soc.history.war.world-war-ii

"David Thornley" wrote:

> Now, if you want comparable positions, try Sicily. I'm more
> impressed by Patton than Montgomery in Sicily. (In fairness,
> I don't think it was one of Montgomery's best, while it was
> closer to being Patton's best.)

An autopilot in stead of both Patton and Montgomery would have achieved more
or less the the same result as the historical outcome of the campaign.

Nay, an autopilot might have performed better than Patton - by giving up the
glitzy Patton ride to Palermo and seriously helping Montgomery by closing in
on the retreating Axis and try bagging some Germans before they could be
shifted to the east.

Sicily was too small and narrow a theater with too limited maneuver space,
and too brief a campaign, to let any army commander ability shine. The
sensible, unimaginative Allied invasion plan didn't open up vast horizons of
operational glory. On both sides, it mostly was a regiment and battalion
commander battle. The Allies had several good division commanders, none
awesome. Hube's campaign management was solid - not that he had many
operational choices - , and culminated in the outstanding Axis evacuation
over the Straits to the mainland, without comparison the best piece of the
campaign.

Haydn