Overrated or was he just less shit compared to other soviet commanders ?

Overrated or was he just less shit compared to other soviet commanders ?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Overrated

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Overrated or was he just less shit compared to other soviet commanders ?
    yes?

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    people believe a lot of bro-history memes about the soviet union but by the end of WW2 they had an incredibly competent army. Zhukov was on the same tier as Patton

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Patton was pretty mediocre though. His only claim to fame was being Eisenhower's subordinate during the Louisiana maneuvers which led to him successfully attacking Texas.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Patton was pretty mediocre though.
        He wasnt mediocre at all.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Patton, like most over rated generals was a very competent tactician with next to no strategic mind outside of encircling the enemy.
          There is a reason no one listened to Patton when planning for the post Normandy offensive.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Patton was pretty mediocre though
        So comparable to Zhukov then

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why are you so keen to smear Patton, vatBlack person? Was it because Patton was right about russians?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Zhukov was the objectivelly better general - only one of these two killed tens of thousands of Russians

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >tens of thousands
              missing a few zeros there bro

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >by the end of WW2 they had an incredibly competent army
      lol, no

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    One of the few people to challenge Stalin. That alone made him invaluable.

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Overrated
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Rzhev

    He would have fit in well with the current very special military operation

  6. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Average, he was delt a shitty hand and performed the best he could with the shitty situation he was stuck in.

    WW2 was won because Germany ran out of resources.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >WW2 was won because Germany ran out of resources.
      Yeah they don't have resources lmao
      Sucks for them

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >WW2 was won because Germany ran out of resources

      Das köpe.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Germany didn't run out of resources.
        Tell it to the 60-year-old Volkssturm draftee, his grandchild serving next to him and the pre-WWI G98 with six shots of ammo and two sharpened shovels they have for armament between them.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          That... is accurate, though? It's actually the same thing that did Germany in back in WW1, British naval blockade. That's basically been Germany's problem since it was formed - while it does have good coal and iron reserves, it doesn't have the ability to domestically produce things like oil without expensive/inefficient synthesis processes. And because it didn't have as powerful of a navy as Britain by the time they came to blows, it didn't have the ability to maintain a colonial empire & trade routes once they were at war.

          Germany's problem since it formed has always been resources. They don't have it as bad as Japan, but it's still been the main problem.

          Conversely, resources is America's big advantage (and Russia's). Despite both countries being populated by borderline subhumans and actual subhumans respectively, they have all the resources they need to build a mighty empire, to the point that they'd have to actually work at it to fail (Russia) and if they at least make an effort (America) then the abundance of natural wealth on their hands guarantees them success.

          So... the Germans failed on the strategic level? That's your defence?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Are you saying Germany succeeded strategically?

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          That... is accurate, though? It's actually the same thing that did Germany in back in WW1, British naval blockade. That's basically been Germany's problem since it was formed - while it does have good coal and iron reserves, it doesn't have the ability to domestically produce things like oil without expensive/inefficient synthesis processes. And because it didn't have as powerful of a navy as Britain by the time they came to blows, it didn't have the ability to maintain a colonial empire & trade routes once they were at war.

          Germany's problem since it formed has always been resources. They don't have it as bad as Japan, but it's still been the main problem.

          Conversely, resources is America's big advantage (and Russia's). Despite both countries being populated by borderline subhumans and actual subhumans respectively, they have all the resources they need to build a mighty empire, to the point that they'd have to actually work at it to fail (Russia) and if they at least make an effort (America) then the abundance of natural wealth on their hands guarantees them success.

          Krauts lurk this place like vermin, always trying to idolize or otherwise justify what their sorry people did back then. Germans lost for one reason: they were stupid enough to put the whole world against them. That happened already in ww1 and they didnt learn the lesson, so the blame for their failure lies entirely onto them

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Germans lost for one reason: they were stupid enough to put the whole world against them
            They were just stupid enough to have weak allies like Romania, Italy and Finland

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Germans lost for one reason: they were stupid enough to put the whole world against them

            because the world had more resources and they didnt. you hare trigger brain finally got to the correct conclusion

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        That... is accurate, though? It's actually the same thing that did Germany in back in WW1, British naval blockade. That's basically been Germany's problem since it was formed - while it does have good coal and iron reserves, it doesn't have the ability to domestically produce things like oil without expensive/inefficient synthesis processes. And because it didn't have as powerful of a navy as Britain by the time they came to blows, it didn't have the ability to maintain a colonial empire & trade routes once they were at war.

        Germany's problem since it formed has always been resources. They don't have it as bad as Japan, but it's still been the main problem.

