Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Best soldier?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
107 replies to this topic

#1 Luke

Luke

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 02:42 AM

What country had the best all round soldier?
say you put one of every country's soldiers into a battle situation, who would come out on top?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]What they gave was priceless, And we will never forget that.

#2 krieg

krieg

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,554 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 04:48 AM

i would say soldiers from all country's were good enuff .some may lacked
good leadership
generals sitting miles behind the lines knowing nothink about how the battle
unfolds .. makes any soldiers from any country look not so good
but me beaing australian i say our digger's .were up there with the very best
cheers krieg....:armyman1:
for thow . will be ours someday.we shall have it all
.:ww1ace:.. und mear...:snoopy:....

#3 Otto

Otto

    GröFaZ

  • Administrators
  • 6,556 posts
  • LocationFestung Chicago

User's Awards

2   

Posted 09 April 2008 - 04:59 AM

I would say that the Germans had some very good troops and some bad ones, the Australian had a good reputation also.

The thing is that in general, "pound for pound" comparison is usually pointless when discussing total war. Quantity almost always counts more that quantity when you are talking such a global, lethal conflict as WWII.

tiger_p_elephant_PzP.gif

Comments, questions or feedback? Contact me at ottomail.png

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." Socrates


#4 JCFalkenbergIII

JCFalkenbergIII

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,479 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 05:09 AM

I have seen this question asked in almost every other forum I have seen or been on and it usually ends up the same way :rolleyes: LOL. I can pretty much predict what the answers will be. Here's an idea though. Why don't you start off with who you think would be the "Best overall"?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

#5 krieg

krieg

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,554 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 05:54 AM

over all best soldiers .. the australian diggers .. the adolf hitler division .
a very good unit ..hitlers mountain ske troops ..
best krieg:PPmp40fire:
for thow . will be ours someday.we shall have it all
.:ww1ace:.. und mear...:snoopy:....

#6 Von Poop

Von Poop

    Waspish

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,236 posts
  • LocationPerfidious Albion

User's Awards

2   

Posted 09 April 2008 - 08:19 AM

I have seen this question asked in almost every other forum I have seen or been on and it usually ends up the same way :rolleyes: LOL.

I once saw a man killed in a thread that began with a similar question, can you hear the sounds of National anthems building... ;)

Anyone who ever picked up a gun and went to war without wetting themselves and running away is a pretty remarkable chap to me, regardless of nationality or training.

Now I'm just off to sing Jerusalem.

Cheers,
Adam
It's only the Internet...

#7 Owen

Owen

    O

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,678 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 08:31 AM

How long is a piece of string?
What country has the most stupid forum members?

Best soldier?
It is a completely unanswerable question.
Every soldier has his breaking point.
Make them all undress and stand in a row naked, you can't tell where anyone comes from can you?
Every person has the potential to be the best or the worst.
  • Slipdigit likes this

#8 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 09 April 2008 - 08:57 AM

All Soldiers are good, extremely good, bless their souls.

They may have better officers and/or better motivations to fight, but this is for another thread.

I find this question infantile and the thread should be closed as useless.
  • Von Poop likes this

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#9 Otto

Otto

    GröFaZ

  • Administrators
  • 6,556 posts
  • LocationFestung Chicago

User's Awards

2   

Posted 09 April 2008 - 09:16 AM

Wow, don't you guys have a shred of patience. ;) This idea might be rehashed to you guys, but not all people start off with a deep knowledge of WWII and warfare. Instead of bashing every new member for not asking the very highest quality questions, why not help him out, ar at least point him to the other threads where this question was asked before.

I'm surprised especially at you Za, is this a whiff of elitism I see? :D A Rogue needs to start somewhere.

tiger_p_elephant_PzP.gif

Comments, questions or feedback? Contact me at ottomail.png

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." Socrates


#10 Luke

Luke

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 10:48 AM

haha, yea im new to this forum so i thought i would just ask a simple question to get the "wheels going" as you can say.

Ill try to keep the questions less vague next time.

thanks for the answers everyone.
  • Von Poop likes this
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]What they gave was priceless, And we will never forget that.

#11 Owen

Owen

    O

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,678 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 11:00 AM

Luke, did you have any relatives fight in WW2?
I see you're from Canada, what would your local Regiments be?

#12 Joe

Joe

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,948 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 11:11 AM

I don't think there is any 'right' or 'wrong' answer to this question.

