Hi all! Timestamps are available in the description, and subtitles are available. Some fun statistics: the video length is 2 hours 50 minutes, the script length is 27,318 words, contains 742 citations, from 57 sources, and the final render took 6 hours and 45 minutes. In total, all the files amount to 870 GBs of hard drive space. This video has been in the works for the past 6 to 7 months, with my editor/animator (Gigz) deserving a big thank you for all her hard work! I also pulled an all-nighter last night to get it to you on time, so I really do hope you all enjoy it. A big thank you to Gigz, as well as Terri (who made the map and the thumbnail), and another a big THANK YOU to my Patreons and SubscribeStars for making this video possible. For further reading, I highly recommend the series “The Crucible of War” by Barrie Pitt, which is probably the best all-round account of the North African Campaign. The South African “Crisis in the Desert” is another good book, but can be difficult to get a hold of, is biased towards Pienaar, and is a bit out of date. Playfair’s Official British History is also recommended, even if it’s out of date and biased towards Auchinleck. Carver’s “Dilemma’s of the Desert” is a necessary read if you’re interested in the debate about whether Ritchie “went rogue” in this battle or not. Forczyk’s “Desert Armour” is also a decent modern source for this battle and others.

@gingerofwest4385

24 күн бұрын

🥳

@dermotrooney9584

24 күн бұрын

Just clicked go and thumbing up already! 👍

@ABO3LYY

24 күн бұрын

All these figures are a testimony of your just and fair search into history, a truly one of kind. Greetings from Saudi Arabia.

@Hillbilly001

24 күн бұрын

Tell Gigz "Well done". Thanks again for all your hard work. I'm only a little way into it and it's outstanding to say the least. Now, back to the video. Cheers from Tennessee

@gagamba9198

24 күн бұрын

Thanks for all your and your editor's hard work.

It's Awesome to see so many people excited for what is essentially a very well prepared and produced independent documentary film. Great work TIK! We are extremely grateful for what you do.

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Thank you so much! The feedback so far has been great

@Hillbilly001

24 күн бұрын

Well said.

@TheSilvert8008

22 күн бұрын

AMEN!!!

Forward Observer: '' Rommel himself just passed my position and was smilling and waving at me, I repeat, Rommel himself is here!'' Officer from 30 Corps: ''There are no enemy forces in your area''.

@Calvin_OBlenis

17 күн бұрын

"I have been wounded. The Germans are treating me. The medic is very polite, his name is Franz. Say hello, Franz." „Hallo!" "We say again, there are no, repeat no, enemy troops near you."

@gernhard.reinholdsen

11 күн бұрын

The five stages of grief in the British Army: 1. Denial 2. Denial 3. Denial 4. Denial 5. Denial

@ac4694

8 күн бұрын

@@gernhard.reinholdsen I would change 5 to: "ok, you're right, but we don't change the plan, because he might use pincer maneuver"

@lllordllloyd

3 күн бұрын

I think Rommel kept letting Messervy go. He was one of the Germans' best assets.

@jgomo3877

2 күн бұрын

"... a sandstorm bought an end to the fighting, however, the British lost a Grant tank after setting fire to it while attempting to brew some tea" *rule britannia is heard faintly in the distance over the sounds of the sandstorm*

Oh my god he's back, over 2 and a half hours on the battle of Gazala, what a treat. Thank you TIK.

Messervy went on to distinguish himself in Burma as a corps commander in the 14th Army. Under a very capable commander in Bill Slim and without the rivalries and hatreds that abounded in Auchinleck's MEC, Messervy was able to function as a very capable corps commander who played a big role in both the battle of Kohima and the capture of Rangoon. One of the lessons Messervy seems to have learned from his time as 7th AD commander is the importance of combined arms. He insisted that the 14th army should use medium tanks, not just light ones, and had Grant tanks shipped out to India for use in Burma where they proved crucial at Kohima. Ritchie too has a redemption arc. He returned to the UK and was given a division to command there. He did well enough and was given XII Corps to command in the British 2nd Army in NW Europe where he did a very competent job and showed good leadership throughout. In both Messervy's and Ritchie's cases it looks like they were undermined by the command atmosphere and chaos of Auchinleck's MEC. Whilst some of his strategy was sound, he allowed far too much infighting, chaos and confusion amongst his subordinates therefore the defeats and setbacks in North Africa under his command lead me to think he bore the lion's share of the blame because he didn't control his army in the same way that Slim and Montgomery could.

@TheImperatorKnight

23 күн бұрын

I agree. As much as Messervy and Ritchie made mistakes, the overall situation was not favourable to them due to Auchinleck and Churchill. I don't think any one person can be blamed entirely for Gazala, it was just a whole host of bad decisions that were made during and prior to the battle that contributed to the defeat. That said, it's understandable why certain individuals did receive the blame.

@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw

19 күн бұрын

Then again Auchinleck also got booted to India replacing Wavell (again) and as overall commander in India he was, of sorts, Messervy's boss again. And Slim credits Auchinleck massively in his book for giving him the support and means to build 14th Army. I reckon that as TIK has said, it was a combinations of bad decisions, poor tactical and operational doctrine, Churchill breathing down everyone's necks, and the wrong people at the wrong places at the wrong time. Ritchie would be a decent corps commander in NW Europe, but apparently not suited for army command. Peter Principle at work. And Messervy, being an infantry officer of the Indian Army was probably not the most optimal choice to head an armored division in the chaos of 1942. The irony is that Messervy would end up Pakistan's 1st chief of the Pakistani Army. Which meant that when Pakistan and India went to war with each other he would command an army to fight against an army commanded by another British general, as General Lockhart commanded the Indian Army. And both armies were under nominal control of......., drumroll, Auchinleck, then supreme commander of both country's armies.

