Agreed, there are several Japanese commanders that should be added. I don't know all of their names because my American brain has a hard time sorting through them. The victories over China as well as successful invasion of Burma merit mentioning. I will do some digging to see what I can turn up. Most sources never bother with naming the Generals. Those that do often focus on attrocities, which makes it difficult to sort out what commander pulled off X certain brilliant victory.

Kuribayashi or Homma would be good choices for the Japenese side of the argument. Of the two Homma would probably be my choice as he led an invading/ occupation force. While Kuribayshi lead a garrison/defensive force.

Doppleganger told me via PM he's asked the mods to add the Japanese I listed to the poll. If anybody has any other suggestions, now's the time.

Good point about Honma, 03USMC. Still I would rather pick Yamashita. When he conquered Singapore he struck from beaches that required the crossing of a vast jungle thought to be non-negotiable by a large force and certainly not one with armor. Yamashita not only brought through the force he did so with tanks. When Singapore fell his army was actually down to their last ammunition and supplies and when Percieval requested surrender negotiations, Yamashita at first thought the British had found out about his lack of ammo and were requesting _his_ surrender. He bluffed his way through getting Percieval's surrender when they met at the Ford factory.

Still, I voted for Guderian as the father of the air/land battle. True it was General J. F. C. Fuller of the British Army who first postulated it, but it was Guderian who actually put it into action for the first time.

strategic level...i like Manstein

tactical level of fighing..i like Rommel the best...


if he just had eough supply and maye a couple more armored division........i bet he could win...

Additions have been made, enjoy.

Yamashita, for his efforts against the odds in Malaya and Singapore with the Japanese 25th Army [just 3 divisions] that routed a force twice its size and seized the "impregnable" fortress of Singapore in about 70 days. Plus, he was still unbeaten and fighting in the Philippines until the end of the war.

Wonder if he deserved to be executed as a war criminal?

It's amazing that the Japanese Blitzkrieg of South East Asia was done with just 11 of it's 50+ divisions, the rest were lined up against the Chinese and guarding Manchuria against a possible Soviet attack.

Amongst the Germans, Manstein was a great strategist, Guderian and Rommel great with Panzers.
Kesselring did well in Italy, although he had ideal country to fight a defensive campaign.

Wondering why have some of you seem to have it in for Rommel?
I know he was made a Legend, partly by the British themselves, but he proved in France and North Africa how good he was, I think he may have been deadly on the Eastern front.

Hauser was probably the best of a fairly average bunch of Waffen SS commanders.

Doppleganger gave his reasons for not including Mannerheim, although not part of the tripartite pact, he fought on the side of the axis powers, and would probably fit into this thread more then the Allied thread.

Where would you rate him amongst the Axis Commanders?

Originally Posted by Ashes

Wondering why have some of you seem to have it in for Rommel? I know he was made a Legend, partly by the British themselves, but he proved in France and North Africa how good he was, I think he may have been deadly on the Eastern front.

Doppleganger gave his reasons for not including Mannerheim, although not part of the tripartite pact, he fought on the side of the axis powers, and would probably fit into this thread more then the Allied thread.

Where would you rate him amongst the Axis Commanders?

Personally I don't have anything against Rommel and regard him as a very able practitioner of mobile warfare. At the operational and strategic level he was untested but through no real fault of his own. He has been accused of ignoring logistics but part of the reason for that is the nature of mobile warfare itself, especially in North Africa where the front line was extremely fluid and constantly shifting. My only problem with Rommel is that people who rate him as best German commander of WW2 usually have no idea who Manstein or Guderian are. Truth of the matter is that had either the aforementioned been active on the Western Front we'd all be singing their praises instead.

As for Mannerheim I'd rate him highly, up there with the best of the German commanders although not on the same level as Manstein or Guderian.

Mannerheim definitely did more with less, moreso than any other Axis Commander. He ends up becoming an Axis commander by default for the interests of his nation. I doubt Finland would have bothered to join the war on Germany's side had the Winter War never happened. Because of the Winter War, Finland can hardly be faulted for taking the opportunity to strike back.

Originally Posted by Ashes

Hauser was probably the best of a fairly average bunch of Waffen SS commanders.

Hauser was more than just average - he was a very good Panzer Korps commander. His II SS Panzer Korps did the best out of any formations at Kursk, not because they had better men and equipment (which they didn't although the 3 SS Panzer divisions attached were excellent formations) but because Hauser came up with a tactical plan that was far better than the plans of any of the other Korps Commanders in the 4th Panzerarmee and indeed the entire Heersgruppe.

I don't see your vote for Yamashita in the poll tally, Ashes.