My father was a Desert Rat with the Royal Artillery and told me that Bardia's Mayor surrendered the port to a single Bren carrier containing two officers, my dad and the driver. The Officers both got the Military Medal where as my dad, a Lance Corporal, and the driver just got Mentioned in Dispatches. They were scouting ahead of the main force, going along the coastal cliff road, came around a bend to find the towns Mayor, dignitaries and civilians standing in the road waving white flags with the still dust rising from the other end of town as the Italian army retreated. This never gets mentioned yet I have seen the letter regarding him being Mentioned in Dispatches and you would think Pathe News would have loved that story.
@@od1452 Well the officers had risks on the downsides too - many would be executed for the actions of small numbers of subordinates. But your main point is true - people need to be recognised or their actions.
A brilliant presentation of the Compass operation. This oft ignored campaign is an interesting study in how to do and how not to do desert warfare in that era. Most treatments of North Africa start with the arrival of Rommel in March or even later, with the arrival of Montgomery. But none of that would have happened, had not O'Conner and company defeated the Italians in 1940-1941. Much of what Rommel did in 1941-1943 used the same tactics of speed and momentum that O'Conner used to defeat the much larger Italian army. TIK also puts to rest the much repeated (and erroneous) idea that the Italians lost because they were cowardly or ill prepared. The Western Desert Force did not win because they had superior equipment, but much like the Germans did in France, they won because that had a superior tactical doctrine. This a far and away the best video presentation of this extremely important campaign. Thank you.
Supplies were the thing so O'Connor only used one armoured and one infantry ( in trucks ) so he had less mouths to feed. I think that Rommel must have done the same.
@@kaveebee Errm, not really. O'Connor did not have more forces available to him. And he too had logistical problems. On the other hand, Italy was the one nuked by supplies and lack of a concentration of forces.
Great joke: A: "Herr General, the Italians have entered the war!" B: "Thats not good, send a Division to defeat them" A: "But they are on our side." B: "Thats worse, send an army to support them!"
French units held off the Germans long enough at Dünnkirchen, so even more could be evacuated. Be a bit thankful. The BEF did not look much better than the French during Fall Gelb. Crosscommunication was really bad, and the doctrines were just unable to cope with the rapid German advance. There are reports where British officers were captured during their breakfast!
Petra Meyer yes and the Royal Navy evacuated an army's worth of French soldiers. And the BEF was under French control, and the entire strategic error and the entire fault should be placed in the French, first of their lack of logic. You don't build a war with a huge gap beside it. Secondly, you try and support your allies operations, like at Arras. Thirdly, actually try and fight when the Germans came out of the Ardennes. You folded so quickly!
You joke but this was the French flag 200 years ago: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbon_Restoration#/media/File:Flag_of_the_Kingdom_of_France_(1814-1830).svg
I'd like to take a moment to appreciate that Wavell was willing to have a junior officer come to him and say, "Here's the plan," and Wavell said, "Sounds good. Carry on." Sure, Wavell made errors later, but I think it's still significant he went along with it.
41:53 : General Tellera died the following day of the battle in a british hospital, as he was found heavily wounded in a M13/40 tank. He tried to break trough the encirclement, even moving in other tanks when his own couldn't advance anymore. Was buried with full military honour by the british, as they admired his will to resist and keep fighting. He is the highest ranking italian office fallen in battle in WWII
Thanks! You should check out my other Battlestorm videos ua-cam.com/play/PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y.html the lastest videos (Battleaxe and Bruneval) are some of my best. Also, I'm currently working on the follow up to Battleaxe (the next in the North African Campaign series), which will be Operation Crusader. As of today, the unfinished script is 74,319 words - which will put the video in the region of between 7 and 8 hours long :)
This was one of history's most decisive and outstanding military victories and came at a time when British outlooks were pretty dim. It is a great pity that O'Connor's brilliant campaign has been overlooked by the public, who mainly concentrate on British defeats at this stage of the war and the Battle of Britain. As Rommel said, nothing would have stopped the British taking Tripolis and the North African War would have ended in early 1941 - but then came Churchill !!!
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- I wouldn't call him an idiot he was a brilliant statesman and possessed great oratory - perhaps born 100 yrs too late. Political change was coming that clashed with his old school aristocratic views. He did have the unique ability to rally the country at an extremely bleak time.But had no business in a war room. For instance he should have left Auchileck and Dorman-Smith alone
Greetings from Canada TIK! New subscriber here. Well... sort of. I've been "marathoning" your videos for about a month (including your 9-hour[+] presentation on Crusader - thanks for that one by the way) and, although I don't always agree with your conclusions, I do appreciate your videos for being well-researched and entertaining. Now as to your question about Graziani: I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and say that he was "partly" to blame for the 10th Army's defeat in North Africa. He was, after all, the "commander on the ground" and the decision on how to deploy his formations was his and his alone. That being said, "Marshal" Graziani was the product of a flawed system in which the criteria for promotion were seniority, nepotism, and "ideological soundness" - i.e.; an adherence to the idea that "Mussolini ha sempre ragione" ("Mussolini is always right") - rather than competence and useful experience. The problems with this "system" were recognized at the time even within the highest echelons of the Comando Supremo, which compelled Marshal Badoglio to make his famous quip: "The wearing of the uniform of a general does not make a general." How true. I've read quite a bit on Graziani and in my opinion he wasn't the brightest lightbulb in the pack. In truth, I regard him as little more than a brown-nosing brute. But... could Graziani have executed Operatione E as a "war of rapid decision" (la guerra di rapido corso), and would it have made a difference if he had? I don't believe so. I too have read Christie's treatise ("Fallen Eagles") and I find many of his arguments questionable. For example, he points out the deficiencies of Italy's "magnificent" M11/39 "breakthrough tank," then maintains it would've been "good enough" for an Italian-style "blitzkrieg." He apparently comes to this conclusion based on the outcome of one obscure engagement that occurred early in the Western Desert Campaign (5 August 1940) between an Italian raggruppamento which included a company of M11/39s and a British column consisting of A9 tanks (Cruiser Tank Mk Is), armored cars, and towed 25-pounders. I don't find it at all surprising that M11s could better A9s in combat: both were lousy tanks and were roughly equivalent in capabilities (and, in this case, it appears that the Italians got the drop on the Brits). But to come to a sweeping conclusion based on this one incident "begs the question" of the effectiveness (and endurance) of Italian armor. To his credit, Christie does "give the nod" to Graziani's nightmarish logistical situation in North Africa, and he correctly observes that had Graziani opted for a "blitzkrieg" attack it would've been a "one-shot affair." But - and here's the crux of the matter - if the 10th Army could only advance as far as Sidi Barrani (about 60 miles) using the "mass approach" before running out of steam (with many tanks breaking down en route), how could the 10th Army - or a smaller but suitably reorganized part of that formation - have made it all the way to the Suez Canal, a distance of more than 600 miles? The problems with the Intendenza (supply corps) were legion, and the Mediterranean wasn't nicknamed "Cunningham's Pond" for nothing. Had Graziani's offensive been planned as a "blitzkrieg," I figure that the 10th Army would've charged as far as Mersa Matruh, and then floundered on O'Connor's defenses. Christie's assertion that the Italians and Libyans would have been sunning themselves on the banks of the Nile River or Suez Canal in short order "if only" is absurd. And here's where I risk being accused of "ethnic slurring" and "cultural stereotyping," but what I'm about to say is factual, well-documented, and not meant to be offensive in any way. During the 1930s and 40s the military services in Italy were not held in the same high regard as they were in, say, the UK and Germany, and therefore they failed to attract Italy's "bestest and brightest." As a typical conscript army, the Regio Esercito was largely made up of men from the lower classes; men who lacked the means of "genteel evasion" - or the skills and talents necessary to meet the requirements of military exemption. In 1940 roughly half of Italy's population was represented by the peasantry, and it was from this traditionally victimized group that the Regio Esercito drew the mass of its manpower. When operating under effective leadership, or when given no other choice, the Italian peasant-soldier could fight like a lion, a fact to which Allied troops would later attest. Individually he was tough; inured to hardship and able to live on little - as he usually had to. But there's also no denying the fact that in practically every theater of World War II where Mussolini sought military glory - not just North Africa - the Italian soldier was hopelessly outclassed. He was ill-trained, ill-equipped, and for the most part poorly led. In general he was unfamiliar with and thus uncomfortable around machines, and he rarely shared Mussolini's vision of a resurrected Roman Empire. His officers, usually World War I veterans recalled to active duty, were little better. They were "old-timers" stuck in a trench warfare mentality which held that mass trumped firepower. In short, the Italian Army of the 1930s to 1940 was a poor candidate for mechanization, even had the organizational, logistical, technical and industrial support actually existed. High-ranking Italian officers could sit around all day waxing eloquent about "eight million bayonets" and innovations such as the "war of rapid decision," but giving lip-service to such ideas was a far cry from actually seeing them implemented. And this brings me back to Graziani. Although I maintain that he wasn't a cerebral chap, even he must have realized that he lacked the means of fighting a "war of rapid decision." Such a doctrine necessitated the use of speed, maneuver, surprise, dependable communications, and initiative at all levels to succeed, and Graziani's officers and men simply weren't trained (or equipped) to fight that way. One could argue that he would've better spent the time he dithered at the border following Mussolini's declaration of war training his troops in mechanized tactics, but doing so obviously wasn't one of his priorities. Graziani was indecisive and, contrary to another one of Christie's claims, his previous experiences fighting against Ethiopian and Senussi tribesmen did not automatically make him the best choice for fighting the British. He was out of his league in the Western Desert. So... was Graziani responsible for the 10th Army's demise? Yes... "partly." In the final analysis the buck has to stop with Il Duce - who's declaration of war against the British constituted little more than another shameless act of opportunism, and was motivated primarily by his jealousy of Hitler's successes - and his cronies at the Comando Supremo who knew damn well that Italy was totally unprepared for war. Okay. I'm done. I apologize for my wordiness but I've found that simple "yes" or "no" answers to complex questions are rarely sufficient. That and I get carried away with enthusiasm when discussing military history. Anyway, keep up the good work TIK! I'm looking forward to watching more of your informative and enjoyable videos. PS: O'Connor was THE MAN!!!
My father who once guarded 500 Italian prisoners on his own said that the Italians weren't cowards they just really disliked Mussolini and had no intention of dying for him.
That doesn‘t surprise me at all. Mussolini‘s regime got progressively less popular over time. He was never that popular to begin with, but his policies actually worked against a lot of the people that supported him initially, like shopkeepers and independent farmers. Overall nutrition worsened noticeably under his rule. Fear may be able to replace loyalty to some degree, but that stops when you‘re being asked to face the bayonets of a determined enemy. The Italian troops in this campaign are arguably behaving exactly like an army that wants to be doing anything other than dying for Il Duce‘s new empire. At the end of the day they were doing the smart thing.
Most of the Italian POW's were shipped out to Australia and at the end of the war thousands refused to go home. They were taken out to sea, processed as immigrants and dropped back on shore in Australia a day or two later. Most then sent money to Italy to bring family out to join them. Some discovered that their family had died in the war. A few that did go home to Europe made sure they had return tickets and also returned with family.
Wesley Bruce that's what l heard from guys l knew from Australia Who's fathers were Italian POWs they wanted to stay So the Australian government decide put them on ships had them go to sea per international rules of war Process them onboard then return as new immigrants Many join the Australian armed forces as an thank you They also sent or got money to bring their families to Australia
Yep. And we did it with the convicts too; within ten years of the Sydney convict settlement being established the governor was allowing them to bring out the convicts families. Including in one case the children of one convict convicted of killing his wife on the oldest child's testimony. There are thousands descended from that man and his kids.
From what i know (also both of my great grandpas), they were all shipped to India and treated very badly by the British, 1 of the grandpas returned with PTSD/mental problems, an obsession that Mussolini was gonna come out of hiding (while he was dead) and a deep hatred towards the British which lasted until his death in the 70s.
In 2012 I stayed at a nice B&B in Cambridge (England) - both the lady owner and her husband were the offspring of Italian POW's taken by the British in this campaign. Many Italiens settled in England and Britain to happily live out their lives, so hate and resentment against the British must have been scarce, at least amongst those who were brought to Britain.
Nice job man. Ive tried finding a breakdown of the early stage of the italian invasion many times over the years but the documentaries I find always simplifies it too much. "the Italians invaded and they failed because they suck" and it immediately jumps to the Desert fox, Turbruk, El Alamain. Theres a few battles of WW2 this happens to in documentaries. Ethiopia, Greece, Create usually gets summed up to "they were defeated but fought hard" but doesn't tell the troop movement during the battle. Especially battles in China against Japanese, those battles never get the breakdown that Kursk or the battle of the bulge gets. Not too long ago everyone talked about Stalingrad but hardly mentioned Kursk but eventually the tank battle of Kursk got more and more attention in documentaries over the years.
I recommend "Beda Fomm: the Classic Victory" (Ballantine's Illustrated History of the Violent Century Battle Book No. 22) It was published in 1971, so there may be a newer work with more information; but this book is very good.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- But then again, that's just speculations. There are more popular what-if's in the underground history, such as Marshal Davout's potential in 1815
General O'Connor was indeed a genius, as he deftly used psychological warfare and classic guerrilla tactics at the outset of his campaign to defeat the Italians even before their campaign had begun. It was quite an impressive feat to use small detachments of his army to launch raids against forward Italian outposts, forts, and supply depots, but one could argue he was inspired by the same effective tactics used by the legendary "Lion of West Africa" Marshal Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, though at a much larger scale than Germany's most successful World War I commander could ever have hoped for. And I think that does speak to O'Connor's brilliance, as he applied lessons from other conflicts or from his own experiences, mixed with a great skill at improvisation, to defeat Graziani and his Italian army.
According to my father, who fought in the 6th AIF Division, many of the Australian units had men who had served in the last years of the WW1, together with many country men who were not only from the bush but had much experience using firearms for hunting. The WW1 veterans put their age back in order to serve. Their experience was passed on as part of infantry training and initial battle acme in the first battles. In the first battle, the Australians went in with full marching order. This was quickly corrected for troops to attack in battle order only. Later the older troops were removed from front line units to units guarding supply dumps, workshops, troop assembly areas and training reinforcements. Many of the older Australian NCOs later trained the Jewish Brigade. . Colloquially known as the "old and bold" they were well respected for their fidelity to their duties in protecting rear areas from infiltration by the enemy and thieving by local native tribesmen.