@lllordllloyd

8 күн бұрын

You're blaming the only competent guy in the theatre for the problems (Churchill and Montgomery shared your views). Auchinlek was from the Indian Army and was constantly undermined by the British Army officers, especially the cavalry and other polo/drinks club types. The record makes it clear he was constantly trying to get them to think much more clearly about how to fight modern war, but they were woefully ill-equipped by temperament and training. Auchinlek had to work with what he had: there were very few capable British armour commanders and much demand for them. The need to work with what he had, and his role as a theatre commander, not 8th Army commander, meant he had to use the good men to keep an eye on the plodders. On top of that, offciers who were fine against Italians or second-rate enemies often struggled with the pace and dynamism of Rommel: when the default British order was always "Charge!!", the Desert Fox just had to deploy his AT guns and flash around a few tanks to draw the British onto them. Which brings us to the British Army itself: Carver says 'we felt like amateurs fighting professionals' and he notes his (cavalry) regiment was just handed tanks of the eve of war and told to get on with it. The British military establishment was not cleaned out after the First World War, and most of the old regimental class system was intact. So they resisted modernisation in the interwar period and eventually saw off Hobart (where was he when needed? In the freaking Home Guard!) and the whole revolution in mobile warfare largely passed them by. Back to polo, while Hitler's men were learning all they could in Spain. The whole beloved 'regimental tradition' inhibited combined arms so much that is was still lacking in Normandy in 1944. From Belgium to Singapore, co-ordinating forces was beyond Britian's generals... especially depressing given that in 1918 they were the best in the world. The infighting and division you speak of- and it was very real- was just an extension of the British Army's culture. Really only Montgomery had the moral authority and will to clean our divisional and even corps commanders: and that moral authority was built on bullshit. You are generous to Messervey and Ritchie. Neither had a comparable challenge after leaving the desert, Messervey had the enormous benefit of serving under Britian's best high commander. Both later faced woefully weak/compromised enemies. Auchinlek saved the British in Crusader and again after Gazala. He was disgustingly libeled by Churchill (whose competence in military matters is risible) and Montgomery, who barely won with material advantages vastly superior to anything his predecessors could have dreamed of. Montgonery's genuis... and I do not dismiss this as very valuable... was to hold his subordinates on a tight leash so their 'what-O, toodle-pip, let's charge those 88s!' tendencies could not lose battles.

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-

5 күн бұрын

@@lllordllloyd I do have to symphathise with Auchinleck, I mean the fact he didn't even have Richard O Connor under his command, but was instead stuck with such mediocre subordinates like Ritchie and with a lack of equipment, compared to when Monty had Brian Horrocks and Richard McReery and over a quarter of a million men. It really was a mammoth task he had to deal with.

Accidentally setting your tank on fire from brewing tea is the most British thing ever 😂

@pavelslama5543

23 күн бұрын

"Oh gosh, the tank is on fire..." "Oh bugger, how did that happen?" "No idea mate, but we should probably escape it." "Nooo, my tea!" The rest of the company: "what a nice opportunity to brew more tea..."

@TheEmperorsChampion964

23 күн бұрын

@@pavelslama5543 *rule Britannia intensifies*

In case you are wondering what "bir" means it's a well. Libya is a desert where the caravans from old times stopped in these places to resupply with water hence cities were formed at places where wells were dug.

@TheNoonish

24 күн бұрын

Thumbs up for the tidbit.

@Huron375

23 күн бұрын

Good to know!

@LARPing_Services_LLC

20 күн бұрын

noice

@LavrencicUrban

18 күн бұрын

CONVENIENT TERM FOR BRITS AND GERMANS ALIKE, OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING TO BE DRUNK.

@brendanukveteran2360

15 күн бұрын

Libya

I really LOVE the exchange of radio messages with that forward observer. "The enemy is here" "No !" Was grima wormtongue feeding lies and casting a spell on that officer like in lord of the rings ? (Saruman attacked ! No he didn't!)

@TheNoonish

24 күн бұрын

I do wonder if they had the same reporting problems in the desert that Americans had in Europe. It seems like almost every armored vehicle Americans spotted was a "Tiger Tank," and I wonder if every armored vehicle the British saw in desert warfare was a "Panzer IV." It could explain the denial if you're getting lots of false positives from people overreacting to armored cars performing reconnaissance.

“We all know how accurate American journalism is, especially during a war.” DAMN

@iatsd

24 күн бұрын

And I actually object to that one. American *journalism* is not really any worse than most other countries efforts, albeit various Americanisms of breathlessness over just-how-gosh-darned-amazing-[they]-are, whereas American *historians* are well known in the rest of the world for being generally terrible outside of a few areas (no surprises, exclusively American history) and a few good historians individually.

@AndreLuis-gw5ox

23 күн бұрын

​@@iatsd Its joke. Lighten up, buddy

@jugbywellington1134

23 күн бұрын

@@iatsd US "journalism" was dreadful during Britain's occupation of Greece and battles with the Greek commies. The British left-wing press was too. None of the journalists did any proper investigation; the lefty press was pro-commie, and the US press anti-British. Interestingly, even the Russians stayed out of it because they respected the spheres of influence agreed with the Anglo-Americans. The press is even worse today, of course,

@Paciat

21 күн бұрын

Look at it the other way. We all know how accurate non American journalism is, especially during a war. Like nazi or commie journalism. DAMN!!!! ITS FAR WORST!!!!

@Seldonlair

21 күн бұрын

@@iatsd You can switch out the word "American" and "Americanisms" for any other country and the same statement is true. Russia, China, England pre-WWI, France during Napoleon, Germany at multiple points in time, Japan in the run-up to 1937 and 1941, North Korea, etc... And History is biased on the opinions of the observer, but that has obviously gone over your head because otherwise you would be cognizant of TIK's multiple references to histories and historians who are blatantly pushing opinions that simply aren't true and often are blatant propoganda. Just like you are now. Your opinions and biases on "American" historians rendering them worse than the rest of the world is just blind prejudice and your own ego.

The initial battle of Gazala in a nutshell: Recon Brigade: "I see over 50 tanks attacking the south" Command: "No you dont" Recon Brigade: Yes. I do. Command: No. You dont. Recon Brigade: Yes. I do. Command: No. You dont. And then all hell broke loose...

@t.hurson2298

24 күн бұрын

Like a real life Monty Python sketch! XD

@SamuelJamesNary

24 күн бұрын

@@t.hurson2298 - They like to argue in their spare time.

