Operation Crusader

Discussion in 'North Africa & the Med' started by Warlord, Feb 18, 2011.

  1. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    I'll ask this very simply:

    Was Crusader an allied victory?
     
  2. Kuno

    Kuno Very Senior Member

    Yes.
     
  3. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    Well, I guess a straight question deserves a straight answer :p

    Let me re-phrase it:

    Can Crusader be considered a true allied victory in both tactical and strategical levels? Why?
     
  4. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Warlord
    the short answer - in contrast to Kuno - I would say NO

    the longer answer can be found in Barrie Pitt's "Crucible of War "

    The main objectives were to clear Cyrenaica - get to Tripoli - oh and by-the-way - free Tobruk- and destroy Rommels armour......!

    Not ONE objective was realised - the armour took a beating at Sidi Resigh - the Tobruk garrison didn't make it - the 50th Div lost the 150th brigade - we lost a lot of South Africans at Totensonntag - Gen. Cunningham was fired -Gen. Ritchie took over and we landed back in Cairo once more, as well we had Lt.Gen. Godwen- Austin resign - Lt.Gen Norrie and and "Strafer" Gott unhappy - South Africans and Kiwis also so all in all I would say that we lost again to Rommel-

    but of course Rommel didn't think so as he had also lost - his casualties were German = 14.600 - British = 17,700 - but Rommels army was mainly Italians and they had lost 23,700 - so the overall total of Axis losses were 38,300 - so it could be said that NO ONE won the Crusader battle -

    Churchill and Alanbrooke had another view and they started to wonder if Auchinlek was the man for the job and by some 9 months later - after the Gazala Gallop back to El Alamein - Alexander and Monty took over - then we started to win .....

    Cheers
     
  5. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    I knew I could count on you, Tom! You smell this kind of thread, don't you? ;)

    Remember that thanks to your advice I'm currently reading Pitt's job (1940-41), and that's the reason why I opened the thread, because after going through almost all of the chapter about the armored phase of the battle, my humble opinion is that if Tobruk was finally relieved, and Rommel chased almost out of Cyrenaica, it was a purely circumstancial result, more out the "supply nightmare" than an overall better performance.

    Just like you, I would call it a tie, but with a slight but perceptible tilt towards the Axis side. The myriad of tactical mistakes, plus facts like the relief of Tobruk against the severe mauling of the 7th Hussars and 22nd Armored (to mention just a couple of the Commonwealth formations decimated), provide the pros and cons for each side.
     
  6. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Warlord -
    A tie it is then !

    when the armoured were battered at Sidi Rezigh- that was the time to pull out and cry uncle and save the Infantry - strangely Cunningham went nowhere afterwards but Ritchie commanded the XII corps in NWE - and the victor of Beda Fomm - Gen. O'Conner after release from his POW status took over the VIII corps again with distinction in NWE and finally did some good work out in Burma, the desert was a good apprenticeship for many leaders in NWE and Italy...

    Cheers
     
  7. sol

    sol Very Senior Member

    Well, I guess a straight question deserves a straight answer :p

    Let me re-phrase it:

    Can Crusader be considered a true allied victory in both tactical and strategical levels? Why?

    Crusader was Allied (read Commonwealth) victory, maybe not decisive but still a victory. They succeeded to relive Tobruk garrison and inflict heavy casualties on the Axis forces, destroying majority of their armour (if I remember correctly only handful of German tanks reach El Agheila) but they also suffered considerable losses and were to tired to achieve total victory.
     
  8. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    Warlord -
    A tie it is then !

    when the armoured were battered at Sidi Rezigh- that was the time to pull out and cry uncle and save the Infantry - Cheers

    The graveyard of man and machine at Sidi Rezegh...

    That maëlstrom gives me the chills just to think about it.
     
  9. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Sol -
    you are correct with your statement that Rommell got back to El Ageila with few panzers and that they were too tired for a complete victory after heavy losses in the Crusader battles......

    however his Chief Intelligence Officer von Mellenthin had a different view on the arrival of some 55 panzers with another 45 panzers sunk by the Royal Navy.....

    "there was a fourth factor to weigh in favour of Panzergruppe Afrika - increasing evidence of disarray in the forces facing them across the frontier at El Ageila,bearing an unexpected resemblance to the weakness and uncertainty of which Rommel had taken advantage of during his first onslaught......by January 12th .....it only remained for Rommel to choose the moment for attack "

    He did on January 16th - 12 whole days after he crawled back to El Ageila with few panzers and tired out.....and made the tie into a great victory !

