The Most Over-Rated / Under-Rated WWII Generals

[enigma]

Inspired by the topic on weapons, lets see peoples views on the guys in charge.

OVerrated:

Eisenhower,
Too short sighted, unwilling to look at the bigger picture - ie the soviets advance, partially the americans political and top brass fault i supose,
unable to keep hi generals incheck,
i believe it has been mentioned that he could have improved the supply problems but never did.
etc etc etc

Monty,
He may have made some sweeping changes to 8th Army, and brought about victory with better planning, ideas and training but
on his arrival he threw out most of the old divisional, brigaders and corps commanders and staff, replacing them with people he had taught in staff college, and men who had served under him.
Even if some of these men were unexperianced and there was people he threw out who where better suited.
His big headness, argumentive.

Great Leader but way overrated,

same goes for Rommel:
Rash, big ego ... disregard for supplies or the strategic picture,
ie ... attacking after the 1st battle of alamin, even though thee was not enough petrol to actually acheive his objective and actually not doing much recon in the believe that the british would sit back and let him run circles around them.
not waiting so an attack upon malta to nuetralise could happen.

Iirc he still held contempt for some of the italians via his exps in ww1,

he then later through out all his lessons he learnt about static defence being worth nothing in the desert when he went to normandy and went about with the intention of defeating the invasion on the beach, sure some of it was sound thinking due to the air and arty power but still ... it seems by this point he had pasted his peak.



Underrated:

Silm, rather unknown. Lead troops in East Africa and then in the middle east and his own opinion not with distingsion.
Went to Burma and lead Burma Corp through the retreats back to India and following that lead 14th Army in the following campaings.
Taking the armed forces and leading them, as the title of his book says - from defeat into victory.



Edit: thinking that in the west, the other fronts other then ne europe and the pacific islands and overshadowed by the well know german generals such as Guderian, Rommel etc and the key nazis, ... i guess you could say people like Manstein, Model, Von Kluge, von Rundstedt etc could be to an extend all be stated as under-rated when outshined by the more popular generals.

But anyhoo your views and opinions?

[sid]

Eisenhower did stop the Soviets taking Denmark, he should Imo have let Patton try to surround the whole German Army in Normandy. I don't think Monty acheived much after alamin except for the crossing of the rhine.

[A.I.]

Monty has a lot to do with ignoring SS panzer divisions in Arnheim when he planned the Market-Garden operation. I think that that defeat was the lowest point of his career.

[sid]

But if it had worked who knows what would've happened, I think it was a risk worth taking.

[Sgt So and So]

But if it had worked who knows what would've happened, I think it was a risk worth taking.
The allies would've had Berlin by Christmas! Heck, maybe we wouldn't even have a Cold War!:D

[CBowling]

Under rated: Hitler-He is mainly overshadowed by the holocaust and hatred of the jews..but I am not talking about him being a good general in the sense of moral standards or anything like that. Tactically, he knew how to fight a war, and did a pretty damn good job during WWII spreading Germany's borders and taking out enemies.

This in no way means I admire Hitler for the man he was and I agree with everything he did. I just recognize his tactic skills.

His biggest mistake was trying to take on Russia and America at the same time..but every general makes mistakes..this one just cost him the war XD.

[Hyperion2010]

Under rated: Hitler-He is mainly overshadowed by the holocaust and hatred of the jews..but I am not talking about him being a good general in the sense of moral standards or anything like that. Tactically, he knew how to fight a war, and did a pretty damn good job during WWII spreading Germany's borders and taking out enemies.

This in no way means I admire Hitler for the man he was and I agree with everything he did. I just recognize his tactic skills.

His biggest mistake was trying to take on Russia and America at the same time..but every general makes mistakes..this one just cost him the war XD.

ROFL

You need to read Inside the Third Reich right now and realize just how stupid he was. Seriously, he had ZERO idea about the conditions of his troops and the terrain they were fighting on, and to make matters worse he had an almost direct connection to the front so people couldnt "honestly" countermand his orders. He refused to listen to those who were experts in their fields and he made mistake after mistake, so many damned mistakes. He had one success, and that was against France, and he was luck, and that success blinded him for the rest of the war. He would propose a stratagy and expect it to work, just like in France. Unfortunately war doesnt work like that.

Go read Inside the Third Reich by Albert Speer, I'm dead serious.

[Ardito]

Eisenhower did stop the Soviets taking Denmark, he should Imo have let Patton try to surround the whole German Army in Normandy. I don't think Monty acheived much after alamin except for the crossing of the rhine.

How do you mean not stopping the Soviets from taking Denmark? The German forces in Denmark surrendered to the British. On the other hand, Eisenhower stopped the western allies from taking Berlin and Prague, being infatuated with the Commies much like the FDR administration at large.

I agree, Mongomery is probably one of the most overrated generals of the war. I would like to add another: Grigory Zhukov. Tongue in cheek: a vain character who's greatest asset probably was that Stalin was almost as preoccupied with his popular image as himself.

[Ardito]

ROFL

You need to read Inside the Third Reich right now and realize just how stupid he was.

Still, there is probably some truth to Hitler being underrated. A great disadvantage Hitler suffers from has likely been his inability to defend his actions when relentlessly bashed by German generals trying to explain why they lost the war. I'm not saying Hitler wasn't for the most part a military moron, only that in the postwar period he conveniently was always there to take the blame.