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-

24 күн бұрын

You didn't see Graphite, you didn't!

@oneofspades

23 күн бұрын

Lol. Keystone cops.

@DirkusTurkess

23 күн бұрын

Needed one more paragraph. Recon Brigade: ........... Command: Told ya.

Its interesting that the British and German commands both had issues with insubordination, but German insubordination tended to be recklessly offensive whereas British insubordination tended to be excessive caution or defensiveness.

@merocaine

23 күн бұрын

Probably something to do with NAZI ideology, the cult of the offensive and a sub conscious fear of a long war.

@sorsocksfake

22 күн бұрын

In a way. The latter is more common, since reckless leaders tend to be self-destructive. It's also much harder to convince your troops to do a seemingly suicidal charge, than to do a needless retreat. But hubris has always been the flipside to cowardice, and can be far more disastrous. But it should probably be noted that particularly in the Panzer school of thought, this was largely upended. The rapidity, concentrated force and novelty, along with the flexible command style of the German army (Auftragstaktik) allowed a highly skilled commander a completely different tool (I'm not sure to what extent they understood that themselves), that we sometimes now call Blitzkrieg. In essence, they'd move and improvise so fast, that strategy became obsolete. With that, the enemy army is suddenly effectively leaderless. Worse than that: their orders will be obsolete, leading to bad actions or outright morale loss and insubordination. Not that the Axis know what's going on, but they at least are prepared for that. And when needed, Rommel will defy death again to check things out himself. He'll generally know the battlefield, and that keeps his underlings confident. Do note that, to do that, you have to get rid of all incompetent commanders. It's risky, so you need leaders who take good calculated risks, and who when they roll poorly, can adapt to that problem.

@lllordllloyd

4 күн бұрын

The German officer/staff system was built on this from generations before: a senior staff officer was *supposed* to be critical of the unit commander, despite seniority. Friction, dispute and argument was a desirable and necessary part of command. For the British, disputes arose from idiotic regimental rivalry and who I didn't get on with at staff college in 1924.

That radio dispatch from the FO is just insane. It's impressive that he didn't start cussing out the damn officer when he can see the enemy right in front of him. It's COs like that who get people killed.

@hanskooiman6477

24 күн бұрын

Yes, lions led by donkeys!!!

@ryanelliott71698

23 күн бұрын

It reads like a comedy. “I can see the enemies” “No you don’t” “I can physically see rows of tanks approaching me!” “I disagree”

@lllordllloyd

4 күн бұрын

This sort of incompetence was very common in the previous war, too. But we have a generation of British historians dedicated to exonerating the Messerveys, Lumsdens and Ritchies of 1915-17. 'Learning curve', they call it. Back then, they had names like Gough, Haking and Butler. It's ironic the two men who lost their jobs out of this were the only commanders in the theatre with any intellectual clarity, Auk, and Dorman-Smith. It would have continued, too: the militarily foolish Churchill wanted Gott to command 8th Army. As a side note, one of the Grant units in this battle was led by Phillip Roberts, a Tank Corps man. Promoted on actual merit (shock!), he led the 11th Armoured Division in Normandy and beyond, Britain's best (but somewhat under-employed). Thank you TIK History for this candid, Frank outline of the battle.

I love how nonchalantly you mentioned the British accidentally destroyed one of their tanks trying to make tea lmaoo I had to do a retake to make sure I heard that correctly

@jamesbeeching6138

24 күн бұрын

Literally "brewed" it up!!😅

@inxendere

24 күн бұрын

@@jamesbeeching6138 brits being brits

@TheNoonish

24 күн бұрын

But DID they manage to get their tea? That's the real question.

@morningstar9233

24 күн бұрын

Immediately thought of the Uboat commander who lost his boat due to incorrectly using the toilet.

@panzerdeal8727

24 күн бұрын

Robert Crisp in his book 'Brazen Chariots" Commented on a time when ,over the radio . a definatly Tetunoic voice was heard to say, "You may, Brew up !" . That phrase had a double meaning in the desert war.

Something for everyone: great graphics; simpleton strategy; terrible tactics; subordinate squabbles; ludicrous logistics; mangling minefields; tank technicalities; getaway general; mystery mortars; paradoxical Pienaar; gobs of guns; problematically mental Prime Minister; roaming Rommel; Indian infantry; malicious Malta; walloped whisky; and tea brewing tank busters. And it was all well done. I behold a workman's wonder. Thank you TIK.

One guy in his apartment does a better job delivering history videos than the "history" television channels are willing to do.

@davethompson3326

20 күн бұрын

"History" television channels? Oh, the Aliens and Jeebus channels?

@jonathanpersson1205

20 күн бұрын

Yes good sound effects and visual effects seems to be inversely related to the quality of the content

742 citations… Closer to reality then reality

@GiovanniPietro9000

24 күн бұрын

FEELS LIKE WE ARE INSIDE ROMMEL'S TANK!

@JoeyJoJoJrShabbado

24 күн бұрын

@@GiovanniPietro9000 he rarely drove a tank and Frederick Von didn’t even learn how to drive one until the western front. Idk what to make of that. Always found that interesting

@AustrianPainter14

22 күн бұрын

And what do you get out of pretending everything and everything you don’t like is socialist?

@JoeyJoJoJrShabbado

21 күн бұрын

@@AustrianPainter14 username checks out

The real tragedy of the battle which only got a passing reference in this video was that the supply of whisky was hit and burned. Much good whiskey was lost on that tragic day and we remember it's passing with tears and sorrow.

@BlueMoonday19

23 күн бұрын

I've read that the Allies loved capturing Italian supplies because of their amazing food rations.

@michaelgurd7477

22 күн бұрын

Brits should have let the Axis capture and consume said whiskey dump; result of battle then could have been quite different.

@brendanukveteran2360

15 күн бұрын

Three of my Uncles died during that Battle...got a joke about them?

@BlueMoonday19

14 күн бұрын

@@brendanukveteran2360 no offence intended to you and your family mate. My apologies if my comment came across that way.

