How Montgomery's 8th Army stormed Rommel's positions at El Alamein

47
How Montgomery's 8th Army stormed Rommel's positions at El Alamein
British tank Crusader Mk. III overcomes the ditch under Mersa Matruh. November 1942


General situation. Preparations for the British offensive


In late August - early September 1942, the Germans tried to resume the offensive in the Alam-Khalfa region (Defeat of Rommel's army at the Battle of Alam el-Khalfa). However, Rommel's last offensive failed due to the lack of fresh troops, supply problems and the presence of large enemy reserves. In turn, the British counterattack also failed, as Rommel managed to withdraw the troops to well-fortified positions.



The British had air supremacy, the Germans were not receiving reinforcements, and the supply situation was deteriorating. The British sank convoys bound for Africa. The British, having superior forces and good supplies, began to prepare an offensive. The 51st and 44th divisions, a large amount of artillery and equipment, including American Tanks Grant and Sherman. By the end of October 1942, the British 8th Army was enlarged to 10 divisions, including 3 armored and 7 independent tank brigades. The total number of the army reached 220 thousand people (150 thousand were at the forefront) with 1 tanks and 100 self-propelled guns, 100 aircraft (700 fighters and 500 bombers) and about 200 thousand field guns. Another 1 tanks were on the way.


British tankers rest in the shade of Mk. VI Crusader in the Western Desert

The commander of the 8th Army, General Bernard Montgomery, was preparing a strike on the northern flank of the central sector of the front in order to break through the front and quickly reach the coast, surrounding the main enemy forces. The main blow was dealt by the 30th and 10th army corps. The 9th Australian, 51st, 2nd New Zealand and 1st South African Infantry Divisions broke into the enemy defenses, laid wide corridors in minefields. Then the 10th Corps, the 1st and 10th Panzer Divisions, entered the battle, which were supposed to destroy the main armored forces of the enemy. Pursuing the defeated enemy was the 2nd New Zealand Division, reinforced by the 9th Armored Brigade. At the same time, auxiliary operations, tying the enemy in battle, were carried out on the southern flank by the 4th Indian Infantry Division and the 13th Army Corps.

Commander-in-Chief of the British Forces in the Middle East, Harold Alexander, and Commander-in-Chief Montgomery did a great deal of preparatory work. Pipelines for water and gasoline were erected, all warehouses were brought as close as possible to the front line. Various numerous layouts were created so that the enemy got the impression that the British were going to attack in the south. On the northern flank, on the contrary, tanks were disguised as vehicles using plywood. This disorientated the German command, which distributed the forces of the tank army along the entire front line.

The start of the operation was scheduled for October 23, 1942, two weeks before the start of Operation Torch, the American landings in Morocco and Algeria. That is, Rommel, even if he had held out for two weeks, then when the enemy landed in French North Africa, he would have to withdraw troops to Libya.


The disposition of the forces of the parties in the Second Battle of El Alamein

German-Italian forces


The Germans and Italians had 12 divisions (4 German and 8 Italian) numbering 115 thousand people with about 550 tanks. At the same time, the German tank army "Africa" ​​was not fully staffed: it had 29 thousand people instead of 46 thousand. At the same time, there were many people in hospitals - up to 10 thousand. More than 1 thousand soldiers were sick in the parachute brigade. The German divisions fully existed only on paper: about 15 people remained in the 3th Panzer Division with a staffing strength of over 900 thousand people, in the 9,1st Panzer Division - 21 people, in the 3th and 900th light divisions - 90 and 164 thousand people.

The Germans were able to organize a fairly dense and strong defense. They set up a dense network of minefields. Over 164 anti-tank and 10 anti-personnel mines were delivered in the sector of the 11,4th division alone. Three lines of fortifications and minefields were placed along the northern flank, which made it possible to divide the attacking enemy formations and destroy them with artillery fire. But due to lack of personnel and weapons the depth of defense was only 8 km.

Due to lack of fuel and in view of the enemy's dominance in the air, Rommel abandoned his usual concentration of mobile forces, he divided them into two groups, trying to cover the entire line of defense. The northern group included the 15th Panzer Division and the Italian Panzer Division "Littorio", the southern group - the 21st Panzer and the Italian Panzer Division "Ariete". The coastline in the rear from al-Rahman to al-Ghazala was defended by the 90th division. Motorized division "Trieste" was located near el-Bad. Part of the Pistol division stood at Mersa Matruh, the rest of the units were on the defensive. Italian troops, reinforced by the Germans, kept the defense in the first line.