I like how you use maps, graphics and do the break downs of the units involved. When the units are broken down it is particularly interesting to hear about the Italians. You don't hear much from the Italian side. I would love to hear like a story Band of Brothers but for the Italians where you follow 1 company of soldiers and how they went. I am sure there will be no Bastogne battles but it would explain how they joined up, their training, there thought on everything and what it is like to be on the receiving end of the allies attacks ie battleship bombardments coming across Matildas etc etc.
In this case I would recommend some Italian movies - 'El Alamein - The Line of Fire' (2002) is a good insight into the last months before the Axis defeat in 1942. Then there's 'Folgore Division' (1954) which meet most our your requirements. Its an old one and in Italian (on UA-cam) but it covers the experiences of the Folgore parachute division from the start. 'Italiani - Brava Gente' (1965) covers the Italian troops in Russia - another very good one. Here are some links if you wish: El Alamein (trailer) - ua-cam.com/video/qzmTQNiWF4k/v-deo.html Folgore - ua-cam.com/video/TCB4Zn408o4/v-deo.html
You have, as usual, done a brilliant job of putting together a video that lays out a rather complicated piece of history. When it comes to historical analysis of battles, strategy and the thinking that went into the decisions that were made and why they were made, you have few equals. Thanks for another very well done study of a campaign.
Really good! Although the commentary wasn't the best, it will continue to get better as time goes on. Huge amount of information, great statistics and awesome maps. Looking forward to some more of these.
TIK has gone from good to excellent in these documentary videos imo. I know there's lots of battles he has not yet covered, but it would be nice to see some of the older stuff, like this one, re done at the higher level of quality which he now demonstrates. This would include place and name pronunciations, photos of the commanders, if possible, some of the equipment certainly. Presuming that the text and graphics are the most time consuming portion to produce, those would be fine with minimal editing, but it would be cool if a re-do looked somewhat like his newer presentations such as his Operation Crusader Marathon which was Top TIK, something I will most likely be watching again at a future date.
Thank you for making this radical video! A map in the background so we can see the battles strategies and tactics unfold! About time. What a great way to follow the events. Maybe some one will copy this tactic? You have done an excellent job presenting this event.Thanks for a very entertaining video.
For this campaign I suggest you read 'The Crucible of War, Western Desert 1941' by Barrie Pitt. It was published by Jonathan Cape in 1980. The Operation Compass is covered in quite some detail and is accompanied by soldiers first hand accounts. Well worth the read!
Yes, I can't remember exactly, but I think I got that book after making this video. I do now have Pitt's series and it's the best series on the North African Campaign, although doesn't include a bibliography (major major issue).
Tik, my copy is the 1980 edition (shows you how old I am!), a first edition I believ?. In it, it does have a bibliography but named as 'notes'. For such a formidable work it does seem that the 'notes' are rather small! Or it may be that he was/is (?) a terrific researcher?
You're the best historian on youtube! Some quality of life issues from my side: the background music can be distracting and don't sweat about the names, however you pronounce them is fine.
my dad was there he was a corporal in the kings royal rifles he used to tell us of all the thousands of Italian pows , they took ,i have got a fascist wall insignia he[ liberated ] from the officers mess at Fort Capuzzo when it was captured by the British army
And Rommel about Italian tanks at El Alamein: "South and southeast of the HQ, huge clouds of dust were to be seen. Here the desperate battle was being played out between the small and the inadequate Italianj tank of XX Corps and about 100 British heavy tanks, which had overtaken the Italians on their open right flanks. As Major von Luck later reported to me, the Italians, who at the time represented our strongest mobile force, fought with unsurpassed courage. Tank after tank blew apart or burnt out, while continuous British heavy artillery pounded Italian infantry and artillery positions. Around 15.30hrs, the last radio message came from Ariete: “Enemy tanks penetrated south of Ariete, with Ariete now surrounded. Located about 5km northwest of Bir el Abd. Ariete tanks fighting on.” By evening the Italian XX Corps was annihilated after fighting against armour with outstanding courage. In the Ariete, we had lost our oldest Italian comrades, of whom we had probably demanded more than their poor equipment allowed them."
Damn Brilliant! One of the most enjoyable (if you can say that about war) and informative documentary I've watched. I can't wait for the next one thank you and Happy New Year.
Hey Lewis, great video! To be honest, I was already waiting on the next video since the end of market garden one. I love the presentation and maps + movement thing. This way you get a really good idea of what was going on, where the forces are and what happened! I really hope you will do lot's more of these, I'm sure you'll get even better at it. Maybe someday you can even do the whole of Barbarossa! ;) Keep up the good work man!
+Gripen85 thanks for the feedback Gripen! I'm working on the next now, but Barbarossa is the ultimate goal (once I've gotten better at this). I'm hoping to improve the graphics a hell of a lot for next time :)
Rodolfo Graziani wrote a book about those events: "Africa settentrionale 1940-1941". I did not read it but I think a definitive story of those events cannot be written without listening to one of the main characters.
Hi TIK, new to your channel, and actually really like your presentation and like a tactical overview of how the conflicts unfolded. I was wondering how much of the war have you covered to current? I'd love to see some coverage of Op.Overlord and some of the Normandy campaign. Keep up the good work! Enjoying the N.Africa part at the minute.
Excellent presentation, well researched. Thank you for your effort. It has been difficult to find much on the early days of the North Africa campaign.'If I had to take Hell, I would use the Australians to take it, and the New Zealanders to hold it.' - ' If I'd had one division of Maori, (New Zealanders) I would have taken the canal in a week.- Erwin Rommel. In a letter to his wife Lucia during the siege of Tobruk he said ' I wish we had 9th Australian Division with us this morning".
@@projectgamling7962 Like they didn't "want to die" in the war of 1866 to get Venezia? Or they "didn't want to die" in the attempt to take Abyssinia in 1894? They certainly died by the hundreds of thousands on the Isonzo Front between 1915 and 1918 against Austria-Hungary, gaining just a few tens of miles over three years despite outnumbering the Austro-Hungarians by 3 to 1? For that matter, just see the Italian performances in Somalia in '92 and Kosovo in '99 to see that not much has changed...
@@@KnightofAges, I think the Italians learned their lessons from the debacles and massacres of WW I. War is Satan's game played by Satan's acolytes. Politics is violence no matter the make, model or flavor; political government is the bane of humanity; it is not Christian and yet people persist in voting. Go figure. The hate mongering, economics dishonest, commie/socialist politicians, mostly Democrats, demonstrate neither love of God nor love of their neighbors (Matthew 22:37-40). Politicians are sociopaths and in some cases they are psychopaths. Politics is a false god. When people worship false-god-politics, they get disasters of wars, recessions, inflation (theft) and taxation (theft), i.e. they get mass murders, economic ruin, theft of wages, debt slavery, welfare “statism” based on looting A to satisfy B and extortion. Revelation teaches us that the troika of evil, that wicked consort of politics, commerce and “false religion,” will be destroyed. We would be wise to terminate/abandon political government. Read Lysander Spooner's No Treason No. 6, The Constitution of No Authority. And then check out The No State Project by Marc Stevens on UA-cam where he asks the question, What factual evidence do you, judge, prosecutor, politician, IRS agent or anyone, have that the manmade, Satan corrupted constitution and law apply to me just because I am physically present in some state such as the commie/socialist, Democrat dictatorship corruptifornia? It doesn't exist and never has else we would be stinkin' slaves on the plantation state run by masters/politicians and their overseers/judges/enforcers in the "land of the free and home of the brave." Why weren’t the Spooner and Stevens points taught in government schools? Does anyone not see the conflict of interest? Does anyone not see the prejudice? How can educators “bite the hand that feeds them?” How diabolically ironic is it that teachers cannot teach the truth about the utter wickedness of political government? BTW, factual evidence would come in the form of a sworn affidavit of truth stating what, when, where, why, how and by whom one was made subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It was never brought up in any school I attended. I have never heard any MSM commentator produce the aforementioned “factual evidence.” I have asked 6 judges in their courtrooms the Marc Stevens/Lysander Spooner Question and on record to provide the aforementioned factual evidence and not one of those 6 “judges” produced that factual evidence thus failing to provide proof of jurisdiction and subsequently effected fraud upon me. I recommend Ted R. Weiland’s books: Bible Law vs. The United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective www.missiontoisrael.org/blvc-index.php Law & Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant www.missiontoisrael.org/law-kingdom.php If Christian Americans ever expect God to fulfill his half of 2 Chronicles 7:14, they must first repent of their national idolatry their love affair with the humanistic, pluralistic, polytheistic, and antichristian United States Constitution. I also recommend the Jehovah Witness website publications: wol.jw.org/en/wol/lv/r1/lp-e/0/5487 The hate speaking, commie/socialist, sociopathic, Democrat politicians, SJWs, snowflakes and MSM are clearly unethical, immoral. They play the emotions game but most people know that the first casualties of emotion are reason/logic and morality. Take a look at how Milton Friedman explains to Phil Donahue the fallacy of commie/socialism. This video should be viewed by all and then asked why they are voting for any politician that is commie/socialist. www.glennbeck.com/2014/01/14/the-blunt-truth-about-greed-and-freedom-was-delivered-over-30-years-ago/?Daily& ua-cam.com/video/E1lWk4TCe4U/v-deo.html “Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.” - Milton Friedman But since God gave us free will, freedom to choose, then those who argue against free markets are really deniers of Jehovah God, i.e. they are Satan’s acolytes! Friedman was a monetarist, i.e. he believed in inflation and thus refuted his own observation. Inflation is theft orchestrated by politicians with the willing assistance of the central bankers et.al. Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone, long time passing? Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone, long time ago? Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone? Voters trashed (Young girls have picked) them everyone. Oh, when will they ever learn? Oh, when will they ever learn? (remember the song?) The time has come,' the Walrus said, To talk of many things: Of shoes - and ships - and sealing-wax - Of cabbages - and kings - And why the sea is boiling hot - And whether pigs have wings.' (remember The Walrus and The Carpenter?) As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -- There are only four things certain since Social Progress began -- That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire, And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wobbling back to the Fire -- And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return! - Kipling, The Gods of The Copybook Headings And I am two and twenty and Oh ‘tis true, ‘tis true.(remember the poem?) "The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods." ~ H.L. Mencken Franz Oppenheimer identified the two basic means by which people can acquire wealth in the world: [1] the “economic means,” and [2] the “political means.” The “economic means” consists of relationships in which individuals voluntarily engage in transactions for the exchange of goods and services. The “political means” involve the forced taking of wealth belonging to one person and bestowing it upon another. And lo' those many years ago the colonists thought they had won their freedoms and preserved them for the future generations. Little did they know. Or did they know they were condemning us to live as slaves on the plantation state? "America does not need to see the tax returns of a billionaire who became a public servant. America needs to see the tax returns of public servants who became millionaires while being public servants” -- Jaeson Lubell So, one of the root causes of the decline in Amerika is the Federal Reserve Bank and its fiat currency/credits. And in the September 1895 American Federationist, Stephen T. Byington assailed the money monopoly: "No legal tender law is ever needed to make men take good money; its only use is to make them take bad money. Kick it out!"
@carmine paola LIke I noted, the Italian poor did die by the hundreds of thousands at the Isonzo Front. And they fought well in North Africa during WW2... AFTER Rommel took (even if not officially) the command of all operations. My point is, Italian troops are not 'afraid to die'. What Italy itself can't do is carry out an effective military campaign. In no small part due to the massive incompetence of its commanders, who cannot plan, equip or adapt to any kind of modern warfare - in 1866 the only major battle (small skirmishes don't count) that Italy won was at Bezzecca, because there Garibaldi was in command, and HE was an actual leader, unlike the rest of the Italian generals.
@carmine paola The Lybian war is an excellent example on a badly conducted campaign: the Italian forces started to suffer defeats facing the locals already in 1911, and despite the serious lack of Ottoman support (the Ottoman officers that were sent there had to go to Libya paying with their own money; Constantinople didn't even want to pay for their trip), by late that year the Italian forces were confined to seven enclaves around the coast, unable to go inland. Italy only won that war because it controlled the sea, which prevented the Turks from sending of any meaningful support to the area and also because Turkey saw no benefit in spending money on a war about what was then seen as just a patch of sand, scorpions and flies. And by 1913 Italy still hadn't managed to get the locals under control. In Abyssinia in 1935 things were indeed better coordinated than in the campaign of 1894, with a two-pronged attack, and finally Italy (a major European power) managed to beat the Abyssinian forces (a small African power). But hey, the Abyssinians DID have 4 tanks and 13 planes! (against 795 tanks and 2.000 planes for Italy). Soo... Avanti Italia?
Photoshop! :D I download maps of the battles for reference then try and recreate them as accurately as possible... Then give them a gritty look using noise and lighting effects
@@TheImperatorKnight Being a German, your accent strucks me as quite interesting. I assume that you're a native English speaker and I'm just curious in what region of the English speaking world YOUR specific accent is used . 😁 Can you tell me?
Thanks for this. Very fair. Interesting to learn that the Italians didn't just lose their heads and flee. They actually mounted counter attacks. Well done!
O'Connor was obviously the British equivalent of Tomoyuki Yamashita, "The Tiger of Malaya." Both men had the same number of troops in their armies and faced vastly superior opponents. Yet, with brilliant maneuvering, swift decisive strikes, and the use of combined arms, they defeated their arguably inept opponents and made great gains in the Second World War that would determine future events as the war continued.
Another excellent documentary, Mr. Lewis! You never fail to disappoint. :)It's interesting to note how this played out nearly identical to the fall of France: The French, too, deployed their armor in penny packets and the German Army prized encirclement of the enemy as the perfect operational/strategic strategy.I'm also glad you mentioned the railroads/roads/supply. When you get to Rommel, if you read 'Supplying War' by Martin van Creveld, he looks at the logistics of Barbarossa and North Africa and they produce the same results.Look forward to your next video/documentary!
+Michael McCabe thanks for the recommendation! I've added that book to my Amazon wish list ;) Felt like I didn't mention the supply enough, although I did include some of the supply dumps in the video that the Brits used to resupply as they moved from Mersa Matruh. And yes, when I was reading up on this battle I was like "O'Connor is doing exactly what the Germans did in the summer!"
+TIK It is interesting to see how just about everybody came up with the same conclusions about tactics, but different countries implemented it differently. Centralized vs. decentralized command strikes again!
7:17 an infantry square in World War 2? I can't imagine what did that look like...any more information in that specific battle? also, the italians being "unprepared for war" keeps being mentioned. how the hell can a fascist, expansionist regime rule a country for two decades and be completely unprepared to fight in the wars they themselves picked? talk about incompetence...
