previous success. In this conflict Rommel lost his signals intelligence capability and wasn’t as effective when he didn’t know what the enemy was doing. Just goes to show how important intelligence gathering is to both sides. However, in this instance Rommel overstretched his logistics too.

@Supercopperhorse 7 місяців тому

From what I learned the British use Enigma information against Rommel only after making a visual sighting. So that the Germans knew they had been spotted and not due to breaking the Enigma code.

@SPQSpartacus 10 місяців тому

The Allies had crushing manpower advantage, and superior supply. I seem to recall Rommel himself thinking, that with the Allied forces he would have defeated himself in a matter of weeks.

@zainmudassir2964 10 місяців тому

First El Alamein battle only had slight numbers advantage for Allies and many units disorganised from retreating and defeats. It was incredible comeback as a multinational force (including colonial troops) beat back armor attacks and bought time for reinforcements and win second battle which is now far more famous

@britsareweak 10 місяців тому

@@zainmudassir2964 no the Allies had overwhelming numbers and still took heavy casualties.

@deriznohappehquite 10 місяців тому

@@britsareweakWhich was more or less because British tank doctrine was awful.

@mrcaboosevg6089 10 місяців тому

@@britsareweak British forces were outnumbered for most of their defense in North Africa, it was only when the Americans turned up that the numbers shifted

@britsareweak 10 місяців тому

@@mrcaboosevg6089 no they weren’t, the British had superior numbers for all the conflict

@JuanRojo-bv7jm 9 місяців тому

Thanks for your video.

@shehansenanayaka3046 8 місяців тому

This documentary is awesome . I love these videos. Brilliant doc. Real time history is one of my fav channels also jesse . Love from Sri Lanka ❤️.🇱🇰🤝🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🔥

@brad5426 8 місяців тому

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🤝🏻🇱🇰

@RooZvonBooZ 10 місяців тому

Really interesting episode, although having heard the story of the Desert Fox several times, this still manages to bring some new perspectives and angles to the African campaign. Really another great example of a commander who were limited by the circumstances, imagine if Rommel got all the supplies he needed and more, one man can definitely change history!

@MsZeeZed 10 місяців тому

1:25 - pretty sure the Gespensterdivision name came from OKH, because Rommel led the 7th like it was a Company and he was 40km from his divisional radio for around 24hrs after breaching the Maginot Line, without orders or update. Sure the French couldn’t find him, but neither could von Rundstedt’s staff. Hence why when Rommell was assigned to Africa it was “impossible” for him to take 7th due to their importance in Barbarossa, despite this Division originally being given to Rommel in the Battle for France because they were understrength. Once more Rommel had understrength units in Africa and less popular officers under his command, who earned some outstanding victories.

@johnnyb2909 10 місяців тому

the french called them "la divison fantome", thats where it comes from.

@clarencehopkins7832 Місяць тому

Excellent stuff bro

@drstevenrey Місяць тому

I am seriously impressed by your language feel. Perfect beyond belief. You are not like all the others who have only a concept of English, one of 7000 languages in the world. Your German, Italian, french and Japanese is just a joy to listen to. Thank you so much for that.

@flickcentergaming680 9 місяців тому

My great-great uncle, Captain Benjamin "Benny" F. Riggs, was shot down over Tunisia on January 19th, 1943. Only 2 members of his crew survived. He flew with the 328th Bomb Squadron, 93rd Bombardment Group, 8th Air Force.

@LuisAldamiz 10 місяців тому

Will watch but beforehand I suspect Shoigu was in charge of the supplies, am I wrong?