Koenigs driver being his mistress seems so very French. Another awesome Battlestorm doco. On the one hand, Rommel acting exactly as we should expect him to. But for me, I feel for Ritchie in the same way I feel for Jellicoe at Jutland. When your subordinates are either not telling you anything or are painting a rosy picture when everything has gone to hell, its all but impossible to react to events in an appropriate way. At the same time you have to believe your subordinates are capable enough to direct their units in a way that leads to a good chance for success in whatever endeavour they are committed to. Ultimately Gazala was a complete disaster but perhaps the one thing Ritchie got right was to abandon the front line and get most of the South Africans and the 50th Division to safety.

@alanpennie

22 күн бұрын

In the end he got a grip on the battle and at least managed to save most of the infantry. It wasn't much, but it was something.

YES! Honey, wake up! TIK just posted Battlestorm Gazala!!!!

@UncleJoeLITE

23 күн бұрын

"...and I have absolutely no idea why she divorced me..." lol. You're lucky your better half is into history!

Thank you. My father was killed during the Battle of Gazala. Your detailed description helps me to understand the context of his sacrifice

@speggeri90

18 күн бұрын

Sorry to hear about your father. God bless.

the selfishness, the lack of discipline, the lack of decisiveness and tactical and strategic calculation of British high command in this battle is mindboggling, and once again, you nailed your battlestorm TIK, i like that you put color radius around unit boxes now, small changes but it shows more of the size of the units and the area they occupied.

@prof_kaos9341

24 күн бұрын

Yet Auchinlek has many modern apologists who ignore HIS army's poor tactics, it's failure to fight as a team & it's repeated failures mostly failing for repeating the same errors. As commander he was responsible.

@cfbythebeach

22 күн бұрын

@@prof_kaos9341 yet the Auk advised Richie to fight in divisional strength not brigade strength.

@prof_kaos9341

22 күн бұрын

@@cfbythebeach Who was responsible for such basic failures? Particularly not working as a team, a fundamental. "Jock Columns" were the Auk's pet advisor, Dormant-Smith's idea. What is clear is the DAK was under strength & a 1/3 the size of WDF, with major supply issues (critical for mechanized units) yet DAK ran rings around WDF/8th Army for 18 months using the same tactics over & over. But the lessons Rommel repeatedly gave them were ignored. Time & again losing 100s of tanks & tens of thousands of troops. It's unforgivable to make the same mistakes over & over.

@cfbythebeach

22 күн бұрын

@@prof_kaos9341 it was the infantry with anti tank guns and the gunners with 25 pdrs that bossed the show time and again. ANZAC infantry particularly. British armour just made up the numbers. Not exactly but look at their performance .

@prof_kaos9341

21 күн бұрын

@@cfbythebeach Kia Ora, sadly it's about Britain's failure to understand & implement combined arms tactics & to fight as one team, helping each other. While Rommel repeatedly showed them how. Here are 2 Kiwi stories. At 1st Alamein, July '42, Gen Freyberg to Brig Kippenberger "I will never trust f-ing Gatehouse again" [Brigadier commanding the tanks], after the capture, whole, of 4th Brig, the most experienced of NZ div's 3 brigades (included Capt Upham). Captured once all the ATGs & 25pdr's were knocked out while waiting for the expected tank support to arrive. The tanks were sitting watching 2 miles away, having refused Kippenberger's requests to fulfill orders to advance to & support 4th Brig. An exact repeat of the loss of [then] Lt Col Kippenberger's 21st Brigade during Op. Crusader. As you know, tanks are to use their mobility & exploit thru a hole in the line, attacking the rear. At 2nd Alamein the furthest the tanks got was ~15miles behind the lines. Yet the last official action of 2nd Alamein was the NZ infantry doing the tanks job of exploiting. They got to Halfaya (Hellfire) Pass, 42miles behind the lines. A scratch company of ~150 organised by Kippenberger assaulted & captured the top. Previously Halfaya Pass had been a tough nut, this time quick thinking & a night attack captured 600 troops, 30 vehicles, a dozen heavy arty & over 20 ATGs, waiting to setup at 1st light.

Well seems like I won't go to bed early after all, thanks for your hard work TIK

Finally, the legend of Pienaar continues.

@prof_kaos9341

23 күн бұрын

Many in SAF wanted to side with Germany who had helped them in the Boer War only 40yrs earlier

@blob22201

23 күн бұрын

​@@prof_kaos9341 yeah, they were bad losers

К сожалению, очень плохо знаю английский, но как же меня восхищает качество видео : детальное, пространное рассмотрение тем, видеоряд, ссылки на источники, риторика автора - всё это рождает запредельную радость и мысли наподобие "Как же это прекрасно"! Этот канал - мой мотив учить английский.

@alexalexin9491

24 күн бұрын

Для лучшего понимания стоит включать субтитры и снижать скорость воспроизведения где-то до х0.85.

@prof_kaos9341

24 күн бұрын

Check out his other series they are all well researched. Stalingrad, Courland Pocket, Operation Crusader, Operation Compass. Or his many other 1hr videos.

@MarkVrem

23 күн бұрын

@@alexalexin9491 with AI you can probably on the fly translate the captions as well. I have no idea how, but extremely likely it is possible already. MIght require downloading the video and running it through some other player. If I am remembering correctly ---I have seen in Windows Media Player - AI generated captions. Translation would just be a plug-in probably.

@lachesachairulanam9137

22 күн бұрын

Try Yandex translation. (попробуйте яндекс ютуб перевод) I used google translate (Я использовал переводчик гугл)

TIK haters....IT IS OVER!!!!!!

@WiseOwl_1408

24 күн бұрын

So over, it's JOEOVER

@joshualoganhoi4

24 күн бұрын

@@WiseOwl_1408 It has NEVER BEEN MORE JOEVER!!!!!

@oscarh.hansen2490

24 күн бұрын

Alliedbros...

@radicalesotericcentrist

24 күн бұрын

@@oscarh.hansen2490 The West(ern allied position) has fallen.

