'Best' infantry division

To open to personal preference IMHO, unless you care to disect each unit bit by bit you'll pick your favorite in most cases or a unit some commander 'designated' as the best.

 

Soviet 13th Guards Rifle.

 

Unquestionably, the United States 1st Division, under their remarkable and brilliant commander Maj. Gen Terry de la Mesa Allen. As the point of the spearhead in multiple campaigns, the 1st had an unprecedented record for my money.

 

Good info Slip, and a division that doesn't immediately come to mind when considering the question. I'll have to read up more on the 30th.

 

Rather then just looking at the time frame, How about we also look at the field of battle, Because the fields of a Russian Winter, European main land, Th African desert and the Pacific Jungle are all vastly different.

In a defensive battle the Australian's seemed to have had it spot in in Africa, While admittedly not great at offensive actions there ability to raid the enemy lines (A tactic I believe similar to the Aussie use of 'peaceful penetration' in WWI) did a remarkable job of keeping the enemy on there toe's just as much as the Aussies, Add onto that there defense's almost always were able to support positions 400 yards in either direction, Something that many liked [Not so much Rommel =)].

As for the Pacific, in offensive battle's the Aussies I believe are at the top, They did remarkable feat's with few men and took the Japanese doctrine and improved it and used the same doctrine improved more right up to the Vietnam war for the Pacific.

 

I think for this comparison to have any validity it would need to be broken down into time periods by the date the unit was sent overseas.

 

I'm not taking any thing away from the Aussies as I consider them excellent troops, but in the Pacific I do not believe anyone comes close to the 1st and 2d Marine Divisions. They both excelled in every battle they fought in. I don't think any division other than the 2d Marine Division could have prevailed at Tarawa except maybe the 1st Marine Division. It came down to individual Marines, many from different units forming small ad-hoc units and continuing the assault. It was groups of two, three and four Marines that kept fighting and Esprit de Corps, that won that battle.

From Utmost Savagery, pg.164: Day two of the assault.

Pharmacist's Mate Costello and his team paused in their treatment of wounded men in the damaged pillbox to watch the drama unfold in the shallows directly in their front. Costello saw something he would never forget.
"It was terrible watching the Marines being shot down. By that time I felt our cause was hopeless and the Marines would never get the island...[Then] I watched one Marine coming in carrying a heavy load and saw him get hit. He continued coming in and and I saw him get hit again, and he still kept coming, and then he was hit a third time. When he reached the shore I grabbed him, saying, "You stupid S.O.B., why the hell didn't you drop the load and crouch in the water so you wouldn't make such a target?" As I dressed the wounds in his arm, jaw and shoulder, I heard him mutter, "They said we had to get this ammo to the Marines on the beach-that they were running short-I had to bring it in."

From Utmost Savagery, pg.165: Telling about Green Acres star, then navy Lt. Eddie Albert.

"At length Albert's boat approached a group of about 35 Marines whose boat had been sunk beneath them. They were unhurt but also unarmed. "I offered to take them back to the ship. They refused. They asked me to bring them rifles so they could fight their way ashore and join their unit."

From "Follow Me: A History of the Second Marine Division":

"The Marines fought back silently and savagely, but the weight of the Jap attack swelled until Lieutenant Norman B. Thomas, acting commander of B Company, telephoned battalion: "We are killing them as fast as they come at us, but we can't hold much longer: we need reinforcements!" There was no time to move up reinforcements. [Maj] Jones told Thomas: "You've got to hold!" Somehow, the Marines of B Company held ... It was over in one endless, agonizing hour. The Marines greeted the breaking dawn with haunted eyes, and tired but proud words: "They told us to hold... and by God, we held.""

Pvt Jack Stambaugh, a rifleman in Company B, was one of the men who stood in the face of this onslaught. . His posthumous Navy Cross citation told of his courageous actions:​

"Observing four Japanese soldiers attacking a wounded Marine in an isolated position during the height of a fierce enemy night counterattack, Private Stambaugh unhesitatingly risked his life to race to the aid of his helpless comrade and, closing in for a brief, savage encounter, killed all four of the enemy with his rifle and bayonet before succumbing to a neck wound inflicted by a saber-wielding Japanese officer."







​

 

My 2 cents.... The grunt Infantryman is my favorite, especially the US National Guard Divisions, but the best of WW 2 was any US Marine Division. Just a well trained and fierce force that overwhelmed it's enemy.

 

Well that is where the Pacific could also be divided realistically in to two fields, The terrain on Papua was far far different to he terrain on Tarawa wasn't it?

But as for Tarawa, I'm not so willing to agree that is could only have been done by the USMC, Was just as common for Aussies to continue to fight even when every one assumed the fight was lost, And they just as many times formed ad-hoc unit's when there forces had been split apart.. But we wont really know due to politics keeping the Aussies back.

Had the marines been on Papua, Can you tell me with 100% certainty that they would have performed better then the Australians?

 

Well New Guniea was not a battle, it was a campaign consisting of several battles each predicated upon the the last.( New Guinea campaign - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )
As far as the fighting ability of the US Marines; Australia would not exisit if it weren't for the US Marines that I can garuntee 100%.

The Troops that went ashore at Normandy/ Iwo Jima were much better trained and equipped than any units, regrdless of nationality, that participated in North Africa or the South West Pacific in 1942. Does that make them better?...Nope. Does that make the earlier units worse?.....nope.

 

Good news about the book going to press, Jeff. I'm looking forward to it.

I will avoid wading too far into the tall grass since my knowledge base on this topic is somewhat limited. However, one thing I do know is that, no matter how right you think you are, never argue with your wife or a Marine. Either way, it will not turn out well for you.

 

Never went a made out the Papua and New Guinea campaign to be a battle, I did how ever use it as an example for the difference's in geography.