@gregturk2824 4 місяці тому

Excellent work

@antonallen8972 9 місяців тому

This is so fascinating to watch, especially having played with Vickers and Matilda tanks on the El Alamein map in World Of Tanks

@mohammedsaysrashid3587 10 місяців тому

It's a super wonderful historical coverage episode about Africa Corp.. and famous General Rommel existed in North Africa... introduced the majority of reasons that defeated African Corp for reaching Alexandra's by this remarkable episode...thank you ( Real Time history) channel for sharing .I appreciate your work hard 👍🏻

@tonylast9181 10 місяців тому

Everyone forgets that Rommel was in hospital in Italy when the battle of El Alamein began. He rushed back but was quite ill and not his usual self

@johndawes9337 10 місяців тому

@@idontthinkso2861 to take on defensive postions it is recommended a 3 to 1 ratio is need Monty did it with a 2 to 1 ratio

@dovetonsturdee7033 10 місяців тому

Oddly, his health did seen to fail him as events turned against him.

@Brian----- 10 місяців тому

Very many Afrika Korps soldiers suffered from illness due to bad water, bad food, and bad available medicine, namely logistics. Most could not evacuate and just suffered including the knowing fear of being in no condition to fight.

@bigwoody4704 10 місяців тому

@@johndawes9337 Break your prozac in half he had much more than his predessessors O'Connor or Auchinleck who both won. But Churchill stuck his fat,drunken nose in both of their operations. the dithering Monty never caught Rommel in 1500 miles with every concievable advantage Big Advantages. Try reading Desert Generals,An Army at Dawn or Brute Force fanboi *The Rommel Papers by B.H.Liddell-Hart page 521 Montgomery was in a position to profit by the bitter experience of his predecessors .While supplies on our side had been cut to a trickle ,American and British ships were bringing vast quantities on materials to North Africa .Many times greater than either his predecessors had ever had.* His principle was to fight no battle unless he knew for certain that he would win it. *Of course that is a method which will only work given material superiority - but that he had.* He was undoubtedly more of a strategist than a tactician. Command of a mobile battle force was not his strong point* British officers made the error off planning operations according to what was strategically desirable ,rather than what was tactically attainable."

@toms9864 10 місяців тому

Rommel was sick at El Alamein, he was pulled from Tripoli because they needed him to work on the Normandy invasion defense, on the day of the Normandy invasion he was celebrating his wife's birthday. I am seeing a pattern that Goebels was Rommel's PR agent.

@michaela7759 10 місяців тому

WOW! Outstanding! Great job!👏 Got a new subscriber. Greetings from Brazil🇧🇷

@realtimehistory 10 місяців тому

Welcome aboard!

@jacobsummers2664 10 місяців тому

Great video!

@cpurssey982 10 місяців тому

08:40 Premindra Singh Bhagat VC cleared 15 minefields over a period of 96 hours working from dawn to dusk!

@SlumberJake 10 місяців тому

I didn't think crusader tanks were used in operation compass against the Italians in the early days of the north African campaign. I thought it was mostly Matilda's and earlier cruiser tank models.

@dovetonsturdee7033 10 місяців тому

Correct. The British used Matilda II infantry tanks, and A9, A10, A13 cruisers, together with Light tankis, Mk VIs. Crusaders first appeared during Operation Battleaxe.

@thegiggler2 10 місяців тому

Just started watching 16 Days in Berlin on Nebula. Phenomenal!!!

@realtimehistory 10 місяців тому

thanks!

@petercannova5026 10 місяців тому

great job

@seanmoran2743 10 місяців тому

My 8th Army Veteran Grandfather told me he didn’t know why he bothered fighting away for 6yrs When looking at the country in the late 80s I’m just glad he’s not here now ! Rip Grandad

@anthonyeaton5153 8 місяців тому

Life would have been unbearable if Germany had won the war.

@godweenausten 10 місяців тому

I think the myth of the 'Gespenster' Division has been debunked many times in recent years. The 'Ghost Division' nickname was given not by the Allies, but by German high command, namely the headquarters of the 4th German Army to which Rommel's 7th Panzer Division was initially subordinated to. The division earned this nickname because Rommel failed to communicate his intentions and position as the operation progressed through its early stages. The corps and army HQ did not know where the 7th Panzer was for a considerable time, and because it was stretched along a very long axis of advance, couldn't pin-point its exact location, because even the staff of 7th Panzer divisional HQ did not know where Rommel was located, nor where some of its subordinate units were located.