@ndogg20

24 күн бұрын

@@WiseOwl_1408 , Joe who? Joe Rogan? haven't heard of this squabble till now. (hopefully I didn't set myself up for a JOE MAMA torrent of replies).

This is spectacularly good. Best maps ever. Best analysis ever. This is why we become history lovers -- when history is done right, we can gain understanding.

The wait is over!

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

I believe you were first! And yes, I'm also really happy it's finally out

@MarkVrem

24 күн бұрын

I wish he didn't start with the word "PREVIOUSLY" threw me for a loop thinking I missed one LOL

@TheNoonish

24 күн бұрын

AAAAND....the wait for Battlestorm: El Alamein begins!

You have the BEST history videos on You Tube. Very impressive. Lots of detail, sources, and your very engaging. As an older historian I have been fortunate to speak with or hang out with people who were in WWII. Sadly almost all of them have passed on. Keep up the great work your doing!

I rarely feel a need to thank a yt creator for their vidoes but your work really cannot be appreciated enough Thank you TiK

Thank you. I sat here and absorbed the whole thing and after 2 hours and 50 minutes I was sorry to see it end. A true testament to you and your crew. Bravo.

Gotta say, for like a umpteenth time now, I do sorely miss the upbeat music at the start of battlestorm episodes and when major action happens

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

I miss the music too, but people complained so I stopped putting any in 🤷‍♂

@darthcalanil5333

24 күн бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight I actually don't believe that the majority prefer it without. Every single "map documentary" on the Internet has music. Maybe run a poll?

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

I could do. But to avoid copyright, I also had to make the music myself, which wasn't the best, and it was also time consuming to make and add into the video. So I don't know.

@andreavoigtlander1087

24 күн бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight I did like the Music Personally. (:

@TheNoonish

24 күн бұрын

I, too, miss the Panzers Advance music.

Cue the Benny Hill theme! Seriously, the amount of chaos, misinformation and often sheer luck on both sides is astounding. Truly an eye-opener to the realities of the desert war.

Just watched the first 10 minutes - oh my god this is brilliant.

These North African campaigns are wild, complex, and too much forgotten about. Excellent video!

@AustrianPainter14

24 күн бұрын

Good thing the ‘good’ guys win WWII! Otherwise we would be speaking German instead of Arabic or Hindi and baby boomers would not be able to call everybody and everything they don’t like a ‘socialist!’ Yeah communism! We allied with the Soviets! Yeah!

The lack of generalship, refusing orders, failing to both assess their positions and those of the enemy and take the initiative are in the best tradition of the generals of the Confederate Army of the Tennessee. Bunch of incompetent cavaliers the lot.

Greetings from Czech republic ❤ Jaroslav

Me: I've got too much to do, so I'll only watch about 15-20 minutes. 3 hours later. . . Kudos to TIK on an excellent presentation. Fantastic job, Mr. TIK.

The 7th Brigade, 1st Free French and 4th South African Armoured Cars were by far the most effective Allied forces in this battle

Appointing Neil Ritchie as Army commander of the Eighth army was a disaster. I imagine the outcome here would have been much different if either Richard O Connor hadn't been captured or Auchinleck was running things.

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Due to the way British armoured doctrine was at the time, I'm not so sure it would have made much difference. Yes, a better commander would have helped, but the issue here was that the British treated their tanks like cavalry, and the way the British officer corps was set up meant that the 'cavalry' weren't being commanded by armoured officers. They were being sent piecemeal into battle as that was what their doctrine said - and Auchinleck agreed with that policy (as indicated later during the retreat to El Alamein).

@williamleskovec4063

24 күн бұрын

Despite all the criticism he seemed to have decent instincts about where his forces should be arranged to meet the threat from Axis attacks. The primary problem with his command was that he couldn't establish authority over all the subordinate commands. Frequently during the battle, a quick and coordinated counterattack would have sealed the fate of the Afrika Korps, but this never came to be because of squabbling subordinates. His frequent deferral of decisions to consensus is an admission of this weakness. You have to wonder if this attitude of his subordinates was largely motivated by petty resentment that they were passed in line by the well connected staff officer.

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-

24 күн бұрын

@@williamleskovec4063 Yeah Auchinleck just didn't have a tight grip on his officers, it was only when Monty showed up that the squabbling appears to have stopped and for the first time his subordinates would follow commands.

@jamesbeeching6138

24 күн бұрын

Yep 100% agree...The loss of O'connor was a worse blow than losing a whole Division...😢

@jamesbeeching6138

24 күн бұрын

And while yes tactics were bad if O'connor hadn't been captured who knows how Crusader would have panned out???

Those active citations and length scales at the bottom of the screen are amazing.

Another Tik battlestorm video. Like having Christmas in May.

What a fabulous treat which really opens up the myth of Rommel. Thank you TIK - immensely informative!

Great to see this series back in action. Honestly shocked that this only came out to less than 3 hours. Then again, Crusader was arguably a more confusing mess of a battle to piece together (then again this one sorta is too). As an American, I place my hand over my heart at the admission that the Grant tank was far superior to anything on both sides at the time, even frustrating Rommel with it's effectiveness. It's something I never hear get brought up in various videos going over the tank, writing it off as a piece of junk stop gap before the Sherman.

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

It does feel like it should be longer, but I also think my script was very efficient for this one. I took my time and condensed a lot of information into a smaller space, so that might explain it. The reason it took so long to edit was because there was just so many battle-animations in there - it's way more condensed than Stalingrad was, which means there's more action per hour of the video, if that makes sense.

@johnburns4017

24 күн бұрын

The British did not really like the tall high profile Grant tank, made at the British Lima tank works in Ohio, only its clumsily mounted more powerful gun. The German tanks were superior. Months later the Churchill tank was introduced, with additional 6-pdr anti-tank guns. Both made an impact. At El Alemein the first batch of Shermans out of Lima was introduced. However its effectiveness was blunted as there was limited crew training and spare parts, being giving a minor role.

@Leafeon1012

24 күн бұрын

It was also was more reliable. I didn’t realize the armor was so effective. Thanks TIK.