        Conversely, resources is America's big advantage (and Russia's). Despite both countries being populated by borderline subhumans and actual subhumans respectively, they have all the resources they need to build a mighty empire, to the point that they'd have to actually work at it to fail (Russia) and if they at least make an effort (America) then the abundance of natural wealth on their hands guarantees them success.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Is okay Dimitri, you are of fightings very well in Great Patriotic War. Supply lines are American imperialist propaganda.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes.
      Not nuff oil.
      Factories bombed to shit. Pressed from multiple sides
      America supplying it's enemies and engaged in direct combat
      INTALY fell
      Wasted resources on some wunderwaffen
      Lost in russia and wasted tons of shit to try and unsuccessfully salvage the situation
      Lost in africa
      >It was a total war and the first side to run out of resources, cut off supply routes or looses the will to fight looses
      Examples of a similar sentiment
      >a Boxer lost because he was KOed
      >Breath diver died because he ran out of breath
      >race car lost because it ran out of gas

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Don't forget:
        >Idiotic industrial management and cronyism that crippled the maintenance of their armored force, such as:
        >Divert spare parts production to assemble more vehicles (clueless)
        >End up losing more vehicles than before, due to a lack of spare parts leaving salvageable vehicles irreparable due to simple mechanical failures or wear
        >Now have to transport even more new tanks to the front, entire complete hulls, instead of just boxes of parts and reusing the old ones
        >Worsen your already painful logistical issues and further erode the combat-ready numbers of front-line armored units
        German technology is the best in the world!1!! Fricking stupid buttholes

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Anyone that thinks that the faults in any side’s military strategy can be summed up in a few sentences is either a moron, underage or both.
          It’s basically just the other side of the “Germany could have won if X!” type arguments.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            I do think much of Germany's failure can be summed up as overextension (+Italy)
            >Italy can't deal with Greece -> overextension into the Balkans
            >Italy can't deal with Africa -> overextension into NA
            >Italy can't deal with Italy -> half your forces are now stuck defending the boot
            >Italy (and Romania) can't help meaningfully on the Eastern Front -> Stalingrad is fricked

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              I don't know why everyone fricking bags on Italy so much. It wasn't a particularly rich country, and had been fighting for years before 1939. It's like some guy starting a barfight and getting mad at his brother who comes to help for not being a star boxer.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Its okay, you got taste and your country is still cool unlike smelly frenchies

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not Italian

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Because given their overall stats, Italy should've performed way better than they actually did. It also doesn't help that they have a kind of so-so modern military history from getting fricked by Ethiopia twice to almost losing in Libya against a handful of Ottoman commanders rallying local militia and being saved by the First Balkan War breaking out. Oh yeah and let's not forget losing to Greece and struggling in fricking Albania of all places.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Because in theory they should have been an industrialized great power and peer with England. Italy also has a long and glorious military history all the way back to Roman times. Benny also had his head screwed on way better than Hitler and, in theory, the Regia Marina would have more or less completely uncontested control of the Mediterranean sea.

                In practice, Italy was fricking broke from fighting colonial wars all throughout the 20's and 30's, their industrial base was hobbled by inefficiency and corruption, which meant that while the infantry were damn good, Italy's armour and air power suffered. Even their weapons were pretty shit and had a bad tendency to jam. The navy sat in port for basically the entire war as a fleet in being and when it did sortie out, the aformentioned industrial problems reared their ugly head, because while the navy was very good on paper and the ships were a beauty to serve on, the fire control systems Italian ships used were fricky and meant that Italian gunnery often failed to hit shit at ranges where it should have been a sure thing. All of these factors largely contributed to their actual in-theater performance, which was pretty bad and required the Germans to need to constantly bail them out and divert resources away from other areas.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >still kill millions of slavic subhumans, and hundreds of thousands of burgermutts and brittoids

          wow, they did pretty well considering.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            loser's thinking

  7. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Posting anything soviet on /k/
    You know these butthole can't give credit where it's due OP. You should have posted some Rhodesian or german general if you wanted honest feedback

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Oh, you poor fricking victim.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      ESL Black folk frick off

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >this board is full of big meanies when it comes to russians all for no reason =(
      Just fricking pathetic

  8. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes.

    Zhukov lost a lot of people, but he at least could get results in exchange for those losses.

  9. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Zhukov was actually quite good
    See: Battle of Khalkin Gol

  10. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Basically Stalin's favorite who took credit for someone else's victory and his own campaigns were massive blunders.

    For instance he wasted hundreds of thousands men in Mars only to be shipped south in order to take credit for Uranus, whose real author was Malinovsky.

  11. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >one more valiant charge into the MG-42s URAAAAAAAAAAA!

  12. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    He was better than most of the soviet shitters but also heavily overrated

  13. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    he got Coca Cola to make a colourless recipe so he could drink it without everyone suspecting him of capitalist sympathies

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's weird Coke isn't capitalising the shit out of that, especially in the former Soviet Union
      >Koka-Kolya: Zhukov's special. Now colourless!
      Especially since carbonated flavoured water was popular in USSR anyway.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >he got Coca Cola to make a colourless recipe so he could drink it without everyone suspecting him of capitalist sympathies
      Oh come on. I don't think that's actually true. I tried to track down the source and it was some pop history guy who wrote a history of Coca-Cola.

  14. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    he dodged joe stalins purges and did ok during the battles Khalkhin Gol

  15. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Overrated *because* he was less shit than the rest. He made a lot of mistakes and wasted a lot of lives but he got things done which made him based by Russian standards.