@jamesemis7376 7 місяців тому

Rommel was wary that his communication with Headquarters may have been compromised/monitored by the Allies, thefore he does that as a precaution.

@jackcameback 10 місяців тому

Excellent - Thank you

@danmcdonald9117 4 місяці тому

Outstanding documentary

@abedfo88 10 місяців тому

I blame Conrad Von Hotzendorf

@kristianfischer9814 10 місяців тому

It was usually his fault.

@frenzalrhomb6919 10 місяців тому

@@kristianfischer9814 Not "usually,'' ALWAYS!! It was always his fault!!

@weltvonalex 10 місяців тому

Rightfully so! Conrad is always to blame

@Swellington_ 10 місяців тому

Was that the pilot"Marseille" at the beginning Rommel was talking with? At the 6 second mark,I think it was,absolute legend that guy

@mathewalden9277 3 місяці тому

Yes that was the Star of Africa

@khaelamensha3624 21 день тому

An amazing pilot...

@valjadsplodgny4455 4 місяці тому

Brilliantly researched, presented with complete neutrality and clarity.

@lparrot0 9 місяців тому

Thank you Ultra.

@davidhyams2769 10 місяців тому

The British focus on North Africa was about more than just Churchill's political survival. At the time, and until the Americans arrived in Operation Torch, the region was the only theatre of war where Britain and the Commonwealth & Empire troops and allies were in direct conflict with German & Italian forces. Also, it was imperative to keep the Suez Canal open as a route to India and the Far East and to keep the Germans out of the Middle East and its oil fields.

@dovetonsturdee7033 10 місяців тому

The British did not use the Suez Canal, except for sending ships to and from the Mediterranean Fleet. They used the longer, safer, Cape route.

@davidhyams2769 10 місяців тому

@@dovetonsturdee7033 You're correct in part. But after coming round the Cape, or from Australia, NZ or India, they came through the canal to get to Alexandria. That's how my Dad got from the UK to join the 8th Army.

@dovetonsturdee7033 10 місяців тому

@@davidhyams2769 As I understand it, the ships terminated at Port of Suez, at the southern end of the canal.

@freemarketjoe9869 5 місяців тому

Great point. I feel the same way you do on that.

@dennisweidner288 4 місяці тому

Not exactly true. The Bruits got their first Lanks in 1942 and were widening the air war. This is much more important than commonly recognized. The air war is a major reason that over half of German war output was committed to the Western Front, denying the Ostheer the supplies they needed.

@darkmatter6714 10 місяців тому

The British were very careful not to stretch their supply lines, preferring to sacrifice the tactical gains from moving forward fast in favour of the strategic gains from shoring up solid logistics. The brilliant tactician (Rommel) lost to the brilliant logistician (Montgomery). As the saying goes, “the pen is mightier than the sword”.

@isthissomesortofmeme8932 10 місяців тому

beautifully said

@bigwoody4704 10 місяців тому

Not really the daft troll Bernard ignored opening up Antwerp 1st.Then later bitched he couldn't get all he wanted - all after it failed and he never showed up of course

@garythomas3219 10 місяців тому

Big wooden! We're have you been ? But Montgomery did take Antwerp! He also took the Sheldt with British commandos and Canadians! Once Montgomery had supplies there was no stopping him ! Odd that they blame Montgomery for not taking Antwerp earlier ? But completely ignore Patton's failure to take 2 French deep water ports? Odd

@CncrndCtzn 10 місяців тому

The British contributed little to the allied successes in North Africa. The Australian’s tenacious defense of Tobruk and the arrival of the U.S. doomed Germany.