It was a tank square The Italians were unprepared because the factories were slowly renewing the Italian army, for example the Carcano used in WW1 was replaced at the beginning of 1937 with an higher caliber (and more suitable for modern war) rifle, at the start of the war the army was nearly completely armed with the new gun but lacks in ammunition so the high command replaced the new gun with the older one, but this guns are now old and new ones have to be made and so the industry was extremely low on efficiency
The italians were thinking in a ww1 kind of war, fought in the alps, in europe. Therefore their tanks were light for manouvering in the mountains, also Mussolini had a big mouth and exagerated the capacity of the italian military and italian people to fight in world war
Mussolini constantly ignored his generals who told him that Italy was unprepared for certain battles and offenses but he kept ordering them to do them anyway, Italy also didn't have the industrial output of Britain or Germany and little natural resources. But even then, their doctrines and Mussolini didn't allow them to exploit what they had, which was numbers. As Tik said, the Italians could've taken Egypt if they reformed their forces into an armoured group instead of having piecemeal tanks here and there.
I wish I could comprehend "logistical problems". I mean, I understand that it means that they had trouble getting supplies to the front (or to the areas that needed supplies) but I just don't understand the actual problems that come up. Is it lack of trucks? Lack of organization? Too many different types of supplies that are needed? Or is it that they could not get the supplies they needed at all over to Africa because of navel blockades in the Mediterranean? In this case, after Operation E, why couldn't the Italians build up supply depots over time close to the battle lines? I'm not really expecting an answer -- just expressing frustration that I've had understanding military campaigns in general. Thank you for the videos. I do learn from them.
The thing to remember above all else is the magnitude of supplies necessary. For example in the stalingrad airlift the 6th army needed over 500 tons of supplies EVERY DAY between fuel, spare parts, food, ammo and a million little things. A ton is between 2000 and 2240 pounds depending on who you ask so that's 1 million pounds of supplies daily for an army that had some access to water unlike in North Africa. For comparison sake, a gas tanker truck only carries 56,700 pounds of gas, a far cry from a million. Plus liquids are compact and easier to transport than solids like bread which carry far less weight per truck. Other trucks would only carry around 5000 pounds. So imagine every single day 15 tankers carrying water/fuel and needing another 64 trucks to cover the ammo/food/misc daily requirements. But wait trucks cant drive far enough in a single day so you need to plan ahead and continuously send trucks everyday so they don't go without. This means at any moment you have 2 to 5 times as many trucks driving because of travel time. But you cant have so many trucks out without resting points, refueling stations, mechanics available, security for your supply lines, administration, traffic monitors and radio stations to relay changes to their destination. All necessitates more supplies, building supplies,more men etc. Trucks are logistical nightmares when you create operations with 100s of thousands of men or more. Trains and boats make the whole process almost impossible to wrap your head around. If you are still curious look up a video from The Great War UA-cam channel called "World war 1 in numbers" logistics are truly staggering after you appreciate them.
Well, the thing is: everything is in a snowball effect with explosives along the mountain. First of all, let's take logistics on sea. Logistics on sea you have 4 things: Infrastructure, suprastructure, length/speed of supply routes and goods to be transported. Infrastructure in this case means port facilities. Suprastructure: ships. And 3rd and 4th are a bit self explanatory. Now, let's dive into the Hell of practice. Let's assume you have 10 ships. Now here the fun begins In the infrastructure area: you need ports to load and unload the ships. But loading and unloading takes time. If you cannot serviced all 10 ships at the same time (so 10 piers in a dock), some ships will have to wait to be serviced. This branches into 2 ways: 1A. You send in each set of serviced ships and take care of another. Problem: you are highly likely to have no damn escort for some of the sets you send in, meaning they get sunk. 1B you have to pull ships back and let others be serviced Problem: lost time and ammount of supplies which can be transported. Suprastructure: certain ships might not be serviced by certain ports. So they need to go to other ports. Others might be faster, others slower. And the biggest problem: losing ships. You do not lose only the ship itself, which alone could take months to complete. You also lose its fuel and supplies. And not only you have to make those AGAIN, this also means that some tank or soldier in the field no longer has ammo or fuel. And because you lost a ship, this means that tank or soldier won't get any more supplies because your supply capacity has been limited: AGAIN. And we get to the 3rd point: supplies themselves. A ship does not carry fuel for troops. It also carries fuel for itself. So a part of what it transports, is consumed. When you get to land warfar THIS IS A MAJOR PROBLEM. 4th. Time and efficient use of it. Ok. Efficient use of time in logistics can be interpreted as being the time a good takes to be changed between one side to another. Aka loading (port changes to ship) and unloading (ship to port). Now, if we assume those things travel at light speed, you would have no wasted time. However, in real world, ships have to travel. While traveling, ships cannot change goods. Thus your ability to transport goods is INEXISTENT. The slower the supply route, the more time it takes for the supplies to reach the destination it is needed. Now, in land warfare, things change a bit. Why? Because, unlike ships which are tied to fixed ports, the end point of the supply chain is not set. So, basically, look again at what I mentioned above: you have roads, trucks carrying supplies for the troops that go on those roads and the supplies needed to be carried. So... here is how it goes. When a force move forwards, first of all it takes more time for its supplies to reach it. However: the means of transport alos need supplies. So. You need trucks to carry fuel for the tanks. Then you need trucks to carry fuel for the trucks carrying fuel for the tanks. And in the end you might need trucks to carry fuel for the trucks that carry fuel for the trucks that carry fuel for the tanks. And then you also need fuel for the truck carrying ammo. Food. Water etc. And fuel for those fuel trucks as well :) When it comes to different types of ammo: I think the right word would be triage. It takes much longer to load and unload and distribute the supplies because you have more types of supplies needed in different places in different quantities. Furthermore, if a shipment is delayed, it means certain units are going to be paralysed because they have nothing to use.
They will be coming later. I'm working on the battles in chronological order so I can fully understand and appreciate everything prior to getting to the later battles like El Alamein. If I skipped ahead, I don't think we could fully grasp how the campaign had progressed, nor how commanders like Montgomery stacked up to previous ones like O'Connor.
***** Ah i realized that later on. Its better that way yeah. if you need some books detailing the later period of the north african campaign ive read these two and they are great. Monty: The Battles of Field Marshall montgomery - Nigel Hamilton. Starts with Alam el Halfa and deals a lot with el alamein too and the pursuit west to Tripoli and Mareth. and Alamein: War Without Hate. This one deals up with the whole campaign too and Tunisia.
just like the previous one - interesting, fun to watch, and made with great detail. Thanks and keep up the good work! :) edit: Graziani on the photo you used seems to be really offended by your opinion on his decisions at the end :D
Congrats on this awesome series that you are doing. I have enjoyed watching both of the documentaries that you have done so far and I am definitely looking forward to the next one. If it is possible and if you are taking requests, could you cover some of the intense fighting that was taking place between the Allies and the Japanese especially around Burma and India. There aren't many documentaries on this part of the war especially on the parts where the Japanese were literally on British India's doorstep during the war. If not, maybe some lesser known conflicts that occur that help in some way with the more well known battles and campaigns. Not many people cover them and what you have done so far, I think you could really do some awesome videos. Keep up the good work and looking forward to more of this series. Cheers! (=0))
Hello Chewy :) thanks for your comment! Now, I'm not taking requests as such, but I do like getting suggestions since I have an idea of the sorts of operations everyone wants me to cover. My aim is to work my way through every major battle and operation in WW2 (yes, I'm setting that bar very high lol), so I'll definitely visit Burma and campaigns like that at some point as I know nothing about them either. Might be a few years off though... The difficulty for me is the research. It takes time and costs a lot of money to buy the numerous books about a subject I need for the research, so I've kinda come to the conclusion I should concentrate on one theater of battle at a time - e.g. the Western Desert Campaign. I've just got several new books on the WDC for Christmas, so I'll definitely be on this for a while. That and the fact it took me about four months to make the Market Garden video and 2.5 months to make this one... The good news is I'm getting faster lol
+TIK Thank you for responding to my message, I really appreciate it. I will be definitely looking forward to them when you release them. Keep up the good work. Cheers! (=0))
Hey TIK great commentary, understanding why this campaign was fought with regards sailing 3 months around Cape Hope. The fighting reminds me of France 1940, lack of mass armour & communication. Love that name the "Pimple" were everything came to a head. Must be British humour.
+Thomas IV it's just a shame that O'Connor couldn't continue on to Tripoli and take all of North Africa. If he'd done that, Rommel would have had a hard time landing in Libya. This is why I made a video about whether Churchill created the Desert Fox as he took the resources from Wavell and O'Connor at the last minute and robbed them of total victory. There's definitely some comparisons between France 1940. It's strange to see that a British general was using good tactics in 1940 as the impression you get from most places up until El Alamein is defeat after defeat. And I'm pretty sure the word "Pimple" isn't Italian or Libyan :D
He absolutely did. I think Churchill was a terrible military leader, probably almost at bad with military matters as Hitler; but Churchill had allies and resources that meant when he screwed things up, it was possible to recover.
He took forces away from North Africa to try and stop the German advance through Greece and some Mediterranean islands. If that had succeeded then the Second World War would have took a very different path.
I would love to know what Graziani's thinking was. I find it shocking that he failed to employ his own doctrine and wonder if there was any outside interference.
My guess is because of the previous british offensive, british tanks manages to beat italian tank forces at the border, made him more skeptical of italian ability to fight in a small motorized number With little support and cooperation between branches, overwhelm the british armor with their number seems to be only possible way And we know the british is preparing for a counter attack, had he attack with small motorized forces, maybe he wouldnt lost as much, but that would be the entire Italian armored forces at risk, he dont know if the british would come reinforce by the time his attack was commense, and later, when the tank force litterally failed in their first mission to effectively outflank the enemy, and got lost, this reinforced his idea that the troops were not prepared good enough
I'm no fan of Graziani, but Italian command was full of infighting and interference from El Duce. Like the Japanese, the Italian air force feuded with the army and navy for resources and control. El Duce threw them into this war with no real plans, just pipe dreams of ruling the Mediterranean. It also hurt that Germany took control of the Romanian oil fields for their own use, which were also Italy's main oil source. Oh and the corruption in Italy's industry which was very slow to produce poor items that were also overpriced. Crappy tanks, small air force, navy with no radar/no carriers/no fuel, and incompetent leaders that led Italy into disaster after disaster.
Amazing documentary! I never knew that the Italian defeat was so decisive. From what I understand the main reason this dissater to the Italians happened was that the lack of understanding what was going on in the battlefield and with that not having a proper front where units collaborated and used their numeral advantage.
+martaxsasLT that's true. I grouped it under "training", but that's exactly it. They seldom sent out scouts. They marched at the front in columns. They didn't group their tanks together. They formed awful tactical formations when engaged (e.g. that Napoleonic style anti-cavalry square). And they sat in isolated camps that didn't support each other, which is why the Battle of Sidi Barrani is also known as the Battle of the Camps.
Good show chap :) You have give me the urge to play hearts of iron again. I think doing these documentaries is fantastic, got anymore lined up or planned?
Most under rated general of the second world war in my opinion. If O'Connor hadn't been captured the war in North Africa would have ended in 1941. He would have been a much better commander than Montgomery.
no O'Connor was unfortunately he had been hamstrung by being attached to Monty who really was ass.Gott,O'Connor and Auchinleck all much more capable commanders. Monty was a lying braggart and had the good fortune of arriving as the tide was turning in the allies favor. Courtesy of the RAF,RN,Bletchley Park(ULTRA) and US tanks/artillery and 110,000 troop Torch landings - none of which Montgomery provided
having only recently viewed this video i will add my comments. To answer the question posed at the end it is both. The Italian force was not prepared for modern war, and secondly Grazani failed to re-organize his force into this own vision of modern armor warfare. There was no excuse as the italians and the world witnessed how the germans defeated the numberically and in some instances technically superior french and british forces in the campaign for france in 1940. The bravery of the individual Italian combatant was no less than their opponents just poorly led at all levels.
If you ever edit your older uploads please add The Crucible of War by Barrie Pitt to the bibliography for Compass. Also maybe Sidi BarrANI ! If you would like a fun story about the taking of Nibilieh and the Tummars let me have an email ddress
It's right that Graziani is to blame for the initial blunder. However, he only got into that situation because of Mussolini. He didn't want to launch the attack, because in a desert supplies is key. He may have had the numbers but he didn't have the logistics... Also, once compass really started to get bad, time and time again Graziani wanted to pull back towards organized defensive lines and the conduct defense in depth warfare. However Mussolini forced him to neglect all the advantages he had by attacking on the spot...
My father was a regular in 7th RTR. He fought during Compass and was killed during Battleaxe. I can not agree, based on my study of the period, that the Italian tanks had any chance against Matilda II's but at Battleaxe the Mk IV's AND 88cm's of the Germans outranged them plus of course the ineptitude of the British Generals (except Wavell ).
The Italians were ill prepared for the Australian volunteers who were tough and could think for themselves rather than waiting for orders when the mayhem of war struck.
@@SD-qw4xx Just face the fact: The Romans were no match for white supremacy. The Anzacs were out numbered and out gunned and we were also inexperienced. Rommel may have swept through Europe but he was stopped dead in his tracks and suffered his first loss at the hands of Volunteer Australians. We done the Germans and we done the Romans. We took prisoners at a ratio of 40-1. FYI, the first loss the Japanese suffered was also at the hands of Australia's volunteers.
4:10 minor linguistic note, the singular determinative masculine article in Italy is "Il" not "el". Il Duce. Stupid computer fonts suggest that I write it in capital letters, "IL" rather than "EL". EL is Spanish (and also Arab and Israelian, although in Arab it is usually written AL, sometimes EL as in El Alamein).
@12:45 you are wrong that neither side did anything. The Italians were busy improving the coastal track into a proper road by laying asphalt in order to improve their supply logistics. But then @ 15:43 you finally mention the road construction. @22:00-23:0 the fact was that O'Conner's Forces had captured so many supplies from the Italians that it allowed him to continue the advance and not so much as the Italians just thinking the Brit's had the same supply problems. This is replicated in so many historical wargames and you just glance over it. This was the same sort of impetus after the fall of France that helped the Germans during the initial phases of Barbarossa (with tanks, fuel, ammunition and trucks) and also the capture of Tobruk by Rommel that allowed him to advance into Egypt. This same formula is being exercised in Ukraine today with captured artillery munitions being utilized in the same way to keep the defense intact. From 25:50 onward, the Brit's were actively building the railroad westward from Mesa Matruh to towards Haifa Pass, same as the Italians had been trying to extend the Via Balbia to Mesa Matruh. @ 30:00 You fail to mention the importance of El Adem, it was a major Airfield! Abd its capture would allow close-in air support and deny the enemy of the same. @31:58/33:57 Place Holder. @ 32:22 You fail to mention how many stores & supplies the Brit's captured at Tobruk. This fed the appetite to continue the advancement despite the incomplete narrow gauge rail line from Mesa Matruh and also the bad road conditions. I think the Italian failures were due both to lack luster command and also a recalcitrance of soldiers to go to war with a former Allie from WW1 just 22 years earlier.
