1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Most powerful ww2 general from each country

Discussion in 'World History' started by commie_21, Jan 21, 2002.

  1. commie_21

    commie_21 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    Marin Co., CA
    What are your choices for best general/admiral from the following countries:
    US
    UK
    Russia
    Germany
    Japan

    Mine are:
    Eisenhower(almost everything the Americans did)
    Percy Hobart(Hobart's funnies)
    Zhukov(Stalingrad)
    Gulderian(Blitzkreig)
    Yamamoto
     
  2. Case

    Case The horror, the horror

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    1,884
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    USA
    Best General: Bradley (more carefull and sensible then Patton)
    Best Admiral: Hasley

    UK
    Best General: Montomery
    Best Admiral: Cunningham (often compared to Nelson)

    USSR
    Best General: Zukov - probably did more to win WW2 then any other single man
    Best Admiral: Whoever was in charge of the Volga flottila during the Battle of Stalingrad

    Germany
    Best General: Gulderian
    Best Admiral: Donitz

    Japan
    Best General: Yamashita (the 'tiger of Malaya', and defender of Luzon)
    Best Admiral: Yammato (sp?)
     
  3. Lefty Scaevola

    Lefty Scaevola Moderatus Illuminatus Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    9,784
    Location:
    San Antonio TX USA
    Nimitz
    Tedder
    Zukhov
    Guderian
    Yama****a
     
  4. kobayashi

    kobayashi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2001
    Messages:
    2,709
    Location:
    Singapore
    For Germany I must go with Erich von Manstein - as the descriptive 'powerful' is not really aligned with Guderian whose contribution was the reorganization of the Werhmacht with limited time spent leading troops into battle. Manstein on the other hand devised the invasion of France and had many successful campaigns on the Eastern Front. If there was to be a close second then I'd have to pick Hasso Von Manteuffel instead of Guderian.
     
  5. Keygen

    Keygen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Messages:
    18
    Location:
    Apolyton
    US: Patton & Mac Arthur
    Germany: Rommel
    Russia: Zukov
     
  6. DingBat

    DingBat Paranoid Android

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    194
    There we go with the "powerfull" again. Do you mean "most skilled" or "most authority"?

    I'll assume you mean most skilled:

    US General: Patton
    Mainly because the rest were so incredibly mediocre.

    US Admiral: Nimitz
    Honorable mention: Halsey


    UK General: Guy Simonds
    Very innovative Canadian general who is credited with developmnet of the armoured personnel carrier. Described by Montgomery as one of the best of the Allied generals.

    UK Admiral: Cunningham


    USSR General: Rokossovski
    He was in command at Stalingrad. Most normally give the credit to Zhukov but he was actually up at Rhzev getting his ass kicked by Model.

    USSR Admiral: ?


    German General: Manstein
    Hands down the best military thinker of the war, including Guderian who gets the honorable mention.

    Germal Admiral: Donitz


    Japanese General: Yama****a
    Japanese Admiral: ?
    Yamamoto does not deserve this title. Neither does Nagumo. Both were outfought in any "fair" fight during the war.

    /bruce
     
  7. DingBat

    DingBat Paranoid Android

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    194
    There's only one problem: Zhukov was NOT in command at Stalingrad. That was Rokossovsky, a very talented general in his own right.

    At the time that Operation Uranus was launched, Zhukov was launching Operation Mars against Model's 9th Army in the Rhzev salient. Model handed Zhukov his ass, to the tune of almost half a million casualties.

    This disaster was covered up by the Soviets at the time in order to keep Zhukov's "legend" alive.

    Btw, Operation Mars shows that the Germans could have withstood the Soviet counterattack at Stalingrad, since the ratio of forces actually was better there than at Rhzev. The difference?

    - Model had mobile reserves.
    - 9th Army made extensive use of the "fortified village" tactic which broke up Soviet penetrations and prevented reserves from moving up.

    /bruce
     
  8. Kennelly

    Kennelly Starfleet Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,284
    Location:
    Bleckede,Northern Germany
    US:patton+Nimitz
    UK:Montgomery+Cunningham
    USSR:Schukow+?
    Germany:Rommel+Dönitz
    Japan:?+Yamamoto
     
  9. Knowltok

    Knowltok Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    215
    US: Patton / Nimitz
    UK: Not Monty. no real briliance and well known for his timidity / Cunningham
    Germany: Guderian / Doenitz
    USSR: Zhukov / They had a navy? j/k
    Japan: Yama****a / Dingbat brings up a good point.
     