@darkmatter6714 10 місяців тому

@@CncrndCtzn And they came out of a sense of duty to help Britain, their mother country, who by far contributed the most in terms of logistics, materials, men as well as a sustained campaign between 1940 and end of 1942, not just in individual battles. You can Britbash all you like, but it won’t change the facts.

@bigsarge2085 10 місяців тому

Incredible.

@toddjones5742 10 місяців тому

great film from battles - really artistic view in many cases. Wonder who the cameraman was.

@Brian----- 10 місяців тому

The Afrika Korps and the Italian Fourth Shore armies lost because of logistics. Even in 1940, both Balbo and Graziani told Mussolini that the Italian Libyan army, which vastly outnumbered the British Egyptian army, was neither equipped nor supplied to conquer Egypt. Mussolini didn't care. Putting a huge army in Libya and not equipping or supplying it for action was a complete waste and the eventual arrival of Afrika Korps did not remedy this waste. The Axis logistical chain was brutal: (1) Axis European resource priority, (2) Italian home rail, (3) Italian shipping, (4) British interference, (5) Libyan port bandwidth, (6) Libyan ground transport bandwidth (partly consuming scarce fuel). So even if Rommel went to Hitler to complain about (1), or even if some sort of Malta success operation (never attempted) had eliminated (4), it would not have made a key difference. Air could supplement but air also consumed fuel. Compare Britain in Egypt: (1) Control of the seas, (2) Ample Egyptian port capacity, (3) Developed enough transport network (Egypt is more developed than Libya), (4) Plentiful fuel nearby (in the British Gulf), (5) Better tropical warfare practices by experience including better food and medicine. Plus (6) Fewer competing fronts, indeed the opposite in that Britain had extra troop resources in New Zealand, Australia, India, and Africa available for expeditionary use. No way were the Axis going to overcome that and conquer Egypt particularly past the easily defensible El Alamein pinch point where British supply was efficient and Axis supply painfully stretched. On a map, an advance to El Alamein looks threatening, but the Axis chance to continue to Alexandria was nil. To conquer Egypt the Axis would need to have waged a different war altogether, with a completely different set of priorities, probably including not attacking the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, or Greece and greatly upgraded German and Italian coordination.

@hlynnkeith9334 10 місяців тому

Brian, Thank you for saying this and saving me the effort. I agree with you on every point.

@antasosam8486 10 місяців тому

Except not attacking Soviet was not an option. Soviets attack on Germans was iminent in July (Marc Solonin). Soviets greatly surpassed in armor ~5x, and in personell ~2…3x. Stalin was absolutely shure of soviet superiority. I believe it was main reason why Stalin "was shure that Germans would not attack".

@Brian----- 10 місяців тому

@@antasosam8486 It was just a hypothetical. My point is that the logistics commitment to invading Egypt was serious in reality, but the Axis did not take it seriously and expected victory in a deprioritized Egypt while expending resources on other priorities.

@wonkothesane7000 10 місяців тому

They lost because USA was no longer reveling (involuntary) British Military plans to Germany

@YaBoiVinnyBot 10 місяців тому

I agree with everything here except for “British control of the seas” and “Italian shipping”. Italian convoys had a massive success rate into North Africa (over 90% made it), their shipping was not the issue, it was the lack of logistics when they actually arrived to North Africa. The ports were too small and then even when supplies were unloaded they heavily relied on trucks to get things to the front over long distances(as you mentioned.) As for British control of the sea, that heavily undersells the Regia Marina, which, while mostly a fleet in being, was something the British were absolutely wary about and often had to contend with. The central Mediterranean, other than Malta, was firmly in Italian hands from 41-43, and after the Raid on Alexandria, even the Eastern Mediterranean was considered to be under Italian control for several months of the war. Everything else you said I believe is spot on and absolutely correct, just wanted to throw my two cents in though.