    It will be recalled that Rommels first onslought was from the same El Ageila - AFTER
    O'Conner's great victory at Beda Fomm when the 4th Indian div was on it's way to Ethiopia and the Kiwi's and the remainder of most of O'Conners force was sent the
    Greece - and 7th Armoured back in Cairo - with the newly arrived 2nd Armoured sitting in Mechili wondering what to do....Rommel was way smarter than our lot - at that time !
    Cheers
     
  10. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    Tom's right.

    The name of the last chapter of Pitt's 1940-41 job, "Lightning Riposte", says it all.

    No matter how depleted Axis forces were when they left the battlefield to a "victorious" foe, the mere fact that they reached Gazala less than two months afterwards, and that that battle WAS a real victory, serves as a proven parameter to rank Crusader as a Commonwealth defeat, evened only by the relief of Tobruk.

    Time and time again during Crusader, British armored officers thought - out of tactical retreats to refuel and rearm - that they had defeated the mighty panzerdivisionen, just to find themselves on the wrong end of an advancing steamroller a few hours later.

    Commonwealth recce and intelligence sections failed miserably during the whole battle; it has to be said that such a fluid environment wasn't exactly the best for having accurate information, but Axis commanders ended up taking better decisions than their adversaries.
     
  11. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Warlord -
    the main problem with the British armoured was their obsolete tactics in charging the enemies armoured until they led them on to the banks of 88mm's waiting for them - we never seemed to learn until Monty took over and gave them strict instructions NOT to chase after their armour - Rommel himself admitted that the British had smartened up at Alam el Halfa when he said to Kesselring - " the swine didn't come out."

    It wasn't until at Medenine that he got rid of the leaders of the obsolete Tank tactics and RAF wallahs - then founded the "cab Rank" RAF system with Broadhurst of close support to Infantry - Tanks - Artillery - in effect the British Blitzkreig which was so effective at El Hamma - Tunis and the great swan in Belgium - that the still undergunned Tanks came into their own ....
    Cheers
     
  12. kfz

    kfz Very Senior Member

    Warlord -
    the main problem with the British armoured was their obsolete tactics in charging the enemies armoured until they led them on to the banks of 88mm's waiting for them - we never seemed to learn until Monty took over and gave them strict instructions NOT to chase after their armour - Rommel himself admitted that the British had smartened up at Alam el Halfa when he said to Kesselring - " the swine didn't come out."


    Tom,
    Its the classic Cavalry charge isnt it. Was there any strength in the argument that as British armour being sometimes thinner armored and being generally a calibre less would force them to close the distance quickly, in a charge.

    best regards
    Kev
     
  13. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    Warlord -
    It wasn't until at Medenine that he got rid of the leaders of the obsolete Tank tactics and RAF wallahs - then founded the "cab Rank" RAF system with Broadhurst of close support to Infantry - Tanks - Artillery - in effect the British Blitzkreig which was so effective at El Hamma - Tunis and the great swan in Belgium - that the still undergunned Tanks came into their own ....
    Cheers

    Tom, this is one of my biggest questions:

    Why didn't the concept of the Jock column become a norm in the Commonwealth armies of those early days? It at least provided some sort of the balance the Axis (German) units had, and I say "sort of", because, e.g., you can't compare the 2pdr peashooter en-portée with an 88 towed or self-propelled.


    Tom,
    Its the classic Cavalry charge isnt it. Was there any strength in the argument that as British armour being sometimes thinner armored and being generally a calibre less would force them to close the distance quickly, in a charge.

    No matter how brave the charge or the stand, British forces were bound to end up as a sea of flaming hulks and bloody casualties; this figures tell the tale, and speak for themselves:Beginning at 3000yds, the 75mm HE shell from the Pzkw IV was deadly against 25pdr crews, and became increasingly effective against British armour as the range shortened (not to mention AP shot); even though the artillery out-ranged the tanks by a lot, gunners had no armor to protect them from shrapnel.

    On the other end, the 2pdr solid shot was only effective against panzers at ranges below 500yds.

    Taken from Barrie Pitt's "The Crucible of War: Western Desert, 1941" (What a treasure vault of information! Thanks a lot, Tom ;)).
    This left a 2500yd gap in which Commonwealth units were almost defenseless against the oncoming onslaught, and no matter how hard you tried to close it, we are talking about a lot of distance under fire here, not only from the said 75's, but from omnipresent 88's capable of penetrating all british armour within range.
     
