Best General of WW2?
 

In your opinion who was the best General of WW2.

In terms of accomplishments. Manstein has the most and biggest accomplishments.

1. Made plan for the invasion of France.

2. Led the 11th army to victory in Crimea, and was promoted to Field Marshall for it.

3. Stopped the Soviet Winter Offensive of 1943 dead in it's tracks by smashing the Popov group, destroying 50 enemy divisions.

4. Led his troops well at Kursk.

5. Continued to fight hard against the Russians in Ukraine, and would have held them off for much longer had it not been for Hitler's horrible strategic policy.

6. Contributed to the strategic and tactical planning of numerous other operations, big and small.

For these reasons I rank him #1.

Although Guderian cannot be overlooked, while his accomplishments on the battlefield weren't as grand as Manstein. He preformed very well in France and Russia where he led Panzers in the offensive. His greatest accomplishment was off the battlefield though, for he invented the concept of Modern Mobile Warfare.

And of course Rommel has a place in my heart, for no other general on earth could do so much with so few. An extra division and sufficient supplies would have taken him all the way to Iraq, Iran, and the Southern Caucuses.

50 Divisions, dang...thats alot of stuff and men..ouch

I say thank god for Hitler. War was inevitable, and I'm glad a fool like him lost the war for Germany, came close though. I agree, Manstein is a machine. He just wasn't used properly.

I wonder what the Soviets did to him after his capture in Stalingrad.

My guess is line him up w/ a few hundered other German troops and got out the ol' DP w/ a squad of PPSH's and cut loose.....

Yeah. Maybe he met with Stalin before that. He may have been put into a Gulag, but thats only a possibility. I never really looked it up.

Just looked it up. It turns out he lived until 1973, death by natural causes. If I was not busy at that date I would have looked him up.

Are you retarded? That was Paulus, not Manstein. Paulus was the worst German Field Marshall that ever lived, a disgrace.

Which means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING because each Soviet division was understrength in the extreme during that time. 1000-2000 men per division.

Also destroying =! killing/capturing all soldiers in that division.

Look at the post above :cool:

Uhh, are you retarded? Hitler was the greatest monster in the XX century. In just 4 years he was directly responsible for the death of ~23 million people (most of them Soviets), and many, many more indirect deaths.

Well if it hadn't been stopped Germany would have lost much much sooner. It means something kid.


The deaths of soviets sounds pretty good to me. I'm pretty sure the tens millions of people that suffered under Soviet occupation and communist rule would agree with that statement.

Whether or not he totally destroyed the 50 Divisions or not I find it amazing in that he was victorious against that many divisions w/ what he had to fight with, which im sure was not nearly as many divisions not sure but im sure he was outnumbered

I think both of you should try to set your heads straight. You know. Youre not talking about some kind of puppet show with toys but a war and a terrible one at that with the death of many people which fought hard on each side of the conflict. You could at least try to show some respect to those peopole. Regardles which side it was.

But even with all of your love for the glorious Mahnstein maybe you you should also not forget his twisted side accepting the death of millions of jews and crimes regarding the enemy forces and even the own population later when they retreated back to Germany (field anweisungen and orders from the front proved that). Mahnstein was a intelligent tactician. But he was also a opportunist and his conections with the nazi party cant be denied. That many of them have broken with the Nazis when the war changed and did not came out in Germanies favour is understandable but it doesnt change that military Generals have welcome the Fuhrer and his loyal mens as long the army was runing from victory to victory.

If there are men I respect then it are Henning von Tresckow or Erwin von Witzleben who have from the far begining in 1933~36 seen the danger coming from Hitler and his party and started to get some opposition against him. While no one of them have been democrats they had some kind of honor. That for sure. I would even go so far to say that Rommel was a men that deserved much respect. But even he was more or less just a oportunist. Many of them had a lot to gain from the Nazis and as long they seen victories all was fine.

I am not surprised anymore from the strange ideals and thoughts people throw around in WW2 forums anymore either cause of stubborn feelings and false honor for the German Reich or of sher ignorance about the topic. What I am surprised is how this topic isnt still closed yet.

