|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Aug 21, 2021 8:04:39 GMT
Zhukov was completely dependent on the brilliance of his subordinates, and in addition, wasted many men, vehicles, and money on a fruitless defense and counterattack of Moskva. Bagration was almost entirely Rokossovsky, Operation Kutuzov and the Ukrainian and Leningrad and Stalingrad operations weren't him, either. I fail to see a single good operation where he was the commander. In the case Of MacArthur, his Army (with naval support) single-handedly won the Southern war in the Pacific, IMO only second to China in terms of Importance (this was where Japan was getting the vast majority of its natural resources). In addition, he did this without the need for subordinate brilliance (which, except for Vandegrift, he mostly lacked), and with very few casualties. 1. Defence and counteroffensive near Moscow weren’t fruitless at all. Germans had numerical superiority even at the point, when the Red Army started the counteroffensive, so the operation was very difficult for the Soviet side. There was no option of losing Moscow, in terms of morale, transport, war industry etc. 2. Rokossovskiy commanded only one front (the 1st Byelorussian) of 4, which participated in operation Bagration. The operation plan was developed mainly by Vasilevskiy, Zhukov and Stavka members, Rokossovskiy planned only its southern wing - Bobruisk cauldron. During the operation he was subordinated to Zhukov, who coordinated the actions of the 1st and the 2nd Byelorussian fronts - and that’s a big part of executing the whole offensive. 3. Zhukov commanded the 1st Ukrainian front after the death of Vatutin in 1944 and led the Proskurov-Chernovzi operation, which has seen a partial success, but still liberated a big part of Ukraine. 4. Vasilevskiy and Zhukov were the 2 co-authors of the general idea of operation Uranus - so Zhukov played a role in the Battle of Stalingrad. 5. Zhukov literally saved Leningrad in September 1941 by organising an effective defence. 6. He lose less percents of his men in both Moscow and Berlin battles than his neighbour Konev. , you should really join the Historical Society. |
|
|
|
Post by alexandrvasilevski on Aug 21, 2021 8:52:55 GMT
1. Defence and counteroffensive near Moscow weren’t fruitless at all. Germans had numerical superiority even at the point, when the Red Army started the counteroffensive, so the operation was very difficult for the Soviet side. There was no option of losing Moscow, in terms of morale, transport, war industry etc. 2. Rokossovskiy commanded only one front (the 1st Byelorussian) of 4, which participated in operation Bagration. The operation plan was developed mainly by Vasilevskiy, Zhukov and Stavka members, Rokossovskiy planned only its southern wing - Bobruisk cauldron. During the operation he was subordinated to Zhukov, who coordinated the actions of the 1st and the 2nd Byelorussian fronts - and that’s a big part of executing the whole offensive. 3. Zhukov commanded the 1st Ukrainian front after the death of Vatutin in 1944 and led the Proskurov-Chernovzi operation, which has seen a partial success, but still liberated a big part of Ukraine. 4. Vasilevskiy and Zhukov were the 2 co-authors of the general idea of operation Uranus - so Zhukov played a role in the Battle of Stalingrad. 5. Zhukov literally saved Leningrad in September 1941 by organising an effective defence. 6. He lose less percents of his men in both Moscow and Berlin battles than his neighbour Konev. , you should really join the Historical Society. Wow, thanks |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Aug 21, 2021 9:01:07 GMT
Well, if I was able to get in you'd get in for sure.  |
|
|
|
Post by Manfred von Richthofen on Aug 23, 2021 0:19:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Aug 23, 2021 4:23:43 GMT
True. |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Aug 23, 2021 5:09:18 GMT
He was one of the finest strategists of the war
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Aug 24, 2021 16:04:48 GMT
I voted to Manstein, still I not buyed him, if Guderian was there I surely vote him...
Hail Guderian
|
|
|
|
Post by Manfred von Richthofen on Aug 24, 2021 23:44:18 GMT
I voted to Manstein, still I not buyed him, if Guderian was there I surely vote him... Hail Guderian This is real life, not Wc4, Captain |
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Aug 26, 2021 3:09:25 GMT
I voted to Manstein, still I not buyed him, if Guderian was there I surely vote him... Hail Guderian This is real life, not Wc4, CaptainThen what you think who was the best general in whole ww2? |
|
|
|
Post by Manfred von Richthofen on Aug 26, 2021 3:11:37 GMT
This is real life, not Wc4, Captain Then what you think who was the best general in whole ww2? I think, Eisenhower because D-day was crucial. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Aug 26, 2021 3:13:58 GMT
Then what you think who was the best general in whole ww2? I think, Eisenhower because D-day was crucial. And from Axis side?? |
|
|
|
Post by Manfred von Richthofen on Aug 26, 2021 3:15:42 GMT
I think, Eisenhower because D-day was crucial. And from Axis side?? , because he was also a big part of the Western Front. And Erich von Manstein, because he was the best commander in the Eastern Front |
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Aug 26, 2021 3:22:47 GMT
Anyway, Manstein and Eisenhower were the best generals of ww2😌😌 |
|
|
|
Post by Manfred von Richthofen on Aug 26, 2021 3:28:10 GMT
Anyway, Manstein and Eisenhower were the best generals of ww2😌😌 Even though nobody even voted Eisenhower... |
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Aug 26, 2021 3:33:52 GMT
Anyway, Manstein and Eisenhower were the best generals of ww2😌😌 Even though nobody even voted Eisenhower... I think maximum member's vote is based on wcq4 generals that's why Manstein got the most number of votes. I also voted to Manstein 🤗 and you? |
|
