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
Was Ike the President or the leader of the United States in WW2?
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
Ike did not become president until 1952. He was the Commander in Chief of SHAEF during WW2. I would not class him with Churchill.
Yes I know. I was asking that because he said Ike was the best leader of the war and this was referring to Political leaders.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
I believe that Ike was a good politician as a general having to deal with all the personalities in the Allied high command including Churchill, Monty, Patton, Alexander, DeGaulle, etc. I don't believe he was much of a strategist, for instance, compared to McArthur.
Urspolar27
Recruit
- 1
- Jan 15, 2008
For myself.....Romanian Marshal Ion Antonescu
parsifal
Colonel
I believe that Ike was a good politician as a general having to deal with all the personalities in the Allied high command including Churchill, Monty, Patton, Alexander, DeGaulle, etc. I don't believe he was much of a strategist, for instance, compared to McArthur
I dont know about that Richard. Eisenhower had an extraordinarily difficult job. With capable, but self opinionated subordinates like Patton, Monty, De Gaulle and even Mallory to contend with, he had a pretty tough assigment.
Also, by adopting the "broad front" strategy, he was minimising risk, whilst not allowing the germans to concentrate (the exception being, of course, the Ardennes counterattack). When the allies departed from this forula, such as at Arnhem, they got the worst of it.
I am a great fan of Eisenhower, Him and marshall are consistently underrated in my opinion
I dont know about that Richard. Eisenhower had an extraordinarily difficult job. With capable, but self opinionated subordinates like Patton, Monty, De Gaulle and even Mallory to contend with, he had a pretty tough assigment.
Also, by adopting the "broad front" strategy, he was minimising risk, whilst not allowing the germans to concentrate (the exception being, of course, the Ardennes counterattack). When the allies departed from this forula, such as at Arnhem, they got the worst of it.
I am a great fan of Eisenhower, Him and marshall are consistently underrated in my opinion
Freebird
Master Sergeant
If you are comparing "political leaders" perhaps. Churchill was not a brilliant strategist, in fact he was a rather poor Minister of Defence.
In this I agree, Churchill was an great leader of the British people.
Again Marshall did a good job building up the US military as head of the army, but as a strategist he had some failings
JugBR
Staff Sergeant
how about stalin ? soviet union was the only country that was invaded by germany and could beign free fighting back, you know what i mean ? the only nation invaded by germany and fights to expel them. and they did it.
btw, among the original leaders of the begining of the war, he was the only one who still in the power in post-war. with eastern europe under his authority and china under his influence.
besides the discussion about good or evil, love or hate, stalin should be one of the greatest leaders of ww2. and also one of the great winners of the conflict.
btw, among the original leaders of the begining of the war, he was the only one who still in the power in post-war. with eastern europe under his authority and china under his influence.
besides the discussion about good or evil, love or hate, stalin should be one of the greatest leaders of ww2. and also one of the great winners of the conflict.
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
and Stalin had to go scrambling for good generals since he killed most of them in the '30s. Yep, great leader.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
Yep, Stalin was a great leader. He killed all of his closest competitors and terrorised the rest and if you were one of his generals and did not suit him you were eliminated. I still go with Churchill.
JugBR
Staff Sergeant
1939:
stalin and hitler signs a treaty, they agreed do not attack themselves and also beign neutral in case of some other power declares war against one of both.
also, and more important: they agreed to divide poland betwen them.
so, when germany invaded poland, the soviet army was in the borderline of this country then, when the last signal of polack resistance in varsaw was crushed, the soviet army invaded poland. isnt that true ?
so, ussr also invaded poland. why declares war just against germany ?
1941:
hitler brokes the treaty and attack ussr. england declares supports the soviet union against germany. the barbarossa operation is the largent military operation made by nazi germany, it counts with 70% of their army.
1945
after a brutal and agressive ofensive, the red army arrives in berlin:
in 1939 stalin negotiated with hitler a half of poland, now stalin has half europe, including half germany.
stalin, a butcher, a cheater, a dictator, a murder and also, the big winner of ww2.
thats my point.
Freebird
Master Sergeant
Can any of the Canucks who voted for Mackenzie-King explain why they think he was a good leader?
Maestro
Master Sergeant
Go figure ! I don't get it myself. Why is he even in the list ?
parsifal
Colonel
Stalin was not a great leader, as such, but i am of the opinion that he was at least better than Hitler. He at least had the good sense not to interfere in operational matters as much as Hitler, and after the absolute act of paranoia he displayed by killing most of his officers, he did settle down enough to allow his army to recover, and produce some of the finest officers of the war,
I also think he was more realistic about the outcome of the postwar makeup of Europe, although to be fair, so was Churchill. The Americans were naive enough to trust Stalin at the end of the war. And didnt realize what his intentions were viz Eastern Europe
I also think he was more realistic about the outcome of the postwar makeup of Europe, although to be fair, so was Churchill. The Americans were naive enough to trust Stalin at the end of the war. And didnt realize what his intentions were viz Eastern Europe
JugBR
Staff Sergeant
i understand your opinion, but i think "greatest" is not "good", or "more ethic", or even "more human", otherwise, the names of stalin and hitler also couldnt being mentioned in this pool, would be waste of time.
my point is besides all his crimes against ucranians, germans, russians, etc... stalin was the great winner of ww2 and the most powerfull man in the world after the conflict.
you have to remember, stalin sign a treaty with hitler, to share the poland, soviet union also invadede poland in 1939, but only against germany was declared war. why ?
also, hitler betrayed stalin and broke the treaty, starting the barbarossa operation, wich counts at least with 70% of germans army forces. the biggest operation of war. and soviets was the only nation who could expels the germans out their territory, fighting back until berlin.
to end my point is good to remember how was europe before the conflict and the new europe after that.
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Jug makes a good point, one I never thought of . When Russia invaded Poland on 17 Sept 1939, why didn't Britain and France declare war on Stalin?
The US wasn't involved then Jug so when we did enter it was well beyond Barbarossa and Stalin was an "Ally".
The US wasn't involved then Jug so when we did enter it was well beyond Barbarossa and Stalin was an "Ally".
JugBR
Staff Sergeant
yes, you see, stalin would be another enemy of allies and then he became one of the 3 great leaders and also soviets made a great contribution to defeat of 3 reich, after the war, russia raises their territory and also their influence over europe.
considering the dictatorial conotation of soviet government, stalin became the most powerfull person of post-war.
parsifal
Colonel
An alternative, and perhaps interesting way of looking at this problem is perhaps to work backwards and think about the worst political leaders in WWII.
I am not a great fan of Petain, or Rydz Smigly. Strangely, perhaps, i would not put either Mussolini, or Hitler in the bottom of the list. I dont think much of Goring, and the japanese political assessment prior to PH was also pretty poor as well. I am not all that impressed by Chiang Kai Shek either.
I am not a great fan of Petain, or Rydz Smigly. Strangely, perhaps, i would not put either Mussolini, or Hitler in the bottom of the list. I dont think much of Goring, and the japanese political assessment prior to PH was also pretty poor as well. I am not all that impressed by Chiang Kai Shek either.