Blimey, O'Connor, what a dude! You just have to look at his face to tell you he was the real deal, sad and serious, not a big ego. How does he relate to the O'Conner in Operation Market Garden? He was blamed for not pushing his tanks forward after the American took so many casualties to take that bridge. (Terrible memory for names. Everyones already watched that video right?) Maybe he did have good tactical reasons for this. I get the impression though, that while he clearly knew how to take the initiative, it would be totally out of character to buck the chain of command.
+Thumper He is a dude! And O'Connor wasn't the guy in charge of XXX Corps (the tanks advancing up Hell's Highway), he was in charge of VII Corps which was on the flank of XXX Corps. I didn't directly mention him in my Market Garden documentary as VII Corps only affected one small part of the Market Garden story towards the end. There's actually a (cheap!) book that looks purely at Richard O'Connor's performance in Normandy and asks why it doesn't compare to his success in North Africa. I won't say too much (because it's an interesting read) but basically O'Connor isn't to blame. www.amazon.co.uk/General-OConnors-Northwest-Effective-Expected-ebook/dp/B00NXZHGA6/
I think it's unfair to blame Graziani for the destruction of the 10th Army. As previously stated, the Italian military in general simply wasn't ready. Combined arms strike forces require a huge amount of thought and training. Training takes time. Graziani was under pressure from Rome to do something immediately. Graziani was in a no-win situation: any action he took was likely to destroy his badlt trained and motivated force. The fact that 10th Army held as long as it did is all Graziani. Had he resigned or been replaced, the 10th would likely have collapsed far faster.
It would be nice if you talk about Operation Brevity, Battleaxe, Crusader, The Battle of Gazala which are impressive battles and none talks about them. Thanks for your documentaries.
No worries! The next documentary video will be on Fort Eben Emael, but Brevity will be the one after (since I've just done Rommel's arrival). I'm thinking going forwards I'll keep alternating from the Western Desert Campaign and something else. Part of my reasoning for starting a series on the Western Desert Campaign was precisely for that reason - nobody talks about these battles. Everyone and their mother has written a book about El Alamein, but I struggled to find a dozen books written on Compass. And to put it bluntly, it's wrong. Just because something's popular doesn't make anything else less interesting. As I said at the end of my latest one, I actually can't wait to come back to the Western Desert Campaign. Honestly, I've never been that interested about the WDC. Again, this was partly why I wanted to do it. But now after two docs I'm really REALLY interested in it :)
My Grandad was in the 6th div AIF fighting from Bradia to Breda Fome.... as a private he was MID(mentioned in dispatches) during this period... th0e British go on to make the mistake of withdrawing the 6th AIF and 2nd NZ div that went to Greece and Crete, just as the DAK make their first drive eastward. His opinion of the Italians was that in the main they were unprepared poorly lead and unwilling to throw their lives away unnecessarily. To clear a common question, AIF is the abbreviation for Australian Imperial Force...the 1st AIF (1st to 5th div and consequently the 1st to 15th brigades
As stated the 1ST AIF fought the Great War and the Second AIF 6th to 9th divs 16th brgd on, fought the Second World War this is the same for the NZ divs with the 1st div in The Great War and the 2nd and 3rd fighting WWII.
"Much of Rommel's 'fingertip feel' for the battlefield was due to his excellent signals intelligence. Signals Intercept Company 621, which listened into British radio transmissions, provided him with unparalleled tactical insights, and was actually responsible for many of his most striking successes." BBC Rommel in the Desert By Dr Niall Barr page
Moorehead, A. The Desert War: The Classic Trilogy on the North Africa Campaign 1940-43. Aurum : Twenty years later there was a condensed volume simply called The Desert War. Now in the later book he gave true tank losses for one of the early battles against the Germans; 200 tanks. In the earlier trilogy it was put at 50 tanks.
Whilst reading N. S. Nash's book 'Strafer Gott Desert General.' Which recommends your video on Operation Compass, I came across something interesting. Both Nash and yourself mentions Royal Navy ships which were used to bombard Bardia; Nash says that the ships were HMS Aphis, HMS Ladybird, according to The Sixth edition of 'All the Worlds Fighting Navies by E. C. Talbot-Booth RNVR, these two ships were 'River Gunboats' armed with 2 6-inch guns and one 3inch A.A. The Ladybird was lost later in the war. According to 'Fighting Navies' there is no mention of monitors being used during WW2 nor did the RN have a ship called HMS Terror.
"Whilst reading N. S. Nash's book 'Strafer Gott Desert General.' Which recommends your video on Operation Compass." Nash's book recommends this video? Or do you mean that I recommend his book in my video?
You did in your video, say that a monitor with two 16inch and two 6inch guns. The Fighting Navies of the World, is part of a series of books including Army, Air Force and Indian Army. I have all the series
HMS Terror existed...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Terror_(I03). The UK used the 2 Erebus Class Monitors (of which Terror was one, and she was later lost) and the 2 Roberts Class (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberts-class_monitor). All 4 were armed with 15 inch guns
I make up toy soldier sets to give away to less well off kiddies and I'm working on one for 4th Indian Div vs Italian forces in East Africa at the moment (just making all the buildings for it). To this end a friend has loaned me the official history of the 4th Indian Div (his dad was in charge of a British Bofors AA unit attached to the division throughout the war). Only just started (it is a big book) but I did take a peek at the most relevant section - The Italians were not a push over, they fought hard but they were poorly lead and when the morale collapsed so did the fighting. I don't have the book to hand but I think you would find it of interest.
Very interesting vid ,my uncle Jim was in N-Africa on 25pdrs and fought at El alamain ,another veteran I met back along he was engineers and said very often when clearing mines the Germans stuck 2 land mines together ...very nasty.
Italian unpreparedness was monumental. At more or less the same time, they hadn't managed to advanced into France and lost to the Greeks, although in all cases they had fielded more men than their opponents.
My uncle was fighting the Italians in the Chasseurs Alpin in the alps. They had stopped the Italians and were working to drive them back when France surrendered.
Considering all the different names out there I would think so, yes... I fully expect him to butcher the names in Norway when he gets around to that. ;-)
Not just the foreign names, he can't pronounce the English names either like Combe and Mackay (Koom and Mak-eye). Such a shame because I love these videos.
I find it jarring that although his graphic clearly shows 'Sidi Barrani' on the map he keeps saying 'Sidi Barrini'. Apart from the clunky pronunciations though I think these presentations are excellent.
hey TIK, I enjoy your vids, and I could help you with pronounciation of words (and hopefully even names) in: - Dutch - French - German - Hungarian - Italian - Polish - Russian - Spanish no kidding : )
Now that I remember, you asked people to criticize this. So firstly the thing that was mostly annoying was that you didn't try to say the city names. I know they are bloody hard to say, but even if you just say the name you will seem more professional. The second thing that made the documentary a bit hard to watch was that there were a lot of maps that ended and rest of the screen was left black (this might just be my personal opinion). Other than those things maybe just bring in a bit more colors (I know, this was a desert map and you had better colors before) or get some small video clips in with the great new pictures. Well that's all. I liked the documentary, except that it didn't have my great Italian victory that took Egypt with the force of thunder!!! (Hearts of Iron
Thank you very much for the feedback. Constructive criticism is great! I'll do my best to pronounce the names. Sometimes it's difficult, since some of the place names aren't in existence now, or I couldn't find the correct pronunciation online. If I can't find them, I may have to guess. The reason for the black screen where the maps ended was because of the animation software I was using. I'm going to (attempt to) use different software for the next one which will hopefully make everything look better anyway. I'm not sure I can add colour since it is a desert war, but I'll see what I can do. And I can't change history and make the Italians win :P
When the Germans took command of N. Africa they retrained the Italian soldiers, upgraded their equipment, and gave them better leadership. After which it was noted the Italians performed much much better.
Yup they weren't useless like the myth likes to make people believe, the British even underestimated some of the Italian forces later in the North African campaign.
@@oreroundpvp896 Can they really be blamed? The Italians were so pathetic in the beginning that if Mussolini was witnessing it he couldve turned the Sahara into an jungle with his tears
I'm consistently amazed by the number of prisoners taken in North Africa, especially considering the difficulty in providing food and water enough for friendly troops. I get the simple reality that escape and evasion was next to impossible, and that there was a sense that life would go on following surrender, but how were these prisoners dealt with. What are the key details of their fate. Were there ever any exchanges? Where they kept in place or moved? Moved by land or sea and to where?
I am not sure if you are interest in book recommendations, but I highly recommend checking out the book, "An Army at Dawn: The War in North Africa, 1942 -1943 (Volume 1 of the Liberation Trilogy)" by Rick Atkinson. I just started reading this book again for the fourth time and it covers a lot of different angles to the war in North Africa especially the western half of it. For example, the allies (Americans/British) were fighting the French first before they were fighting the Italians/Germans. Or how the allied landings almost became a disaster. I mean if you are looking for a good book to read or some more material to help fresh out your series especially the western portion of the North African campaign, I definitely recommend it. Keep up the good work. Cheers! (=0))
I've got it on my wishlist and I will buy that book when I get to 1942/43. I've only just reached 1941 and have the whole of the Western Desert Campaign to get through before the US landings in Vichy France territory. I wish that book covered the whole of the "War in North Africa" like it claims because as I keep saying on my Twitter, there aren't many that do :(
You might like to read Vladimir Peniakoff's book "Popski's Private Army." It describes his operations behind the Italian lines in Cyrenaica. Gathering intelligence and working with the locals who hated the Italians and spied within their the Italian's own camps for the British. It sounds as though Sicilian occupation of the coast where they took the best farms from the locals was the the main reason for the local's dislike of the Italians. It appears that Popski impressed upon the locals that the British would free them from the Italians (he even convinced them not to fight, though they wanted to so as not to undermine his intelligence gathering operation). The Italians intelligence was very poor and they clearly assumed they owned the land they were on, while the Allies reconnaissance of the desert was far more comprehensive. Allowing them to find routes that were not available to the Italians. The LRDG, SAS and numerous other allies parties explored the desert in great detail. But I think the local support was probably more important than people would have thought. I'm only half way through the book at present.
You're right about that. O'Connor seems to have grasped that early on. I'm hopefully going to be able to include more of the logistical side of things in my upcoming Operation Crusader video. And Rommel's logistics are clearly stretched right from the beginning.
This channel is criminally undersubscribed.
I totally agree with you.
You both, then, should file a complaint with the federales.
Its crazy how you look back and watch these videos and then watch his videos from today. Tik has changed so much we love you!
My father was a Desert Rat with the Royal Artillery and told me that Bardia's Mayor surrendered the port to a single Bren carrier containing two officers, my dad and the driver. The Officers both got the Military Medal where as my dad, a Lance Corporal, and the driver just got Mentioned in Dispatches. They were scouting ahead of the main force, going along the coastal cliff road, came around a bend to find the towns Mayor, dignitaries and civilians standing in the road waving white flags with the still dust rising from the other end of town as the Italian army retreated. This never gets mentioned yet I have seen the letter regarding him being Mentioned in Dispatches and you would think Pathe News would have loved that story.
Yes... Good story. Thanks. Yes.. the officers get the medals and the enlisted men ,Who shared the same danger... get little if anything.
@@od1452 Well the officers had risks on the downsides too - many would be executed for the actions of small numbers of subordinates. But your main point is true - people need to be recognised or their actions.
@@billburr5881 I liked how you said this.
You are somehow mistaken. As officers, they would have got the Military Cross. The M.M. was for non-officers.
Awesome story
A brilliant presentation of the Compass operation. This oft ignored campaign is an interesting study in how to do and how not to do desert warfare in that era. Most treatments of North Africa start with the arrival of Rommel in March or even later, with the arrival of Montgomery. But none of that would have happened, had not O'Conner and company defeated the Italians in 1940-1941. Much of what Rommel did in 1941-1943 used the same tactics of speed and momentum that O'Conner used to defeat the much larger Italian army. TIK also puts to rest the much repeated (and erroneous) idea that the Italians lost because they were cowardly or ill prepared. The Western Desert Force did not win because they had superior equipment, but much like the Germans did in France, they won because that had a superior tactical doctrine. This a far and away the best video presentation of this extremely important campaign. Thank you.
Supplies were the thing so O'Connor only used one armoured and one infantry ( in trucks ) so he had less mouths to feed. I think that Rommel must have done the same.
@@kaveebee Errm, not really. O'Connor did not have more forces available to him. And he too had logistical problems. On the other hand, Italy was the one nuked by supplies and lack of a concentration of forces.
@@nottoday3817 I'd check that if I was you
@@kaveebee He did check that, and he is correct.
@@TimeTraveller010 Read Alan Moorehead's book
Great joke: A: "Herr General, the Italians have entered the war!" B: "Thats not good, send a Division to defeat them" A: "But they are on our side." B: "Thats worse, send an army to support them!"
Some people don't like the look of the WW2 era French flag but I think it's all white
French units held off the Germans long enough at Dünnkirchen, so even more could be evacuated. Be a bit thankful.
The BEF did not look much better than the French during Fall Gelb. Crosscommunication was really bad, and the doctrines were just unable to cope with the rapid German advance.
There are reports where British officers were captured during their breakfast!
Petra Meyer yes and the Royal Navy evacuated an army's worth of French soldiers. And the BEF was under French control, and the entire strategic error and the entire fault should be placed in the French, first of their lack of logic. You don't build a war with a huge gap beside it. Secondly, you try and support your allies operations, like at Arras. Thirdly, actually try and fight when the Germans came out of the Ardennes. You folded so quickly!
It was just a joke man, chill.
You joke but this was the French flag 200 years ago:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbon_Restoration#/media/File:Flag_of_the_Kingdom_of_France_(1814-1830).svg
They formed a square!?!? poor bastards
+Sam H yes, I couldn't believe it when I read that either
They would lose every Total War game with that tactic
I'd like to take a moment to appreciate that Wavell was willing to have a junior officer come to him and say, "Here's the plan," and Wavell said, "Sounds good. Carry on." Sure, Wavell made errors later, but I think it's still significant he went along with it.
The Desert Rats thought a lot of Wavell but my father also said that Montgomery was not generally liked by the men.
41:53 : General Tellera died the following day of the battle in a british hospital, as he was found heavily wounded in a M13/40 tank. He tried to break trough the encirclement, even moving in other tanks when his own couldn't advance anymore.