On the northern flank from the sea and beyond, the defense was held by the Italian 21st Corps - the 12th Bersaglieri Regiment (selected Italian infantry), the German 164th division and the Italian motorized division "Trento". Further north, the Italian infantry division "Bologna", reinforced by half of the German parachute brigade, defended. On the southern flank stood the Italian 10th Corps - the Pavia and Brescia infantry divisions, reinforced by the Falgore parachute division and part of the German parachute brigade.

The German commander Rommel, who was seriously ill, on September 23 went on vacation to Austria for treatment. The army was received by General of the Tank Forces Georg Stumme, recalled from the Eastern Front. On October 24, Stumme fell out of a car attacked by an English plane at full speed and died of a heart attack. The field marshal had to urgently return to North Africa without completing his treatment.


The anti-tank position of the paratroopers of the 185th Italian division "Folgore" near El Alamein at the 47-mm anti-tank gun Cannone da 47/32 M35


Italian self-propelled artillery Semovente M.40 da 75/18 based on the Fiat M13/40 tank near El Alamein. October 1942


A British truck is blown up by a mine. October 1942

German-Italian troops beat off the first blow


On the night of October 22-23, 1942, British troops returned to their original positions. At 21:40 on October 23, 1 guns began artillery preparation. Then 200 thousand soldiers, supported by 70 tanks, went on the offensive.

But by the morning of the 24th, the offensive began to fade due to the strong resistance of the German 164th division and the Italian 102nd Trento division. The area was small, the tanks could not break into the operational space. Allied troops came under dagger fire from enemy artillery and suffered heavy losses.

Divisional operations by the 44th Infantry Division and the 7th Armored Division in the southern sector were also unsuccessful. The 13th Corps of General Horrocks ran into minefields, and the 2nd French Brigade was badly battered by enemy counterattacks.

During the day, Montgomery launched tanks into the attack. The 2nd armored brigade reached the edge of the minefield, but could not break through the entire defense. In the south, near the el-Miteiriya ridge, the attack bogged down. By evening, the enemy defenses had not been broken through. The German-Italian troops held out well. The German 15th Panzer Division counterattacked the British 22nd Armored Brigade. In the evening, the command of the British 8th Army decided to withdraw and regroup the tank divisions of the 10th Corps.

On October 25, the situation did not change. The 2nd New Zealand Division did not break through the enemy defenses. On the southern flank, the 13th Corps went on the defensive. On the 26th, New Zealand and South African infantry were able to capture several positions on the el Miteiriya Ridge. The rest of the areas were quiet. In four days of hard fighting, the British battalions thinned noticeably, 200 tanks were lost. Montgomery was stunned by the impending failure.


The deterioration of the position of the army "Africa"


The commander of the 8th Army did not abandon the offensive. On the evening of October 26, Montgomery decided to move the center of gravity of the operation closer to the coast. The New Zealand Division was ordered to move back to regroup. Meanwhile, on the 27th, the Germans transferred the southern mobile group to the north. The 21st Panzer Division is trying to launch a counterattack. However, the German tanks ran into the fire of British heavy tanks and anti-tank artillery. On October 28, the Germans try to repeat the attack, but this time they were stopped by the Royal Air Force.

On October 29, British troops resumed their offensive. The 9th Australian division was able to push the German 164th division. But when intelligence reported that the Germans had the 90th division in the second echelon, Montgomery shifted the main attack south to the area of ​​the 2nd New Zealand Division. On the night of October 30-31, the Australians continued to push the 164th enemy division to the sea. However, the Allies were pushed back by a counterattack by units of the 90th Light and 21st Panzer Divisions. The Germans took 200 prisoners and knocked out 20 enemy tanks.

However, the German army suffered heavy losses. In the 21st Panzer Division, out of more than 140 tanks, about half remained, a similar situation was in the 15th Division. There was nothing to replenish these losses. Fuel was running low. On October 27 and 29, the British destroyed transports with ammunition and fuel on their way to Libya. Rommel decides to retreat to the Fuka line, which was about 100 km to the west.