@fatdaddyeddiejr 10 місяців тому

Easy answer. The Qattara Depression. In all the battles in North Africa. When Rommel faced the British. All Rommel did was drive his tanks south of the British defensive lines and the come up from behind their lines to attack them. When the Battle of El Alamein happened. Rommel had the Mediterranean to his north and the Qattara Depression to his south. The only way to fight the British was to go right through them. Montgomery knew this as well. So the British laid out more defensive lines and littered the area with landmines.

@Stormbringer2012 8 місяців тому

Rommel lost Africa because after he took Trobuk, Malta was suppose to be conquered but because he was a glory hound he convinced both Hitler and Mussolini to support his drive into Egypt. Later he had the nerve to complain about the lack of supplies that was being interdicted by bases in Malta.

@ktg8030 7 місяців тому

Such a great goddamn channel. Love it

@malovicn 10 місяців тому

Romel lost because the Allies had deciphered the Enigma code and knew precisely what the Axis plans were, the number of tanks, positions, etc... Without it, the allies would have won the battle in the end (due to more enormous industry, oil supplies, etc). Still, it would take them at least one more year due to Romel using his skills to win a lot of the battles he had lost. It was simply not a fair fight (luckily for us all)

@FranceKilledThomasSankara 8 місяців тому

You say that as if Rommel wasn't also getting intelligence on British tactical movements from his signals intercepts and, at least in 1943, on the operational level from decrypted reports to Washington by the American attaché in Cairo.

@Ugly_German_Truths 10 місяців тому

An army marches on its stomachs, but a Panzer Army needs FUEL (and ammunition and spare parts and replacement tanks) to continue fighting. Rommel pretty much was in the same situation as Stalingrad after the city got surrounded by the Red Army... getting SOME supplies, but nowhere near enough to keep winning, slowly being pushed back each time they had made some advances.

@antonboludo8886 10 місяців тому

Pretty much.

@katieb777 10 місяців тому

I remember Rommel used the 88 stationary anti tank guns very well that was a NICe weapon since with a differennt shell it can also be used as a FLAK gun (anti aircraft) or a different shell it can be used as a light artillary piece

@earlyapex911 5 місяців тому

Thanks!

@andrewsoboeiro6979 10 місяців тому

Excellent video! I especially appreciate your focus on logistics in the outcome of the campaign, because that factor is só often overlooked in popular accounts of World War II. Só many of the "turning points" in the war (including the battles of Moscow and Stalingrad in addition to Alamein) occurred at the outer limits of the Germans' supply lines; likewise, Allied victories in Egypt, Tunisia, Kursk, & Normandy were due in no small part to our various logistical advantages (including better supply planning, massive advantage in available resources, & unchecked naval superiority)

@omarbradley6807 10 місяців тому

The imposal of the Orient Plan on Rommel after the first battle of El Alamein, was the downfall, also, the third rate tanks who the Germans sent to Africa, (until after the defeat at 2nd El Alamein), the broading of the war by Hitler, Italian bad quality, few resources invested by the Axis, etc resulted in an unwinnable war in africa.

@angusmacdonald7187 3 місяці тому

In my youth I paid attention, like most, to weapons, tactics, big battles, and leaders; now in my 60s, I see that strategy and logistics were far more important.