Was buried with full military honour by the british, as they admired his will to resist and keep fighting.
He is the highest ranking italian office fallen in battle in WWII
Wow.. I can't even imagine the amount of time and research that went into making this video. Top notch in every way. Thanks for your hard work.
Thanks! You should check out my other Battlestorm videos ua-cam.com/play/PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y.html the lastest videos (Battleaxe and Bruneval) are some of my best. Also, I'm currently working on the follow up to Battleaxe (the next in the North African Campaign series), which will be Operation Crusader. As of today, the unfinished script is 74,319 words - which will put the video in the region of between 7 and 8 hours long :)
This was one of history's most decisive and outstanding military victories and came at a time when British outlooks were pretty dim. It is a great pity that O'Connor's brilliant campaign has been overlooked by the public, who mainly concentrate on British defeats at this stage of the war and the Battle of Britain. As Rommel said, nothing would have stopped the British taking Tripolis and the North African War would have ended in early 1941 - but then came Churchill !!!
Exactly - then came Churchill,O'Connor was robbed of his position not only in the Army but I believe in History
@@bigwoody4704 I made a comment on here that criticises churchill and for good reason ua-cam.com/video/z2c7d5RfkAA/v-deo.html
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- I wouldn't call him an idiot he was a brilliant statesman and possessed great oratory - perhaps born 100 yrs too late. Political change was coming that clashed with his old school aristocratic views. He did have the unique ability to rally the country at an extremely bleak time.But had no business in a war room. For instance he should have left Auchileck and Dorman-Smith alone
Greetings from Canada TIK! New subscriber here. Well... sort of. I've been "marathoning" your videos for about a month (including your 9-hour[+] presentation on Crusader - thanks for that one by the way) and, although I don't always agree with your conclusions, I do appreciate your videos for being well-researched and entertaining.
Now as to your question about Graziani: I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and say that he was "partly" to blame for the 10th Army's defeat in North Africa. He was, after all, the "commander on the ground" and the decision on how to deploy his formations was his and his alone. That being said, "Marshal" Graziani was the product of a flawed system in which the criteria for promotion were seniority, nepotism, and "ideological soundness" - i.e.; an adherence to the idea that "Mussolini ha sempre ragione" ("Mussolini is always right") - rather than competence and useful experience. The problems with this "system" were recognized at the time even within the highest echelons of the Comando Supremo, which compelled Marshal Badoglio to make his famous quip: "The wearing of the uniform of a general does not make a general." How true. I've read quite a bit on Graziani and in my opinion he wasn't the brightest lightbulb in the pack. In truth, I regard him as little more than a brown-nosing brute.
But... could Graziani have executed Operatione E as a "war of rapid decision" (la guerra di rapido corso), and would it have made a difference if he had? I don't believe so. I too have read Christie's treatise ("Fallen Eagles") and I find many of his arguments questionable. For example, he points out the deficiencies of Italy's "magnificent" M11/39 "breakthrough tank," then maintains it would've been "good enough" for an Italian-style "blitzkrieg." He apparently comes to this conclusion based on the outcome of one obscure engagement that occurred early in the Western Desert Campaign (5 August 1940) between an Italian raggruppamento which included a company of M11/39s and a British column consisting of A9 tanks (Cruiser Tank Mk Is), armored cars, and towed 25-pounders. I don't find it at all surprising that M11s could better A9s in combat: both were lousy tanks and were roughly equivalent in capabilities (and, in this case, it appears that the Italians got the drop on the Brits). But to come to a sweeping conclusion based on this one incident "begs the question" of the effectiveness (and endurance) of Italian armor.
To his credit, Christie does "give the nod" to Graziani's nightmarish logistical situation in North Africa, and he correctly observes that had Graziani opted for a "blitzkrieg" attack it would've been a "one-shot affair." But - and here's the crux of the matter - if the 10th Army could only advance as far as Sidi Barrani (about 60 miles) using the "mass approach" before running out of steam (with many tanks breaking down en route), how could the 10th Army - or a smaller but suitably reorganized part of that formation - have made it all the way to the Suez Canal, a distance of more than 600 miles? The problems with the Intendenza (supply corps) were legion, and the Mediterranean wasn't nicknamed "Cunningham's Pond" for nothing. Had Graziani's offensive been planned as a "blitzkrieg," I figure that the 10th Army would've charged as far as Mersa Matruh, and then floundered on O'Connor's defenses. Christie's assertion that the Italians and Libyans would have been sunning themselves on the banks of the Nile River or Suez Canal in short order "if only" is absurd.
And here's where I risk being accused of "ethnic slurring" and "cultural stereotyping," but what I'm about to say is factual, well-documented, and not meant to be offensive in any way. During the 1930s and 40s the military services in Italy were not held in the same high regard as they were in, say, the UK and Germany, and therefore they failed to attract Italy's "bestest and brightest." As a typical conscript army, the Regio Esercito was largely made up of men from the lower classes; men who lacked the means of "genteel evasion" - or the skills and talents necessary to meet the requirements of military exemption. In 1940 roughly half of Italy's population was represented by the peasantry, and it was from this traditionally victimized group that the Regio Esercito drew the mass of its manpower. When operating under effective leadership, or when given no other choice, the Italian peasant-soldier could fight like a lion, a fact to which Allied troops would later attest. Individually he was tough; inured to hardship and able to live on little - as he usually had to. But there's also no denying the fact that in practically every theater of World War II where Mussolini sought military glory - not just North Africa - the Italian soldier was hopelessly outclassed. He was ill-trained, ill-equipped, and for the most part poorly led. In general he was unfamiliar with and thus uncomfortable around machines, and he rarely shared Mussolini's vision of a resurrected Roman Empire. His officers, usually World War I veterans recalled to active duty, were little better. They were "old-timers" stuck in a trench warfare mentality which held that mass trumped firepower. In short, the Italian Army of the 1930s to 1940 was a poor candidate for mechanization, even had the organizational, logistical, technical and industrial support actually existed. High-ranking Italian officers could sit around all day waxing eloquent about "eight million bayonets" and innovations such as the "war of rapid decision," but giving lip-service to such ideas was a far cry from actually seeing them implemented.
And this brings me back to Graziani. Although I maintain that he wasn't a cerebral chap, even he must have realized that he lacked the means of fighting a "war of rapid decision." Such a doctrine necessitated the use of speed, maneuver, surprise, dependable communications, and initiative at all levels to succeed, and Graziani's officers and men simply weren't trained (or equipped) to fight that way. One could argue that he would've better spent the time he dithered at the border following Mussolini's declaration of war training his troops in mechanized tactics, but doing so obviously wasn't one of his priorities. Graziani was indecisive and, contrary to another one of Christie's claims, his previous experiences fighting against Ethiopian and Senussi tribesmen did not automatically make him the best choice for fighting the British. He was out of his league in the Western Desert. So... was Graziani responsible for the 10th Army's demise? Yes... "partly." In the final analysis the buck has to stop with Il Duce - who's declaration of war against the British constituted little more than another shameless act of opportunism, and was motivated primarily by his jealousy of Hitler's successes - and his cronies at the Comando Supremo who knew damn well that Italy was totally unprepared for war.
Okay. I'm done. I apologize for my wordiness but I've found that simple "yes" or "no" answers to complex questions are rarely sufficient. That and I get carried away with enthusiasm when discussing military history. Anyway, keep up the good work TIK! I'm looking forward to watching more of your informative and enjoyable videos.
PS: O'Connor was THE MAN!!!
My father who once guarded 500 Italian prisoners on his own said that the Italians weren't cowards they just really disliked Mussolini and had no intention of dying for him.
That doesn‘t surprise me at all. Mussolini‘s regime got progressively less popular over time. He was never that popular to begin with, but his policies actually worked against a lot of the people that supported him initially, like shopkeepers and independent farmers. Overall nutrition worsened noticeably under his rule.
Fear may be able to replace loyalty to some degree, but that stops when you‘re being asked to face the bayonets of a determined enemy. The Italian troops in this campaign are arguably behaving exactly like an army that wants to be doing anything other than dying for Il Duce‘s new empire. At the end of the day they were doing the smart thing.
Most of the Italian POW's were shipped out to Australia and at the end of the war thousands refused to go home. They were taken out to sea, processed as immigrants and dropped back on shore in Australia a day or two later. Most then sent money to Italy to bring family out to join them. Some discovered that their family had died in the war. A few that did go home to Europe made sure they had return tickets and also returned with family.
Wesley Bruce that's what l heard from guys l knew from Australia
Who's fathers were Italian POWs they wanted to stay
So the Australian government decide put them on ships had them go to sea per international rules of war
Process them onboard then return as new immigrants
Many join the Australian armed forces as an thank you
They also sent or got money to bring their families to Australia
Yep. And we did it with the convicts too; within ten years of the Sydney convict settlement being established the governor was allowing them to bring out the convicts families. Including in one case the children of one convict convicted of killing his wife on the oldest child's testimony. There are thousands descended from that man and his kids.
They also gave the polygamist a new wife?!? He had a heap of kids. lol.
From what i know (also both of my great grandpas), they were all shipped to India and treated very badly by the British, 1 of the grandpas returned with PTSD/mental problems, an obsession that Mussolini was gonna come out of hiding (while he was dead) and a deep hatred towards the British which lasted until his death in the 70s.
In 2012 I stayed at a nice B&B in Cambridge (England) - both the lady owner and her husband were the offspring of Italian POW's taken by the British in this campaign. Many Italiens settled in England and Britain to happily live out their lives, so hate and resentment against the British must have been scarce, at least amongst those who were brought to Britain.
Nice job man. Ive tried finding a breakdown of the early stage of the italian invasion many times over the years but the documentaries I find always simplifies it too much. "the Italians invaded and they failed because they suck" and it immediately jumps to the Desert fox, Turbruk, El Alamain. Theres a few battles of WW2 this happens to in documentaries. Ethiopia, Greece, Create usually gets summed up to "they were defeated but fought hard" but doesn't tell the troop movement during the battle. Especially battles in China against Japanese, those battles never get the breakdown that Kursk or the battle of the bulge gets. Not too long ago everyone talked about Stalingrad but hardly mentioned Kursk but eventually the tank battle of Kursk got more and more attention in documentaries over the years.
Yeah, I wish China got more attention. It also had huge battles like the Battle of Wuhan for instance
I recommend "Beda Fomm: the Classic Victory" (Ballantine's Illustrated History of the Violent Century Battle Book No. 22)
It was published in 1971, so there may be a newer work with more information; but this book is very good.
@@BruceK10032 Alan Moorehead's The Desert War is superb, particularly because he was actually there.
Richard O'Connor was an absolute genius. There are a million ways he could have screwed up and lost against the Italians, but he still won.
And this considering that he was willing to accept the risk for victory.
@@tyvamakes5226 Imagine if Richard O Connor was leading 21st Army Group instead of Monty, the potential encirclements......what could have been.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- We can all speculate to the man who brought the first major ground victory to not just Britain, but Europe as a whole.
@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- But then again, that's just speculations. There are more popular what-if's in the underground history, such as Marshal Davout's potential in 1815
General O'Connor was indeed a genius, as he deftly used psychological warfare and classic guerrilla tactics at the outset of his campaign to defeat the Italians even before their campaign had begun. It was quite an impressive feat to use small detachments of his army to launch raids against forward Italian outposts, forts, and supply depots, but one could argue he was inspired by the same effective tactics used by the legendary "Lion of West Africa" Marshal Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, though at a much larger scale than Germany's most successful World War I commander could ever have hoped for. And I think that does speak to O'Connor's brilliance, as he applied lessons from other conflicts or from his own experiences, mixed with a great skill at improvisation, to defeat Graziani and his Italian army.
Can’t believe I have missed this video for eight years. Wonderful campaign. Thanks TIK! 👍👍
An 8 year long documentary. And your still not done. TIK, i love the dedication and facts.
Going back and picking up some of your earlier work. Great stuff TIK.
According to my father, who fought in the 6th AIF Division, many of the Australian units had men who had served in the last years of the WW1, together with many country men who were not only from the bush but had much experience using firearms for hunting. The WW1 veterans put their age back in order to serve. Their experience was passed on as part of infantry training and initial battle acme in the first battles. In the first battle, the Australians went in with full marching order. This was quickly corrected for troops to attack in battle order only. Later the older troops were removed from front line units to units guarding supply dumps, workshops, troop assembly areas and training reinforcements. Many of the older Australian NCOs later trained the Jewish Brigade. . Colloquially known as the "old and bold" they were well respected for their fidelity to their duties in protecting rear areas from infiltration by the enemy and thieving by local native tribesmen.
What a mistake to train the "tribe"
I like how you use maps, graphics and do the break downs of the units involved. When the units are broken down it is particularly interesting to hear about the Italians. You don't hear much from the Italian side.
I would love to hear like a story Band of Brothers but for the Italians where you follow 1 company of soldiers and how they went. I am sure there will be no Bastogne battles but it would explain how they joined up, their training, there thought on everything and what it is like to be on the receiving end of the allies attacks ie battleship bombardments coming across Matildas etc etc.
In this case I would recommend some Italian movies - 'El Alamein - The Line of Fire' (2002) is a good insight into the last months before the Axis defeat in 1942. Then there's 'Folgore Division' (1954) which meet most our your requirements. Its an old one and in Italian (on UA-cam) but it covers the experiences of the Folgore parachute division from the start. 'Italiani - Brava Gente' (1965) covers the Italian troops in Russia - another very good one. Here are some links if you wish:
El Alamein (trailer) - ua-cam.com/video/qzmTQNiWF4k/v-deo.html
Folgore - ua-cam.com/video/TCB4Zn408o4/v-deo.html
You have, as usual, done a brilliant job of putting together a video that lays out a rather complicated piece of history. When it comes to historical analysis of battles, strategy and the thinking that went into the decisions that were made and why they were made, you have few equals. Thanks for another very well done study of a campaign.
But wait, there is more.
Rommel's first dessert offensive video is on this channel.
Really good! Although the commentary wasn't the best, it will continue to get better as time goes on. Huge amount of information, great statistics and awesome maps. Looking forward to some more of these.
Thanks for the feedback :) more on the way (eventually)
Fantastic work, well done!
Thank you, glad you liked it :)
TIK has gone from good to excellent in these documentary videos imo.
I know there's lots of battles he has not yet covered, but it would be nice to see some of the older stuff, like this one, re done at the higher level of quality which he now demonstrates.
This would include place and name pronunciations, photos of the commanders, if possible, some of the equipment certainly. Presuming that the text and graphics are the most time consuming portion to produce, those would be fine with minimal editing, but it would be cool if a re-do looked somewhat like his newer presentations such as his Operation Crusader Marathon which was Top TIK, something I will most likely be watching again at a future date.