Now, I respect the US force's 100%, But why is it always those they have not served that make such claim's that you wouldn't be alive if it wasn't for the US army or the USMC.. Drives me bonkers. Yes, There was a strong belief that Australia was going to be invaded, A belief that turned out to be misjudged when record's after the war showed the IJA turned down the IJN proposal for an invasion of Australia, So if you had made that statement back in 1942-45 I'd agree with it to an extent, But to make it in this day and age with what we know now just makes you out to be an idiot (no offense).

To go and say that Australia would not exist without the US marines fighting ability makes it out (intentionally or not) that the Aussie Digger's couldn't and didn't know how to fight.. And as history from the last 120 years show's that is just a load of bull.

So my point still stands, The USMC might have been the best at Invading Islands, But when it came to the Jungle/Tropical warfare of the South Pacific, After the Aussie's had knocked the Japanese off the top position it was them.

Cheers, von_noobie.

 

Jugs never served? Where did you get that impression? You might want to head for your bunker before he reads that! Because

That's a pretty broad statement and while accurate on the micro level it is not necessarily so on the macro level. There were a great number of events that occured that had they gone slightly differently, could and probably would have led to a different decision in regards to Australia.
What if the Australians hadn't stopped the Japanese during the fighting on the Kokoda Trail and the Japanese had taken Port Moresby? Would they have stopped there?
What if the Port Moresby invasion hadn't been turned back by the US Navy at the Coral Sea? Would Yamamoto have pushed for the Midway Operation or would he have turned his attention towards the SW Pacific to exploit the advantage gained there?
If the Marines hadn't stopped the Japanese from developing an airfield on Guadalcanal and the Japanese managed to secure the lower Solomons and get across Australia's lines of supply, could not the changed strategic situation have led to a different Japanese strategy?
The Guadalcanal campaign and the attendant attrition that Japanese air and naval power suffered insured that no matter how the strategic situation changed, invading Australia would never again become an option for Japan.

Where did anyone ever say that the Aussie Digger's couldn't or wouldn't fight? At the time of Guadalcanal the First Marine Division just happened to be the right unit, in the right place at the right time. When it was decided to invade Guadalcanal it just so happened that they were the only division in theater with the required skill in amphibious operations.

Again, not to take anything away from the Digger's, but Guadalcanal did require jungle fighting, as did the 1stMarDiv's Cape Gloucester campaign. Also, the thread is best infantry division, as Slipdigits recent post points out (with regards to the 30thID) it's really about consistency across the units employment, not just one fight. The First Division performed excellently at Guadalcanal, Cape Gloucester, Peleilu and Okinawa, actually three very different types of battles.

-Guadalcanal jungle fighting, no advantage in material as the allies normally enjoyed. Japan initially had control of the surrounding seas and enjoyed air superiority, another thing the allies seldom faced. How many allied units underwent battleship bombardments?

-Cape Glocester, jungle fighting in extremis.

-Peleilu, an amphibious assault in the classic sense, plus the extensive prepared defenses in depth, using the islands natural cave systems, optimized. Shades of Tarawa with Iwo thrown in.

-Okinawa a big major ground campaign.

How many other divisions have as varied a resume and performed exceptionally in each instance?

 

Sort of gave me that impression when he him self stated that with out the USMC Australia wouldn't exist today, That sort of statement usually comes from those that havn't served and seem to think that the US of A is the only country that knows how to fight and win a war...

That's adding in a lot of WI's, Most of which are not directly tied into Guadalcanal.. Kokoda, Midway, Coral Sea.. They all occurred before Guadalcanal.. If you want to start WI them then we might as well change every other aspect of the Pacific campaign to date... Fact is, The Aussie CMF's already had stopped the Japanese at Kokoda, The US had already defeated the Japanese at Midway and the Aussies and US (largely US) had already defeated the Japanese at the Coral Sea...

The Japanese winning at Guadalcanal might have given them a renewed push but not 100% certain, With out there carrier force any invasion force of there's was in dangerous situations and they knew this, Hence why the cancelled operation FS after there losses at Midway and Coral Sea. The Imperial Head quarters had already decided on the 4th of March 1942 that any invasion of Australia would be a future option only, And then it would also have required the success of operation FS which meant the Japanese taking Fiji, Samoa and New Caledonia.

So I wouldn't put down the Japanese losses at Guadalcanal as the reason invading Australia was put off the table, The proposal had already been rejected in all forms after Midway and the Coral Sea battles which occurred in May-June '42... The first Marines didn't land on Guadalcanal until August 7th 1942..

No one said it, But he implied it, Intentionally or not when he stated clearly in his own words..

"As far as the fighting ability of the US Marines; Australia would not exisit if it weren't for the US Marines that I can garuntee 100%."

To me that say's that with out the USMC Australia would have fallen, The Aussie digger's wouldn't have made a difference thus implying they didn't know how to fight..

How about the Australian 7th Division? Success from the north African desert to the mountainous jungles of the Pacific..

And I'll agree that Guadalcanal did require Jungle fighting, But the geography for Guadalcanal is far different to that of Papua and New Guinea.

 

In May 44, the performance of 36 US Infantry Division in cutting up Monte Artemisio and into the Alban Hills to divide two German Corps and unlock the Caesar Line was immensely impressive.

I would have them down as the best for those two incredible days of action. Quite a stunning achievement.

Regards

FdeP

 

minden1750.... Many thanks for that post !

The capture of Velletri was an amazing infantry attack. Best off all, it allowed the good General Fred Walker to thumb his nose at Alexander, Clark and Keyes. He knew those 3 were going to hang him out to dry for their stupid decisions in the early stages of Italy.

The hard luck 36th ??? A good Division under bad Corps leadership.....

Look at The Battle of Montelimar too !