Guys, if you want to discuss how "great" it is that Manstein killed all those Soviet soldiers, please do it somewhere else. There is several other forums you can visit if you like to discuss that kind of things. Feel free to discuss which General were the best of WWII, but keep it civilized please.

There is absolutely no reason to mention that you personally think that it is great that so-and-so-many soldiers from this-or-that nation were killed by a certain general. If this discussion continues in the same manner as before, I´ll close down the thread.

Respect the dead, no matter which side they fought on, because they all fought for something that they believed in, no matter if the cause were the wrong one or not.

//Zeke Wolff, Moderator.

Your a fool, neither Manstein or Rommel believed in Nazi Ideology or were members of the Nazi party. Both were extremely skilled professional soldiers who served Germany, not Nazi causes. The only good German general that was a Nazi was Model. Most of Germany's greatest generals were not Nazis at all. Same thing with Russian generals, many did not agree with Stalin's evil policies at all. But they served their country, the Motherland, not Stalin.

FM Von Manstein:

The next time you call any other forum user "retard" or "fool" or any similar insulting nickname, you will receive a warning and ultimately, a ban. If you can´t post messages without resorting to insults to other forum users, don´t post at all.

//Zeke Wolff, Moderator.

You should read over my post again. Just a bit more carefully cause I will only explain it one time for you here (I dont want to sound cocky, but it seems you made up your mind already and thus I see it a bit pointless to discuss that).

If you dont know about the word "oportunism" then you should eventualy also google that one.

Beeing a member of the Nazi party and suporting the Nazi party are 2 seperate things. Even the Allies (most of them) realized that after WW2 and have not punished everyone or dealt with everyone on the same level. There have been members, nominal members and confidants. Mahnstein and Rommel have been at least people on the level confidants. As high ranking officers anyway. It is more likely that they have been nominal members meaning they supported the changes of the Nazis particuilarly to the military. Have they been alone in such thinking ? Definetly not. But it tells a lot about their cahracter. Rommel had once the chance to talk with a captured SAS officers and he confessed to him what fine soldiers the Brits are and that both should fight the real enemy, the reds. But, if not for the differences was the answer of the SAS member, what differences asked Rommel. The things with the jews explained the SAS. And Rommel countered, that the jews would be politics and thats not a the concern of a soldier.

Many of them, Mahnstein as well have been oportunists and supporters of the Nazi party particularly as long the German military was victorious. That is fact. It can be read from dossiers, field orders, personal oppinions etc. all those things are free and available for everyone at the German Bundesarchiv.

Not serving Nazi causes ? Well then tell us "Mahnstein" what kind of idea was behind the whole war and conquering of east from a German perspective. I suggest you to go and read again personal notes of German generals. They knew very well particularly as the intelligent tacticians they were what a defeat of the Sovietunion would mean to it's citizens of Russia and its satelite states they accepted the fact for example that the German effort to remove most of the Ukrain wheat would cause a very large death killing 100.000 if not Millions. Many people have known and read mein Kampf which was Hitlers book and described very well his targets. So there is no member of the Military that could simply say he would fullfill his honor and duty not knowing about the raid in the east. There is a difference between defence and attack. And that for a reason. Hands down not many army personal are saints. But we are talking about the Mahnsteins and other German generals conection to the Nazi party and their goals. To say that they had not the same relation to them compared to people like Heidrich or Kaltenbrunner (chief of Gestapo) is obvious. But telling with al seriousness those people would not have served the Nazi party and most important Hitler as willing deeds is quite wrong as well.

The desire to conquer another country has nothing to do with Nazism. Obviously Manstein knew that many Russians would die in the process of the war. But that's what war is. Manstein or most German generals for the matter did not endorse genocide or racism. Rommel would have shot any soldier who displayed such ideals. Many German generals had a great deal of respect for Hitler, he saved their country, that's just human nature. Being professional soldiers they would like to see their country succeed in warfare, and obviously had a great deal of devotion to their country. But they were not devoted to Nazi causes. They did not believe in extermination, and as the war dragged on they knew that Hitler was destroying the country they loved. They knew that their service to their country meant nothing because it was being run by a mad man. But they carried on because they wanted to defend their people.

