Which country do you think had the best soldiers?

Please do not get into some stuff about how we can't judge a group of individuals as a whole.

I'd say the Japanese. No not cuz my name is Yamamoto, heh. I just think they were the bravest soldiers (what other soldier is going to deliberatly crash a plane into a ship?), and craziest(crazy can be good ya know? Well usually...) and I also heard that Japanese soldiers could surivive with only a fistful of rice a day where as most other soldiers could not.

__________________
"In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success."
Admiral Yamamoto, 1940

The best soldiers as a whole? I would say the Gurkhas were the best soldiers in ww2--closely followed by the Senegalese, Finns and then the Germans.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

The Gurkhas?

__________________
"In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success."
Admiral Yamamoto, 1940

Admiral -

The stranger it seems, the more likely it is to be true.

Who was best? I'm not sure, but from Allied Forces in the Mediteranean I like (in alphabetic order) the (Moroccan) Goumiers, Gurkhas, (American) Nisei, and Poles.

If you weren't aware of the Gurkhas, check out http://www.milhist.net/mto/19gurkha.shtml

I've always heard that the Japanese were not as amazing as the legend makes out. They were not better jungle fighters than anyone else and if they did survive on only a bowl of rice a day, it's only because they had to because their army and govt. treated them like garbage. The guys that went through the Battan death march survived on less than that. Well, if they survived.

I also don't think they were brave, just because they were brainwashed. I'd say the people who were really brave were the ones who fought those nuts. Fighting an enemy as fanatical as the Japanese is brave. Getting drunk on saki and dying a suicidal death for a half-assed govt. that doesn't give a dern about it's people is stupid.

On top of all of this, add in the type of thing that is illustraited in the book "The Rape of Nanking". "Good soldiers" don't use young civilian women for bayonet practice.

__________________
Living History at http://oldreliable9_47.tripod.com

Hi Admiral--the Gurkhas are from India--they fought alongside the British. These were VERY brave and tough men. They carried the famed: "Kukri" (SP?) curved fighting knife. The Japanese greatly feared them.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

Small correction Carl, the Gurkhas are from Nepal (ok, perhapse I am just being more specific but what the hey). They were and still are one of the finest units of soldiers in the world. They were formed when the British lost a war with the Gurkha army, their leader was so impressed with the way the British fought he gave us a unit of his own men. I am sorry I can not be more specific but that is all I actually know (or rather the way I heared the story). Anyhow, to become Gurkha soldier is one of the hightest honours that can befall a man in that area of Nepal and if you have ever met one you can see why. I spent a short time at sandhurst (2 days to be precise) and we were billetted behind the Gurkha demonstration company, they are good, very good. There are lots of stories about them but one of the most impressive involves a MG position that was pinning down British soldiers at the bottom of the hill. The Gurkhas turned up and after a few minutes dropped their rifles and charged the gun with their Kukris. They killed some of the gun team whilst others ran away, suffered relativley few casualties and it was assumed that they had run out of ammunition. In fact it was discovered they still had full Rifles in many cases but had charged anyway because they felt it was the only way to budge the Germans.

As for the question of who were the finest solders of WW2, I would say the British Royal Marines, Commandos and Airborn troops, German 1st and 12th SS as well as Panzer lehr and Grossdeutchland (though I do not know enough about the latter), the US Airborn, the Indian and Gurkha soldiers in British service, ANZACS, and maybe Finns (again I do not know much about them). I think that should just about cover everyone. Sorry for the list but I think one has to be a little more specific.

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

ANZACs gave the Japs hell...

French Moroccan Gourniers (sp.) gave no quarter to the Germans at Monte Cassino and asked for none in return...

Japanese soldiers weren't brave in my opinion-brainwashed, and some of the stuff they did was appalling as well as ridiculous...Sorry If I feel this way, but before anyone has a go at me...keep in mind my grandfather was imprisoned in Changi for 3 years, and was tortured and beaten whilst there-and my family heritage doesn't take that too kindly...

__________________
"GARRY OWEN"-Traditional war-cry of the US 7th Cavalry.
"CURRAHEE"-War-cry of the US 506th PIR.
"Everybody thinks that they are going to get the chance to punch some Nazi in the face at Normandy-and those days are over, they are long gone"-Lt Chris Burnett

Hi Stefan--thanks for the correction. No better a person to do so than someone from England.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

Any time Carl, though obviously not that often I have met a few Gurkhas and the are a good group of men. As for the Japanese, well I dont think they were anything special as soldiers, they achieved a lot and fought hard but then again so did most soldiers. I have met Japanese veterans and most of them seem much like any other veteran.

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

Ahh ok. I thought thats what its was but wasn't sure.

Hehe that story is a little hard to believe. charging a machine gun nest with swords? Did they sneak up on it or just go head on?

__________________
"In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success."
Admiral Yamamoto, 1940

The Kukri is not a sword, it is a knife, about 8 inches long and curved. It is an exceptional weapon for close combat but yeah, the story does seem far fetched, I have always wondered how true it is. I think it is true but dont take my word for it. It does sound like the kinda thing the Gurkhas would do and actually it is possible, I mean how would you feel if suddenly a load of blokes charged you screaming like banchees and weilding knives, you cant kill them all, you run, at least you do unless you are brave or stupid.

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

Thank you Stefan.