No single country had the best soldiers. There where cowards in the German army, heros in the Italian army. Sure, some are better trained, better equipped, better led, but if all the soldiers had the same weapons, same leaders, and the same training then they would all be the same.
Posted Image

#13 PzJgr

PzJgr

    Drill Instructor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,068 posts
  • LocationJefferson, OH

User's Awards

2   

Posted 09 April 2008 - 01:02 PM

Trick question. I believe that any country's fighting men are equal given the same training and weapons. The Italians are always made fun of but consider what they were given to fight with. Consider going into battle on the Russian front in an Italian tank against the T-34. Also, take a look at the Polish calvary attacking the German tanks with lances. No success there but that is what their government gave them to fight with. Answer to the question would have to be that there were all equal.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

#14 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 09 April 2008 - 01:39 PM

I'm surprised especially at you Za, is this a whiff of elitism I see? :D A Rogue needs to start somewhere.


Otto, you know me better than this, I normally do have more than enough patience with fledgling Rogues. But you'll realise that a subject like this runs the risk of getting ugly quickly if some of our higher-temperature headed members see it, the potential for unpleasantness is high.

Anyway, I'm game. I'll vote for the Romanian Soldier!

Before the battle of Stalingrad, the 1st Armored Division consisted of the 1st Tank Regiment, the 3rd and 4th Motorized Vanatori Regiments, the 1st Motorized Artillery Regiment, the Motorized Special Weapons Group, the Motorized Recon Group, the Motorized Pioneer Battalion, the AT Battalion, the AA Company, the Communications Company, the Service Group, the Traffic Platoon and the Police Company. It had 501 officers, 538 NCOs, 11,592 soldiers, 9,335 rifles, 278 LMGs, 61 HMGs, 67 mortars, 36 guns and howitzers, 1,358 vehicles, 109 R-2 tanks (French Renault 35), 11 T-3 (Pz III) tanks, 11 T-4 (Pz IV) tanks, 2 captured Soviet tanks, 10 AB armored cars (Sdkfz 222) and 8 TB armored personnel carriers (SPW 251).

The 1st Tank Regiment was made up of two battalions, each having four companies: 3 companies of R-2s and one medium tank company (the T-4s were assigned to the 4th Company/1st Battalion and the T-3s to the 8th Company/2nd Battalion). The medium tank companies proved to be the only ones capable of resisting more efficiently to the heavier Soviet tanks. However, during the Stalingrad campaign the 1st Armored Division suffered heavy losses: 130 officers, 87 NCOs, 3,067 soldiers, 3,000 frostbites, 474 rifles, 149 LMGs, 22 HMGs, 55 mortars, 22 guns, 678 vehicles and 86 tanks. (WorldWar2.ro - Romanian Army in the Second World War)


This division was paired with German 22nd Pz Div in 48th PzKorps, right in the way of the 2 Soviet Fronts (Don and Southwestern) making up the Northern pincer of Op. Uranus. I suppose the tanks not lost were those absent at depot for repairs.

on 20 Nov... The 1st Romanian Armored Division, without any available radio contact, tried to advance to Petshany in order to make the junction with the 22nd Panzer Division, but was forced to stop a few kilometers West of Korotovsky by stiff Soviet resistance and numerous counterattacks with the Soviet tanks, flowing between the German 22nd and the Romanian 1st, occupying the Varlamovsky and Peralasovsky villages and making the junction with forces coming from Gromsky, thus encircling the 5th Corps



The former commander of the 6th Infantry Division, Major General Mihail Lascar, took command of the troops from the infantry divisions and formed the "General Lascăr" Group (40,000 men).


On 21 Nov, the 22nd Panzer Division tried to advance towards Perelasovsky in order to make the junction with the 1st Armored Division and to relieve the "General Lascār" Group, but failed and was stopped the next day between Bol. Donschynka and Perelasovky. The 1st Romanian Armored Division was advancing towards Bol. Donschynka , where it was hoping to find the German Division, but the village was under Soviet control and then headed south and, after grim fighting, crossed the Chir river on the 25th


On 22 Nov, the encircled "General Lascār" Group, which had been ordered to resist at any cost, was attacked and transmitted its last message. They had run out of food and each gun had only 40 rounds left and after refusing the Soviet proposal to surrender they were entirely destroyed


I don't know if they were the best, but for putting up such a fight in such awful conditions and with such miserable equipment, they looked pretty good to me.

Posted Image

By the way, great forum in WorldWar2.ro Forum - Romanian Military History Research Community

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#15 JCFalkenbergIII

JCFalkenbergIII

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,479 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 02:16 PM

Otto, you know me better than this, I normally do have more than enough patience with fledgling Rogues. But you'll realise that a subject like this runs the risk of getting ugly quickly if some of our higher-temperature headed members see it, the potential for unpleasantness is high.