As for the German generals being opportunists and supporters of the Nazi party. They might have believed in the changes made to the armed forces, but they did not believe in the Nazi ideals. They supported the Nazi Party because they wanted Germany to be powerful, not because they believed in it's politics.

Youre missing the point. I will repeat it again. I suggest you go and read dossiers, field orders and personal entries of those Generals. As well Manstein. Then we can contiune on the subject. You seem to have a twisted view on the German military of WW2. I am not comparing the German OKH and its leaders to the Nazi party. But they have been more then just soldiers and many of those Generals did not only just accepted war crimes but also enganged with their troops in it some more others less it is NOT a simple black vs white scenario that for sure and to paint a acurate picture about everything is very hard maybe even impossible (we will knever know all details). But Germany spend the last 60 years working that history up. And I think if anyone has a good view about it then it are the German historians. And they spend a lot of time and effort in understanding characters like either Rommel or Manstein, Kluge, Witzleben, Tresckow etc. you name it. So believe it or not. There cant be a doubt that Manstein was part of all the war effords and played his role. How big that was and how much responsible he was as individual is up to historians to discuss. For sure there is a lot of conversity and yet not solved historical events ~ for example how close was Manstein to the Nazi doctrine really ?. But there cant be a doubt that he was more then just only a soldier and usual character by its time.

Also, "the others did it as well" rhetoric is =/= excuse. It is very unprofessional to argue that way regarding history and no serious historian would do that so we as usual people should not either. It shows a lack of fundamental understanding regarding WW2 and its causes. Its the same stupid rhetoric like comparing war crimes with each other for example which is a disgrace to the dead. Many of the right wing supporters label Dresden and the bombing as "allied war crime" for example. But thats foolish. Ever heard, they sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

Right, cause many of them did not believed in "defeating the communistic Untermenschen, called Russians, Balkans etc." is a good thing or at least not a bad thing. Dont be silly. Not everyone was a die hard Nazi. Probably only very few. But most of them did not had much condolence for Russians. Regardles if it was war or not. Because that :
Was what many thought about it.

Precisely, to the people of the Satellite states the Germans must have looked at as the do gooders for fighting the evil Soviet Oppressors.

Yeah like the Ukrain or White Russian population which have welcome German units as liberators till they realised what a conquer by the Germans meant.

Either way how you see it. Hitler or Stalin. Neither the one nor the other was a good choice.

I remember a quote from a Russian soldier when he was asked about the War that he said, in the end it was a decision between 2 dicators. And he simply choose the one who spoke Russian.

But what I meant was the view of German high military officers on the Russian population in General. And they had less concerns in killing masses of Russians then compared to Brits or French for example which somewhat was in favour of the general Nationalsocialistic doctrine of the Rassenlehre and Untermenschen beeing inferior to the Germanic population. Hands down, if there really would not have been at least in the base of it some overlaping of the Nazi-ideology with what some military officers believed the Nazis would never have been so succesfull in their attempts. Its not like there have not been already a oppsition present since the 1933 even from the military side (See Tresckow and a few other Generals which wanted already in that time to remove Hitler), but those had a very hard time to convince other military personal of their point of view and explain Hitle was a danger to the Reich. For obvious reasons. Particularly after situations like the Munich Agreement it became almost impossible to search for any critical voices cause what people feared didnt happened. War in 1938 with Britain and France what many officers feared since no one believed that it could be won at that point and even the Invasion of Poland many thought (cause of 1938 ) the Brits and French would remain quiet again. It was to late at some point though and those voices that have been critical about the Wehrmachts progression in war efforts and Nazi ideas have been removed from the Military (Blomberg–Fritsch Affair) and replaced with loyal to the Nazi party officers. This includes as well others like Manstein, Rommel and many other Generals which have been even to the end loyal to the Nazi gouvernement. Since both have dissagreed to any attempt of removing Hitler even after it was eminent that the war was loost, at least Staufenberg realised that even though he was a Nazi suporter in the begining. I repeat Manstein might not have been a Nazi in the traditional sense but he was in some aspects close to the Nationalsocialistic ideals and ideas. There is for example a order from 1941 "Reichenau Order" by Manstein which explicit involved the killing of jews.


