Infantry of World War 2

Do the Ghurkas have a TA formation as well? Virtually every other formation in the British army has their equivalent among the STABs.

Just curious...

 

Against most opponents, I'd have to agree. The French Foreign Legion and the US Marine Corps could match them, though, IMHO.

 

I thought this topic was really interesting and id like to bring it up for us new guys and veterans to commit on. Well, taking into account only the normal infantry type and no elite, heres my top ranking countries:

1. German Infantry for their all around capabilities, initiative,ingenuity and fanaticisim at times.
2. American infantry for their high flexibility and mobility.
3. British Infantry for their high morale and their dedication.
4. Japanese infantry for their absolute courage and dedication.
5.Soviet Infantry for their surprising ability to absorb casualties and still fight on.

And somewhere in that list id put the Goams, excellent mountainers and very brave men. (Also a question of loyalty )

 

British infantry was just as mobile as the Americans, both being fully motorized, but usually (probably due to their leaders!) took less casualties in comparable battles than US infantry. I'd rank them above the American GIs, if not for their loyalty to their regiment and high morale.

The Germans had a considerable liabilty once the tide started turning; their infantry training focused on attack and range fighting, and when required to fight defensively and in close quarters they took terrible casualties (see the encirclement at Stalingrad).

 

Actually Roel, thats not true, ur overlooking alot of things in Stalingrad. Sure the germans had plenty of casualties there, but the Russians for the large part were usually massacred by a smaller and underequipped force at Stalingrad.

The germans failed miserably Strategically, but they did win tactically at Stalingrad.

 

Well, I wasn't talking about the casualties they inflicted, just those they took themselves. And of course they may have slaughtered the Russians at Stalingrad, they slaughtered them everywhere, but in few places did the Russians develop such a tactical superiority over the Germans. They managed to find just what the German soldiers couldn't endure and used it (like positioning close enough to throw a grenade, or fight during the night and as close as possible).

 

True, but that same kind of fighting was not only inherent in Stalingrad but elswhere as well. Examples are Leningrad, Kaharkov, Kiev, Sevastopol, and many other cities. What happened at Stalingrad was that the germans entered into a war were tactical superiority is usually ineffective: City Warfare.

 

Although l will leave it to Kellhound to expand on the subject lets us include also
1-The Spanish Foreign Legion-
2-the average Spanish infantry soldier-You myt recall that although Spain remained Neutral in WW 2, Franco allowed the formation of a Spanish Vol;unteer Division-the 250th, or "División Azul"-"The Blue Division" which distinguished itself in the Eastern Front.. Of this Spanish unit Hitler once said :" They are bums, who cannot button their tunic, rdo not like to salute, but they are the same as the soldiers of the Inmortal Spanish Tercios. They have not degenerated in over 400 years. They are equivalent to the best German Divisions". which coming from Adolf, is quite a compliment,,,.. There was a book published in the 1980s called "Hitler's Spanish Division" which traces the history of this unit on the Eastern Front....

 

With all respect due to spanish troops, I do not consider Hitlers judgement being any valid, don't forget what he said about other troops.
During the whole war he saw the russians as a horde of barbaric peasants.
His judgement about the russians in 1945 was about the same as in 1941.

The same goes for his judgement about the americans, which he did not consider being good soldiers.
Before the ardennes offensive, he told his generals something like:"The american army only works as long as it is sucessfull, as long as it's soldiers are well fed....Give them a severe setback and they will run....".

Hitler did not seem to be an expert on troops.

 

It is interesting to note that the spanish air squadrons that fought in the Eastern front did indeed gave a beating to the russian planes they met.

 

Indded-and the Spanish infantry acquited itself brilliantly as well Here's a summary description of one of the engagements in which the Blue Division took part. :.
"When two Soviet infantry regimenmts, suported by hevy mortars tried to to storm positions at Udarnik held by 60 men of the 5th company of the the 269th. Reg, of the Blue Division as well as its 2nd. AT company with a pair of 37 mm PAKs. The Spaniards held until reinforced by two aditional infantry companies of the 269th which were sent there at forced s marches. The battle lasted twelve hours and the Russians withdrew in disarray. A body count revealed that the Russian dead totalled 1080. Spanish losses : officers and 32 other ranks killed, four officers and 61 other ranks wounded".The authors also point out that the Blue Division itself was not defeated by the Russsians in the many engaments fought..
(Gerald R. KJleinfeld and Lewis A Tambs" Hitler's Spanish Division: The Blue Division in Russia (Southern Illinois University Press, 197 l have quoted from the Spanish ediiton by Editorial San Martin, 1979) pp/226-222
Dr. Kleinfled, by the way taught history at various universities here in the US and at the time was the editor of "German Studies Review"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With all respect due to spanish troops, I do not consider Hitlers judgement being any valid, don't forget what he said about other troops.
During the whole war he saw the russians as a horde of barbaric peasants.
His judgement about the russians in 1945 was about the same as in 1941.