Australian soldiers during the attack near El Alamein. October 24, 1942



British artillery shelling German positions near El Alamein at night

To be continued ...
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    1 November 2022 05: 30
    Supply and logistics... it was for them that Rommel lost the battle.
    1. +3
      1 November 2022 09: 23
      True, it was not the British Army that won the battle, but the Royal Navy.

      1. +2
        1 November 2022 10: 57
        Quote: Sea Cat
        True, it was not the British Army that won the battle, but the Royal Navy.

        Why did you forget about KVVS? wink
        What sailed to Africa and did not go to supply the longest supply chain was burned in the frontline zone during Desert Air Force raids on supply columns.

        In general, Rommel himself was Rommel's main opponent. Which, having an average of 1500 to 2500 tons of supplies daily in African ports, pulled out a supply line that ate more than the front. And demanded more and more.
        Pomnitsa, Kesselring wrote that Rommel even wanted to take away trucks from the Luftwaffe - apparently in order to leave African airfields without fuel and supplies and finally bury the supply in the frontline zone under the blows of the KVVS. smile
        1. 0
          1 November 2022 15: 41
          Dreams of a parade in Cairo haunted Mussolini and Rommel.
  2. +8
    1 November 2022 06: 08
    The war in Africa is just a small episode in the Second World War, which did not affect its further course in any way. All so-called. Churchill came up with the "turning battle", which allegedly changed the course of the war, in order to somehow bargain at peace conferences. If not Montgomery had won, but Rommel, absolutely nothing would have changed ...
    1. +2
      1 November 2022 06: 19
      From the point of view of the British, this is the greatest battle of WWII ... The Battle of Stalingrad was not even close. smile
      1. +5
        1 November 2022 11: 05
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        From the point of view of the British, this is the greatest battle of WWII ... The Battle of Stalingrad was not even close. smile

        well, like this for the british army for 1942 - this is really the greatest victory. Against the backdrop of previous buttings in Africa, the surrender of Singapore and, not by the night will be remembered, the Anakim meat grinder.
        And in general - not to give the victory in Africa to the uncouth cousins ​​from the colony with their "Torch"? smile
      2. +2
        1 November 2022 14: 47
        "From the point of view of the British, this is the greatest battle of WWII."
        and from the point of view of the amers, their butting with japs ​​for useless islands is even more epic battles. but as always, russia won the war and lost the peace
        1. +1
          1 November 2022 15: 28
          Quote: aglet
          and from the point of view of amers, their butting with japs ​​for worthless islands is even more epic battles

          Well, in terms of the forces involved, the TO battle is really epic. If we do not forget that each aircraft carrier is the equivalent of a pair of tank corps and an air division.
          So the same landing on Okinawa is quite drawn to the Vistula-Oder.

          And for worthless islands we must thank the US industry, which provided the fleet with mobile rear services and quick-assembly bases capable of making any fifth point in the world a full-fledged base even for an aircraft carrier squadron. Otherwise, the Yankees, in order to bring the chain of bases to Japan, would have to storm the famous islands and towns - the same Truk and Rabaul.
          1. 0
            1 November 2022 15: 41
            "So the same landing on Okinawa is quite drawn to the Vistula-Oder."
            you don’t forget about the balance of power when a division of marines is against a battalion of japs, or vice versa. or the assault on the island of kitty - very much in the vein, about the importance of TVD. the Americans chose an enemy according to their strength, and fought with them for 4 years, pretending that these were the main battles in WW2. but for them the main thing is that they again managed to divide up when the USSR, the Euro-Reich, led by Hitler, ground it. and here they are, from the Pacific Ocean, and where is our share? and after all, they found a share, and so far in Germany and Japan there are occupying Amer troops. but, true, the Fritz and Japs believe that it is their Americans who are saving from evil Russia
            1. -2
              2 November 2022 09: 52
              Quote: aglet
              you don’t forget about the balance of power when a division of marines is against a battalion of japs, or vice versa.