@iatsd

24 күн бұрын

It depends on the level of the comparison. It *was* objectively a terrible tank at the macro level. It was a good tank in the strategic context of North Africa at *that* precise time. In the context of tactical employment it was both good and bad. The Americans didn't even want to put it into series production, but the British were *so* short of vehicles and capacity that *they* ordered it in enough numbers to get into production. The Sherman was already a thing - just it was a thing that was ~9 months further away and that wasn't something the British could *wait* on.

@johnburns4017

23 күн бұрын

@@iatsd The British financed the idle and semi dilapidated Lima locomotive works in Ohio, converting it to make tanks, using idle US industry as their own was working 24/7. They wanted to produce an improved and up-gunned version of the Crusader tank. The US said let's make a tank that is more suitable for both, so the Sherman came about which had heavy British and Canadian input in its design. But in the meantime to get a tank with a decent sized gun in the field asap, the Grant/Lee was made for only British use. The tank was advanced in its engineering tooling for manufacturing so went ahead as a stop-gap. The British tank procurement went off the rails with the Cromwell 18 months overdue, so the Grant and Sherman it had to be to fill the gap until the Cromwell, Comet and Centurion came along. The first batch of Shermans went to British forces in the desert being used at El Alemein II in Sept 1942. The US took control of the Lima tank factory on the condition they supply the British with Shermans for free. It still makes tanks today.

First of all: great video: well worth the wait. I almost feel guilty pointing out a small typo at 32:45. where (242 Panzer IV) should probably read (242 Panzer III). This is not a criticism (I know from personal experience how hard fully correct editing is), I just thought that you would want to know.

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Yeah you're correct, a few people have pointed this out. There are a few other minor mistakes like that in the video, so see how many you can spot :)

@lonesheepdog6337

23 күн бұрын

​@TheImperatorKnight TIK, any mistakes you make are deliberate mistakes that test your subscribers to see if they're paying attention 🇬🇧

This battle reminds me a lot of General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson’s Shenandoah Valley campaign in 1862. Jackson faced overwhelming forces as well and was also able to concentrate his forces against piecemeal Union forces. Jackson’s victory made him very well known on both sides as well as internationally and gave his infantry the nickname foot cavalry due to how much ground they covered in a very short period of time. I’ve heard that Rommel studied Jackson’s tactics at some point but I’ve never seen anything to authenticate that. But his actions at Gazala seem to mirror what Jackson did 80 years earlier in Virginia.

Yes yes, Rommel was reckless. He could have truly benefited from a competent staff officer to plan these operations by the book as a starting point. Then Rommel could lead from the front and take decisive action at crucial moments. His own planning efforts were poor. Having said that, he does deserve credit for his actions during the battle. The man led a supply column himself, under British fire to 21st Pz as it was running out of supply. Then he stayed at the front and suffered with his men as supplies continued to run out. He was clear eyed enough to see that surrender was a day away unless supplies arrived. One suspects his men held out and maintained the will to fight just that little bit longer because they knew Rommel was there. In their minds, they must have thought, the crazy fucker has really ran our asses into a crack this time, but he's here among us, suffering too, and he'll figure something out, because he has before. It's probably partly for the same reason that the supplies made it through the minefield. Men who believed in their commander's ability to pull their bacon out of the fire, braved minefields to move supplies to the front. Rarely has one man had the chance to make such a difference in battles as Rommel did here, because his men had confidence in his ability to lead. And when the opportunities arose, did her ever lead them! During the crucial attack, the man led a platoon into combat. Crazy reckless restless fucker! This is the fact. By the book, he was not even an above average commander. Yet when chaos reigned, because the British couldn't get their act together, the restlessness and personal bravery to be at the front and DO SOMETHING could be decisive. In battles where one corps fought another across an entire theatre of war, Rommel was incredible.

I enjoyed the Stalingrad and Kharkov coverage alot, but this is truly excellent TIK. Well done sir, its going into my favorites.

This video makes the obscure Messervy into a meme. How many times can a man get captured in a single battle?

@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw

19 күн бұрын

He almost got captured in 1944 by the Japanese in the Battle for the Admin Box when his division HQ was overrun.

@dangerousidiot1111

19 күн бұрын

@@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw Again how ha Messervy never been meme'd before?

@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw

19 күн бұрын

@@dangerousidiot1111 Maybe because we had like dozens of episodes with Chuikov's crazy escapades and we only get 1 movie length episode with Messervy? Its as youtuber Nerdrotic says about weekly episodic television vs. the Netflix binge model. Binge is fun but talk about your show dies down within a few weeks after release. Whereas weekly gets you more exposure over time, more talk, more watercooler moments. Stalingrad was the weekly model, Gazala is Netflix binge. And that is why Chuikov will be with us for a long time and Messervy not.

What is the point of even deploying Recon Troops if you are unwilling to listen to them? "Sir, I see German tanks advancing to our position!" "These are not the droids... I mean *tanks* you are looking for" Might as well stay at home and drink tea...

Messervy was captured by Germans more times than Chuikov almost died at Stalingrad :D

What an amazing treat. Thank you Team TIK. No matter how many times I’ve read about this battle, the magic you’ve woven to show and dissect it is truly wondrous. Bravo, bravo, bravo.

Every Battlestorms are a MASTERPIECE and a piece of History teaching that must be kept at all cost !

This battle is so disorganized and chaotic that if a writer had invented it, I would call it cartoonish and impossible in real life.

@LD-Orbs

22 күн бұрын

"No commander would be so stupid as to deploy recon, and then ignore what they have to say! Not even the Russians do _that_!"

Never ceases to amaze me that such high quality documentary work can be made by two guy. You've even inspired me to do my own! Thanks TIK you're a legend!! Edit: Two guys, Gigz is also a legend

quality of this one is unmatched, just finished watching, well done tik!

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it!