Erich von Manstein - Indopedia
However, von Manstein did issue an order on November 20, 1941: his version of the infamous "Reichenau Order" [2], which equated "partisans" and "Jews" and called for draconic measures against them. Hitler and Field Marshal von Rundstedt recommended the "Reichenau Order" as being exemplary and encouraged other generals to issue similar orders. Not all did, in fact, it seems that only a minority did do so. Von Manstein was among those who voluntarily issued such an order. It stated that:

This struggle is not being carried on against the Soviet Armed Forces alone in the established form laid down by European rules of warfare.
Behind the front too, the fighting continues. Partisan snipers dressed as civilians attack single soldiers and small units and try to disrupt our supplies by sabotage with mines and infernal machines. Bolshevists left behind keep the population freed from Bolshevism in a state of unrest by means of terror and attempt thereby to sabotage the political and economic pacification of the country. Harvests and factories are destroyed and the city population in particular is thereby ruthlessly delivered to starvation.
Jewry is the middleman between the enemy in the rear and the remains of the Red Army and the Red leadership still fighting. More strongly than in Europe they hold all key positions of political leadership and administration, of trade and crafts and constitutes a cell for all unrest and possible uprisings.
The Jewish Bolshevik system must be wiped out once and for all and should never again be allowed to invade our European living space.
The German soldier has therefore not only the task of crushing the military potential of this system. He comes also as the bearer of a racial concept and as the avenger of all the cruelties which have been perpetrated on him and on the German people."
...
"The soldier must appreciate the necessity for the harsh punishment of Jewry, the spiritual bearer of the Bolshevik terror. This is also necessary in order to nip in the bud all uprisings which are mostly plotted by Jews."
(Nuremberg trials proceedings, Vol. 20, pp. 639 - 645 [3])

Jewry is the middleman between the enemy in the rear and the remains of the Red Army and the Red leadership still fighting.
This is exactly one of the propagandistic phrases carried out by the Nazi party for many years. As well before the war. Comparing all jews with Bolschewiks or label them as enemies to the Reich. Though I dont have to explain to you know how idiotic that kind of rhetoric was ? A person as inteligent like Manstein might have been a good tactician. But he's not simply the honorable soldier many (even in Germany) tried to portayed him during the 60s cause it helped to create a clean image of the Wehrmacht for the Cold War efforts. Today thankefull we have a better understanding of many things. Ideology should never taint our view on history.

No Germany wouldn't. Lmao. Besides how hard is it 2 stop it? the offensive was out of steam.



In that case, I believe you should leave this discussion. Your 2 dumb to talk about such things.

Hell countries "occupied" by Soviets post destalinization were not bad 2 live in. Most of them were already backward b4 WW2.

But even Stalinist country is far better than Nazi Germany. People like you should be beaten up imo. Unfourtenatly that isn't possible though

Um no? The offensive was not out of steam. There were hundreds of Russian Divisions coming up against Manstein, had he not stopped the offensive it would have just kept rolling forwards and forced AGC and AGN to make strategic withdraws back into Poland in order to reorganize their lines.

Hands down. Manstein did a lot to secure the frontline in the east and some of his offensives have been quite spectacular. Like the capture and fighting around Charkov. But fact is as well even if Hitler gave Manstein a free hand in all his operations Germany had no chance to win the war or its targets.

Probably not, but if Hitler didn't interfere with any strategic or tactical planning of any operation Germany would have won.

please ... you cant believe that really. Won ? What would they have won ?

I see this many times mentioned as pseudo-historic idea without Hitlers mistakes (letz call it that) the Germans would have won.

Its a useless idea even hypotheticaly cause actualy the only way for Germany to win WW2 was ... to never start it. Or letz better say never elect Hitler. As stupid it sounds but thats how it is.

If you think about it what kind of goals Hitler had and the propaganda / targets of the Nazi Party its clear the war would have never stoped cause they would never have achied any of the targets. Killing all Jews and Communists ? Or wining against the Sovietunion, America and ... rest of the world ? You know Herman Goering had already plans for a occupation of Palestina and Israel ... When would they have stoped fighting. When would Germany have tried really to do any truce ? Fact is the financial situation would not have allowed the third Reich to exist without war. Even before 1938 the German gouvernemt was pretty much bankrupt. They would not have been able to pay all their credits back in 1939 which would have caused a major inflation. Almost everything the Nazis did was on credit. All the buildings and stuff they did for the population. Hence why war was needed. With every conquered nation one of the first things the German Bank did was to aquire all finances of the occupied nation. One example. When they had troops deployed somewhere as occuping force they would usualy pay those soldiers in the local currency. That way not the German military / gouvernemt was paying them but the population of the occupied terrirtory.

