Was he the best Soviet general?

Well let's see. Is this Zhukov? No? Then no.

>>3118248
Georgy "Let's send all of our male population to die" Zhukov

>>3118252
It was either that or complete annihilation and slavery in the name of lebensraum. There was no other choice for them.

>>3118252
You can either loose 1 000 000 soldiers in one battle in 2 months, or you can loose 1 000 000 men in 10 different battles in 1 year, which will make the war last longer, which will kill more soldiers and civilians on another places, pick one.

>>3118242
Someone officer of Royal Russia who died in 193x by Stalin's repressions.

File: 180px-Tuhach.jpg (8KB, 180x285px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 180x285px

*teleports behind you*

>>3118684
Brusilov, he died of natural causes tho

>>3118242
Adolf Hitler

>>3118684
Tukchachevsky?

Probably Zhukov because deep battle is dank as fuck

Rokossovky, Konev, and Chuikov were also pretty based. Vatutin is also massively underrated in my opinion, considering that IIRC he was responsible for the rather elaborate series of fortifications, traps, and defenses that the Germans ran into at Kursk.

>>3119265
Wasn't deep battle conceived by Soviet military theorists in the 1920s? Or is it separate from Deep operations!

>>3119272
Supposed to be ? Not a !

>>3119265
What is the main difference between blitzkreig and Deep Battle? With Blitzkreig you create holes and then exploit said holes with tanks and mechanized units, but doesn't Deep Battle do the same with creating holes than exploiting them?

>>3119281
I'm not keen on blitz but deep operations also focused on suppressing the enemy's offensive thrusts, isolating the zone of conflict from enemy reserves and blocking enemy logistical efforts. Or did the blitzkrieg have those theories as well?

>>3119281
Deep Battle is more creating breakthroughs on a wide front, while Blitzkrieg (Schwerpunkt) focuses on much more narrow breakthroughs

File: image.jpg (171KB, 672x800px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 672x800px

>>3119281
As I recall, the difference is that blitzkrieg is a tactical doctrine, while deep battle is a strategic-level doctrine. Deep battle advocates using combined-arms offensives to exploit weak points in the enemy's frontline, into which you then pour fresh mobile reserve troops and armored units. So, sort of similar to blitzkrieg, but on a strategic scale and without the obsessive emphasis on tanks and air support at the expense of everything else. Also, deep battle stresses the necessity of combined-arms cooperation at all levels.

File: red army interesting.jpg (59KB, 441x680px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 441x680px

>>3119414
>>3119281
Also Blikrieg rellies on small amount of huge attacks. (Barbarossa-Kiev, Fall Blau, Kursk) in attempt to encircle huge amount of enemy troops, while deep battle rellies on several pushes (quantity of tanks is very useful here) and is trying to create numerous smaller encirclements while fresh reserves continue and push the frontile, which doesnt exist in Blitzkrieg.

>>3119265
Chuikov is the only non-meme answer in this whole thread.

Chuikov
he pushes people into closets and doesn't afraid of anything

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1xJ5iTiNQg

>>3119265
Zhukov also btfo Japans army in Mongolia, essentially doing a blizkreig on them. Which explains why he was capable enough to develop ways to counter that tactic later on.