@julianmhall 10 місяців тому

Curiously the video fails to mention among the reasons to help Italy in North Africa was that occupation of the British held territories would have put Germany much closer to the oil reserves in the Middle East at a time when they /really/ needed fuel. Regarding the logistic issue, quoted from my MA dissertation: 'It might be assumed that having been ably assisted in their Libyan endeavours by the Germans that the Italians would have done all they could to assist their ally, however despite suffering little in lost capacity to Allied bombing they failed to supply their German allies adequately in North Africa.[1] Evans noted that in October 1942 Rommel remonstrated with Mussolini regarding supplies, warning that failure to meet minimum requirements would lose the campaign; Harvey's figures indicate this requirement was never met.[2] Therefore endemic organisational failures in the Fascist regime failing to supply the Afrika Korps were as much to blame for their defeat as any failure in distribution of such supplies as did arrive.[3] [1] Stephen Harvey, ‘The Italian War Effort And The Strategic Bombing Of Italy’, History, 70, no. 228 (February 1985), p. 35, pp. 34-36. [2] Bryn Evans, The Decisive Campaigns of the Desert Air Force 1942-1945, Kindle locs. 1060-1061; cf. Harvey, ‘Italian War Effort’, p. 35 At the end of 1942 the Italian merchant fleet cargo capacity was 1,794,963 tonnes, capacity of Libyan ports was over 120,000 tonnes a month. Yet in July only 97,794 tonnes had been despatched and in August 77,134 tonnes. [3] Harvey, ‘The Italian War Effort’, p. 36. ' Therefore Italian military performance was /not/ matched by their merchant marine performance, so while it might be said the Italian /army/ supported the Afrika Korps, the merchant navy certainly did not.

@extrahistory8956 10 місяців тому

What is it with all the North Africa videos all of the sudden? First _The Operations Room,_ then _Kings and Generals_ and now you guys.

@jamesdreads7828 10 місяців тому

Was thinking the same thing, still watched em all tho..

@indianajones4321 10 місяців тому

They coordinated lol

@theuniverse5173 10 місяців тому

I'm subbed to all three of those channels

@realtimehistory 10 місяців тому

for us it was mainly based on getting access to the Tiger 131 and the other tanks at the Tank Museum and then we developed a video around that.

@theuniverse5173 10 місяців тому

@@realtimehistory intreseting

@johnburns4017 9 місяців тому

In North Africa one commander routinely outstripped his supplies driving his troops to exhaustion, often squandering any positive gains that he had made leaving himself open to counterattack. He also kept pushing his forces beyond the operational range of his air power. That commander was Rommel. Strangely a commander many regard as a brilliant general. Then we have one that joined later in North Africa that build up his forces, stock supplies and increased the level of inter-service co-operation. He absorbed an attack in his first encounter with Rommel that he had correctly anticipated and planned for, then winning the battle. He then launched an effective counterattack that kicked off the drive that ended in victory, all the while adjusting his strategy on the fly to maximum effectiveness. That commander was Montgomery.

@theicecreamjones 9 місяців тому

yeah the same brilliant general that had to commit suicide or be shot in the head cause of his blunders lol

@bigwoody4704 8 місяців тому

Monty was an ankle biter trying to pass himself off as a head hunter

@johnburns4017 8 місяців тому

@@bigwoody4704 Rambo, a quiz. Name the British field marshal who had to take command of two shambolic US armies in the German Bulge attack? 20 points for the correct answer.

@bigwoody4704 8 місяців тому

if the US was bad, then the British should have stayed home and saved a bunch of Englishmen - after having already using the colonials as sandbags that is. Monty lost a lot. What he won he won with overwhelming superiority in men, materials, and air support. Then barely.. and poorly. Johnnie perhaps when your ankle monitor is removed the staff at the home will take you to a library

@johnburns4017 8 місяців тому

@@bigwoody4704 *BZZZZZT!* Wrong answer. Rambo, the name the British field marshal who had to take command of two shambolic US armies in the German Bulge attack, was.... 🍾🍸🎊 *Field Marshal Montgomery* 🍾🍸🎊 Zero points Rambo. Zero. Better luck next time.

@tommywolker5787 10 місяців тому

Fact after interesting fact. It's not too slow; it's not too fast. I feel richer after having watched -- thank you!

@antoslv3913 9 місяців тому

What about the quite cools little victories of Free France in Nothern Africa ? There is really cool battles between Charles Leclerc and Italians, (given the inexistant equipment of French)... There's a video of 'Histoire Appliqué', a French UKpostsr that talk about one cool battle. With your visuals it would be so cool !