4:12 "El Douche" 😂 - that was unexpectedly brilliant. I know it's unintended and just a case of bad English accent, but I still lol'd hard
me too :D
same lol
Great video TIK. I love learning details about battles I have little familiarity with. I learned a lot. Thanks for the effort. :-)
Thank you for making this radical video! A map in the background so we can see the battles strategies and tactics unfold! About time. What a great way to follow the events. Maybe some one will copy this tactic? You have done an excellent job presenting this event.Thanks for a very entertaining video.
British used Hacks. That K/D ratio is unthinkable.
For this campaign I suggest you read 'The Crucible of War, Western Desert 1941' by Barrie Pitt. It was published by Jonathan Cape in 1980. The Operation Compass is covered in quite some detail and is accompanied by soldiers first hand accounts. Well worth the read!
Yes, I can't remember exactly, but I think I got that book after making this video. I do now have Pitt's series and it's the best series on the North African Campaign, although doesn't include a bibliography (major major issue).
Tik, my copy is the 1980 edition (shows you how old I am!), a first edition I believ?. In it, it does have a bibliography but named as 'notes'. For such a formidable work it does seem that the 'notes' are rather small! Or it may be that he was/is (?) a terrific researcher?
You're the best historian on youtube!
Some quality of life issues from my side: the background music can be distracting and don't sweat about the names, however you pronounce them is fine.
Wow nice job. Hard to believe that this Aussies and Brits did this great a job against the Italians but so little is known of it...
TIK, I believe you rule, when it comes to humor and intelligence. Love to watch your programs
Ah, how great to get back to the vintage TIK videos. The new ones are excellent of course, but these have some specific charm to them.
my dad was there he was a corporal in the kings royal rifles he used to tell us of all the thousands of Italian pows , they took ,i have got a fascist wall insignia he[ liberated ] from the officers mess at Fort Capuzzo when it was captured by the British army
Fantastic content mate .Just finding your feet on this old one .I loved it !! Just Brilluant.I know you kept up the good work 🧐
An old WWII joke: Italian tanks had five reverse speeds, and one forward speed, just in case the enemy got behind them.
i laughed a lot with this one
handsome boss all day you... the guy that abuses Britain watches this video
And who was laughing when the British tanks were blasted to pieces by an inferior number of Italian tanks of the Ariete Division at Bir el Gubi?
And Rommel about Italian tanks at El Alamein: "South and southeast of the HQ, huge clouds of dust were to be seen. Here the desperate battle was being played out between the small and the inadequate Italianj tank of XX Corps and about 100 British heavy tanks, which had overtaken the Italians on their open right flanks. As Major von Luck later reported to me, the Italians, who at the time represented our strongest mobile force, fought with unsurpassed courage. Tank after tank blew apart or burnt out, while continuous British heavy artillery pounded Italian infantry and artillery positions. Around 15.30hrs, the last radio message came from Ariete:
“Enemy tanks penetrated south of Ariete, with Ariete now surrounded. Located about 5km northwest of Bir el Abd. Ariete tanks fighting on.”
By evening the Italian XX Corps was annihilated after fighting against armour with outstanding courage. In the Ariete, we had lost our oldest Italian comrades, of whom we had probably demanded more than their poor equipment allowed them."
Someone got triggered real hard here
Damn Brilliant! One of the most enjoyable (if you can say that about war) and informative documentary I've watched. I can't wait for the next one thank you and Happy New Year.
Happy New Year to you too Katarnstar :) you'll be happy to know I'm already working on the next one
Hey Lewis, great video! To be honest, I was already waiting on the next video since the end of market garden one. I love the presentation and maps + movement thing. This way you get a really good idea of what was going on, where the forces are and what happened!
I really hope you will do lot's more of these, I'm sure you'll get even better at it. Maybe someday you can even do the whole of Barbarossa! ;) Keep up the good work man!
+Gripen85 thanks for the feedback Gripen! I'm working on the next now, but Barbarossa is the ultimate goal (once I've gotten better at this). I'm hoping to improve the graphics a hell of a lot for next time :)
Rodolfo Graziani wrote a book about those events: "Africa settentrionale 1940-1941". I did not read it but I think a definitive story of those events cannot be written without listening to one of the main characters.
Hi TIK, new to your channel, and actually really like your presentation and like a tactical overview of how the conflicts unfolded. I was wondering how much of the war have you covered to current? I'd love to see some coverage of Op.Overlord and some of the Normandy campaign. Keep up the good work! Enjoying the N.Africa part at the minute.
Hey Kirk, see 15:35 of this video here ua-cam.com/video/nZcIS2_kxsY/v-deo.html where I explain what my future battlestorm plans are/were
Excellent presentation, well researched. Thank you for your effort. It has been difficult to find much on the early days of the North Africa campaign.'If I had to take Hell, I would use the Australians to take it, and the New Zealanders to hold it.' - ' If I'd had one division of Maori, (New Zealanders) I would have taken the canal in a week.- Erwin Rommel. In a letter to his wife Lucia during the siege of Tobruk he said ' I wish we had 9th Australian Division with us this morning".
Jesus, I knew the Italians sucked at warfare but this is worse than I imagined.
It is not about them "sucked", it is more about men, not wanting to die for some idiots' interests. I would do the same if I were one of them
@@projectgamling7962 Like they didn't "want to die" in the war of 1866 to get Venezia? Or they "didn't want to die" in the attempt to take Abyssinia in 1894? They certainly died by the hundreds of thousands on the Isonzo Front between 1915 and 1918 against Austria-Hungary, gaining just a few tens of miles over three years despite outnumbering the Austro-Hungarians by 3 to 1?
For that matter, just see the Italian performances in Somalia in '92 and Kosovo in '99 to see that not much has changed...
@@@KnightofAges, I think the Italians learned their lessons from the debacles and massacres of WW I. War is Satan's game played by Satan's acolytes.
Politics is violence no matter the make, model or flavor; political government is the bane of humanity; it is not Christian and yet people persist in voting. Go figure. The hate mongering, economics dishonest, commie/socialist politicians, mostly Democrats, demonstrate neither love of God nor love of their neighbors (Matthew 22:37-40). Politicians are sociopaths and in some
cases they are psychopaths.
Politics is a false god. When people worship false-god-politics, they get disasters of wars, recessions, inflation (theft) and taxation (theft), i.e. they get mass murders, economic ruin, theft of wages, debt slavery, welfare “statism” based on looting A to satisfy B and extortion. Revelation teaches us that the troika of evil, that wicked consort of politics, commerce and “false religion,” will be destroyed. We would be wise to terminate/abandon political government.
Read Lysander Spooner's No Treason No. 6, The Constitution of No Authority. And then check out The No State Project by Marc Stevens on UA-cam where he asks the question, What factual evidence do you, judge, prosecutor, politician, IRS agent or anyone, have that the manmade,
Satan corrupted constitution and law apply to me just because I am physically present in some state such as the commie/socialist, Democrat dictatorship corruptifornia? It doesn't exist and never has else we would be stinkin' slaves on the plantation state run by masters/politicians and their overseers/judges/enforcers in the "land of the free and home of the brave." Why weren’t the
Spooner and Stevens points taught in government schools? Does anyone not see the conflict of interest? Does anyone not see the prejudice? How can educators “bite the hand that feeds them?” How diabolically ironic is it that teachers cannot teach the truth about the utter wickedness of political government? BTW, factual evidence would come in the form of a sworn affidavit of truth stating what, when, where, why, how and by whom one was made subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It was never brought up in any school I attended. I have never heard any MSM commentator produce the aforementioned “factual evidence.” I have asked 6 judges in their courtrooms the Marc Stevens/Lysander Spooner Question and on record to provide the aforementioned factual evidence and not one of those 6 “judges” produced that factual evidence thus failing to provide proof of jurisdiction and subsequently effected fraud upon me.
I recommend Ted R. Weiland’s books:
Bible Law vs. The United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective
www.missiontoisrael.org/blvc-index.php
Law & Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant
www.missiontoisrael.org/law-kingdom.php
If Christian Americans ever expect God to fulfill his half of 2 Chronicles 7:14, they must first repent of their national idolatry their love affair with the humanistic, pluralistic, polytheistic, and antichristian United States Constitution.
I also recommend the Jehovah Witness website publications: wol.jw.org/en/wol/lv/r1/lp-e/0/5487
The hate speaking, commie/socialist, sociopathic, Democrat politicians, SJWs, snowflakes and MSM are clearly unethical, immoral. They play the emotions game but most people know that the first casualties of emotion are reason/logic and morality.
Take a look at how Milton Friedman explains to Phil Donahue the fallacy of commie/socialism. This video should be viewed by all and then asked why they are voting for any politician that is commie/socialist.
www.glennbeck.com/2014/01/14/the-blunt-truth-about-greed-and-freedom-was-delivered-over-30-years-ago/?Daily&
ua-cam.com/video/E1lWk4TCe4U/v-deo.html
“Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.” - Milton Friedman
But since God gave us free will, freedom to choose, then those who argue against free markets are really deniers of Jehovah God, i.e. they are
Satan’s acolytes!
Friedman was a monetarist, i.e. he believed in inflation and thus refuted his own observation. Inflation is theft orchestrated by politicians with the willing assistance of the central bankers et.al.
Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone, long time passing?
Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone, long time ago?
Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone?
Voters trashed (Young girls have picked) them everyone.
Oh, when will they ever learn?
Oh, when will they ever learn? (remember the song?)
The time has come,' the Walrus said,
To talk of many things:
Of shoes - and ships - and sealing-wax -
Of cabbages - and kings -
And why the sea is boiling hot -
And whether pigs have wings.' (remember The Walrus and The
Carpenter?)
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man --
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began --
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wobbling back to the Fire --
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return! - Kipling, The Gods of The Copybook Headings
And I am two and twenty and Oh ‘tis true, ‘tis true.(remember the poem?)
"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for
something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods." ~ H.L. Mencken
Franz Oppenheimer identified the two basic means by which people can acquire wealth in the world: [1] the “economic means,” and [2] the “political means.” The “economic means” consists of relationships in which individuals voluntarily engage in transactions for the exchange of goods and services. The “political means” involve the forced taking of wealth belonging to one person and bestowing it upon another.
And lo' those many years ago the colonists thought they had won their freedoms and preserved them for the future generations. Little did they know. Or did they know they were condemning us to live as slaves on the plantation state?
"America does not need to see the tax returns of a billionaire who became a public servant. America needs to see the tax returns of public servants who became millionaires while being public servants” -- Jaeson Lubell
So, one of the root causes of the decline in Amerika is the Federal Reserve Bank and its fiat
currency/credits. And in the September 1895 American Federationist, Stephen T. Byington assailed the money monopoly: "No legal tender law is ever needed to make men take good money; its only use is to make them take bad money. Kick it out!"
@carmine paola LIke I noted, the Italian poor did die by the hundreds of thousands at the Isonzo Front. And they fought well in North Africa during WW2... AFTER Rommel took (even if not officially) the command of all operations.
My point is, Italian troops are not 'afraid to die'. What Italy itself can't do is carry out an effective military campaign. In no small part due to the massive incompetence of its commanders, who cannot plan, equip or adapt to any kind of modern warfare - in 1866 the only major battle (small skirmishes don't count) that Italy won was at Bezzecca, because there Garibaldi was in command, and HE was an actual leader, unlike the rest of the Italian generals.
@carmine paola The Lybian war is an excellent example on a badly conducted campaign: the Italian forces started to suffer defeats facing the locals already in 1911, and despite the serious lack of Ottoman support (the Ottoman officers that were sent there had to go to Libya paying with their own money; Constantinople didn't even want to pay for their trip), by late that year the Italian forces were confined to seven enclaves around the coast, unable to go inland.
Italy only won that war because it controlled the sea, which prevented the Turks from sending of any meaningful support to the area and also because Turkey saw no benefit in spending money on a war about what was then seen as just a patch of sand, scorpions and flies. And by 1913 Italy still hadn't managed to get the locals under control.
In Abyssinia in 1935 things were indeed better coordinated than in the campaign of 1894, with a two-pronged attack, and finally Italy (a major European power) managed to beat the Abyssinian forces (a small African power). But hey, the Abyssinians DID have 4 tanks and 13 planes! (against 795 tanks and 2.000 planes for Italy). Soo... Avanti Italia?
Operation Compass was badass. Hope it gets depicted in future Call of Duty and Company of Heroes games.
Your storytelling has improved in the years. Good stuff.
16:48 "To Buq Buq we go!" sang no British infantryman ever...
Thanks TIK, another fascinating and informative video.
How do you make the maps? They look so good:-)
Photoshop! :D
I download maps of the battles for reference then try and recreate them as accurately as possible... Then give them a gritty look using noise and lighting effects
@@TheImperatorKnight Being a German, your accent strucks me as quite interesting. I assume that you're a native English speaker and I'm just curious in what region of the English speaking world YOUR specific accent is used . 😁 Can you tell me?
It sounds like a Liverpool accent to me but not particularly thick, it's called scouse inside the UK
It's a Mancunian Accent , from Manchester / surrounds.
@@patrickkelly6691
Thanks. 😀🙋
Thanks for this. Very fair. Interesting to learn that the Italians didn't just lose their heads and flee. They actually mounted counter attacks. Well done!
El Douche! You've come a long way from this to Stalingrad. Good shit
O'Connor was obviously the British equivalent of Tomoyuki Yamashita, "The Tiger of Malaya." Both men had the same number of troops in their armies and faced vastly superior opponents. Yet, with brilliant maneuvering, swift decisive strikes, and the use of combined arms, they defeated their arguably inept opponents and made great gains in the Second World War that would determine future events as the war continued.
I am working my way randomly around your work. It is very good.
Another excellent documentary, Mr. Lewis! You never fail to disappoint. :)It's interesting to note how this played out nearly identical to the fall of France: The French, too, deployed their armor in penny packets and the German Army prized encirclement of the enemy as the perfect operational/strategic strategy.I'm also glad you mentioned the railroads/roads/supply. When you get to Rommel, if you read 'Supplying War' by Martin van Creveld, he looks at the logistics of Barbarossa and North Africa and they produce the same results.Look forward to your next video/documentary!
+Michael McCabe thanks for the recommendation! I've added that book to my Amazon wish list ;) Felt like I didn't mention the supply enough, although I did include some of the supply dumps in the video that the Brits used to resupply as they moved from Mersa Matruh.
And yes, when I was reading up on this battle I was like "O'Connor is doing exactly what the Germans did in the summer!"
+TIK It is interesting to see how just about everybody came up with the same conclusions about tactics, but different countries implemented it differently. Centralized vs. decentralized command strikes again!