There is actualy no question if or if not Germany would have loost. The question is more about the time they would have loost. Even if Hitler would not have been involved in the military all they would have achied eventualy would been a delay in defeat.

I think you misunderstood me... Obviously war was necessary, as Germany needed more natural resources and $. But Hitler hampered the war by making stupid decisions. The BoB for one was pointless, it accomplished nothing but killing Germany's best pilots. Sending more aid and troops to Africa would have been much more logical. Germany needed oil badly and the capture of the Middle East and Persia would have done that, and created a 2nd front for the USSR. Turkey could have also been forced into the axis powers if they were surrounded. They were already economic partners with Germany, and some Turks believed it would be wise to join the Axis powers but many feared Anglo-Soviet invasion.

Today i looked at the forums and fuond this post.I simply cannot belive it.I belive FM_Von_Manstein should be banned.Insulting onather nation.I mean what horible person are you ,FM_Von_Manstein.I m not russian,but still ,I m offended too.

Just imagne that you are dead and I came at your grave and said "The death of FM_Von_Masterin sound pretty good for me."

I belive every person of this world should be respected,exept if he was a killer.

Hitler and Stalin cannot compare.Hitler will always be rememberd as a scum,while Stailn as a hero who won WW2

Robi120,

I don´t believe in instants bans etc since I prefer to give everyone a second chance. However, I am keeping an eye out for any further insults towards other in this thread, no matter if they are made about other nations or other forum users and I´ve written warnings to offending forum users already. But please, in the future, when and if you feel insulted/offended by something another user has written, please contact me, or Nike_it, by PMs and tell us about it instead of writing it in the forums.

In the above case, FM_Von_Manstein has been told to behave or...

//Zeke Wolff, Moderator.

LOL! Kid Stalin murdered +30 million of his own people. They're both ridiculously evil. And Soviets doesn't necessarily mean Russian. It's like Nazis. Not all Germans believed in Nazism, not all Russians were believed in Soviet ideology. If you knew anything about the suffering of the people in the Warsaw pact countries you'd probably dislike Soviets too.

There is no point to debate the motivations of the war beeing needed as it was lead mainly by agressions and most of the politic was focused around confrontation. This is evident by the politics from Nazi members like Ribbentropp who was in charge regarding foreign affairs and the many different official or inofficial comments by Hitler himself and Nazi members.

War was not necessary. Only Hitler and his Nazi members made it necessary due to their stupid economical decisions and twised political ideas that the German population needed desperately "room in the east" at all cost to survive. But as said there is absolutely no way how Germany could have achieved its goals with the war and military force. Like I mentioned the only way how germany could have prevented a defeat is simply not to start the war at all and living in a peacefull coexistance with its neigbours. But that would have required sane politicans.

You dont really choose your words very carefully dont you?

It is very easy comparing the Nazi party with the Soviet system from outside. But historicaly there is more to it then just that. But we should leave it to that as that part alone can fill books of arguments and informations.

Fact is that the Sovietunion and its citizens have a different meaning compared to the simple Nazi for example. Hence why I think its a gross generalisation if you say something like "killing of soviets sounds good". It should also not really be that advicable to say the same for nazis. There is no black vs white. Many people which feelt as part of the Nazi or Soviet culture cant be simply idealised or classified. John Rabe or Oscar Schindler just to name some examples.

Wow ... these two are going on and on .. this is funny....



....and there doing it on the internet !

lmao

FM_Von_Manstein
You should be ashamed. I'm from Ukraine and I feel disgisting reading you'r posts. You seems to hate russian people. And you just don't know about all the horror of war. You are disgusting person

Ok, since people obviously can´t follow the rules and behave nicely towards each other, I will now lock this thread.


//Zeke Wolff, Moderator.