Who was the best commander in WWII?

Who was the best commander in WWII?
(Forgive me for my bad english :) )


Ups, I wanted to put this topic in "Offtopic".

Last edited September 22, 2007 at 8:19 AM by UeArtemis

where the heck is Erwin Rommel  ???

I have forgotten about him :(

I haven't heard of most of them. What about George S. Patton? or Charles de Gaulle, or others. From that list ive only heard of Montgomery, Rommel, and Eisenhower.

Did you hear about Yamomoto and Zhukov?

Admiral Yamomoto has planned/commanded attack on PearlHarbour.
The marshal Zhukov commanded the defence of the Moscow and he planned/commanded the counteroffensive near Kursk, for exaple.

Last edited September 22, 2007 at 8:28 PM by UeArtemis

Ive heard of them, i just would of thought it better to put up a bunch of very good important generals, one from each main country of WW2.

Maybe :)
But I simply copied questions from other forum :)

Rokossovsky played a significant part in the battle of Kursk :)

Where the heck is Guderian?  No list of WWII generals is complete without Heinz :P

Any list of general will be unachieved. All can not be complacent :)

Rommel by far for me, in the desert there is nothing so you have to execute perfect tactics to stay alive, that man made a lot of so little and i have a lot of respect for him.

Tasty wrote:
Rommel by far for me, in the desert there is nothing so you have to execute perfect tactics to stay alive, that man made a lot of so little and i have a lot of respect for him.

+1

rommel  ;D he is jsut da uber general  :angel1:

Zhukov & Rommel.
But i vote for Rommel coz he OWNZ! :P

Too hard they all have their good and bad points.

Agreed.
Zhukov's bad point was that he don't really care about soldiers.
And Rommel's bad point was he can't wait.
I hope you can understand me.

Yes but in north Africa Rommel could not wait for anything as he was constantly promised supplies that never reached him and so on :p but what he did have he made a huge deal out of, but yes i can see what you mean he was impatient.

lmfao @ Charles de Gaulle....i mean seriously....what did he do..besides parade into paris...?????

About Rommel why couldn't he have done like we did with the Italians? 30,000 British with enough supplies for 3 days versus 250,000 Italians with plenty of supplies. What happened? We fought them all the way back to Tripoli using their own supplies and vehicles at least until it went messy at the Greece thing. 

Who was the best commander in WWII?

Without a doubt General Erhard Raus

Possibly the most overlooked & underrated Panzer Commander of WWII

Zhukov, that's simple. Because he's the winner and he's the one who captured Berlin and did it with lower casualties than the enemy (which is almost impossible to make). End of story.

Well De Gaulle did pioneer Blitzkrieg-like doctrine just no one listened as the French High Command were effectively a retirement home.

AL_Hassan wrote:
Zhukov, that's simple. Because he's the winner and he's the one who captured Berlin and did it with lower casualties than the enemy (which is almost impossible to make). End of story.

Impossible? Well, you can shell and bomb every cm of Berlin and you have victory in a box. When your enemy is surrounded it's just easy.

palm wrote:
I'd say the Desert Fox here.

Please don't double post. - Dragon93

Last edited June 14, 2008 at 4:04 PM by Dragon93

to:palm
None surrender without reason ;)
Purpose of any war is surrenderring of enemy.
you won if your enemy surrenders. Think why he won and why they surrender or faith in red zergs :)

Last edited May 7, 2008 at 12:13 PM by UeArtemis

Imo, capturing of Berlin was poor planned. Red army have only 2,5 times more soldiers. There must be 3 million soldiers to capture city like Berlin with 1000000 solders defending it

Why 3mil?

to Soviet_Marine
I spoke not about Berlin :) Я вообще говорил :) Не зря же он свое звание и почести получил. Not in vain he has got his rank and honours in the USSR.

Last edited May 7, 2008 at 5:13 PM by UeArtemis

to Dragon93
Oh, its simple. defending soldier kills 1 attacker, then wound the second one, but 3rd attacker kills him.

Artemis
Ok. Видно я чаго-то недопонял. проехали тему)))
Nwm

Hmm, i guess. That's pretty simple though, and doesn't take a lot of things into account.

Лучшими были Советские командиры))))))))))))))))

I like Russian and would love to learn it but could you please keep to English on the main forum, thanks.

Well, that's one opinion tanker but when you see how the Germans smashed the French which statistically was by far the better army you really do have to give them some credit. However, the Soviet commanders did do amazing things as well.

"The Soviet commanders were best" (according to tanker and Babelfish) Have you heard about the Finninsh winter war maybe? The Russians won because of their numbers not their commanders.

Dragon93 wrote:
I like Russian and would love to learn it but could you please keep to English on the main forum, thanks.

ok) sorry

tanker wrote:
If honestly, I consider that to argue about that who won in WWII, or whose commander was better it is a small talk. Who does have a right to judge commanders and put them marks.?

Please don't double post. - Dragon93

Last edited June 14, 2008 at 4:03 PM by Dragon93

That was what you did.

I think he's going to lose.

Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim (Finland), he took Finland trought the war even if we didn't win it.
Mannerheim didn't cause any unnecessary casualties against the Russians.

Many said that 1 Finn could take down at least 4 Russians.

Winter War

The infantry ratio was 4 to 1 (400 Russians was 100 Finns)
The tank ratio was 200 to 1 (200 Russian tanks was 1 Finnish tank)
The aircraft ratio was 30 to 1 (30 Russian planes was 1 Finnish plane)

The Finns: 250 000 men, 30 tanks 130 aircraft Losses: 26 662 dead, 39 886 wounded, 1 000 captured
The Russians: 1,000,000 men, 6 541 tanks, 3 800 aircraft Losses: 126 875 dead, 264 908 wounded, 5 600 captured, 2 268+ tanks

;D

Anyone who wan't to call the Russian commanders: Kliment Voroshilov, Kirill Meretskov,
Semyon Timoshenko, BEST!?!? :D

Last edited June 9, 2008 at 10:42 PM by JuL14n

Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim or Erich von Manstein cant decide wich one of them is the best!

tisse wrote:
Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim or Erich von Manstein cant decide wich one of them is the best!

