(1/11) Battlefield II El Alamein Ep10 World War II

[Angayasse]

I like this film very much - once have seen on TV too. Alamein and generally North Africa is my main focus of interest in WWII:)

[vampiroangelico]

I find it rather disgusting how the Italians in WWII are always described as ineffective and cowards, when the bottom line was that the soldiers and their leadership never shared the same dreams as Mussolini and Hitler. They wanted to fight against Hitler and alongside with the Americans and English, and Mussolini was an idiot who made some disastrous mistakes and decisions!

[fauxsham]

It sometimes seems strange that episodes seem to leap a time frame, like the previous Guadalcanal ending in the attacks on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and then the next episode goes back to something that happened earlier.

[Kokoda144]

that seems to be the motto of the british in all wars, attrition.

[Plinije1]

This movie is unreal. On one place it's said thats allies had better comander and tactics witch is not true. Also the americans not have better equipment and weapons than the germans. Their tanks especialy sherman was just a piece of junk in compare with german tanks. Romell was thousand time better comander than Monty but he didn't have materials and resources and that was not been his mistake.

[MokomaSusi]

How was Sherman or Grant junk when compared to Panzer II and III or panzer IV ?

[Plinije1]

I am talking about Panzer V and VI (Panther and Tiger). This tanks have vetter armour and better gun. My mistake i was thinking on the fighting in Normandy. But i a am not sure that Germans dont have Tiger's in the desert. If they had it then i am in right for one part of the story. Let's be honnest, the Tigers were better than Sherman's.

[MokomaSusi]

Germans had only 40 Tigers in Africa! and they didn't perform that well so allies didn't see need to replace Sherman. Same happenned in Italy with Panther.

[101Dobermanns]

Shermans used petrol rather than diesel, one hit and burned like a Ronson lighter, as germans called them.

[NewEstonia]

Compared to the Tigers and later German tanks Sherman and the Crusader were inferior but the Sherman could easily take out a Mk III Panzer which was Rommel's main tank in Africa.. Plus there was more than enough Shermans to go around(50 000+ was built). As for commanders both Rommel and Monty were equal. Rommel was a fan of flanking movements which gained him several victories. Monty however was a fan of diversions and misinformation.(lured Rommel to Qattara depression)

[TheRawke]

Rommel was a good tatician, but because his "always at the front" thingy he ususally lacked a good strategy. Monty, on the other hand, always worked very cautious and precisely, he always had a strategy. Rommel had totally unrealistic demands regarding supplies. He asked for massive reinforcements of which he actually should have known were not available because of the fightings on the eastern front. The Sherman was equal to Panzer III and IV. The German panzers however were less likely to burn.

[Teynor18]

@TheRawke Rommel had plenty of strategy and his demands for supplies and reinforcements were not at all exaggerated. The Italian forces under Rommel were no help and Rommel needed those supplies to run his army if they had any chance of victory in North Afrika. No luftwaffe support cost Rommel untold #'s of sunken supply ships. Hitler asked to much of Rommel where Monty only won because he had more men, vehicles and unlike Rommel was decently supplied, it wasnt strategy just attrition

[swollower]

@Plinije1 So why did he lose or even better why did 138,000 italians surrender in less than 2 weeks?

[indiasrainbow]

My grandad was out their as a medic , he died in the 80's screaming after a stroke " i have to go back, i have to go back!" not knowing the war was over.

[Denusch]

that's very concerning =/

[Abrams108]

whoever thinks that italy was basically a militarily a puppet state to germnay say :aye

[YamaniNetsi]

Look at old footage - do you see what I see? Allies materiel, with the exception of air force, looks like it belonged to mid 30s, not to 40s. While Germans liberally used captured Soviet equipment, I am not aware that they used any of the Allied junk. Am I mistaken? Do you know of any?

[iroscoe]

Yes they used it when they could get it in North Africa,they used Valentine,Matilda and Honey tanks as well as universal carriers . Have you considered that the reason they did not use as much British and American equipment as they did Soviet is because they did not manage to capture it

in such huge quantitys? . Or are you really trying to say that if they had captured thousands of US 105's or British 25pdrs they would not of used them like they used the thousands of Soviet 76.2mm .

[YamaniNetsi]

iroscoe, I honestly never heard or saw German using Brit's equipment. You making a good point, however, in Dunkirk Germans did capture a lot of British implements of war. Do you have any source that can educate me as to your point? Thank you!

[iroscoe]

Despite its perilous position the units of the BEF mostly retained some measure of cohesion so a lot of the material was partially or completely destroyed,though enough Universal(or Bren)carriers were repaired and were given German designations some being fitted out with PAK 3.7 or rockets or just used as mortar or machinegun carriers .

[iroscoe]

British tanks were captured and used but without either capturing large enough numbers to canabalise or workshops or tank depots for parts and tools they had a limited operational life . Britian was uprepared because politicians then as now quibled over a few % of GDP for the military the rush to re-arm after Munich was to little to late,it wasn't all bad we had sound small arms and field artillery already in place the most important defiecencys were in tanks and anti-tank weapons .

[YamaniNetsi]

iroscoe, I guess I was trying to make two points - 1) Britain was woefully unprepared to fight WWII due to its pre-was liberal morass and that forced brave British soldiers to fight with second-rate weapons and inferior military doctrine. 2) Given that, I honor and respect noble Allied fighters even more for defeating nazi militaristic beasts.

[MokomaSusi]

"Allies materiel, with the exception of air force, looks like it belonged to mid 30s, not to 40s. "

Most german artillery was designed in late 20's and tanks in 30's.

[32silvercoins]

Rommel was a great tank commander. He knew how to make the most out of his limited resources.

But in terms of logestics he left a lot to be desired. Thats just my 2cents.

[hozhifeng123]

i'm a world war 2 folower and i'm only 10 (really) i hate germens and a little hate the soviets. LOL

[NFSUpanda]

thanks for uploading this vid

[Paddis92]

Thank you for uploading yet another exciting episode!

[HoustonGD]

Guadalcanal ended in Feb 1943 but ok

[HoustonGD]

Battlefield II El Alamein is a 1 Gig upload I suggest watching in HIGH QUALITY

[metho20]

1 gd wow thats massive thx for uplaoding

[donolaz]

Indeed an excellent video GD ;)

[HoustonGD]

well whatever you call it STAVKA expected the 1942 attack towards Moscow

[Historystartsnow]

Great Video. Good job GD