Was General Zukov really a great general? Was he really the best

>>534154
Great? I'd argue that he was, if only for his more pragmatic approach of handling things. Tactically, he may have been lacking, but he was excellent at handling the strategic side of things, which is what really matters in a war.

Best? Definitely not.

>>534154

>Was General Zukov really a great general?

IMO yes. People go "lol zerg rush", but especially in 1941, the Red Army was in shambles. Poor training, poor doctrine, with peoples revolutionary spirit meant to compensate for a whole host of material deficiencies, and organziational bottlenecks.

Just look at various sections of the front before and after Zhukov showed up. He almost always stabilized things where they looked on the brink of collapse.

Furthermore, he had considerable organizational skills, something otherwise lacking in a lot of the Soviet military effort. He actually managed to make sure that his supplies got to his men, which wasn't a claim a lot of his contemporaries could make.

>Was he really the best in WWII?

Probably not. But at least in my opinion, judging only guys who commanded significant sections of fronts, (so like, no divisional or even single corps commanders) he'd be in the top 5.

I'd probably put Manstein as the best, or very maybe Kesselring.

>>534154
>Was General Zukov really a great general?

Yes.

>Was he really the best in WWII?

Probably not. The best was probably some undersung divisional commander on the Eastern or Chinese front.

Out of men operating at his level it is hard to make a comparison. I mean Ike was FAR less adept at managing the human resources issues he faced, probably helped him become a better president.

>Or did he just send a lot of men to their death and have a lot killed?

All generals do this. taco_girl.jpeg

>>534211
>I'd probably put Manstein as the best, or very maybe Kesselring.

While these are better choices than Ike, I'd dispute your concept of "command of front." By 1942 Zhukov had responsibilities across the entire theatre.

Also Manstein and Kesselring couldn't manage upwards like Zhukov could. GROFAZ remember?

he might have not been the best but he certainly knew what Russia needed

>>534154
Yeah he won, but he seems so replacable to me, someone a bit capable would have done the same probably.
His attack on Berlin would be considered a war crime today

>>534553

I was just trying to exclude guys who were in "small" commands, because it's very hard to compare what a guy like Zhukov does to what someone like say, Balck did.

I was really going for anyone whose command included multiple corps/armies, and sorry if I wasn't precise.

And Kesselring could certainly manage upwards. Or at least ignore orders he didn't feel like following and get away with it.

>>534566
Yes, there are quite a lot of things that occurred in WW2 that would be considered war crimes. Both punished and unpunished.

>>534566
>His attack on Berlin would be considered a war crime today

No it bloody wouldn't. Berlin wasn't an open city, it was defended and defended as a fortress. Gevena didn't apply, and the Soviets stopped the rape after 3 days.

Learn your law of war if you're going to make large humorous statements.

File: don.jpg (48KB, 492x572px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 492x572px

>>534789
>the Soviets stopped the rape after 3 days.
>
>Learn your law of war if you're going to make large humorous statements.

>according to the law of war it is okay to rape a city if you stop it after 3 days

>>534796
>>according to the law of war it is okay to rape a city if you stop it after 3 days
Yes, exactly. Prior to Geneva: A defended city may be raped for 3 days.

On day 3 the new Soviet city commander walked into the streets and started shooting soviet soldiers who were raping with a pistol and unleashed the NKVD on the Soviet soldiery.

Similarly the rape of Konigsberg was legal. But the rapes in Poland weren't.

Learn your law of war.

>>534789
You misunderstand-the war crime was against the soviet soldiers he sacrificed to take the city, when he could have simply surrounded the city and waited for surrender.

>>534844
That isn't a war crime, you're disputing his military choice.

>>534857
>By the afternoon of 16 April, Stalin was displaying audible impatience with Zhukov's progress. ''So you underestimated the enemy on the Berlin axis,'' he said irritably, when the Marshall reported by telephone. ''Things are going better for Konev.'' The 1st Ukrainian Front had pushed ahead from its bridgeheads and was now swinging north towards the German capital. Zhukov reacted to Stalin's jibes with characteristic ruthlessness. He ordered formation commanders personally to lead the attacks on the Seelow defenses, and warned that further failures would be rewarded with instant dismissal. He took the drastic step of committing armored divisions even before his infantry had achieved a breakthrough. There was no tactical subtlety here, no signs of a great captain maneuvering forces with imagination. This was merely a clumsy battering ram, thrusting repeatedly and at fearsome cost against the German defenses, as Zhukov vented his own frustrations in the lives of his men.

>>534879
This isn't a war crime.

Do none of you cunts know the law of war?

>On day 3 the new Soviet city commander walked into the streets and started shooting soviet soldiers who were raping with a pistol and unleashed the NKVD on the Soviet soldiery.

Got a source or link for this?

>>534844
Being unconcerned about casualties (short of gross incompetence, at least) is not a war crime.

Zhukov's justification for the bloody assaults he often launched was that the casualties were going to happen one way or another. Sure, running your men through a minefield may be horrific, but you're going to lose just as many men - if not more - funneling them into the chokepoints the minefields create or alerting the enemy by spending the time clearing the field.

In effect, he was the ultimate pragmatist and big-picture thinker. I sure as shit would never want to serve under him, but how he waged war was not incompetence, let alone a crime.

>>534888
Bellamy, Chris (2007), Absolute war: Soviet Russia in the Second World War, Alfred A. Knopf, ISBN 978-0-375-41086-4 p670 is what wiki relies upon in its article.

I haven't read Bellamy, but given that Scholar is showing 0 relevant hits for Bezarin I doubt deep text searching will bring up an article on rape policy in Berlin. Particularly after Beevor's pathetic intervention in 2002.

>>535062 (you)
Berzarin you idiot

>>535062 (You)
Look I swear I read this when I was reading Grossman vs Beevor on the rape issue. But obviously I can't place it.