7:17 an infantry square in World War 2? I can't imagine what did that look like...any more information in that specific battle?
also, the italians being "unprepared for war" keeps being mentioned. how the hell can a fascist, expansionist regime rule a country for two decades and be completely unprepared to fight in the wars they themselves picked? talk about incompetence...
Incompetence and corruption
It was a tank square
The Italians were unprepared because the factories were slowly renewing the Italian army, for example the Carcano used in WW1 was replaced at the beginning of 1937 with an higher caliber (and more suitable for modern war) rifle, at the start of the war the army was nearly completely armed with the new gun but lacks in ammunition so the high command replaced the new gun with the older one, but this guns are now old and new ones have to be made and so the industry was extremely low on efficiency
The italians were thinking in a ww1 kind of war, fought in the alps, in europe. Therefore their tanks were light for manouvering in the mountains, also Mussolini had a big mouth and exagerated the capacity of the italian military and italian people to fight in world war
Mussolini constantly ignored his generals who told him that Italy was unprepared for certain battles and offenses but he kept ordering them to do them anyway, Italy also didn't have the industrial output of Britain or Germany and little natural resources. But even then, their doctrines and Mussolini didn't allow them to exploit what they had, which was numbers. As Tik said, the Italians could've taken Egypt if they reformed their forces into an armoured group instead of having piecemeal tanks here and there.
the romans are rolling in their grave
You ought to redo this video with your honed narration and editing super powers. The subject (and your writing) deserve it.
It's certainly tempting
no way 1:00 is lit, I'm tripping out
Do IT
found out I haven't yet watched this battlestorm episode. Fun to see TIC 8 years younger
Nice presentation! I like the pronunciations, especially the ones only attempted - that's how I've been doing it.
I wish I could comprehend "logistical problems". I mean, I understand that it means that they had trouble getting supplies to the front (or to the areas that needed supplies) but I just don't understand the actual problems that come up. Is it lack of trucks? Lack of organization? Too many different types of supplies that are needed? Or is it that they could not get the supplies they needed at all over to Africa because of navel blockades in the Mediterranean?
In this case, after Operation E, why couldn't the Italians build up supply depots over time close to the battle lines?
I'm not really expecting an answer -- just expressing frustration that I've had understanding military campaigns in general.
Thank you for the videos. I do learn from them.
The thing to remember above all else is the magnitude of supplies necessary. For example in the stalingrad airlift the 6th army needed over 500 tons of supplies EVERY DAY between fuel, spare parts, food, ammo and a million little things. A ton is between 2000 and 2240 pounds depending on who you ask so that's 1 million pounds of supplies daily for an army that had some access to water unlike in North Africa.
For comparison sake, a gas tanker truck only carries 56,700 pounds of gas, a far cry from a million. Plus liquids are compact and easier to transport than solids like bread which carry far less weight per truck. Other trucks would only carry around 5000 pounds. So imagine every single day 15 tankers carrying water/fuel and needing another 64 trucks to cover the ammo/food/misc daily requirements.
But wait trucks cant drive far enough in a single day so you need to plan ahead and continuously send trucks everyday so they don't go without. This means at any moment you have 2 to 5 times as many trucks driving because of travel time.
But you cant have so many trucks out without resting points, refueling stations, mechanics available, security for your supply lines, administration, traffic monitors and radio stations to relay changes to their destination. All necessitates more supplies, building supplies,more men etc.
Trucks are logistical nightmares when you create operations with 100s of thousands of men or more. Trains and boats make the whole process almost impossible to wrap your head around.
If you are still curious look up a video from The Great War UA-cam channel called "World war 1 in numbers" logistics are truly staggering after you appreciate them.
Well, the thing is: everything is in a snowball effect with explosives along the mountain.
First of all, let's take logistics on sea.
Logistics on sea you have 4 things: Infrastructure, suprastructure, length/speed of supply routes and goods to be transported.
Infrastructure in this case means port facilities.
Suprastructure: ships. And 3rd and 4th are a bit self explanatory.
Now, let's dive into the Hell of practice.
Let's assume you have 10 ships. Now here the fun begins
In the infrastructure area: you need ports to load and unload the ships. But loading and unloading takes time. If you cannot serviced all 10 ships at the same time (so 10 piers in a dock), some ships will have to wait to be serviced. This branches into 2 ways: 1A. You send in each set of serviced ships and take care of another. Problem: you are highly likely to have no damn escort for some of the sets you send in, meaning they get sunk. 1B you have to pull ships back and let others be serviced Problem: lost time and ammount of supplies which can be transported.
Suprastructure: certain ships might not be serviced by certain ports. So they need to go to other ports. Others might be faster, others slower. And the biggest problem: losing ships. You do not lose only the ship itself, which alone could take months to complete. You also lose its fuel and supplies. And not only you have to make those AGAIN, this also means that some tank or soldier in the field no longer has ammo or fuel. And because you lost a ship, this means that tank or soldier won't get any more supplies because your supply capacity has been limited: AGAIN.
And we get to the 3rd point: supplies themselves. A ship does not carry fuel for troops. It also carries fuel for itself. So a part of what it transports, is consumed. When you get to land warfar THIS IS A MAJOR PROBLEM.
4th. Time and efficient use of it. Ok. Efficient use of time in logistics can be interpreted as being the time a good takes to be changed between one side to another. Aka loading (port changes to ship) and unloading (ship to port). Now, if we assume those things travel at light speed, you would have no wasted time. However, in real world, ships have to travel. While traveling, ships cannot change goods. Thus your ability to transport goods is INEXISTENT. The slower the supply route, the more time it takes for the supplies to reach the destination it is needed.
Now, in land warfare, things change a bit.
Why? Because, unlike ships which are tied to fixed ports, the end point of the supply chain is not set. So, basically, look again at what I mentioned above: you have roads, trucks carrying supplies for the troops that go on those roads and the supplies needed to be carried. So... here is how it goes. When a force move forwards, first of all it takes more time for its supplies to reach it. However: the means of transport alos need supplies. So. You need trucks to carry fuel for the tanks. Then you need trucks to carry fuel for the trucks carrying fuel for the tanks. And in the end you might need trucks to carry fuel for the trucks that carry fuel for the trucks that carry fuel for the tanks. And then you also need fuel for the truck carrying ammo. Food. Water etc. And fuel for those fuel trucks as well :)
When it comes to different types of ammo: I think the right word would be triage. It takes much longer to load and unload and distribute the supplies because you have more types of supplies needed in different places in different quantities. Furthermore, if a shipment is delayed, it means certain units are going to be paralysed because they have nothing to use.
I will say the only thing I see wrong with this channel is you should have more subscribers.... it's a very good channel.
Love your videos mate! How about one of the battle of Alam el Halfa? or 2nd El Alamein for that matter.
They will be coming later. I'm working on the battles in chronological order so I can fully understand and appreciate everything prior to getting to the later battles like El Alamein. If I skipped ahead, I don't think we could fully grasp how the campaign had progressed, nor how commanders like Montgomery stacked up to previous ones like O'Connor.
***** Ah i realized that later on. Its better that way yeah.
if you need some books detailing the later period of the north african campaign ive read these two and they are great.
Monty: The Battles of Field Marshall montgomery - Nigel Hamilton.
Starts with Alam el Halfa and deals a lot with el alamein too and the pursuit west to Tripoli and Mareth.
and Alamein: War Without Hate. This one deals up with the whole campaign too and Tunisia.
Excellent campaign by O' Conner and Wavell, and their team.
just like the previous one - interesting, fun to watch, and made with great detail. Thanks and keep up the good work! :)
edit: Graziani on the photo you used seems to be really offended by your opinion on his decisions at the end :D
+Michał Jurczuk and thank you for the feedback :) his eyes seem to stare into your soul...
Great video as always, i enjoy your work a lot.
Thank! I'm glad you like it :) my next doc (on Fort Eben Emael) will be coming soon-ish. Will be similar to the Rommel one but also different again
Congrats on this awesome series that you are doing. I have enjoyed watching both of the documentaries that you have done so far and I am definitely looking forward to the next one. If it is possible and if you are taking requests, could you cover some of the intense fighting that was taking place between the Allies and the Japanese especially around Burma and India. There aren't many documentaries on this part of the war especially on the parts where the Japanese were literally on British India's doorstep during the war. If not, maybe some lesser known conflicts that occur that help in some way with the more well known battles and campaigns. Not many people cover them and what you have done so far, I think you could really do some awesome videos. Keep up the good work and looking forward to more of this series. Cheers! (=0))
Hello Chewy :) thanks for your comment! Now, I'm not taking requests as such, but I do like getting suggestions since I have an idea of the sorts of operations everyone wants me to cover. My aim is to work my way through every major battle and operation in WW2 (yes, I'm setting that bar very high lol), so I'll definitely visit Burma and campaigns like that at some point as I know nothing about them either. Might be a few years off though...
The difficulty for me is the research. It takes time and costs a lot of money to buy the numerous books about a subject I need for the research, so I've kinda come to the conclusion I should concentrate on one theater of battle at a time - e.g. the Western Desert Campaign. I've just got several new books on the WDC for Christmas, so I'll definitely be on this for a while. That and the fact it took me about four months to make the Market Garden video and 2.5 months to make this one... The good news is I'm getting faster lol
+TIK Thank you for responding to my message, I really appreciate it. I will be definitely looking forward to them when you release them. Keep up the good work. Cheers! (=0))
Hey TIK great commentary, understanding why this campaign was fought with regards sailing 3 months around Cape Hope. The fighting reminds me of France 1940, lack of mass armour & communication. Love that name the "Pimple" were everything came to a head. Must be British humour.
+Thomas IV it's just a shame that O'Connor couldn't continue on to Tripoli and take all of North Africa. If he'd done that, Rommel would have had a hard time landing in Libya. This is why I made a video about whether Churchill created the Desert Fox as he took the resources from Wavell and O'Connor at the last minute and robbed them of total victory.
There's definitely some comparisons between France 1940. It's strange to see that a British general was using good tactics in 1940 as the impression you get from most places up until El Alamein is defeat after defeat.
And I'm pretty sure the word "Pimple" isn't Italian or Libyan :D
He absolutely did. I think Churchill was a terrible military leader, probably almost at bad with military matters as Hitler; but Churchill had allies and resources that meant when he screwed things up, it was possible to recover.
He took forces away from North Africa to try and stop the German advance through Greece and some Mediterranean islands. If that had succeeded then the Second World War would have took a very different path.
Just look at Churchill's WW1 record and you can see his ability (or lack of) as a military leader.
Having just come from your series on Crusader, I've got say you've got a lot better at pronouncing all these names ☺
Haha thanks 😂
@@TheImperatorKnight Very sorry but your pronunciation spoilt it for me. VERY VERY good otherwise!
I would love to know what Graziani's thinking was. I find it shocking that he failed to employ his own doctrine and wonder if there was any outside interference.
My guess is because of the previous british offensive, british tanks manages to beat italian tank forces at the border, made him more skeptical of italian ability to fight in a small motorized number
With little support and cooperation between branches, overwhelm the british armor with their number seems to be only possible way
And we know the british is preparing for a counter attack, had he attack with small motorized forces, maybe he wouldnt lost as much, but that would be the entire Italian armored forces at risk, he dont know if the british would come reinforce by the time his attack was commense, and later, when the tank force litterally failed in their first mission to effectively outflank the enemy, and got lost, this reinforced his idea that the troops were not prepared good enough
I'm no fan of Graziani, but Italian command was full of infighting and interference from El Duce. Like the Japanese, the Italian air force feuded with the army and navy for resources and control. El Duce threw them into this war with no real plans, just pipe dreams of ruling the Mediterranean.
It also hurt that Germany took control of the Romanian oil fields for their own use, which were also Italy's main oil source. Oh and the corruption in Italy's industry which was very slow to produce poor items that were also overpriced. Crappy tanks, small air force, navy with no radar/no carriers/no fuel, and incompetent leaders that led Italy into disaster after disaster.
Amazing documentary! I never knew that the Italian defeat was so decisive. From what I understand the main reason this dissater to the Italians happened was that the lack of understanding what was going on in the battlefield and with that not having a proper front where units collaborated and used their numeral advantage.
+martaxsasLT that's true. I grouped it under "training", but that's exactly it. They seldom sent out scouts. They marched at the front in columns. They didn't group their tanks together. They formed awful tactical formations when engaged (e.g. that Napoleonic style anti-cavalry square). And they sat in isolated camps that didn't support each other, which is why the Battle of Sidi Barrani is also known as the Battle of the Camps.
Good show chap :)
You have give me the urge to play hearts of iron again.
I think doing these documentaries is fantastic, got anymore lined up or planned?
+Cameron Thompson oh yes! Next one will be on Rommel's introduction to North Africa :)
Really looking forward to HOI4
Most under rated general of the second world war in my opinion. If O'Connor hadn't been captured the war in North Africa would have ended in 1941. He would have been a much better commander than Montgomery.
He was ok later on in the war. But he simply wasn't an Army Commander, Corps Level was probably his limit (as it was for Rommel as well).
no O'Connor was unfortunately he had been hamstrung by being attached to Monty who really was ass.Gott,O'Connor and Auchinleck all much more capable commanders. Monty was a lying braggart and had the good fortune of arriving as the tide was turning in the allies favor. Courtesy of the RAF,RN,Bletchley Park(ULTRA) and US tanks/artillery and 110,000 troop Torch landings - none of which Montgomery provided
having only recently viewed this video i will add my comments. To answer the question posed at the end it is both. The Italian force was not prepared for modern war, and secondly Grazani failed to re-organize his force into this own vision of modern armor warfare. There was no excuse as the italians and the world witnessed how the germans defeated the numberically and in some instances technically superior french and british forces in the campaign for france in 1940. The bravery of the individual Italian combatant was no less than their opponents just poorly led at all levels.
If you ever edit your older uploads please add The Crucible of War by Barrie Pitt to the bibliography for Compass. Also maybe Sidi BarrANI ! If you would like a fun story about the taking of Nibilieh and the Tummars let me have an email ddress
It's right that Graziani is to blame for the initial blunder.
However, he only got into that situation because of Mussolini.
He didn't want to launch the attack, because in a desert supplies is key. He may have had the numbers but he didn't have the logistics...
Also, once compass really started to get bad, time and time again Graziani wanted to pull back towards organized defensive lines and the conduct defense in depth warfare.
However Mussolini forced him to neglect all the advantages he had by attacking on the spot...
Great work as always!
My father was a regular in 7th RTR. He fought during Compass and was killed during Battleaxe. I can not agree, based on my study of the period, that the Italian tanks had any chance against Matilda II's but at Battleaxe the Mk IV's AND 88cm's of the Germans outranged them plus of course the ineptitude of the British Generals (except Wavell ).
