While the claim he was overrated has some merit, to claim he was bad or worst is as silly as claiming Monty was the worst general of WW2

Any general who managed to win a battle or battles, is in my view, automatically disqualified from the list of 'Worst general of WW2'

__________________
if in doubt....Panic!!!!

I've recently read Antony Beevor's book on Stalingrad. Paulus comes across as an effective staff officer who was promoted above his capabilities.
The major reason for the German defeat was due to their forces being overstretched, the Axis Allies on their flanks were far too weak.
Paulus's main fault in this battle was to allow his forces to get sucked into a slogging match for the city, so that when the Soviets attacked, his forces were in effect trapped in the city, with not enough transport to escape.
Beevor's view is that the only time escape (for at least some of the army) was possible was before the Soviets had completely cut off Paulus's army in the first days of their counter-offensive. After that Paulus's army was doomed no matter what he did.

__________________
if in doubt....Panic!!!!

Allowed his forces to get into a slogging match? He didn't get a choice in that Hitler wanted that city as well Stalin, both seeing it as a symbol, the war was either going to be won or lost at Stalingrad. Again Paulus did not get a choice of retreat, Hitler would never had allowed this, just as he never allowed the surrender of the 6th Army, that was Paulus desicision against the orders of his Commander.

Urban warfare is the most hated type of combat in war, due mainly to the loss of communication and control of your units. Your once Oorganised unit suddenly becomes disorganised, and prone to counter attacks ambushes and the constant sheeling from the enemy. High casualties are unavoidable with the risk of falling buildings along with all the other causes of casualties in battle. They almost had the city, but the flanks were badly protected, whether that was intentional or not, I don't know. This invited the Russians to attack and attempt an encirclement of the the city. I think purely that the Germans were just out done by the soviets.

__________________
For want of a nail the shoe was lost, for the want of a shoe the horse was lost, for the want of a horse the rider was lost, for the want of a rider the battle was lost, For want of a battle the kingdom was lost, and all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

Robert,

I give up on you lot of Monty supporters, some of you make me sick, in fact your comments are not worth my time in replying. good bye.

OK then - goodbye!

Grounded, do you not enjoy seeing your opinions refuted with facts? Ah well.

I think something people often forget is that Monty had little choice but to be methodical, when one considers the state of morale at home and the fact that unlike the US, Britain didn't have practically unlimited resources and that what we did have had been worn down by 2 and a bit years of fighting Germany pretty much alone. So unlike Patton or some others he couldn't really say 'lets charge this way' and rocket off like a man posessed because if it didn't work it would have devastated the British war effort.

__________________
There's no honorable way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There is nothing good in war. Except its ending.

I would agree almost, but ….

Paulus 6th Army was heavily drained due to Hitler ordering/opening up a second front to the south east (Caucasus) and as such also thinning out the south eastern Front (south of Stalingrad) more or less leaving it entirely to the Italians to defend or hold.

This is where Paulus should/could have listened to his staff officers who clearly pointed out the possibility of the Russians recognizing this and as such giving them the chance to exploit this situation (Just as they later did).
It was Paulus decision to send the entire remaining body of the 6th Army into Stalingrad, thus also depleting the north eastern Front entirely -Rumanian Front – not Hitler – Hitler merely ordered Paulus to take Stalingrad.

Paulus also failed miserably in holding/developing a plan to counter such an encircling move by the Russians. When it happened he stood there and gazed into the sky. It was his Staff-officers who persuaded him to break out and rejoin with the southern Front (later Hoth). After Paulus telephoned with Hitler, he ordered the 6th Army to remain in Stalingrad since Hitler and Goering had promised him full support.

The attached Luftwaffe Staff made it very clear to him, that Goering’s promise would be an impossible task, since they would not be able to support an Army such as the 6th Army.

He watched on as the supplies of the Luftwaffe dwindled more and more and refused to break out even after Hoth (Who in the meantime had managed to stabilize the southern front) urged him to prepare a plan for this in order to unite with Hoth’s forces attacking towards Stalingrad.

Paulus didn’t even prepare a plan; he actually issued orders that strictly forbid such an undertaking.
Hoth still attacked (was never court-martialed by Hitler, despite opposing straight orders from him). In the end the 6th Army was completely annihilated and Hoth’s Army group suffered tremendous casualties for nothing, but actually forcing a depleted Hoth to retreat all the way in order not to be run down or encircled by the Russians.

And the best part is, that Paulus became the first General of the East German Army, because so his statement - he had felt being betrayed by Hitler and the NAZI idea.

What a moron

Regards
Kruska

__________________
Imagine there is a WAR!!! - and your TV doesn't work

air vice marshal harry broadhurst was brilliant.on the other hand air marshal tedder was crappy,tedder never attacked below 20,000ft,and was imho jealous of monty and broadhurst.yours,4th wilts.

__________________
"I never knew Canadians were as clever as that?".thankyou all,4th wilts.

yep air marshal tedder was the worst general of ww2,followed by mark clarke.yours,4th wilts.

__________________
"I never knew Canadians were as clever as that?".thankyou all,4th wilts.

I'd say the worst general is Voroshilov... The men was downright incompetent.



Cheers...

Lee, why would Tedder ring your bell?

He was certainly instrumental in the defeat of Rommel at el Alamein. What was his weaknesses when he was commander of the Allied air forces in the Mediterranean? Was there any error in is his planning of the air campaign at Normandy?