              And this is the problem of the enemy. The art of war lies precisely in the concentration of superior forces. And leave fair fights of equals to the trueborn.
              Quote: aglet
              or storming the island of pussy-very much in the vein

              Exercises in conditions as close as possible to combat. smile The Yankees could afford it. Anything is better than fighting for a year for the forester's hut without any success.
              Quote: aglet
              about the importance of TVD. the Americans chose an enemy according to their strength, and fought with them for 4 years, pretending that these were the main battles in WW2.

              Nope. Since February 1941, the Yankees have appointed Europe as the main theater of operations. And TO fought according to the "residual principle". On Guadalcanal, remember, they managed to send European illiquid assets - the ancestors of the "Cobras", which the limes refused.
              It's just that Nimitz was lucky that the armies in the Atlantic did not need his LK and AB. smile
              And so, the United States fought on three fronts, and their military-industrial complex - on five or six.
              Quote: aglet
              but for them the main thing is that they again managed to divide up when the USSR, the Euro-Reich, led by Hitler, ground it. and here they are, from the Pacific Ocean, and where is our share?

              Well, everyone got it wrong. The same USSR successfully jumped on the bandwagon of the war with Japan.
              But for them, the main thing is that they again managed to divide up when the United States of Japan, led by Hirohito, grinded. And here they are, from Europe - and where is our share? laughing
              1. 0
                6 November 2022 12: 30
                "The same USSR successfully jumped on the bandwagon of the war with Japan"
                it was the Amees who successfully jumped into the war with the Germans, and the USSR entered the war with Japan on time and in accordance with the agreements with the allies
          2. +1
            1 November 2022 15: 50
            "So the same landing on Okinawa is quite drawn to the Vistula-Oder"
            The Vistula-Oder operation finally broke the Wehrmacht and paved the way to Berlin. What would have changed if the Americans had not taken Okinawa? absolutely nothing. all these victories over the yaps are only amers propaganda. even if they didn’t fight with the Yaps at all, nothing would change on a global scale
            1. +1
              2 November 2022 09: 58
              Quote: aglet
              The Vistula-Oder operation finally broke the Wehrmacht and paved the way to Berlin.

              And the Okinawa operation paved the way to the Metropolis. The United States received a naval and air base literally in the backyard of the Island Empire. The next step is Olympic and Coronet.
              And in Japan they also understood this - otherwise the rebellion against capitulation would not have been so operetta.
              Quote: aglet
              even if they didn’t fight with the Yaps at all, nothing would change on a global scale

              And why do jingoists always want to put the USSR in an even worse position than it was in real life?
              Want the US not at war with Japan? Get the war between the USSR and Japan and cut off 50% of lend-lease - the very half that went along the Eastern route.
              1. 0
                3 November 2022 09: 03
                "Get the war between the USSR and Japan and cutting off 50% of Lend-Lease - that very half"
                are you so sure about that? why didn’t Japan attack when it didn’t fight with the amers?
                1. 0
                  3 November 2022 10: 41
                  Quote: aglet
                  "Get the war between the USSR and Japan and cutting off 50% of Lend-Lease - that very half"
                  are you so sure about that? why didn’t Japan attack when it didn’t fight with the amers?

                  But because when the time came for an attack on the USSR, Japan was already preparing for war with the United States.
                  The US started the war with Japan long before the first shots were fired. And if the United States sat evenly, without Hull notes, embargoes and other things, then the scumbags from the IJA could well demand to choose the Northern option and fulfill their allied duty to the Reich. For in this option, Japan would have oil.

                  We were saved from the war with Japan in 1941 by two things. Our Far Eastern Front and the US economic and political strike against Japan, which actually determined the direction of the Empire's strike in a future war.
              2. 0
                3 November 2022 09: 06
                "And the Okinawa operation paved the way to the Metropolis"
                it was important for amers. on the course of the Second World War did not matter much
          3. +1
            1 November 2022 15: 52
            "If we do not forget that each aircraft carrier is the equivalent of a pair of tank corps and an air division."
            it's now, not then
            1. +1
              2 November 2022 10: 10
              Quote: aglet
              it's now, not then