  10. Warlord Sam

    Warlord Sam 2500 hours and counting..

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2001
    Messages:
    379
    Patton was my type of guy... he wanted to drive on through and take the Soviet Union down, and then go south and make sure that the democrats in China won their little civil war. Huzzah for Patton!! Besides that, my grandpa served under him. If you could hear some of those stories, you'd know Patton was of the two best dang Generals for America during WWII.

    MacArthur is also the man.
     
  11. Case

    Case The horror, the horror

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    1,884
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    Who were the democrats in China? :confused: Chaing Kai Check (sp!) was nothing more then an incompetent and murderous despot, and the communists were hardly democratic. Also, I'd hardly call the Chinese civil war 'little'.

    Patton's main problem was that he was headstrong and didn't know when to call it quits.
    As an example he caused major problems for the Allies in late 1944 by advancing after he had been ordered to stop (he kept pushing 'recon' forces forward, and getting into pitched battles so that he could keep his main forces moving). This worsened the Allies supply problems and was at least partly to blame for the Allies poor dispositions in the north just before the Battle of the Bulge (various newly arrived American divisions were hanging around in Normandy simply because there wasn't enough supplies to keep them in the front line)
     
  12. Knowltok

    Knowltok Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    215
    The main part of the supply problem was in dividing it and shifting priority based upon politics. There wasn't enough supply to support both the American and British armies. The shifting back and forth caused major problems for both armies.

    As far as newly arived divisions in Normandy go, better to have Patton's third army disengage and wheel north to relieve Bastogne than to rush green troops all the way from Normandy to try and do it.
     
  13. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Genial drunkard

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2001
    Messages:
    880
    I don't think that Eisenhower would have been able to stop Patton from counter-attacking, Patton was one hell of an agressive General. :)

    My personal favorite British Admiral during WWII - although certainly not the most powerful - was Admiral Sir Walter Cowan. He was retired by the outbreak of WWII (he had joined the Royal Navy in 1884) but wanted to go out in a blaze of glory, so despite having only being given the post of RN liason officer to the the Commando forces there, he swindled his way into raids in N. Africa and Italy. He was captured by the Italians once, who repatriated him on the grounds that he was too old to fight (he was in his 70's) but he just kept going. He never managed to get himself killed during the war and died in 1956, aged 84.
     
  14. Case

    Case The horror, the horror

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    1,884
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    Knowltok, I was refering to the fact that Patton's actions in late 1944 limited the number of divisions that the Allies could field before the German offencive. Had Patton followed his orders, then the Allied offencive in the North would have been stronger, and the German counter offencive would have been an even bigger disarster. :cool:

    As for British Admirals, Admiral Ramsey also deserves a mention. In 1940 he returned from early retirement to command the British evacuation from Dunkirk, and then went on to mastermind all the other major Allied amphibious operations in Europe.
     
  15. Oda Nobunaga

    Oda Nobunaga Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,352
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario
    DingBat does not have a good point ; Yamamoto was not outfought in a fair fight during the war - mostly because he never actually comanded a fleet in any so-called fair fight. He was not a "field" officer, so to speak - and in his role of planning strategies, he did quite well with the limited resources he had.

    Yamamoto masterminded Pearl Harbor (yes, he had help from Genda and co, most general does) and his Midway plan was quite good - but two factors played out on him. First being the american having broken the japanesse code, second - and more important even perhaps being the fact that the US Navy had one of those unbelievalbe strike of good luck. On papers, no matter how you look at it, EVEN with America aware of the Japanesse plan, Japan should have won.

    Only, the plane that was to check out the very area of sea were the carriers where didn't take out in time due to a technical failure on the cruiser Tone. This caused the whole mess with planes being rearmed by the time the US attack force arrived.

    Only, the Japanesse Zero, which would have BUTCHERED the dive bombers in any given circumstances, were already at sea level intercepting the torpedo bombers when the dive bombers showed up - because the American planes had gotten separated during the flight and through random luck arrived with a perfect timing - it was NOT planned out.