He didn't only make bad decisions (with the exception of the 1940 sickle stroke plan). For example, his refusal to let the generals have their way and retreat in the winter of 1941-42 was probably the best alternative. There simply weren't enough logistical resources to take care of such a retreat, had the Germans left their fortified villages for the freezing winds of the steppes. Steadfastness in this regard saved the German army and crushed the Soviet counterattack. On the other hand, this experience contributed to fulfill the disaster at Stalingrad the following year.
He also realized at an early stage, much prior to the general staff, that the war demanded heavier and much better armed tanks. Neither did he require any help understanding that Sealion in 1940 was an impossibility given the British Navy, and quietly needed to be written off.

I'd say Hitler could have advantages at a very low tactical level (he was a sucker for details) and at the highest strategic/political level. What he sorely lacked, to say the least, was a proper understanding of how war was conducted at intermediate tactical levels.

[Hyperion2010]

The problem is that he was Commander and Chief, which mean that details shouldnt have been his job, but he tried to make it that way, and, well, just read the book. The rest is history (yes yes I know).

[OliverMarshall]

AGHHH!


So many generals and leaders.


Montgomery: Do not bash him for Market Garden whatever you do since that was a risk, and if you tell a leader not to take risks you're doomed. If MG would have suceeded the Allies would have been in Berling by Christmas, no Hurtgen Forest and no Mons II. Also if you think he did nothing at normandy, the fact when his 21st AG was facing numerous panzer divisions on relativly open terrain and the Americans facing only one on closed terrain say something for himself that he actually managed to defend let alone attack.

Zhukov: How can you say Zhukov was a bad general? He organised the defense of both Leningrad and Stalingrad and was the main proponent for RUssia's victory. Never say Zhukov was bad to a russian because you would probably get lynched, and with good reason too.

Hitler:Hitler 1934-1940 was the greatest leader in the world probably. This was before all the major holocaust stuff started. He had gotten the poorest nation in Europe with huge debts to being the most powerful nation in Europe in 7 years. That was a brilliant feat of administratin and logistics. Hist first mistake was in 1941 declaring was on the US and USSR, bad move. The next place he went wrong was in 1942 after the German defeat in Russia the year before when he completely lost his head with logistics and planing, he tried to take the whole of the Caucasus with 2 armies and did not take into account the fact that they were in short supply and the roads were bad.

[enigma]

The German forces in Denmark surrendered to the British. On the other hand, Eisenhower stopped the western allies from taking Berlin and Prague, being infatuated with the Commies much like the FDR administration at large.
precisely, as for Denmark
Iirc after bitching and non stop complaining by the British they finally let us cut Denmark off from the Russian advance, plus we then dropped a small para unit into the capital as well.
It was also after alot of complaining from the British that they let us liberate Greece and again not let the ruskies get it.




I'm not saying Hitler wasn't for the most part a military moron, only that in the postwar period he conveniently was always there to take the blame.

He didn't only make bad decisions (with the exception of the 1940 sickle stroke plan).
Apart from the fact he didn’t come up with it, Manstien did.


Hitler was a Corp, and i dont mean to sound snobbish but he was no officer or a military leader ... he had charisma and was able to get the people to follow him but other then that ....

So yea, Manstein came up for the plan of the invasion, Hitler ok'd because he thought it was daring. After which he ordered the panzers to a halt because he did not understand the plan, the ideas etc, after enough whining towards him he let them roll but then in sight of total victory he ordered the panzers to a halt... letting the BEF, Belgium’s and French to escape.
Barbarossa, he gave the order for the planning of the operation to begin but didnt plan it himself, forget the officers name who did.
He then balls that up if i remember correctly my ordering troops moved from one Army Group to another etc etc etc
He then balls up the entire front with stand fast orders, not letting his generals do their job,
balls up the western front via placing the panzer divisions under his own control

Ordered the capture of Stalingrad, after the plan had been to bypass the town as it was unneeded, sacrificed the 6th Army because he was big headed.

He balls up the entire situation by having a complicated chain of command, having each department play off one another etc etc

In fact he won the war with his stupid mistakes. It has been argued that if he had let the Generals do there job and stop intervening that the war may have had a different outcome ... not necessary a win though.

[sid]

How do you mean not stopping the Soviets from taking Denmark? The German forces in Denmark surrendered to the British. On the other hand, Eisenhower stopped the western allies from taking Berlin and Prague, being infatuated with the Commies much like the FDR administration at large.


I said he did stop them.

[OliverMarshall]

Also about Monty throwing out people it was for good reasons, firstly if they couldn't run 3 miles or something, they were thrown out, that was a good move and undoubtably improved moral for troops at the front. He also completely changed the plans for overlord. If you look at Omaha in the revised plan there was still some confusion because one regiment landed on top of another. The original plans called for CORPS to land after one another. This would have screwed up the whole invasion. I would say that the changes he made to the Overlord plan surpass the accievment at Alemain II.


Also I completely agree with you enigma about Rommel, in Normandy even though Guderian had warned him against it with his experiences at Anzio. He still insisted on defending the beach. He should have made a stop line far inland out of the range of the warships and then attacked.

[enigma]

aye yea, as you said they wanted a few beaches with the Corps landing ontop of one another, he enlarged the beachead so each corp had there own beachhead, cut the logistics effort and improved efficency etc.

As for my comments in Africa, there was dudes who people though should have been kept, indeed some where, but he threw out quite alot of people, some more compendent then the ones who needed to be replaced with 'his own people', dudes who had served with him, or under him and people he had taught in college.