Also--real ww2 vintage Kukris will often sell for at least $2,000.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

ANZACS were tough and they fought in appalling conditions.
Now my fathers Uncle fought in Burma and was captured by the Japanese, but escaped the prison camps. I believe that the Japanese were not as good as many people think. They fought hard, but no more than the Americans, British, French, Russians, Germans and the ANZACS.

Jet

__________________
And when he gets to heaven
To Saint Peter he will tell
One more soldier reporting sir
I have served my time in hell

One thing that has made an impression on me in several battles is the toughness of the Australian soldier. ( among other things ...)

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-...el_alamein.htm

EL ALAMEIN

Churchill said the magnificent drive towards the coast by the Australians, achieved by ceaseless bitter fighting, swung the whole battle in favour of the British. Montgomery's Chief of Staff, Sir Francis de Guingand said in Operation Victory of the Australian thrust towards the coast:

I think this area saw the most determined and savage fighting of the campaign. No quarter was given, and the Australians fought some of the finest German troops in well-prepared positions to a standstill, and by their action did a great deal to win the battle of El Alamein.

The 8th Army casualties were 13,500 killed, wounded or missing. About 27,000 prisoners were taken, 450 tanks destroyed or abandoned and much equipment captured. The 9th Australian Division losses between 23 October and 4 November totalled 2,694, including 620 dead, 1944 wounded and 130 taken prisoner.

TOBRUK

The soil of Tobruk must be forever Australian. Australians, backed by British artillery and tanks, captured the fortress in the first Allied drive through Cyrenaica (Libya), and Australian troops, again backed by British artillery, held it against as great odds as have been faced by any garrison in history. The very dust of its bomb-pocked perimeter is hallowed with Australian blood, and Australian dead lie in its windswept cemetery.

And throughout the eight bitter months of heat and dust and blood and flies, the garrison retained those high spirits that are the hallmark of high courage. If Lord Haw Haw thought he could goad the Australians with his bitter tilt at the "Rats of Tobruk" he committed the grossest of his many misjudgements. The men were proud of the title and some of them now treasure an unofficial medal, bearing the stamp of a rodent rampant, which was unofficially struck to commemorate the defence of Tobruk.

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-...ww2/tobruk.htm

__________________

To attempt to decide which soldier is the best is somewhat pointless. Every nation had soldiers who were good and bad it is a question of the individuals performance.

To compare fanaticism with quality is a dangerous comparison to make. Most late war SS and Hitler youth units fought with fanaticism but should not be regarded as superior troops due to it.

But as I do have an opinion on this I will give my opinion but in terms of which units performed better. My top list would be...

British Airborne (1st and 6th)
German Airborne (at the time of 7th Flieger)
1st SS Liebstandarte
U.S. Rangers
Gurkas (possibly the most consistent performer in the British Army)
L.R.D.G

But as for national and cultural quality I think that the Germans performed the best. The Australians always have a tough reputation and justifiably so, they fought long and hard at Crete, but lets not forget the Canadians! As for the Japs I would have to disagree with the point that they were the best troops. I would consider the Aussies and the U.S. marines the quality troops in the Pacific theatre. If the Japs are the best due to their suicidal tendencies then surely the Russians must be given the same respect, for mass headlong charges at German positions.

Sorry for the rambling rant, I only get on the forum every other day at best, too much lecturing and that damn PhD!!!

__________________
"Watch that Fu*ker, he'll 'ave someones eye out!" King Harold at Hastings 1066.

Too many variables to take into consideration when asking the question: Which country had the best soldiers

It's easy for soldiers to look good if they have...

1) Air Superiority: It's always nice when fighters aren't strafing your column on a daily basis, or bombers aren't turning your supply depot's into rubble.

2) Supplies: Having unlimited supplies of Fuel, Men, Tanks, Ammo, etc......

How good would the americans have been, if from the moment they landed on Omaha they were constantly at the mercy of the Luftwaffe?

How good would Montgomery and the brits have been in Afrika, had their been no Russian front?

What if American tanks had more firepower & armor than German tanks?......His tank is great, mine sucks....does that make him a better soldier?

Too many variables

Agree with that 100% - I've eaten goat curry with these guys, and I tell you they are damn fine cooks as well!

__________________
Paul Reed
Webmaster - Battlefields of WW2- http://www.ww2battlefields.info
D Day Ancestors: The British Army in Normandy - http://www.ddayancestors.com

Thank you Sommecourt. Also that meal sounds nice as well. Ive had curried meats and other dishes before and they were goooooooood.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

http://www.army.mod.uk/brigade_of_gurkhas/

Bit of advice, never wake a sleeping Ghurka, even if he is in a hospital bed.

__________________
Prepare to repel borders.
William L. McGonagle, MOH, U. S. Navy, Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY 1967.

Tough lads, is it true that strictly speaking they are mercenaries?

__________________
Ain't no rocket scientists in the firehall

Strictly speaking, Gurkhas are British soldiers who are not British citizens (they’re Nepalese) but are paid by the British government. I have heard some Americans ‘get cute’ calling them ‘mercenaries’ on this technicality, however, the Gurkhas only fight for the British – whereas if they were ‘mercenaries’ they would fight for anyone who paid them. Perhaps others are jealous the Gurkhas won’t fight for them?

Perhaps if you meet a Gurkha you would care to tell him he was ‘just a mercenary’ – advice, have a spare head with you when you do

No.9