Exactly. I agree for the same reasons LOL.And Im not bashing a newbie per se :). And sometimes(ok almost always LOL) this kind of thread and question breaks down into a pissing match. Like all the other types of "Best" threads and questions it comes down to a poster's opinions,bias,nationality,ect. :D. Too many variables here. Another good one I have seen is "Who were the most brave soldiers in WW 2 ?" . Thats just asking for mayhem LOL.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

#16 mikebatzel

mikebatzel

    Dreadnaught

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 03:26 PM

The best soldier of WWII is easily :panzerpenguin:

Ok seriously, the men who fought the Battle of Britian. They where just too determined.
Please give the Combined Fleet the chance to bloom as flowers of death. This is the navy’s earnest request. RADM Tasuku Nakazawa prior to the Battle of Leyte Gulf
It is the function of the Navy to carry the war to the enemy so that it will not be fought on U.S. soil. Admiral Chester W. Nimitz

#17 Paul Errass

Paul Errass

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 04:39 PM

A totally unanswerable question !!

I'm gone from this thread
Nikto ne Zabyt . Nichto ne Zabyto. Let no one forget . Let nothing be forgotten.

Always looking to buy Militaria / documents related to the Battle of Narva 1944 and Infanterie Regt 15 , 29 ( Mot) Infanterie Division.

#18 Luke

Luke

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 04:56 PM

Luke, did you have any relatives fight in WW2?
I see you're from Canada, what would your local Regiments be?


I was actully born in England but moved to canada when i was young, my grandad on my mothers side was a motorbike messenger for the british. I have no clue what regiment.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]What they gave was priceless, And we will never forget that.

#19 arneken

arneken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 278 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 06:55 PM

Maybe if whe look not to to soldiers itself but at his training who had to prepare him for war?
Sixty-four bomber pilots and crew lie in the cemetery at Wevelgem Communal and today many locals still pay their respects to those brave men from high in the skies.

#20 skunk works

skunk works

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 07:22 PM

Orks...

You grow them like potato's, (hundreds at a time), they follow orders, (they terrify the enemy), they fight to the death, (not very brave, but who cares, there's a million more where that came from), they march on foot, (no fuel costs) and make there own weapons, ( no R&D costs) and you don't need rations, (because they kill & eat there own) ?

:D
  • Von Poop likes this
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says "Yes", you know he's a crook. Groucho Marx

#21 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 09 April 2008 - 07:25 PM

Ok seriously, the men who fought the Battle of Britain.

On which side?

Corpo Aereo Italiano
The "Italian Air Corps" (Corpo Aereo Italiano, or CAI) was an Italian expeditionary force that participated in the Battle of Britain during the final months of 1940 during World War II. The CAI supported the German Air Force (Luftwaffe) and flew against the British Royal Air Force (RAF). The CAI achieved limited success during its brief existence. In general, the corps was hampered by the inadequacy of its equipment.

Corpo Aereo Italiano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:D

Orks...

If you can't join them, beat them :lol:

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#22 C.Evans

C.Evans

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,883 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 10:06 PM

Just an honest opinion but, I think the Germans and the Japanese started the war as the best all around military's BUT, as the war progressed, the Americans, British and the Russians became great soldiers as ell. When I saw British, I also include UK troops. Also, the Ghurkas were great soldiers as well as the Senegalese. If I left out someone-sorry only a slip of the mind.
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.
:snoopy: :ww1ace:
Posted Image

#23 Erich

Erich

    Alte Hase

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,429 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 11:28 PM

as Paul said it is unanswerable, with relatives fighting for both sides in the ETO and in the Pacific I can surely imagine what they would say if I posed this very question

maybe Luke as a suggestion is to take such a broad spectrum question as you stated and put it in a more specific light, example like which Allied or German division on land was the best overall...........still poses a serious almost what-if answer. But again even if you were here at the inception of this forum you still could not get the ultimate answer you seek

E ~

#24 mac_bolan00

mac_bolan00

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 492 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 11:31 PM

this is like starting a new thread entitled "american GIs have always been overrated."

#25 cruachan

cruachan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 02:39 PM

Wow, don't you guys have a shred of patience. ;) This idea might be rehashed to you guys, but not all people start off with a deep knowledge of WWII and warfare. Instead of bashing every new member for not asking the very highest quality questions, why not help him out, ar at least point him to the other threads where this question was asked before.

I'm surprised especially at you Za, is this a whiff of elitism I see? :D A Rogue needs to start somewhere.


Otto
I agree with you, as you mentioned no one was born with this knowledge as a newbie I will do a search around the net first then on here if it doesn't show up that doesn't mean the info isn't there it's probably just that I haven't phrased it right. I would be so pleased if some one told where to find the post. Another forum I asked a question and was told bluntly it had been already discussed it would have been less words for him to tell me the answer, I never did find out.
Sometimes I think there should be a beginners section so that a question can be asked and a pointer to the correct thread given that's if it has been asked before or the topic moved to the relevant section if not.
Sometimes the simplest of questions can be the most interesting.

Thanks
cruachan




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users