Greatest Military Leaders of all Time

Western allied generals are nothing to brag about, secondly what else could I take away from your comment? Lastly, instead of begging for acceptance, why wont you earn it? Argue for Patton and you might get a pass on this one.

Barely impressive

1. Allies had 1,4 million men in Normandy against 300 000 Germans, that were secondary forces to begin with.

2. He did not destroy those armies, so why are you even mentioning it?

3. Germans were surrendering to west "en masse" where as they stood to death against USSR.

Here are some generals, who wipe the floor under your little Patton.

Germans:
Heinz Guderian, father of Blitzkrieg, author of Achtung panzer and supreme commander of army group center.

Erich von Manstein, master mind behind invasion of France & brilliant tactician.


Soviets:
Konstantin Rokkosovky, trapped Germans in Stalingrad, made plans for Operation Bagration which lead to 550 000 Germans killed or captured and advanced 400 miles.

Vasily Chuikov, father of modern urban combat

Alexander Vasilevsky, lead the Manchuria offensive (USSR lost 9 700 dead/missing Japanese lost 83 000 KIA and 640 000 POWs)

Georgy Zhukov, who according to Max Hastings was hands down best general of the entire war and is a long way to second place (Historian that has studied Eastern front for over 32 years and wrote multiple books on the subject) Same would go for Anthony Beevor & Dan Carlin.

PS. These are only some high lights of these people, not doing full list of their achievements.

PPS. What you write is how you're going to be seen, would that be true or not.

It is for a reason, that I lean to them. West had no epic battles. Battle of bulge you love to talk about all the time was all in days work in eastern front. But it is not only for that, but also the achievements that generals made in eastern front. No western general had the skill to lead such a huge armies, to crush the entire enemy army groups, logistical experience nor cordination skills need in that scale. Western front is like a little fly compared to the titan of Ost front. Also the fact that only secondary forces were put against western allies and strongest formation against soviets does not help his couse nor does the fact that Germans were surrendering to west almost without a fight. So no. Not a single western general has achieved anything close to that what some German and Soviet generals did and I have multiple historians backing my statement.

How would he be in top WWII generals?

Grammar mistakes tell me what I need to know. You're a native English-speaker, man.

That's okay for a career. I can't call it nearly impressive, though. It's not worth to be mentioned in one post with Arthur Wellesley.

D-Day wasn't nearly massive compared to the Eastern front. The battle of Stalingrad: 550 000 deaths on one side. 550 000! That's more than half a million!

One side lost more men in a single battle, than some nations in entire war. Makes you think, eh. Stalin once said: "WW2 was won by American steel, Brittish brains and Russian blood"

But hey 850 000 Germans were killed or captured in Prague offensive by USSR. (At cost of 12 000 dead or missing)

Nah, WW2 was just won by Russian blood alone. Americans didn't do shit.

They did weaken and disperse German forces. Not that much, but I think they deserve credit for that (But not as much as they actually get credit) Oh and they kept British war machine (If you can call that pathetic mess by that name) running.

@Battleearl
That includes wounded, because KIA/MIA are 4,3 million for Germans and 6,2 million for Soviets

EDIT: I suspect that it includes POW deaths as well, which would explain such high casualties for USSR

Americans went off to celabrate the victory in their homes, where as Russians and many other people had to continue to live in ruins without electricity or running water, limited food and clean up the huge piles of corpses that have left behind by the war.

Good times, good times...

Great Patriotic war it was called