Greatest WWII Military Commanders: Updated

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

 

[Dac]

Rommel, Guderian, Zhukov, and Spruance for me. did anyone know about the battle at Khalikan Gol ( might have misspelled) where Zhukov crushed a invading Japanese army and that caused Japan to sign a nonaggression pact with Russia. That way when Hitler invaded Germany Stalin could deploy lots of divisions from the Asian part of Russia to the Europe part of Russia without fearing a Japanese attack.

Is that also called the Battle of Nomonhan. Zhukov was brilliant, he pioneered some of the basic Blitzkrieg techniques there. He built submerged bridges over the river separating the two forces and brought up hundreds of BT series tanks running rapidly on their road wheels with tracks removed. He coordinated artillery, air, infantry and armor to totally overwhelm the Japanese forces and something like 65,000 were killed.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Zhokov deffinatly was one of the great commanders and what he did for the Russians was simply amazing. He basically took nothing and made it somethign with his tactics.

My favorites as stated however are Rommel and then Patton.

 

[Dac]

Rommel and Patton were great tactical commanders but somewhat limited when it came to strategy. I picked Ike even though he had little field experience. He had the managerial and diplomatic skills to lead a huge multinational force that might have fallen apart under a lesser commander.

 

[Dac]

Shouldn't "Smiling Albert" be on the list. Not many officiers commanded both land and air forces the way he did in WW II.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Rommel and Patton were great tactical commanders but somewhat limited when it came to strategy.

Are you serious? Rommel was a strategic genius. His strategies are still studied today and he did so well with what limited resources that he had.

 

[loomaluftwaffe]

Rommel and Guderian are the best 4 me though

 

[P38 Pilot]

For me, General Patton was the Greatest in my opinion. He was a true, born leader. He is someone to respect.

"No ******* ever won a war for dieing for his country. He won it by making that other poor, dumb ******* die for his!"

Now that's what the Germans needed!!

 

[loomaluftwaffe]

in most cases, they'd either surrender or kill as many till they can't kill any more

 

[P38 Pilot]

Yeah. Maybe it should have been aimed toward the Russians. By the way, how many Russian soldiers died in WWII?

Originally Posted by Dac
Rommel and Patton were great tactical commanders but somewhat limited when it came to strategy.

Like Alder said, Rommel was given limited resources by the German Army. If they had kept him well supplied and given more tanks, the war in N. Africa would've lasted longer.

As for Patton; he also used strategy! Yes, he did modernize the blitzkreig tactics and made them American, but that was the amazing! He took a battle strategy thought to be outdated by Allies, and turned it into a superior weapon which ultmately got him into Czechoslovakia!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

P38 Pilot how did they think it was outdated when the first time the allies saw the Blitzkrieg they were still fighting trenches?

 

[P38 Pilot]

What I mean is the plan later on in the war. The Germans weren't using it in 1944. I know the allies in the beggining didn't catch on, but when things started heating up for them, thats when Patton took the Blitzkreig and made it American.

 

[syscom3]

P38, the US Army early on in the 30's embraced the concept of mobile warfare. Patton was among the many officers in the corps that contributed to this doctrine.

The main difference between the US and Germans through out the 30's and first couple years of the war was the Germans generally had superior weapons and eqmt. However, as the war progressed, the US eqmt got progressively better.

One thing where the US excelled in mobile warfare (or blitzkreig if you prefer) was the US emphysis on all levels of logistics. The US could support sustained thrusts by dozens of divisions while the Germans couldnt.

 

[plan_D]

The Germans used 'blitzkrieg' right up until the end of the war. Their tactics were developed beyond the Allies, only the Soviet Union were close to an equal in mobile warfare.

Great Britain developed mobile war in the deserts of North Africa, and had the only fully mobilised Army on the planet in 1939. But compared to the German doctrine of arm supporting arm to cut off the enemy logistical support, it was pityful. The German equipment was not so superior, in fact a lot of cases found it inferior to the British equipment of 1939-1940 but the tactical genius saw them through.

Before any of you claim to know what the Germans were doing with their tanks in 1943-1945, read Panzer Battles by Maj. Gen. von Mellenthin. It'll put you straight on the ideas of Germany suddenly becoming imobile when the Allies reached the Continent.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

What I mean is the plan later on in the war. The Germans weren't using it in 1944.

They were not using it as much because they were on the defensive....

 

[wmaxt]

I think Rommel was probably the best all around General with very good abilities in Politics, Strategy and a tactical sense.
Patton was the best tactical general, good strategical planner but poor Politically.
Palus, Rundstat and most of the German generals were very good but you just can't swim with your hands tied and concrete on your feet.
Zukov was very very good.
Montgomery was a good strategic planner, good at politics and poor in the field.
Ike was the best man for his job as overall command superb at Strategy, picking generals and politics, who knows how he would have done in the field.
Bradley was OK but worried about the foot soldier to much.

Patton worried about getting it done, and in the process ate up lots of ground. By cutting the enemy off and gaining a lot of ground he kept the enemy disorientated he saved soldiers on both sides as well as the civilians caught in between. His genius was in not taking to much at any given time.

wmaxt

 

[pbfoot]

Once again how can we not include Tito after all they were the only country to liberate itself plus and probably had the most effective partisans of all the countries

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

And he held it together after WW2. After his death it all started to unravel. Tito though I think was a great partisan commander but as a commander of large masses of soldiers I dont think he would rank with Rommel and Patton.

 

[trackend]

Guderian is my choice his tactics very nearly succeeded and set the mould for modern warfare Eisenhower was superb but more for his ability in controlling the political factions than as a military tactician and Yamamoto fought an incredible campaign considering the constraints and limitations he had foisted upon him by the higher ups plus the lack of renewable logistics.

 

[CCM von Hausser]

Also if I think that this poll isn't 100% correct - IHMO - I say:

Erich von Manstein: a Genius 8)