Loved it! Exceptionally well done, loved the animations and the narration. Your interpretation of the varios sources really makes sense of the situation, while your presentation of the different views beforehand make the overall conclusions very interesting and pertinent for a present-day debate of this nearly 82 years old battle. Also, I really liked this new stile and the way this was condensed, a battlestrom less than 3h long is incredibly refreshing considering each one stalingrad episode was about 40 minutes! Thank you for your amazing work and for temporarly sticking to tanks without droping the Marmalade 😂

Brilliant, thank you so much for this! I guess Piennaar getting some stuff right is akin to a broken clock being right twice a day. I feel bad for what is about to happen to Klopper though... Continue your excellent work it is highly appreciated.

@prof_kaos9341

23 күн бұрын

Which side was Pienaar on? This is only 40yrs after the Boer War where the Boers with German help (modern rifles & canon) gave the Brits a bloody nose leading to Boer civilians being put in camps. So many in SAF wanted to side with Germany ...

Cannot wait to get into this TIK. From a viewer perspective, this is amazing! Really hope it gives you a batter worklife balance than Stalingrad did!

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Hope you enjoy it! Considering I just did an all-nighter to get this out, I'm not so sure about the worklife balance... But yes, I've been trying to have more breaks.

It speaks very well of the British and commonwealth soldiers that with the command of their units not functioning the soldiers fought to keep the enemy back , regardless of the insanity of the fight .

I really like the fluid nature of the blobby divisions that you represent. It makes a division seem more like a conglomeration of many pieces, which it is, instead of a monolith.

@TheNoonish

24 күн бұрын

The whole map and animations are just beautiful in this one.

i think you are judging Rommel too harshly. ppl say he got lucky, but you could say he created those lucky situations by moving with confidence. the genius of the Blitzkrieg WAS recklessness at the right moment to expose the slow adaption rate of the enemy to new circumstances. also, fog of war was a thing back then. believe in the effup was the motto. if you press the enemy enough he will effup by miscommunication or indecisiveness.

@GOLDEN-sm3wr

18 күн бұрын

yeah i also notice he just saying that Rommel was just a normal commander like he didn't turn the battle of north Africa in axis favor and push the whole British army toward Egypt after they win against Italy he also always giving excuses to the defeats of the British divisions unlike the axis divisions just saying oh Rommel win by luck he didn't even mention that he made a victory while attacking an army outnumbered his army

Late to the party. Had to watch it over three evenings in hourly installments due to work commitments. Talk about triumph of the will to switch off and go to bed! Brilliant stuff Tik!. I believe this is the first of your planned longer formats? Really worth the wait and the longer format works well imho. Learned a great deal here. Thanks as ever

@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw

19 күн бұрын

I'm only seeing it today. At almost 3 hours it is something you need to see by making time for it, and I only have found that time today.

@morningstar9233

19 күн бұрын

@@ChaptermasterPedroKantor-kv5yw Yes. Ideally I'd have watched it in one sitting. Enjoy, excellent work from Tik as ever.

Wow, another defete snached from the jaws of victory. I've learned so much about various campaigns and battles, amazing & marvellously informative. TIK, your efforts are much appreciated.

I have seen all of your Battlestom videos (actually I think I have seen all of your videos) multiple times, but this has to be the best. Perfect balance between analysis and the battle map and the opinions are clear, which are yours and which are from others and from what sources! I also would like to say that the arguments of your own opinions, were very convincing. Good job and keep it going! Can't wait for the next one!

Very interesting video tik, thanks. The incompetence of the British officers at times was really mind boggling.

As a American and a retired Colonel of Engineers I was fascinated and horrified how their was such dysfunction at the field grade and general officer level. To me this debacle was allowed to happen by Auchinlek and by Churchill. Churchill's actions bring in mind Gallipoli and the chase of the Goeben in WWI. Auchinlek appears to me not willing to break any eggs to get things done. And Rommel appears content to break and fry every egg he can get his hands on to win.

It's not an easy task to hold viewers' attention for three hours but you really pulled it off. Although there was a mountain of detail I felt that I could follow the events of the narrative. The maps did much to make sense of it all.

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Thank you, that's great feedback! And yes, the maps help a lot, which is why I think people struggle to fully comprehend the battles in the history books as there are never enough maps. I obviously have a lot of books, but I think there's a future for history in video format. I just wish more historians realised this.

Great video, TIK. If Tobruk's port had been taken it would have shortened the lines of communication from Tripoli by about 1270 km overland. From Benghazi it was half the distance, but its port couldn't handle the mass of supplies needed. I recall reading the Afrika Korps was consuming nine litres of fuel for every one delivered from Tripoli to Rommel's forces at the Egyptian border, which is about 200 km east of Tobrok. There is no rail line running east from Tripoli. To overcome this constraint Germany at times used subs to deliver fuel and other supplies off the coast just behind German lines . A _milchkuh_ carried 603 tonnes of re-supply fuel (about 8.45 bbl petrol = 1 tonne, so about 837,500 litres total), but often it was regular u-boats making the delivery of a much smaller quantity when the sub was stripped for such a mission. The 10 fuel resupply missions conducted by Italian subs from 10 May '41 to 31 December '41 delivered 1,086 tonnes of fuel. The Panzer IV on average consumed 2 litres of petrol per 1 km traveled on paved road.

I'll say this in defense of the British military. They suffered one setback after the next for the 1st three years of fighting but they were never knocked out of the war. They kept picking themselves up off the ground dusting themselves off and getting back into the fight.

Wow that was an epic and amazing video on the battle of gazala.

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Glad you liked it!

@chasechristophermurraydola9314

24 күн бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight liked it I enjoyed it.

Hey tik great video and I loved how you went into the day by day events of the battle. One thing I wished you delved more into was the state of the Italian armored forces because during the battle of Gazala it’s where the Semovente da 75/18 made its first appearance south of Knightsbridge. It was the only armored vehicle in the axis arsenal at that time that could destroy not just Grants but even Shermans when they were later introduced. The Semovente was fairly well armored and was of similar size of a stug. The gun it utilized was an Ansaldo howitzer which had AP, HE, and most importantly HE rounds which were capable of devastating allied armor. On June 10th Ariete positions at Knightsbridge were under assault by British Stuarts and Grants. The battle engagement ended with 15 grants and 5 stuarts destroyed for only a loss on the Italian side of 2 M13/40s. The Semovente developed a reputation of being a competent tank killer and British preferred to have air wings strafe them rather engage them head on.