    IE, no one can fault Yamamoto for the failure of his plan there, except for a few minor details. The US Navy winning Midway was a one-in-a-million shot. America won the lottery, so to speak.

    Yamamoto's other campaign was Guadalcanal and the Solomons, were *SEA* battles swung one way and the other, without any sides being able to claim a clear edge there - Japan lost a battleship or two, and maybe a few carriers (not sure on the carriers, I would have to check) but the US lost the Hornet and Wasp, got the Saratoga badly wounded (again) and even the Enterprise had to be removed from operation for a while due to damage.

    Yamamoto was never in direct command, but most of his plans were quite good. Pear Harbor was a mistake overall, he knew it (Sleeping Giant quote), but Japan had decided to go to war with America, and it was the best opening move to make - though Nagumo really blundered by not ordering that third strike. Knocking out the oil tanks and repairing dock of the Pearl Harbor base would have hampered the navy seriously. Not to mention that with the orders they were giving out at that point, they had at least a fair chance of luring out the Enterprise (and Lexington possibly) to attack - and taking THAT one out on day 1 would have been another major edge.

    Yamamoto's plan was good, Nagumo blundred when it came time to set it in motion.

    The plan for Midway was just as sound ; only the US had broken the "unbreakable" Japanesse code, which allowed the Navy to avoid the Aleutians trap, and the USN was, as said earlier, extremely lucky.
     
  16. Oda Nobunaga

    Oda Nobunaga Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,352
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario
    Incidentaly, on DingBat's comment, there's never a fair fight in war. There's always one side that has a clear edge on the other. From 1943 onward the Pacific War saw no true fair fight. Midway wasn't fair either when you get right down to it ; one side knew exactly what the other was up to, and while Japan had one more carrier on the field, I do believe overall American carriers had more planes each. Not to mention American luck.

    So insisting that Yamamoto was consistently outfought in fair fights would get me to ask you, in which fair fight was Yamamoto in dirrect command?
     
  17. Adebisi

    Adebisi Chemical Engineer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2001
    Messages:
    1,296
    Location:
    Finland
    edit
     
  18. DingBat

    DingBat Paranoid Android

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    194
    Seem to have hit a nerve. Sorry, no offense intended.

    Since you bring "direct" command into it, we have to define this. At what level does a general cease to be in direct command. Montgomery get's all sorts of abuse during his command of 21st AG yet no one ever says he wasn't in "direct" command.

    Midway was Yamamoto's plan. That's enough for me. I don't really care what swung the balance in the fight. This is what's called the "grit" of battle and it happens to everyone.

    Yamamoto assumed that the Americans would do exactly as they planned. In fact, the Japanese continually came up with convoluted, complicated plans that relied on the enemy behaving in a particular manner. Leyte Gulf is just the most extreme example of this.

    Calling Yamamoto a strategist, while valid, only makes him look worse. Japan's strategy was flawed from the very beginning. It depended entirely on command of the sea. When that was lost, their vast "empire" was shown to be exactly what it was: a series of small, worthless, isolated islands that drained resources and manpower to no good end.

    If it makes you feel better, I will withdraw my "fair fight" comment and ammend it to read that, except for Pearl Harbor, Yamamoto was just plain outfought.

    Is that better? ;)

    /bruce
     
  19. DingBat

    DingBat Paranoid Android

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    194
    This is actually an excellent nomination.

    Simply for Finland to remain intact and independent after the war was an incredible feat of military achievement, diplomacy, whatever.

    Good post.
    /bruce
     
  20. Bill_in_PDX

    Bill_in_PDX Grumpy Submariner

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,880
    Location:
    The Wilderness of Orygun
    But why did the Japanese fleet only have the advantage of one extra carrier? Because Yamamoto's plan had split his force, including the meaningless occupation of Attu up north, designed to draw out the US fleet to just a about the spot they actually attacked from.

    Worse still for Yama' was that he knew full well from the Pearl Harbor planning on that he was on borrowed time and had to achieve a decisive victory before the US mobilized. This was even more evident following the Doolittle raid. Yet he failed to mass his forces for that decisive strike.

    We CIVIII players who love to complain about combat results could learn the same lesson here. If you have decisive force, but fail to concentrate it, you are playing into the opponents hand.

    Bill
     

Share This Page