              It's just then. AB is from 60 to 100 aircraft. 25-35 thousand tons of steel, mechanisms and electrics with electronics. And about 40 million bucks just for iron. Not current, but then, which were 15 times more expensive.
              And most importantly, a large AB is two and a half years of construction and a year of study. That is, if before the start of the war you do not take care of future replenishment, then most likely you will have to fight only with what was at the beginning of the war or managed to be converted. Or a light trifle according to simplified standards.
              1. 0
                3 November 2022 09: 00
                "That's Just Then"
                you do not confuse the then aircraft carriers with modern ones. those aircraft carriers with a tank corps could compete only in terms of weight, but not in terms of combat effectiveness, and only at sea and a little on the coast, where there were practically no databases, and there were 30-40 aircraft each, like on illastries, heavy , damn it, an aircraft carrier
                1. -1
                  3 November 2022 10: 32
                  Quote: aglet
                  those aircraft carriers with a tank corps only in terms of weight could compete, but not in terms of combat effectiveness, and only at sea and a little on the coast, where there were no databases

                  Almost the entire Pacific Theater of Operations is one continuous coast.
                  And as for efficiency ... the American TF swept through the Japanese near the Philippines in terms of efficiency was comparable to the raid of a pair of tank armies on enemy bases. One way out - and the Empire in the Philippines has neither a fleet nor an air force.
                  An aircraft carrier formation is a concentrated air power that is not limited to fixed bases. This is dominance in the air and at sea in the area of ​​operation. And a nightmare for the rear of the enemy within a radius of several hundred miles.
                  Quote: aglet
                  and there were 30-40 aircraft each, like on illastries, a heavy, damn it, aircraft carrier

                  And what does the British "Illustries" have to do with the USA? The Yankees have Essexes.
                  If we take Polmar, then in the middle of 1944 the Essex air group consisted of 54 fighters, 24 dive bombers and 18 torpedo bombers.
                  At the end of 1944 - 72 fighters, 15 dive bombers and 15 torpedo bombers.
                  Moreover, what the USN called a fighter, in the Air Force of other countries, would have completely passed for an attack aircraft. And with us - and for a normal bomber.
                  1. +1
                    6 November 2022 12: 27
                    "the American TF that swept through the Japanese near the Philippines was comparable in effectiveness to a raid by a pair of tank armies"
                    maybe, all the same, the fronts? The Americans chose an enemy according to their strength, and for a long time pretended that they fought with them. and if they had not fought, what would have changed? what role did these shooters for worthless islands have in the history of World War II?
                    1. -1
                      7 November 2022 10: 15
                      Quote: aglet
                      the Americans chose their opponent according to their strength, and for a long time pretended that they fought with them.

                      Land thinking at its finest. Burdened with the RIA complex, in which, as Slashchev wrote, the scale of the battle is estimated by the severity of the losses. If you didn’t lose a couple of hundred thousand for the battle, then you didn’t fight. wink
                      Indeed, what a trifle - the third fleet of the world and the army, which kicked out the enemy from Southeast Asia and the Philippines in six months. The USSR lost too little in the war - it was also necessary to fight with Japan in 1941.
                      Quote: aglet
                      what role did these shooters for worthless islands have in the history of World War II?

                      The absence of a second front in our Far East. As well as British control over India.
                      If the US does not go to war with Japan, then Japan goes south for oil, bypassing the Philippines - after which Britain loses Indian and Australian divisions at once, which remain at home. And in the worst case, if there is no oil embargo, then somewhere in September-October, Japan goes north. And the USSR gets another front.
                      1. 0
                        7 November 2022 10: 31
                        then Japan goes south for "oil bypassing the Philippines - after which Britain is immediately deprived of the Indian and Australian divisions that remain at home"
                        how can japan prevent the indian, and also the australian, divisions from passing through the suez? especially if the "third fleet" in the world is spinning there?
                      2. 0
                        7 November 2022 11: 24
                        Quote: aglet
                        how can japan prevent the indian, and also the australian, divisions from passing through the suez?