The same goes for his judgement about the americans, which he did not consider being good soldiers.
Before the ardennes offensive, he told his generals something like:"The american army only works as long as it is sucessfull, as long as it's soldiers are well fed....Give them a severe setback and they will run....".

Hitler did not seem to be an expert on troops

Shall we agree that he seldom had anything good to say about non-German soldiers-?he was particularly ruthless when it came to the Italians-of the French he once remarked" Great soldiers with German officers they would make a Splendid army".

Hence, praise from this rather jaundiced sources is praise indeed-also the fact that this opinion was based on the reports of senior German officers of Northern Army Group, of which the 250th (Blue) Division was an integral part..There'a another work oin the subject, not as complete but just as interetring-it is called "Agony of a Neutral"...

 

The combat record you just quoted is much more impressive than Hitler's judgment!

 

Please forgive me for going slightly off topic here.

Has anyone heard of, or got a copy of a book/magazine/pamphlet; the title of which I do not know, but I know does exist. This publication rates every single Division that took part in WWII, from all the participating countries. It rates them in fighting quality, equipment quality, training quality, leadership quality & morale quality. It would be a goldmine of info for this discussion.

B.T.W My votes would be for Japanese, Australian & New Zealand. (But I'm no expert)

 

Dog cookies are more impressive that any argument of that unemployed housepainter, former bohemian corporal and carpet-chewer who some of my friends call SHITLER..but they are accurate, only because they stem from battle reports from his field commanders-Other interesting items which energes from "Httler's Spanish Division" on several ocassions they received support from a mortar section of a Dutch SS unit, and At support from three 75 mm guns manned by Norwegian SS volunteers..

 

Elite Wehrmact units (eg Grossdeutshland) and the principal Waffen SS units were unquestionably the best troops of the war. Wasnt uncommon of them to beat odds as great as 30-1 on the Eastern Front.

Britian and the US only ever beat the Germans in circumstances where they enjoyed massive superiority in every conceivable fashion, particularly in air support. El Alemain was the first British Victory over the axis. I think they enjoyed 3 or 4 to 1 advantages in all arms, and, of course, most of Rommels' axis army was composed of the inferior italians.
Even late war the western allies struggled against the Germans - look how long it took the British/Canadians to take Caen, which I think was a first day D-Day objective, from the Hilter Youth (largely boys of 16-17 years old).

 

Please note however that we are dicussing the regular armies and not individual branches such as the Waffen SS.

 

Please also note the Ardennes Offensive, and operation Nordwind.

 

Sorry Wolf - I thought it was about Infantry of any description!

Hi Roel,
By Ardenne offensive, are you highlighting the failure of this part SS driven Operation against Americans at places such as Bastogne etc? On an equal footing, Id still say the troops I mention were the best. The Americans did well in places during the Ardenne offensive, other places less so, but bear in mind the major German armys disadvantages here, most notably extreme lack of fuel, poor quality, if any, replacements and no air support (although to be fair the bad weather prevented allied air forces intervening for a period).

Also - tell me more about operation Nordwind? Im unsure if I have have come across this before. Thanks!

 

No problem Kilgore, welcome to the forum

 

Some of the American divisions in the area were just as green as the Germans attacking them, most notably the 106th Infantry which had only arrived at the front ten days earlier. Yet, assaults by three divisions on two regiments of the 106th could not break them for five days. The remaining Regiment of the 106th defended St. Vith with the 7th Armoured facing even higher odds.

The 99th Infantry division (green) held its positions against attacks of the 12th SS, supported by two infantry divisions, and they never broke. They fell back a little but remained a cohesive unit, and in the end the SS had to give up its hopes of breaking through at the north end of the offensive's area.

The 28th Infantry division, less than half of it war-weary veterans, the majority fresh soldiers, held cities like Clervaux, Wiltz and Diekirch at impossible odds. At times a single regiment of this division managed to hold off the attacks of two Panzer divisions with support from one of the toughest and most experienced of the German infantry divisions in the area (the 26th Volksgrenadier).

And do note that the Western Allies relied heavily on air and artillery support, yet in the Ardennes often had neither and still held out.

Nordwind was an operation in the Alsace, carried out by units originally intended to reinforce the Ardennes offensive but redeployed when it was clear the offensive would fail; its mission was to relieve pressure on the Colmar pocket, retake Strasbourg and thereby deal a morale blow to the French troops and people, and to draw Allied forces from the Ardennes area to ease the German withdrawal there. However, the operation was poorly led and coordinated and ultimately failed in the face of stiff Allied resistance - offered by completely green units such as the 70th Infantry division and the 12th and 14th Armoured divisions. In the snow and cold they decimated seasoned units like the 6th SS mountain division "Nord" and the 17th SS PzGr Division.