In GENERALS !

@suprise:

I know he was not a General, but Yamamoto was one of the best with his invasion plan of Hawaii.
Great thread.

Yes, he could have been one of the best if he actually had an invasion plan of Hawaii, but he did not because of lack of trannies. He just had a plan to sink some old obsolete battleships, and he even failed in doing that. Now if he had at least bombed and destroyed the harbor facilities and the huge oil depot, then USA would get one year set back, and the war would end in 1946 and not in 45, but it was no honor in that, so he would go for the old useless battleships. Poor strategy

Rommel and Von Bock

@aequitas-et-veritas

How could you choose just two? There were so many good generals during the war. The best general of World War 2 was Rommel. Some people might fuss about Rommel’s logistics views, but that can be argued over (like how Rommel was willing to weaken his own troops to invade Malta), but hardly anyone comment about how “logistically minded” Manstein or Guderian were.

The “Professionals Of War”:

Erwin Rommel

Erich Von Manstein

Walther Model

Tamechi Hara

Jisaburo Ozawa

Gunichi Mikawa

Raymond Spurance

William “Bull” Halsey

Georgy Zhukov

Chester W. Nimitz

Ernest King

Now, if I can choose just two? Rommel and Model or Manstein. If given good fortifications and positions, they might be able to achieve a 1:5 or even 1:10 kill ratio against the attacking forces.

@kurtgodel7 But Patton had no counterpart. He was a loner often competing with his “counterparts” The question begs a symbiotic relationship or pairing of two men working together.

@yavid said in In GENERALS !:

You lost me at best general of WW2. I would have to say that honor goes to Zhukov. And to me it comes down to a simple question. What was the name of the battle Zhukov lost or his failed mission?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mars

The offensive was a joint operation of the Soviet Western Front and Kalinin Front co-ordinated by Georgy Zhukov.

…

The battles became known as the “Rzhev meat grinder” (“Ржевская мясорубка”) for their huge losses, particularly on the Soviet side. For many years, they were relegated to a footnote in Soviet military history.

…

The Soviet forces concentrated for Operation Mars were much larger than the ones used in Operation Uranus at Stalingrad.[11] Military historian David M. Glantz believes that Operation Mars was the main Soviet offensive and that the narrative that it was intended as a “diversion attack” was a propaganda effort on the part of the Soviet government. He termed Operation Mars as the “greatest defeat of Marshal Zhukov”.

In the unlikely event that Zhukov was correct and Mars was really a diversion, there has never been one so ambitious, so large, so clumsily executed, or so costly.— David M. Glantz

Its been 6 years. But I am still researching for the answer.

@aequitas-et-veritas

As I said, the best German general of World War 2 was Rommel.

@superbattleshipyamato123

again the other part of the question:
“And who do you think would be fit best as his counterpart?”

Rommel had no counterpart in battle, so the two Generals that worked best as team was…Manstein and Guderian …The two best grouping of men without peer.

@imperious-leader

As I said, Rommel would pair most well with Model or Manstein. As you said, Rommel didn’t have any counterpart, so I’m just pairing generals together based on their ability. Both Rommel and Model were excellent masters of defensive warfare.

I just don’t think Guderian was equal to Manstein in capability, which is why I don’t think they were the most deadly combo. Rommel was a much better tank commander than Guderian.

@superbattleshipyamato123 Rommel didn’t pair up with anybody, but he commanded Both German and Italians. Manstein and Guderian both fought together on the eastern front. I don’t think this is a “dream scenario” but a actual experience of having one in command of the front or army group and another directing the schwerpunt (sp?) of the effort. Who did Rommel actually have as an front line commander? Remember this isn’t a dreamland scenario, or maybe it is.

@imperious-leader said in In GENERALS !:

@superbattleshipyamato123

again the other part of the question:
“And who do you think would be fit best as his counterpart?”

Rommel had no counterpart in battle, so the two Generals that worked best as team was…Manstein and Guderian …The two best grouping of men without peer.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/counterpart

a person or thing that has the same purpose as another one in a different place or organization

Under any definition of counterpart, I would say that the second question is “who do you think was the best commanding non-German general through WW2 having had a role similar to any one which whoever you named as an answer to the first question had?”. Moreover, since this is a war, I suspect the counterpart was supposed to be an Allied general (though I’ve written just non-German because this is not literally implied).

Maybe @aequitas-et-veritas should clarify what he/she meant (if he/she still can).

Nevermind: I should have checked if @aequitas-et-veritas already clarified, which he/she did.

@aequitas-et-veritas said in In GENERALS !:

@CWO:

@aequitas:

And who do you think would be fit best as his counterpart?

Do you mean his counterpart in another country beside Germany?Â

Honestly?! Yes ,I realized after IL’s comment that counterpart also includes the meaning of a sidekick.
I do apologize but I’m willing to keep it the way it is running right now and open another Topic later.

@imperious-leader

Sorry if there was any confusion. How I interpreted the question is which general during World War 2 would have been the best partner to the best German general of World War 2 based on ability? Based on this, this seems to be a hypothetical scenario only.

Also, Rommel never fought on the Eastern Front in World War 2. Guderian and Rommel fought in the Battle Of France in command of panzer divisions, but they seemed to have little interaction.

@cernel

I read that, but I am unable to draw any conclusion from the message you quoted.

@cernel

And based on your updated question, I would put Rommel with Patton. Too very aggressive generals greatly liked by troops, and masters of armoured warfare.