Could your antipathy toward him be that he was an outspoken critic of his countryman, the commander of the 21st AG?

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

Looks like once again this has become another OPINION thread. There appears to be many opinions on what consitutes the "Worst" general. Perhaps there should be a more clear and succinct criteria rather then something ,excuse the pun, general?

__________________


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.

I agree, JC. How can you name a general to the list who had success, even among his failures?

There are the various camps espousing differing schools of thought. We have the Monty and Patton haters, all looking at some unfavorable outcome they each had, all the while ignoring their other successes. Rommel gets rave reviews from one quarter for victories in North Africa, then is excoriated by the next.

No one person is perfect (Christian's views on Christ notwithstanding) and ratings are rather subjective.

One needs to look at a person's entire body of work when passing judgement on a person. Obviously generals who remained in command for long periods of time must have been doing something right in the eyes of those who had the power to remove them.

I'm not an especially big fan of Montgomery, but I don't dislike him nor think he was a terrible commander. Read what the men under him thought of him. They, for the most part, would gone to the very gates of hell for him. Would he have endeared the same response had he been in another country? That is unanswerable, but looking from the US prespective, probably not. But that doesn't make him a poor general, it is just a difference in national attitudes.

Market Garden was an overall failure, but look at the risk he was taking vs the potential outcome. Yes, there were a good many things that could have been addressed differently (single road, LZ near Arnhem, etc) but we have the luxury (and what a luxury it is) of hindsight to know what would work and what the other guys had. He didn't. The old dictum that says no plan survives contact with the enemy was certainly true here. He fought battles that he thought his men and material could best handle, just as Patton, Rundstedt, Yamashita or Zhukov would.

I would ask that as you comment in this thread to reflect fully on the man you are excoriating and provide adequately explained concrete reasons why you want him at the top of the list (or bottom, depending on how you see the list). Just to say "Gen. Nerdly Dorkstein was the worst general ever" leaves us wondering why you think that way. Could it be that you didn't like the color of his shirt?

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

hey jeff,the question was asked and i answered it.tedder was bloody awful,the 20,000ft issue was a balls up in a long line of balls ups.brooke wrote some good stuff,i believe.so did several other generals.ill try to dig up some material.lee.

__________________
"I never knew Canadians were as clever as that?".thankyou all,4th wilts.

Lee, I wasn't barking necessarily at you. I finally got around to adding what I meant to add several days ago. You just happen to post as I thought about it.

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

While Tedders feud with Monty was detrimental to the Allied cause, he was a competent commander.

__________________
if in doubt....Panic!!!!

From what I've read about Monty it is noticeable that the men who served under him, thought very highly of him, be they British, Commonwealth or US. It is with the men who served alongside him or above him that his personality caused problems.


ps, A quote by Churchill about Monty, on appointing him to command 8th Army

"If he is disagreeable to those about him, he is also disagreeable to the enemy."

__________________
if in doubt....Panic!!!!

I posted this in WW2Talk, when asking a question on why Montgomery was chosen to command the British 8th Army after Gott was killed.

I thought the author's words were mildly amusing.

My question followed.

I used to work with a general surgeon who spent 4 years as a shore engineer (Sicily, Italy, Normandy, Operation Plunder) during the war, before going to med school. He did not have a great affection for Montgomery at all. He didn't speak negatively of him, just didn't care for him. He reserved his admiration for Simpson of the US Ninth Army.

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

All this is true, but none of this got in the way of him being a very good general

Not completely true.
He commanded the 3rd Division of the BEF during the Battle Of France in May 1940. His handling of the division during the fighting withdrawal was outstanding, and his division was the only division to get back from Dunkirk in a battleworthy condition.

__________________
if in doubt....Panic!!!!

The author's words, not mine. His c.v. was discussed at length in the thread, trust me.

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

Im not as well versed on alot of the generals-certainly not as much as some of you are- but for my money? Courtney Hodges was pretty bad. Look at how we floundered in the Hurtgen forest for so long, overlooking obvious objectives like Roer river dam until it was an afterthought. To this day the Hurtgen is still thought of by some as Americas largest military blunder of all time, so that must count for something in this discussion.

__________________

Those who kept silent yesterday will remain silent tomorrow"
~Elie Wiesel~

I say Hitler was the worst General of all time. Sure a great politician and a developer of Germany, but when it came to leading an army, he failed miserably.

You can also look at the facts behind the amount of failures he had, many due to his stubborness. The determination of the "no retreat" order, the argued desicisions about the Evacuation of Dunkirk, the Total invasion of the Soviet Union, the limited force sent to Africa, the complete waste of resources used to develop 'super weapons' such as the V Rocket, esperimental aircraft and in main ways, the Navy its self, or to be more specific, battleships.

__________________
For want of a nail the shoe was lost, for the want of a shoe the horse was lost, for the want of a horse the rider was lost, for the want of a rider the battle was lost, For want of a battle the kingdom was lost, and all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

Robert,

i would also agree with keystones comment concerning hodges.
the u.s 9th army c.o simpson was another often overlooked general.he was imo the finest u.s general in the e.t.o.

__________________
"I never knew Canadians were as clever as that?".thankyou all,4th wilts.

answering redcoats post of 116,i dont believe there was a feud between monty and tedder.tedder loathed montys battlefield skill.jealousey is a terrible thing imo.yours,lee.

__________________
"I never knew Canadians were as clever as that?".thankyou all,4th wilts.

general paulus he was a good tactition but nowhere near good enough to command the entire 6th army!