  14. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Warlord / KFZ
    The main reason for the constant charge of the Armour - was mainly historical - when Hobo arrived in the Desert in the very early days - he was greeted by the c -in- c of the day - Lt.Gen.Gordon-Finlayson - who said to Hobo - "why have you come - I don't want you here "

    Hobo prevailed and made up the core of the later 7th Armoured....with the 4th Light Brigade - later 4th Armoured ...then he was fired and returned to the Uk to become a Lance Corporal in his local Home Guard.....he retained his humour though as when invited to meet Alanbrooke at the War House - he asked if he should dress as a Maj.Gen. or a Lance Corporal - he left - thankfully as G.O.C. 79th (funnies) Division !

    Then the Cavalry wallahs took over...and fought the Crimea all over again - until Monty came along..and finally go rid of them all before Medenine -

    the tactic of trying to shorten the range agianst the special 75's and 88mm' was meaningless as they could pick us off at 2500 yards and even the best gunner with a six pounder was helpless at 800 yards.....Medenine also saw the advent of FOUR - 17 pounders - which mauled the three panzers Divisions attacking out of the sun - but they were sent back to the Uk for a decent base and the bodged up 25 pounder was not good enough - we didn't see them again until a battery of them landed at Sicily with the Canadians - who lost them all after Cassino !

    WE all had a demo of the 17 pounder - and were overjoyed to see one shot knock a PZMk IV off its ring and drop it 50 yards behind- so when we asked please can we have some - like Oliver - we were told to forget it as they were all going into the second front - they did... - and we never saw them in Italy ! at least I didn't...

    Cheers
     
  15. John Lawson

    John Lawson Arte et Marte

    Tom, was it not Monty who said that - he would be glad when he had rid of the old guard professional officer, making decisions that would not affect his career adversly, and had officers who were only for the duration of the war, who made decisions to get the war ended sooner - or something like that?
     
  16. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    JOhn - don't quite understand your statement - "it was not Monty who said - what "?

    Cheers
     
  17. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    Tom, was it not Monty who said that - he would be glad when he had rid of the old guard professional officer, making decisions that would not affect his career adversly, and had officers who were only for the duration of the war, who made decisions to get the war ended sooner - or something like that?

    Well, even though once I read Pitt's job I was able to drop several misconceptions about British brass, enough remained to sustain the view I've always had of high-ranking career officers taking idiotic (and deadly) decisions out of concepts that should have been mothballed and forgotten by the time they were used.

    This quote out of "Hidden Victory: The Battle of Habbaniya, May 1941", by AVM A.G. Dudgeon (close enough to the Western Desert ;)), should illustrate my point:

    "Wing Commander Paul Holder, whom we met in an earlier chapter, was his Senior Administrative Officer (to AVM H.G. Smart, AOC Habbaniya) and he had no such scruples. He dreamed up what he believed to be a splendid idea for putting pressure on Raschid Ali and his henchmen. It sprang from the fact that it was well known in the higher level of our command that all the upper-echelon Iraqis were busily salting away large sums of money, filched from public funds and diverted into personal accounts. Paul trotted in next door to see the great man.

    'Sir', said Paul politely, 'I have thought up a simple scheme by which we can require the rebel Raschid Ali to do anything we want, with no air-operations, nor any loss of life.' Smart raised his eyebrows, and smiled inquiringly. 'I have found that all Iraqi bank-notes are printed by Messrs Waterlow, in Britain, the famous printers of currency for many, many countries. With some co-operation from Whitehall we could tell Raschid Ali that if he does not stop intriguing and behaving contrarily to what we wish from him, we would fly over Baghdad and all the major cities in Iraq, dropping unlimited quantities of bank-notes. Specially printed for us by Waterlow's. Real bank-notes, not forgeries. On the proper paper. Of every denomination there is.' Smart frowned. Paul went on, 'Then, as he will readily recognise, almost overnight the Iraqi currency will become valueless. He is no fool, and he will instantly see that all the vast personal fortune that he has amassed would have evaporated. And so also those of his confederates, who would then be ready to do him a severe injury. We would be in complete control.'

    Paul sat back and waited for the applause. Smart leaned forward, shock and surprise shining from his face. 'Holder', he said in tones of utter disapproval, 'we couldn't possibly do such an unacceptable thing. It wouldn't be cricket!'..."
     
  18. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Warlord -
    more than likely true but hardly answers my query concerning what did Monty say - and where did John get the idea that I actually quoted Monty in any of my posts......?

    Cheers
     
  19. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    Seems to me like he's only asking if you know if Monty said that, or at least something similar.

    To me, no visible suggestions implying you quoted Sir Bernard, Tom.
     
  20. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Warlord - my real question is - WHAT did Monty say ... that he thinks I quoted ....?

    Cheers
     

Share This Page