mosquitoman
Master Sergeant
Either Churchill or Dowding for me, especially with the way that the BoB war fought by him, just a pity that he got sidelined afterwards
Who was the Greatest Leader of WWII?
- Thread starter Soundbreaker Welch?
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Churchill great leader plus he drank FDR under the table several times. He also pissed in the Rhine. What a guy.
Mussolini only ever got 1 train running on time when the facist succesfully revolted in Rome. He decided to get their on time after hiding away from the action.
Mussolini only ever got 1 train running on time when the facist succesfully revolted in Rome. He decided to get their on time after hiding away from the action.
And that makes a man great?
Dont take me wrong I think Churchill was a great leader but for that reason...
bigZ said:
I have done that numerous times. Also in the Thames, Mississippi, Euphratis, Tigris and Danub. Does that make me better?
And that makes a man great?
Dont take me wrong I think Churchill was a great leader but for that reason...
I have done that numerous times. Also in the Thames, Mississippi, Euphratis, Tigris and Danub. Does that make me better?
No it means go to the doctor as you have a bladder problem.
I voted Churchill for obvious reason and of course our own queen, as she's still considered as a hero in our country, the way she acted during the war.
In that case how about Emperor Hirohito for escaping the gallows and retaining his title?
Emac44
Staff Sergeant
As an Aussie John Curtin Prime Minister of Australia. Less I say about Churchill the better ok as for FDR good war time leader and peace time leader for US. As for Stalin except for political differences not much between him and Hitler except a bloody pyscho ward with rubber rooms boing as for the other leaders list on the poll no comment
dreadnought
Airman
I don't see how Franklin D. Roosevelt could be called a great WW2 leader, he didn't actually want to get involved and didn't need be worried about his country being bombed up as the USA is so far away from any country that wanted to destroy it/ take its resources in any way. He also had such massive military and industrial strength (compared with everyone except possibly Russia) behind him that he hardly faced any major threats compared with Britain, France and Germany (Germany, mainly because of Britain, France and the Soviet Union). In my opinion the best was Churchill, who kept Britain fighting and managed to bring the US into the war against Germany by showing that Britain was a strong enough allie to beat or at least keep up with the Germans in some areas, e.g. the Mediteranean and Battle of Britain.
You obviously dont know your history on the other side of the pond.
He was a wonderful leader. He rallied the people behind him in a way that could not be matched anywhere.
As for threats, no one knew that. At the time Japan very well could have launched an attack for all they knew.
When the war started the USA was in pretty bad shape when it came to armament and equipment. He rallied the people and they made that production capacity happen. The US was not allways in that state where they could effectivly fight a war.
Last but not least, if it were not for Roosevelt would the English have survived? Would England have recieved the Destroyers? Would England have recieved the Lend Lease equipment? Roosevelt supported the British and he helped the British from the Beginning.
Dont bash him because he is an American.
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
Here here Adler...
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
I believe Roosevelt was as important if not more so then Churchill if it wasn't for the USN covering convoys for the Brits before 7 Dec and all the aircraft, armament ,fuel tanks and ships all of this while being challenged by a Senate and Congress that were scepticle of aiding the Brits
Agreed, you cant be blind to what really happened in History no matter how much national pride you have.
Not to mention that Roosevelt was commanding a Nation fighting a war on two theaters. I'm not sayin' that other allies didn't do their part, but it was the US who played the bigger role in the pacific theater.
That's why I choose Roosevelt not for national pride, but it takes a great leader to do the things Roosevelt did in the war.
That's why I choose Roosevelt not for national pride, but it takes a great leader to do the things Roosevelt did in the war.
The British had a very big part in the PTO. Ever read up on Burma?
I didn't say they didn't. Ashamed to say I don't know much of what they did in the PTO. But, the British had a top notch military since the Great War at the time, but the US on the other hand was falling way behind when it came to military strength. Not to say that our military was useless, but when compared to countries like England, Russia, Germany, Italy, and Japan, they really had some catching up to do.
Also, I'm not sure why they don't talk about the British actions in the PTO virtually at all over here, but I would certainly like too. National pride is no excuse, Opinion is nothing, evidence and fact is what's important.
Also, I'm not sure why they don't talk about the British actions in the PTO virtually at all over here, but I would certainly like too. National pride is no excuse, Opinion is nothing, evidence and fact is what's important.
I agree but that unfortunatly is the way of thinking in most non history minded people.