@griffinbailey5868 10 місяців тому

As a direct descendant of the man, I seek out everything I can and when you guys post something it’s a special treat.

@hugoweaving6275 10 місяців тому

I have always admired his tenacity and drive. He was a great leader forced into impossible situations handicapped by Hitlers plans.

@realtissaye 10 місяців тому

goddamn that's cool

@CharlieNasty-cd5hu 10 місяців тому

Don't believe every you read on the internet, kid. It's amazing how every one of these videos has kids of the historical figures the video covers

@bigdawgggbachi5394 3 місяці тому

This man used Jewish slaves to clear minefields and called them “ mine dogs”..ahhh how proud you should be!!!

@grandmoffrex 8 місяців тому

Becuase he wasn’t a tactical genius that relied on British incompetence rather than on sound tactics

@jloiben12 9 місяців тому

Germany: Rommel. Just defend this area. Rommel: How about I defend this area by driving the Brit Bongers all the way out? HR McMaster: Hmmm… I think I will do some of that at 73 Easting but America-style

@dresden_slowjog 8 місяців тому

The host's German pronunciation is simply awesome. Especially the typical German "R", but he also nails to stress the correct syllables with the right "length" or "shortness". I'm in awe (Native German here).

@oliversherman2414 10 місяців тому

German high command: Don't attack, just do some recon Rommel: *Actually attacks French frontlines in France* *A couple of years later* German high command: Don't attack, just do some recon Rommel: *Actually attacks British frontlines in North Africa*

@damianousley8833 10 місяців тому

With the loss of his intelligence means in 1942 of Bonner Fellers and his own signals interception unit, Rommel was then in the dark and had to revert to normal military oversights. He had no more success as he did not know the disposition of British forces in the western desert on the eve of the second battle of El Alemain. Which resulted in a full retreat to Tunisia after heavy fighting and losses for the Africa Korp and eventually to Tunisgrad.

@joiedevie3901 10 місяців тому

Sie sind ein wunderbar informativer und unterhaltsamer Lehrer. Neben der wunderbaren Art und Weise, in der Sie Ihre Einsichten erzählen, ist Ihre Exposition strahlend. Ich finde Ihre deutsche Aussprache besonders ansprechend, da Sie sprechen, als wären Sie ein versierter deutscher Bühnenschauspieler.

@realtimehistory 10 місяців тому

vielen Dank, Jesse ist Kanadier, aber spricht fließend Deutsch und lebt in Wien, wir müssen ihm nur manchmal den Wiener Dialekt austreiben ;)

@joiedevie3901 10 місяців тому

@@realtimehistory Mein bester Freund war Bayer und sprach mir oft auf seinen Dialekt, besonders wenn er über Berliner sprach! Ich bin mit den Nuancen und Unterschieden im deutschsprachigen Europa bestens vertraut! Sie machen einen tollen Job mit Jesse. Er fühlt sich auch wie jemand, der in der Vergangenheit im Theater aufgetreten ist.

@martinvondereinode623 6 місяців тому

One of my uncles was fighting in Rommels troops. He told me, when he was shipped over to North-Africa, there where three ships in the convoy. The first two ships were downed by the british bombers ... only the third ship - on which he was - came through.

@Jauhl1 6 місяців тому

Because he was hopelessly outnumbered yet continuously attacked against orders and without any logistical support?

@barryjgalbraith2635 10 місяців тому

A very interesting video. I’m not sure though that it gives enough credit to Montgomery whose drive and brilliance was one of the main factors in Rommels defeat at El Alamein. Still very well made and worth watching. Thanks.

@user-pb8yw8cw3s 10 місяців тому

14:41 the spirit matters in combat ! 21:47 is it Enigma ? Respect to the narrator for the German names pronunciation ! The Montgomery citation 9:18 is a cool slogan at the end 29:29

@jeanetdejager3956 2 місяці тому

Very intetesting info. My father was 1 of the South Africans in North Africa and Italy.