Thanks TIK….! The effort you’ve gone through in the making of this is fantastic. Very well done. History at its best. 👍❤️!

It's amazing to think that a single British Infantry brigade (with some additional loose elements) was in a position where they nearly ended the war in North Africa.

Excellent job! So packed with great information, I’m getting ready to watch again and again.,,

@TheImperatorKnight

23 күн бұрын

Awesome! Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it

Had run out of tv shows and docos to watch and then to the rescue!! Well done TIK

TIK another brilliant work. I have Pitts' books and with your use of maps and dialogue bringing to life this amazing story, you are the best history teacher, I have ever had. Thanks again.

Bloody marvelous!! I've been waiting on this one. Thanks for posting it TiK. Cheers from Tennessee

No way the tommies lost a grant tank while brewing tea 🤣 Lewis what a funny one 54:33

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

It's not a joke, they genuinely did lose a Grant tank from brewing tea

@johnburns4017

24 күн бұрын

That is how bad the tank was. Knocked out by tea.

@AyoubusMagnus

24 күн бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight omg hahahaha 🤣🤣🤣 Very very good video Lewis I command your effort this was indeed worth the wait. Thank you

@sebastianpijov8708

23 күн бұрын

​@@johnburns4017Or they had really strong tea, so potent it could knock a machine out.

@johnburns4017

23 күн бұрын

@@sebastianpijov8708 🤣

TIK, congratulations on BATTLESTORM GAZALLA! Incredible details, well done maps. Very well scripts. Thank you very much!

Brilliant, fascinating, informative... and ultimately depressing 😁. The list of "what if's" are mind-blowing! Cheers, and deep and grateful thanks for all the effort.

Binging now, dude you really are my favorite on YT

No idea why KZread didn’t alert me this was out, been waiting 4 years for this 😀

Fantastic upload, thank you - probably THE best work you give us here, in the last 2 years ! Thank you.

Keep up the great work TIK, another fantastic video, number 1 on youtube on the subject!

I wouldn't call it a pyric victory if he managed to destroy nearly 400 more tanks. The Germans were pretty badly out numbered and supplied compared to the British. And I think his frenzied blitz may have contributed to British disarray. I feel like had it been a war of attrition the Brits would've held out and defeated Rommel entirely

A masterful presentation. You have achieved legendary status - CONGRATULATIONS!

Fantastic again, thankyou TIK! Thoroughly enjoyable and educational!!

The man, the legend.... TIK is back! You say Battlestorm, I click 👍

Two of the reasons behind the major success of Rommel in North Africa (apart from poor British generalship) are Bonner Fellers the ‘Good Source’ US attaché (whom TIK mentions), whose reports to Washington on the supply, dispositions, morale and numbers of the Eighth Army in 1941-42 were decoded by the Germans, thanks to the Italians copying his code books, as well as the poor radio discipline of the British and Commonwealth units which was consequently picked up by Radio Intelligence Company 621. With both of these sources Rommel was able to ascertain the dispositions, supply situations, morale and numbers of tanks etc. in the Eighth Army Order of Battle and plan accordingly - to his enormous advantage. It wasn’t until the battle of Tel el Eisa in July 1942 when Company 621 was attacked and captured by the Australian 9th Division - and then discovering the Bonner Fellers leak via these captured documents and personnel from Company 621 that Rommel almost in an instant lost his ‘touch’ and thereafter was blind to Allied intentions and dispositions. Furthermore he had no significant successes after these two sources of information were lost to him (with the possible exception of Kasserine).

Technology and logistics is often more important than most politicians realize.

YES! YES! And YES! That is what I've been waiting for! THANK you TIK you're The Man.

Great job as always. This just made my Monday better.

This battle has all the best stereotypes of the belligerents. British: -Crappy tanks with no artillery or infantry support -Carryover philosophies of warfare from the first world war -Overly hesitant generals who ignore actionable intel -Setting a tank on fire trying to make tea Germans: -Rommel being praised as an amazing general for a pretty bog standard tactical move that works mostly because the British are dumb -The Germans running out of literally everything -The Germans getting resupplied just in the nick of time French: -Getting left behind by the British Italians: -Earning a participation ribbon South Africans: -Pienaar

Really enjoying this so far. At 33:00 i think there is a typo. The box that breaks down the number of german panzers by type lists panzer IV twice. I suspect one of these is meant to be for the panzer III

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

Good spot! Yeah, there were 242 Panzer III's and 40 Panzer IVs. Sorry about that

@momokeo2521

24 күн бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Minor mistakes like this are inevitable in such a long video, doesn't detract from the overall quality. I'm about an hour in, I think this is the best battlestorm so far. It seems to flow much better than previous ones.

@TheImperatorKnight

24 күн бұрын

There's a couple more mistakes I've spotted :) They're all minor, but it's still annoying... I did have more time to work on the script than normal, so that's why it's flowing much better. It's definitely the most efficient script I've written so far.

Excellent video as always. truly enlightening, thank you.

Simply amazing. You are such a productive individual its truly amazing to see. So pleased with your work TIK, thank you!

This is a great video. What strikes me here is how the problems the British had here were more or less the same problems they had in Malaya/Singapore. To me this points more to a poor doctrine/military culture made much worse by a weak/incompetent high command, more than anything else. So events and intentions get muddy. You also have to really take some of these sources with a grain of salt. Books like 'The Desert Generals' by Barnett are more or less useless to understand what happened...being much more interested in deflecting blame from favored people like Auchinleck and Dorman-Smith than relating a true account. And the actual principals had no problem in lying after the fact to cover up their mistakes. So making a video like this is doubly-difficult imo. Kudos.

Brits: "Oh hey, we´ve got heavily armored infantry tanks for charging into enemy lines, and fast but barely armored cavalry tanks for running around them." Also Brits: "Oh hey, a cavalry tank! You´re going straight into the 88s, buddy!"

I hope to some day be as good at the things I love doing as you are at what you do in teaching history. God bless you.

Well worth the wait. Thank you, Tik!!