Agreed, they both kicked some serious ass.

Zhukov all the way!!!!

He may not have cared about his troops, but he almost singlehanded masterminded the german defeat outside Moscow, operation Uranus, the encirclement of Orel, the defence of Kursk, the advance through eastern europe and the attack on Berlin! Without him and other commanders who had the authority to argue with Stalin, russia would have fallen.

how come Pavlol isnt here? he became a nitional heore in the soviet union after the seige at "pavlovs house"

well, pavlov was a soldier, not a commander: he was a hero in the USSR, but did not oversee command of an army or front.

lol @ operation uranus, wat kind of person names a military operation that...

errr... Some stalin's boot licking commisar?

Besides, Uranus in Russian isnt gonna be the same...

"we're now comencing operation bomb the crap out of your house" soldier, Family Guy

dark1991 wrote:
[quote author=Tasty link=topic=118.msg739#msg739 date=1190645695]
Rommel by far for me, in the desert there is nothing so you have to execute perfect tactics to stay alive, that man made a lot of so little and i have a lot of respect for him.

okay. yh the man was a fantastic general. the best german general. the man lost to bernard montgomery. so who is the better general. the man who fought in the open desert or the man who won in the open desert. rommel was an all round general though. hitler liked him. of course after rommel became a traitor and tried to make peace with the allied forces hitler had him burnt alive in hot oil or sometin. anyways. Montogomery alll the way. the brains behind Overlord. the overalll commander of the british forces. he was a field marshall. the highes rank of the highest. he was the supreme allied commander of WW2. thats why he is the gr8est

woah123 wrote:
okay. yh the man was a fantastic general. the best german general. the man lost to bernard montgomery. so who is the better general. the man who fought in the open desert or the man who won in the open desert. rommel was an all round general though. hitler liked him. of course after rommel became a traitor and tried to make peace with the allied forces hitler had him burnt alive in hot oil or sometin. anyways. Montogomery alll the way. the brains behind Overlord. the overalll commander of the british forces. he was a field marshall. the highes rank of the highest. he was the supreme allied commander of WW2. thats why he is the gr8est

You need to study history more, just because you are in charge, does not mean you are the best suited for the operation. Erwin Rommel lost because he could not get the supplies he needed to fight a desert campaign. The British would of lost Africa long ago if supplies were not being deverted to the eastern front. Erwin lost because of a lack of supplies and replacements. An army fights on its stomach. If your troops are hungry, and there is no food to go around, do not expect to be around for long.

Did you notice that the losses for the British increased as his supply lines shortened? His losses were replaced and the equipment was able to stay in operation. Desert combat is the worse kind of combat out there, if you do not keep your equipment and yourself togethor in good order, you will die.

Last edited October 7, 2008 at 9:58 PM by BunkerBob

wasn't it Chruchill who stated over old Monty? (after Operation Market Garden and the Ardennes):
If you judge on the Ressources and the possibilities of the Former (Rommel), you can estimate the mediocrity of the Latter (Montgomery).

By the time of the second battle of El Alamein, Afrikakorps had 33.500 Men without supplies vs 251.000 well equipped brits on Montys side. 62.000 Italians didn't help much because they had to hold the positions all over the captured land.
Also Rommel was not in Africa when the attack commenced. He was Ill and recovering in Berlin, while it was unclear wether Georg Stumme (who died after a few days) or Ritter von Thoma should have the main command during the defense.
So its not really Rommel who was beaten by Montgomery at El Alamein, its the German Afrika-Korps.
Rommel wasn't only an offensive General. In fact he kiled most brits when luring them into death zones of flak88 and mgs instead of actually overrunning them. He was also responsible for the major pat of the beach obstacles on the atlantic wall and he knew the weakpoint in Normandy, but he had not enough time to prepare it evrywhere.

Last edited October 19, 2008 at 11:10 PM by SniperHans

sorry, this List is more than incomplete

( the French Generals Name is Charles-Marte-Jules Tassin , the German Fieldmarshall
was called Gerd von Rundstedt, the US High Commader was Dwight D. Eisenhower )

MANY superior commanders are missing, while others ( what the heck does tassin there ? )
simply dont belong there...

US: definetively missing Bradley and McArthur
Germany: Model and Guderian could have been mentioned, von Manstein SHOULD

Still think Zhukov... He practically commanded eastern front

He shouted so loud down radios at seelow his officers had hearing problems for years

He's an iconic hero in Russia, Stalin took most of his credit because he was respected by the people, and a friend of kruschev.

He was not a party fanatic or a communist but a strategist who arguably won world war two...

AL_Hassan wrote:
Zhukov, that's simple. Because he's the winner and he's the one who captured Berlin and did it with lower casualties than the enemy (which is almost impossible to make). End of story.

Most of the german army had already surrendered to the western allies trying to get away from the soviets :p Zhukov had incredible trouble getting through the Seelow Heights, and sent hundreds of men to their deaths in frontal attacks. Not the mark of a good general, in my opinion. The defenders of Berlin were mostly young or old men with very little equipment and almost no armored assets, not to mention the fact that berlin had been bombed to hell and gone by the time the russian army got there... and personally any general who can't keep his soldiers under control enough to stop wholesale rape and murder of a conquered populace doesn't get my respect to begin with. Nearly the entire female population of berlin was raped, some dozens of times.

No, I don't respect Zhukov.