                        Yes, just like it prevented the Australians in real life - when, after the start of the Japanese offensive in Southeast Asia, the leadership of Australia retained the divisions already promised to Britain and decided to return the forces already transferred to Africa to protect the continent. If the United States remains neutral, then Britain will not wait for the Indian divisions in Africa - they will remain to defend India, for the attack on which Japan will be able to use forces that in real life are diverted to the Philippines.
                        And only the army of the Metropolis, Canada and South Africa will remain with the Empire. And cutting off supplies from India, because in this alternative, Nihon Kaigun will be able to come to grips with the Indian Ocean.
                      3. 0
                        9 November 2022 22: 01
                        "for the attack on which Japan can use forces,"
                        do you represent the shoulder of delivery? from japan to india either by sea or by land
                      4. 0
                        10 November 2022 10: 48
                        Against the backdrop of the shoulder from Japan to Burma and from Japan to the Solomon Islands, the Japan-India shoulder does not stand out.
                        In addition, Japan is freeing up forces that are actually employed in the Philippines.
    2. 0
      1 November 2022 15: 50
      Few people know about the battles on the land of the Horn of Africa and in the waters of the Red Sea!
      1. +2
        1 November 2022 19: 40
        "Only a few people know about the battles on the land of the Horn of Africa and in the waters of the Red Sea!"
        this is because these were meager battles, the battalions fought against each other, with the corresponding result
        1. 0
          1 November 2022 19: 55
          “By this moment, Italy had forces in the region that were impressive by African standards - 256 thousand people, including 72 thousand Italians and 184 thousand Africans. The most combat-ready were two divisions manned by Italians - the elite Savoy Grenadiers from the metropolis and Africa, in which white Italian colonists served.Also, the Italians were equipped with 8 separate battalions of black shirts, units of carabinieri, naval forces (about 10 thousand people) and air force (about 8 thousand).
          The natives were organized into 25 colonial brigades (or 29 according to other sources), another 7 brigades were in the process of being formed. Italian native units were very different in the quality of training; as a rule, recruits from Ethiopians outnumbered those recruited from Somalis and Eritreans.
          The troops of Duke Amadeus were armed with 62 tanks (mainly tankettes CV-33/35), 129 armored vehicles and about 150 combat aircraft.
          By the beginning of hostilities, the British had very small forces in the region - it was during this period that Germany was completing the defeat of France, and the defense of the mother country was an obvious priority for the British. There were 9000 British soldiers in Sudan, 5500 in Kenya, and only 1475 in British Somalia. In addition, there were 2500 British troops in Aden, British possession in southern Yemen. The British had no tanks here at all, as well as anti-tank artillery. The RAF in Aden, Sudan and Kenya had 85 aircraft."
          warspot.ru
          War of Duke Amadeus
          Alexander Sirota Aug 07 '15
          "Battalions you say- heh ..."
          1. +1
            2 November 2022 05: 23
            By this time, Italy had an impressive force by African standards in the region - 256 people, including 72 Italians and 184 Africans.

            This is approximately 200-300 km of the front in the Second World War. At the same time, given the quality of the troops, it is generally good to keep 50 km. Of the Italians, only the Blackshirts fought bravely and at the same time completely unable to fight. Africans, even as auxiliary troops, are difficult to use.
            - heh...

            Well, I do not believe the British and their propaganda.
          2. 0
            3 November 2022 09: 24
            ""Battalions you say- heh ...""
            well, a little more, miscalculated a bit. the results are comparable to those of the battalion. small-shaven people fought the Germans all over the world, thousands of kilometers from London - in Africa, all over the area, in Malaysia, Singapore, New Guinea and all over the seas and oceans. they didn’t fight only in Europe, 50 km from the borders of Germany
            1. 0
              3 November 2022 16: 29
              Did the Teutons take Singapore?
              You "rushed All templates"!!!
              Who commanded the Asiatic Corps of the Wehrmacht?
              1. 0
                6 November 2022 12: 20
                "Teutons took Singapore?"
                yes, sir. you have a gap of something there. the Japanese are, of course, allies of the Teutons
  3. +1
    1 November 2022 06: 43
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    From an English point of view

    Well, except that only from the point of view of the British ...
  4. +5
    1 November 2022 08: 38
    How Montgomery's 8th Army stormed Rommel's positions at El Alamein
    How, how ... superior forces in everything ..
  5. +1
    1 November 2022 22: 28
    How accurately in one article and on the basis of one battle the strengths of entire countries are described: the Germans are the best in the war on land, Britain, as befits the Queen of the Seas, took out at the expense of the Royal Navy, and the Americans vilely waited and got into battle only after allies and opponents are already pretty bloodless in battles, they burst in and skimmed off - they hung the laurels of the winner on themselves and imposed their conditions on the bloodless allies and the vanquished.
    1. +1
      2 November 2022 10: 26
      Quote: Dron_sk
      and the Americans vilely waited and got into battle only after both allies and opponents were already pretty bloodless in battles, burst in and skimmed off - they hung the laurels of the winner on themselves and imposed their conditions on the bloodless allies and the vanquished.