@cdnsk12 10 місяців тому

Hitler fancied himself a great war General. Unfortunately he really was only a messenger corporal. He stupidly split his military into 5 or 6 fronts. North, central & South fronts in Russia; Rommel's North African campaign & the Crimean Front. This had the effect of weakening his attack on Russia. A standard rule in fighting a war, is to adhere to the famous Chinese Army Commander Sun Tzu, who advised, "To defeat your enemy, Concentrate all your strongest forces and attack the enemy's weakest position". Hitler ignored this advice and paid the price with a self afflicted bullet from his mouth to his brain.

@johannessievers6759 10 місяців тому

what do you know

@ronlackey2689 10 місяців тому

@@johannessievers6759 Impressive rebuttal.

@ronlackey2689 10 місяців тому

@@johannessievers6759 Hitler did get his country WAY overextended. He didn't read up on Napoleon's Russia fiasco before attacking the Soviet Union. The USSR cannot be conquered in one summer or spring. Mother Nature will freeze you and your machines in place before you accomplish it. Even if you are rolling along unopposed. Secondly, he sent Rommel across the Med to fight in Africa. Surely even he knew that the Italian Navy couldn't keep his sea supply lines open against the Royal Navy? Both were doomed from the start.

@crhu319 10 місяців тому

Actually Hitler starved North Africa and did Crimea only long after bypassing it. Had the generals listened to him the South would have been the only serious attack vector. But the generals felt that Leningrad had to be isolated, that the Finns a d Balts would help more there than they did. And that Moscow the rail hub had to be taken.

@ronlackey2689 10 місяців тому

@@crhu319 Problem is, he starved North Africa with the Afrika Corps still there.

@francishooper9548 8 місяців тому

The key to Rommels early success was surely the American Colonel embedded with the British who attended all major beiefings of the British high command and then immediately informed Rommel of what was discussed. He was supposedly reporting to Washington but knowingly used a code the Germans had broken. This is why Rommel had a special code breaking unit under his command. It helps to get a briefing 4 to 5 times per day of your enemies intentions.

@raydenn6027 8 місяців тому

I read that during a confused battle the intelligence unit was captured and suddenly Rommel was no longer a tactical genius. The American Colonel was ordered to change to a stronger code which was never broken. The debacle in Tunisia in 1943 where at least 250,000 Axis soldiers were captured was a disaster second only to Stalingrad.

@californiadreamin8423 7 місяців тому

Bonner Feller.

@user-sc9oy1kz8g 7 місяців тому

Knowingly? As in the Americans knew the code had been broken?

@josefoglio9250 5 місяців тому

Again down playing italians who were actually the ones that broke the american code in American Rome embassy

@DirtyMikeandTheBoys69 3 місяці тому

Feller's Intel was only available from January to June of 1942. Which doesn't excuse British Commonwealth defeats before or after. There is no evidence that Feller used a code knowing it was broken, as the Black Code was actually compromised when SIS agents stole a code book and returned it to the embassy in Rome. That said, you seem to ignore the massive SIGINT operation that also undermined the British. "In addition, the Italian SIS code-breakers were able to successfully intercept much radio encrypted signals intelligence (SIGINT) from British aircraft traffic as well as first-class ciphers from British vessels and land bases, providing Regia Marina with timely warnings of Allied intentions in the Mediterranean. Indeed, so successful was the Italian SIS in handling the bulk of Axis naval intelligence in the Mediterranean, that "Britain's offensive use of SIGINT was largely negated by Italy's defensive SIGINT."

@nates9105 10 місяців тому

shows that logistics is the backbone of any army. Failure to provide for troops causes most certain death to the poorest of troops and ultimate failure to the most exceptional.

@camoTiara 10 місяців тому

The margins in every battle were tiny and winning this war was almost miraculous when you consider everything. Ie, every win was pretty much a miracle.