  16. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    absolutely overrated. his tactics relied heavily on human waves, and probably cemented this country killing philosophy onto russia for the following decades. of course Hollywood had to glaze on his memory and make him a badass soviet napoleon. for some reason hollywood greatly praised russians ever since the fall of the union.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >human waves

      Do you have a source for this other than german memoirs and hollywood movies

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        So for you 25 million russians just decided to go full jonestown instead of throwing themselves at machinegun nests? Someone gave the orders to charge, and that someone was zhukov

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          An awful lot of that 25 million dead were civilians, you very stupid buffoon.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        german memoirs seem pretty accurate considering russians follow the same tactics up to this very day

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          I haven't seen any "human wave" tactics moron

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Vohledar

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous
  17. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Brilliant for the sole reason that he was one of the only men in Russia capable of tard wrangling Stalin, and whatever failures he had are offset by this fact

  18. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    He contributed more to Stalin's Ten Blows than Stalin did so he's got that going for him.

  19. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    he knew full well what his army as capable of.What it could do and not do in contrast to the soviet government

  20. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Rokossowski was better

  21. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Pic very related

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >G*rmoid cope meme

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >assmad zigger detected

  22. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    He is overrated. He was politically reliable and competent with the latter being less important than the first. Konev was a better general and Rokossovsky his superior in strategy.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous
  23. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Overrated. Rokossovsky carried his ass

  24. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you track casualties across all battles across the Eastern front, things start way lopsided in '41 as you'd expect, but balance out around 42-43 before tipping way over in 44. This is all just Wikipedia battle boxes so take it with a grain of salt, but the general gist is there.

  25. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Overrated garbage, I can order human waves too.
    Some NKVDBlack folk were smarter.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >human waves
      ignoramus detected

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        coping tankie detected

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >pic
          It’s something that baffles me.
          Russians are clearly capable of conceptualizing kindness, charity, decency etc. in fiction. Why does the reality fall short by such a ludicrous margin?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's pretty simple, Russia is big, like really big. When it comes to media and fiction in Russia particularly before the 50's there was an extremely small minority of people who were capable of making it and even smaller who actually wanted to.
            Even until the 1920's the literacy rate was only about 20-25% and it wasn't until the 40's where more than half the population could read/write. Which ofcourse always heavily favored the cities of St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev, and so on.
            Then when it comes to film, around the dawn of film in Russia it was extremely hard to get everything you needed unless you were directly making a film for the government.
            Basically Russian fiction has always been controlled by the hyperwealthy until the 50-60's when you start seeing more traditionally poor people making things which are almost always extremely depressing.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Stalin never existed. Now what do you say to that?

  26. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    He managed to survive and stand his ground under Stalin and then later executes Beria without even trying to take power himself... that's more impressive than winning WWII.

  27. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Anyone who says "HUMAN WAVES TACTICS!!!" should be executed. It's such a bizzare myth that can be dispelled with 5 minutes of thought. It would never work, it would make attrition horrible, there'd be incredible backlash from the troops who have to carry out the order. Russian tactics weren't golden standard shit, but they sure as hell didn't beat the russians by just banzai charging them over and over again.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >It would never work, it would make attrition horrible, there'd be incredible backlash from the troops who have to carry out the order.
      Now take a look at russian losses and consider what barrier troops were for. You're close to getting it.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Roughly 2 million more military losses than the Germans. Barrier troops employed in most armies. You're a coping moron. Eastern front was a bloodbath for reasons other than mass waves.
        >T-Tankie!!!
        Whatever helps you sleep at night.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Roughly 2 million more military losses than the Germans
          lol, in your dreams tankie dipshit
          >Barrier troops employed in most armies
          you are a coping homosexual

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >lol, in your dreams tankie dipshit
            Well I'm convinced of your point. Bistow some more first rate wisdom onto me Black person homosexual.
            Your point so far is that just about every major analysis into Russian military casualties is incorrect and that the German military lost to a literal non-tactic.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Bistow

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Bistow

                Minor grammatical error, game over bros...

                Are you that guy who still believes Russian strategic forces are totes uncorrupted unlike everything else?

                Not at all, the Russian military sucks ass. I just cannot possibly believe that "ebin mass wave tactics" were the only factor in winning WW2. It's an absolutely diabolical narrative that discredits how wars are actually fought and won. I've yet to be given any substantial evidence that mass wave tactics were just spammed by the Russians to secure victory, just a gaggle of baboons screeching

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Bistow

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Are you that guy who still believes Russian strategic forces are totes uncorrupted unlike everything else?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      are you a mutt? you have no clue just how miserable and broken the russian soul is. they absolutely would charge to their deaths when mikhail the commisar ordered it. the chinese are very similar in this regard

  28. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    He was a good general. above average but not exceptional. But what he was and why he is remembered so well is that he was an excellent Stalin wrangler, arguably the most important skill of anybody if they want to survive in the Soviet upeer circles of that time.

  29. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Literally used my Red alert 2 strategy of spawning 40 conscripts to take on 5 tanks and then declaring victory after losing 38 men to five tanks

  30. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Overrated and he was just less shit compared to other soviet commanders.
    Zhukov knew how logistics worked. And that was more than any other Red or any Nazi general in the Eastern front was seemingly capable of.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *