# Interesting what might have been



## Glider (Aug 30, 2006)

I have been reading the Memoirs of Colonel Hans Von Luck who fought through the war with Rommel and speciailised in commanding reconisance forces.

As we are all aware in the Middle East there was no front line as we normally know it. There were areas where both sides faced off against one another, but there were large gaps where small forces could penetrate.

In late January there occurred what might well have been a massive change in the war.

I quote. On 23rd January the British occupied Tripoli without a fight. A few days later a patrol reported 'Gathering of high millitary personnel six to eight KM to the Northeast, believe Monty identified, strong protection with tanks and scout cars.

I went there at once and it did seem that Montgomery was there and more sensationally Churchill wearing a safari helmet.

The range was too far for our light weapons and the 88mm and heavy artillary were not available. I later found out that it could have been Churchill, as he stopped on the way to Casablanca to meet Monty.

Can you imagine what would have happened if they had the weapons and had been able to kill or capture Monty and Churchill in Jan 1943?


----------



## redcoat (Aug 30, 2006)

Glider said:


> IIn late January there occurred what might well have been a massive change in the war.
> 
> ICan you imagine what would have happened if they had the weapons and had been able to kill or capture Monty and Churchill in Jan 1943?


By Jan 43 Monty would have been a greater loss than Churchill, Allied victory by this time was pretty well certain, and even if Churchill had been killed or captured, the British governments policies would have stayed the same or similar.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 31, 2006)

I dont know if it was certain by Jan 43. Do you mean the war or victory in N. Afrika?


----------



## HealzDevo (Feb 28, 2007)

I think that by that time Monty had really achieved his big part in North Afrika and if I understand it there was a lot of bickering between him and Patton which distracted from the main task. Therefore unity might have better been served not to have him on D-Day but politics said he was there for the British.


----------



## Civettone (Mar 5, 2007)

In democratic countries no one is irreplacable. 





Kris


----------



## HealzDevo (Mar 11, 2007)

Debatable though how true that is in fact. Democracy in theory states the same thing as Communism- "That Everyone is Equal" but in practice certain people are better in certain situations. Monty was needed in the African Theatre but if he had died there after his victory there. D-Day might have ran a bit smoother for the Allies, as the Supreme Commander had to listen to him bickering with Ike.


----------



## Civettone (Mar 12, 2007)

Ever heard the story of how Hitler reacted when he heard the news of Roosevelt's death? 

When the allies were already invading Germany from two sides and defeat was imminent, he saw Providence coming to his rescue in the nick of time. 

Kris


----------



## renrich (Mar 20, 2007)

Hitler rejoicing when Roosevelt died showed how out of touch with reality he was. Roosevelt was so ill his last term he was not very effective as a leader. And Truman turned out to be not all that bad, huh? I believe Churchill would have been a much greater loss to the free world than Monty.


----------



## Civettone (Mar 20, 2007)

True but no longer in 1943. From that point his continuous concern for British interests in the Mediterranean were becoming a nuisance to Allied Command. Just look at the stunt he pulled in the Greek islands.


Of course in hindsight it would have been good for the freedom of Eastern Europe had England invaded the Balkans.

Kris


----------



## renrich (Mar 21, 2007)

I believe that Churchill had a legitimate and early concern about the Soviets that Roosevelt did not share. Much of the PMs meddling in the overall strategy of the war was a result of that concern.


----------



## renrich (Mar 25, 2007)

Besides, if Churchill had been picked off during WW2 he would not have been able to plan "Operation Hope Not" his funeral.


----------



## Joe2 (Apr 16, 2007)

What was 'operation Hope Not' anyways?


----------



## HealzDevo (Apr 22, 2007)

It is questionable though, whether Monty would really have been a great loss considering that the Afrika Corps was largely abandoned by Germany and dying a slow painful death. Monty delayed the hammer-blow falling on Rommel's neck and this allowed Rommel to escape to Germany. Therefore it could be questioned whether Monty was playing like a cat with a mouse with Afrika Corps when he could have delivered a swift mercifull blow and ended it quickly.


----------