The Italians were ill prepared for the Australian volunteers who were tough and could think for themselves rather than waiting for orders when the mayhem of war struck.
@@SD-qw4xx Can you give references for your bizarre accusations .. the ausies were magnificent soldiers
@@steveswitzer4353 cause they fought hard doesn't mean they weren't scumbags.
@@SD-qw4xx Just face the fact: The Romans were no match for white supremacy. The Anzacs were out numbered and out gunned and we were also inexperienced. Rommel may have swept through Europe but he was stopped dead in his tracks and suffered his first loss at the hands of Volunteer Australians. We done the Germans and we done the Romans. We took prisoners at a ratio of 40-1. FYI, the first loss the Japanese suffered was also at the hands of Australia's volunteers.
@@MarineInfantry00 They hanged all the scumbags back in England. They only sent their finest to Australia. Hence our litany of remarkable victories.
@@WTF7176 lol.
4:10 minor linguistic note, the singular determinative masculine article in Italy is "Il" not "el". Il Duce. Stupid computer fonts suggest that I write it in capital letters, "IL" rather than "EL". EL is Spanish (and also Arab and Israelian, although in Arab it is usually written AL, sometimes EL as in El Alamein).
@12:45 you are wrong that neither side did anything. The Italians were busy improving the coastal track into a proper road by laying asphalt in order to improve their supply logistics. But then @ 15:43 you finally mention the road construction.
@22:00-23:0 the fact was that O'Conner's Forces had captured so many supplies from the Italians that it allowed him to continue the advance and not so much as the Italians just thinking the Brit's had the same supply problems.
This is replicated in so many historical wargames and you just glance over it. This was the same sort of impetus after the fall of France that helped the Germans during the initial phases of Barbarossa (with tanks, fuel, ammunition and trucks) and also the capture of Tobruk by Rommel that allowed him to advance into Egypt. This same formula is being exercised in Ukraine today with captured artillery munitions being utilized in the same way to keep the defense intact.
From 25:50 onward, the Brit's were actively building the railroad westward from Mesa Matruh to towards Haifa Pass, same as the Italians had been trying to extend the Via Balbia to Mesa Matruh.
@ 30:00 You fail to mention the importance of El Adem, it was a major Airfield! Abd its capture would allow close-in air support and deny the enemy of the same.
@31:58/33:57 Place Holder.
@ 32:22 You fail to mention how many stores & supplies the Brit's captured at Tobruk. This fed the appetite to continue the advancement despite the incomplete narrow gauge rail line from Mesa Matruh and also the bad road conditions.
I think the Italian failures were due both to lack luster command and also a recalcitrance of soldiers to go to war with a former Allie from WW1 just 22 years earlier.
Blimey, O'Connor, what a dude! You just have to look at his face to tell you he was the real deal, sad and serious, not a big ego.
How does he relate to the O'Conner in Operation Market Garden? He was blamed for not pushing his tanks forward after the American took so many casualties to take that bridge. (Terrible memory for names. Everyones already watched that video right?)
Maybe he did have good tactical reasons for this. I get the impression though, that while he clearly knew how to take the initiative, it would be totally out of character to buck the chain of command.
+Thumper He is a dude! And O'Connor wasn't the guy in charge of XXX Corps (the tanks advancing up Hell's Highway), he was in charge of VII Corps which was on the flank of XXX Corps. I didn't directly mention him in my Market Garden documentary as VII Corps only affected one small part of the Market Garden story towards the end.
There's actually a (cheap!) book that looks purely at Richard O'Connor's performance in Normandy and asks why it doesn't compare to his success in North Africa. I won't say too much (because it's an interesting read) but basically O'Connor isn't to blame. www.amazon.co.uk/General-OConnors-Northwest-Effective-Expected-ebook/dp/B00NXZHGA6/
VIII Corps, not VII Corps :/
@@TheImperatorKnight He was in Command of VIII Corps.
I think it's unfair to blame Graziani for the destruction of the 10th Army. As previously stated, the Italian military in general simply wasn't ready. Combined arms strike forces require a huge amount of thought and training. Training takes time. Graziani was under pressure from Rome to do something immediately. Graziani was in a no-win situation: any action he took was likely to destroy his badlt trained and motivated force. The fact that 10th Army held as long as it did is all Graziani. Had he resigned or been replaced, the 10th would likely have collapsed far faster.
It would be nice if you talk about Operation Brevity, Battleaxe, Crusader, The Battle of Gazala which are impressive battles and none talks about them. Thanks for your documentaries.
No worries! The next documentary video will be on Fort Eben Emael, but Brevity will be the one after (since I've just done Rommel's arrival). I'm thinking going forwards I'll keep alternating from the Western Desert Campaign and something else.
Part of my reasoning for starting a series on the Western Desert Campaign was precisely for that reason - nobody talks about these battles. Everyone and their mother has written a book about El Alamein, but I struggled to find a dozen books written on Compass. And to put it bluntly, it's wrong. Just because something's popular doesn't make anything else less interesting.
As I said at the end of my latest one, I actually can't wait to come back to the Western Desert Campaign. Honestly, I've never been that interested about the WDC. Again, this was partly why I wanted to do it. But now after two docs I'm really REALLY interested in it :)
Thank you very much!! You do great documentaries.
My Grandad was in the 6th div AIF fighting from Bradia to Breda Fome.... as a private he was MID(mentioned in dispatches) during this period... th0e British go on to make the mistake of withdrawing the 6th AIF and 2nd NZ div that went to Greece and Crete, just as the DAK make their first drive eastward. His opinion of the Italians was that in the main they were unprepared poorly lead and unwilling to throw their lives away unnecessarily. To clear a common question, AIF is the abbreviation for Australian Imperial Force...the 1st AIF (1st to 5th div and consequently the 1st to 15th brigades
As stated the 1ST AIF fought the Great War and the Second AIF 6th to 9th divs 16th brgd on, fought the Second World War this is the same for the NZ divs with the 1st div in The Great War and the 2nd and 3rd fighting WWII.
Amazing video! I don’t know what was more funny.. you trying to pronounce village names or the Italian Battle Plans
"Much of Rommel's 'fingertip feel' for the battlefield was due to his excellent signals intelligence. Signals Intercept Company 621, which listened into British radio transmissions, provided him with unparalleled tactical insights, and was actually responsible for many of his most striking successes."
BBC Rommel in the Desert By Dr Niall Barr page
Moorehead, A. The Desert War: The Classic Trilogy on the North Africa Campaign 1940-43. Aurum : Twenty years later there was a condensed volume simply called The Desert War. Now in the later book he gave true tank losses for one of the early battles against the Germans; 200 tanks. In the earlier trilogy it was put at 50 tanks.
Whilst reading N. S. Nash's book 'Strafer Gott Desert General.' Which recommends your video on Operation Compass, I came across something interesting.
Both Nash and yourself mentions Royal Navy ships which were used to bombard Bardia; Nash says that the ships were HMS Aphis, HMS Ladybird, according to The Sixth edition of 'All the Worlds Fighting Navies by E. C. Talbot-Booth RNVR, these two ships were 'River Gunboats' armed with 2 6-inch guns and one 3inch A.A. The Ladybird was lost later in the war. According to 'Fighting Navies' there is no mention of monitors being used during WW2 nor did the RN have a ship called HMS Terror.
"Whilst reading N. S. Nash's book 'Strafer Gott Desert General.' Which recommends your video on Operation Compass."
Nash's book recommends this video? Or do you mean that I recommend his book in my video?
@@TheImperatorKnight Nash recommends your video in his book. You quoted from Nash's book in your videos.
Huh... well, that's an interesting development! Thanks for letting me know!
You did in your video, say that a monitor with two 16inch and two 6inch guns.
The Fighting Navies of the World, is part of a series of books including Army, Air Force and Indian Army. I have all the series
HMS Terror existed...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Terror_(I03).
The UK used the 2 Erebus Class Monitors (of which Terror was one, and she was later lost) and the 2 Roberts Class (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberts-class_monitor). All 4 were armed with 15 inch guns
I make up toy soldier sets to give away to less well off kiddies and I'm working on one for 4th Indian Div vs Italian forces in East Africa at the moment (just making all the buildings for it). To this end a friend has loaned me the official history of the 4th Indian Div (his dad was in charge of a British Bofors AA unit attached to the division throughout the war). Only just started (it is a big book) but I did take a peek at the most relevant section - The Italians were not a push over, they fought hard but they were poorly lead and when the morale collapsed so did the fighting. I don't have the book to hand but I think you would find it of interest.
Very interesting vid ,my uncle Jim was in N-Africa on 25pdrs and fought at El alamain ,another veteran I met back along he was engineers and said very often when clearing mines the Germans stuck 2 land mines together ...very nasty.
Italian unpreparedness was monumental. At more or less the same time, they hadn't managed to advanced into France and lost to the Greeks, although in all cases they had fielded more men than their opponents.
To be fair Italy really shouldnt have got involved in the war - it just didnt have the economic, financial or innovative basis' to compete
My uncle was fighting the Italians in the Chasseurs Alpin in the alps. They had stopped the Italians and were working to drive them back when France surrendered.
@@johnfisk811 The French troops in the Alps performed very well. The éclaireurs-skieurs were famous and too
I enjoy your lectures but would it be asking too much for you to rehearse the pronunciation of foreign names before you record to video?
Considering all the different names out there I would think so, yes...
I fully expect him to butcher the names in Norway when he gets around to that. ;-)
Not just the foreign names, he can't pronounce the English names either like Combe and Mackay (Koom and Mak-eye). Such a shame because I love these videos.
Campbell was my favourite "Camp Bell". That said his German pronunciations are pretty good.
I find it jarring that although his graphic clearly shows 'Sidi Barrani' on the map he keeps saying 'Sidi Barrini'. Apart from the clunky pronunciations though I think these presentations are excellent.
hey TIK, I enjoy your vids, and I could help you with pronounciation of words (and hopefully even names) in:
- Dutch
- French
- German
- Hungarian
- Italian
- Polish
- Russian
- Spanish
no kidding : )
To quote Anthony Eden "never has so much been surrendered by so many to so few " or words to that effect
Great video! I did know almost nothing about that operation. Now I am an expert! :)
Thanks! And after your contribution to Panzer Corps Afrika Korps, I thought you knew everything on the Western Desert Campaign :D
No actually I only know a bit about Barbarossa :)
Love these western desert videos though I knew my round WD history till this guy turned up .certainly enlightened me ✌👍🇵🇱
Now that I remember, you asked people to criticize this. So firstly the thing that was mostly annoying was that you didn't try to say the city names. I know they are bloody hard to say, but even if you just say the name you will seem more professional.
The second thing that made the documentary a bit hard to watch was that there were a lot of maps that ended and rest of the screen was left black (this might just be my personal opinion).
Other than those things maybe just bring in a bit more colors (I know, this was a desert map and you had better colors before) or get some small video clips in with the great new pictures.
Well that's all. I liked the documentary, except that it didn't have my great Italian victory that took Egypt with the force of thunder!!! (Hearts of Iron
Thank you very much for the feedback. Constructive criticism is great! I'll do my best to pronounce the names. Sometimes it's difficult, since some of the place names aren't in existence now, or I couldn't find the correct pronunciation online. If I can't find them, I may have to guess.
The reason for the black screen where the maps ended was because of the animation software I was using. I'm going to (attempt to) use different software for the next one which will hopefully make everything look better anyway. I'm not sure I can add colour since it is a desert war, but I'll see what I can do.
And I can't change history and make the Italians win :P
When the Germans took command of N. Africa they retrained the Italian soldiers, upgraded their equipment, and gave them better leadership. After which it was noted the Italians performed much much better.
Yup they weren't useless like the myth likes to make people believe, the British even underestimated some of the Italian forces later in the North African campaign.
@@oreroundpvp896 Can they really be blamed? The Italians were so pathetic in the beginning that if Mussolini was witnessing it he couldve turned the Sahara into an jungle with his tears
@@darthmongoltheunwise8776 Yeah they had constant pathetic defeats.
still average at best tho
I'm consistently amazed by the number of prisoners taken in North Africa, especially considering the difficulty in providing food and water enough for friendly troops.
I get the simple reality that escape and evasion was next to impossible, and that there was a sense that life would go on following surrender, but how were these prisoners dealt with. What are the key details of their fate. Were there ever any exchanges? Where they kept in place or moved? Moved by land or sea and to where?
I am not sure if you are interest in book recommendations, but I highly recommend checking out the book, "An Army at Dawn: The War in North Africa, 1942 -1943 (Volume 1 of the Liberation Trilogy)" by Rick Atkinson. I just started reading this book again for the fourth time and it covers a lot of different angles to the war in North Africa especially the western half of it. For example, the allies (Americans/British) were fighting the French first before they were fighting the Italians/Germans. Or how the allied landings almost became a disaster. I mean if you are looking for a good book to read or some more material to help fresh out your series especially the western portion of the North African campaign, I definitely recommend it. Keep up the good work. Cheers! (=0))
I've got it on my wishlist and I will buy that book when I get to 1942/43. I've only just reached 1941 and have the whole of the Western Desert Campaign to get through before the US landings in Vichy France territory. I wish that book covered the whole of the "War in North Africa" like it claims because as I keep saying on my Twitter, there aren't many that do :(
hi tik will you be covering the Dday battles soon mate
Great video. Pitts books are great.
If Richard O Connor was not captured and his forces not diverted to Greece, there's no way Rommel would have taken Tobruk.
You might like to read Vladimir Peniakoff's book "Popski's Private Army." It describes his operations behind the Italian lines in Cyrenaica. Gathering intelligence and working with the locals who hated the Italians and spied within their the Italian's own camps for the British. It sounds as though Sicilian occupation of the coast where they took the best farms from the locals was the the main reason for the local's dislike of the Italians. It appears that Popski impressed upon the locals that the British would free them from the Italians (he even convinced them not to fight, though they wanted to so as not to undermine his intelligence gathering operation). The Italians intelligence was very poor and they clearly assumed they owned the land they were on, while the Allies reconnaissance of the desert was far more comprehensive. Allowing them to find routes that were not available to the Italians. The LRDG, SAS and numerous other allies parties explored the desert in great detail. But I think the local support was probably more important than people would have thought. I'm only half way through the book at present.
Dear God, this front was a logistical nightmare. It's making me a little nauseous, thinking about it.
You're right about that. O'Connor seems to have grasped that early on. I'm hopefully going to be able to include more of the logistical side of things in my upcoming Operation Crusader video. And Rommel's logistics are clearly stretched right from the beginning.