      Firstly, the Americans simply had nothing to fight with - they used all their combat-ready divisions in Torch. The US Army a year before the war consisted of four settlement divisions. What can I say - half the number of personnel of the US ground forces before the war accounted for coastal artillery. Both the reserve l / s and the capabilities of the military-industrial complex corresponded to these four divisions.
      Yes, by the end of 1941, according to the documents, the Yankees had 50 divisions. But, as the teachings showed, most of this wealth was crowd of men with rifles - because the stock of weapons available in the arsenals was plundered by the FDR at Lend-Lease, orders from industry were also partially reoriented to save Runway No. 1, and personnel training was faced with a wild shortage of sergeants, officers, materiel and training areas. In general, something similar to our mob divisions at the beginning of the war at the recruitment stage.
      Secondly, what was a boon in the defense of the United States turned out to be a nightmare in the offensive. Because between the divisions and the battlefield lay the Atlantic and a foreign coast. It was necessary not only to form an army, but also to provide it with the means of landing and supplying supplies. And they ate the American divisions with their mechanization and motorization fairly. Plus, it was necessary to deliver it all to Africa, and not to the bottom of the sea. That is, to ensure normal PLO on the route and in the landing area.
      And all this in conditions when the angry cries of Nimitz and MacArthur are heard from the other side of the United States, demanding the same thing, and even more and even faster. Because they are cutting for Guadalcanal, and the US forces are melting before our eyes. smile

      In general, as they could - so they came. The United States did not particularly strive to tear the veins and shed American blood for an ally who was losing with its own numerical superiority. This ally and so the army was actually re-created.
      1. 0
        9 November 2022 17: 22
        I agree with you in general that the main front for the United States in that war was in the Pacific region against Japan. After I left that comment under which you answered, I already realized that I got excited about the United States and its vile late entry into the war in Europe, because their main forces were involved from the very beginning of WW2 against Japan, and only Japan directly threatened them, not Germany and Italy. Well, the fact that the US ground forces were insignificant before the war is understandable, they were not going to fight in the depths of the continents, they knew that no one would attack the continental main part of the United States, they were preparing to fight specifically against Japan for influence in the Asia-Pacific region. And anyway, about 4 land divisions before the war, this is rather cunning, American sources preaching the position that the United States was not ready and did not want that war. The fact that they inflicted a decisive defeat on the Japanese fleet at Midway already half a year after Pearl Harbor indicates that they were ready for that war. And their political and military leadership deliberately led the country to war, putting forward unacceptable demands on Japan, just as the United States is now making unacceptable demands on Russia. And they don’t care, just like then, that people will die, including Americans, the main thing is their ambitions, the ambitions of even more of the world under the United States, the whole world ...
        1. +1
          10 November 2022 10: 39
          Quote: Dron_sk
          I agree with you in general that the main front for the United States in that war was in the Pacific region against Japan.

          The most interesting thing is that it doesn't. The main front for the United States was Europe - this was recorded back in February 1941 at the ABC-1 conference. And Nimitz and MacArthur were content with what was left after the ETTD.
          Even "Norka" and "Wasp" were given to Nimitz only after Midway - before that, LK was guarded by "Tirpitz", and AB shuttled to Mediterranean.
          So "Torch" is the maximum that the United States could do at that time.
          Quote: Dron_sk
          And anyway, about 4 land divisions before the war, this is rather cunning, American sources preaching the position that the United States was not ready and did not want that war.

          Nope, no trickery. This is the usual isolationism + defense strategy with the help of the fleet and air force. The US ground forces were needed purely to finish off those who have surfaced. smile In addition, a massive army is a very expensive business, and the US budget after the Great Depression was already worth spending.
          American sources just write that the United States began to prepare for the war before it began - against the background of the aggravation of the situation in Europe. Roosevelt's million is, EMNIP, 1938. But the preparation process was crippled, on the one hand, by the lack of trained personnel and the industry that did not have time to develop, and on the other, by the constant correction of plans (increasing) and the need to be distracted by the armament of a couple more armies.
          Quote: Dron_sk
          The fact that they inflicted a decisive defeat on the Japanese fleet at Midway already half a year after Pearl Harbor indicates that they were ready for that war.

