tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335175720102608134.post1385581026687502357..comments2024-01-18T00:59:52.237-08:00Comments on Christos military and intelligence corner: Wartime exploitation of Turkish codes by Axis and Allied powersChristos T.http://www.blogger.com/profile/04246906263926130737noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335175720102608134.post-78120551692997473772014-09-20T13:11:24.582-07:002014-09-20T13:11:24.582-07:00thank you - interesting as always - gmthank you - interesting as always - gmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335175720102608134.post-49259165427591499162014-09-20T02:47:48.113-07:002014-09-20T02:47:48.113-07:00‘The british obviously used codebreaking to assist...‘The british obviously used codebreaking to assist the campaign against Rommel’<br /><br />Undeniably true, although it seems their successes have been wildly overrated.<br /><br />‘Rommel benefitted from signals intel’<br /><br />Again, undeniably true. I think this was true for all German commanders (not only sigint but also photo reconnaissance by the LW).<br /><br />‘"Rommel was a great commander" view of the british - was this to cover there own failures?’<br /><br />Rommel was a great commander, I don’t think anyone can deny that. Obviously the Brits exaggerated his performance in order to hide their own failures. However postwar he was criticized for moving his forces too far from his supply bases (fuel shortages etc) and for commanding his troops from the front, which often led to him being out of contact with his subordinates. <br /><br />‘Why wouldn't the germans and Italians be circumspect about their own code security given their own experience of the benefits of reading enemy codes’<br /><br />WWII cipher security for all participants is a complicated subject. Regarding the statements on Enigma I think it’s simply a matter of historians not doing their work properly and of course of relevant material remaining classified for too long. <br />Christos T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04246906263926130737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335175720102608134.post-34411670024234507492014-09-20T02:05:56.792-07:002014-09-20T02:05:56.792-07:00Hello Christos
I have a question for you about co...Hello Christos<br /><br />I have a question for you about codebreaking more generally in ww2<br />(greg mcnulty here btw)<br /><br />The british obviously used codebreaking to assist the campaign against Rommel.<br /><br />Rommel benefitted from signals intel , codebreaking, lack of security etc - which was obviously well known in the senior german command of navy and Luftwaffe.<br /><br />Hence I find it tough to understand the post war conventional wisdom<br /><br />"Rommel was a great commander" view of the british - was this to cover there own failures? <br /><br />Also the "germans would never believe their enigma could be compromised" hence "Italians were leaking information to the british" etc<br /><br />Why wouldn't the germans and Italians be circumspect about their own code security given their own experience of the benefits of reading enemy codes - and the resources they were hence willing to throw at codebreaking. Also they knew something of the polish work on enigma ?<br /><br />So we have this "Rommel was a genius" ; "germans could not conceive of enigma weakness"; "germans thought Italians were traitors" nonsense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com