          So this fleet is the main force of the United States before the war. And then, under Midway, the Yankees did their best to lose - but the statistics did not give them. smile
          Quote: Dron_sk
          And their political and military leadership deliberately led the country to war, putting forward unacceptable demands on Japan, just as the United States is now making unacceptable demands on Russia.

          Ahem...you want to say that Russia in Ukraine is behaving like Japan in China? belay
          The fact of the matter is that Japan of the 30s did everything possible to make the war against it seem justified. The United States, of course, was far from angels and entered the war not for the sake of helping the Chinese ... but formally, their demands were quite normal. Japan itself, by its actions, drove itself into an extremely vulnerable situation, in which even the US demand for an end to the war became a pretext for a new war.
          1. 0
            11 November 2022 16: 02
            "Ahem ... you mean that Russia in Ukraine is behaving like Japan in China?"
            No, of course not, I didn't mean that. And he compared only the ultimatum form of communication between the United States and Japan of those times and the ultimatum form of communication between the United States and Russia in recent years and today.
            For the rest, I agree with you. I can admit my mistakes. You obviously know history in general and especially American history better. And specifically in this dialogue, I often wished for reality, reinforcing this with a superficial knowledge of American history) So I basically agree with you, but still then somehow it will be necessary to clarify these "quite normal" US requirements for Japan before the war, because that in those sources that I read, these requirements were called boorish in relation to Japan and, of course, those that Japan could not agree to.
  6. 0
    3 November 2022 11: 30
    Quote: Alexey RA
    For in this option, Japan would have oil.

    What kind of oil?
    1. 0
      7 November 2022 11: 28
      Quote: Chack Wessel
      What kind of oil?

      Should the US remain completely neutral? Then Japan has at least American oil.
      For the oil embargo is actually an invitation to Japan to go to war with the Allies. After its introduction, the United States cannot remain neutral. And since they are neutral in this alternative, then there is no embargo, Hull is silent, and the tankers are sailing to Japan.
      1. 0
        8 November 2022 14: 38
        As I understand it, in the event of a war with Russia, the Japs could conquer the oil fields that were discovered after the war ... Am I mistaken?
        1. +1
          8 November 2022 15: 01
          Quote: Chack Wessel
          As I understand it, in the event of a war with Russia, the Japs could conquer the oil fields that were discovered after the war ... Am I mistaken?

          They can. But the problem is that the oil fields of the Soviet Far East for the 40s are potential oil. It takes time, money, equipment and personnel to convert it into production.
          In real life, the USSR, with incredible efforts, was able to raise production from its fields in Northern Sakhalin by only one and a half times, and the increase since 1944 is largely due to the transfer of former Japanese concession sites to the USSR.
          1941 - 479.6 thousand tons;
          1942 - 540.2 thousand tons;
          1943 - 569.6 thousand tons;
          1944 - 616.5 thousand tons;
          1945 - 695.7 thousand tons.

          Just for comparison: the monthly consumption of fuel by IJN alone ranged from 250 to 300 thousand tons. And the estimated total annual consumption of all of Japan in wartime is about 6 million tons (in real life, it took another 20 percent more).

          That is why the Japanese went south - there was not only oil itself, but also all the related infrastructure for its production, processing and transportation.
          1. 0
            10 November 2022 09: 12
            So the question arises - what did the Japs need to catch in the USSR? That is why they moved to Asia.
            1. +1
              10 November 2022 10: 57
              Quote: Chack Wessel
              So the question arises - what did the Japs need to catch in the USSR? That is why they moved to Asia.

              The Japanese moved south when their oil supplies were cut off. In such a situation, they simply had no alternatives.
              If the US remains neutral, then oil supplies to Japan also remain. And in this situation, the General Staff of the IJA may well lean towards the Kwantung scumbags, deciding first to deal with the northern problem. Moreover, the situation on the ETTD after Smolensk or Kyiv seems to be developing in favor of the Germans allied to the Japanese, and the divisions of the Red Army from the Far East went west.