Largest army ever commanded by one man?

Actually, if I had been a communist I would've said something like "our glorious leader so troubled by affairs of state turned over direct control to his marshals so he could give such matters his full attention."

What I did was call it straight. Stalin did have the sense to eventually realize he was screwing things up and stepped out of direct control. My comment on that is hardly flattering. If he'd had good sense to begin with he'd never have tried it. There is a world of difference between the phrases "good sense" and "wise enough".
 
The answer is Stalin, whether he actually directed orders or not. The Red Army were, in theory and in practice, acting at his behest.

BTW, Hitler was not as bad a military commander as most people seem to make out. He actually had a solid grip on strategy. For example, he approved the Manstein Plan for the invasion of France and ignored the advice of most of his Senior Staff in the process. He was proven right as history tells us. Most of the West's view of Hitler as a military commander is through the memoirs of his Generals, who had a vested interest in making themselves look as good as possible and blaming Hitler for almost every problem. Hitler didn't come up with the strategy for the Battle of Kursk as many people commonly believe he did. Yet he gets blamed for it by many people.

Hitler went seriously wrong when he tried to micro-manage everything. His paranoia and onset of Parkinson's didn't help either. He also listened to the wrong men who told him what he wanted to hear and not what was really happening. He really needed to listen to commanders like Guderian and Manstein who could have saved the Third Reich from ruin had they been given the chance.
 
Doppleganger said:
The answer is Stalin, whether he actually directed orders or not. The Red Army were, in theory and in practice, acting at his behest.

BTW, Hitler was not as bad a military commander as most people seem to make out. He actually had a solid grip on strategy. For example, he approved the Manstein Plan for the invasion of France and ignored the advice of most of his Senior Staff in the process. He was proven right as history tells us. Most of the West's view of Hitler as a military commander is through the memoirs of his Generals, who had a vested interest in making themselves look as good as possible and blaming Hitler for almost every problem. Hitler didn't come up with the strategy for the Battle of Kursk as many people commonly believe he did. Yet he gets blamed for it by many people.

Hitler went seriously wrong when he tried to micro-manage everything. His paranoia and onset of Parkinson's didn't help either. He also listened to the wrong men who told him what he wanted to hear and not what was really happening. He really needed to listen to commanders like Guderian and Manstein who could have saved the Third Reich from ruin had they been given the chance.

Now that's what I call a good comment, man. :bravo:
 
After many muck ups Stalin stood back and let the Generals run the war, he in turn set the directives and aims for them to follow.
 
Now General Slim commanded the British & Commonwealth 14th Army, this consisted of 1 million men. This Army fought in south East Asia and was nick named the forgotten army
 
I guess its true then.. A true hero is a hidden hero..

Anyway, one million is nothing compared to the armies mister Stalin had..but still
 
Stalin definitely comes out on top as having controlled the largest army engaged in warfare in human history. Hitler? I'm not sure, but the USA's WW2 overall numbers, Europe and Pacific combined, likely surpasses WW2 Germany at it's greatest numerical strength. The PLA of China fielded astounding numbers whilst kicking the crud outa the Nationalists, but I don't have the numbers for that.

Isn't it interesting that Hitler and Stalin -- commanders of the two most potent land military machines in modern times ... were both incompetant morons. I'm not willing to be as generous with Stalin's legacy as Dopp. The man murdered his own troops and there was seldom a battle in WW2 where his micro-management of things didn't lead to significantly more Russian casualties than I believe were necessary. He's the one who decapitated the Red Army of its leadership shortly before Germany invaded to begin with. That taken alone ...

Charge is correct in that Stalin did at least get better at deferring to those who knew what the hell they were doing ... eventually.
 
Did Stalin command the armies of Russia or did he just set the policies for the Generals to follow. there is a lot of difference of setting polices and actually leading an army. If we were to go down that line then you would President Roosevelt up there with all the big boys.
 
Lets throw an odd one in here, has any one ever considered the French General Foch who took over all control of the British and French Forces during WW1
 
I have been trying not to post in here but well there you go...

The largest army ever commanded by one was the Army of the Persian king Xerxes (800'000 men) that invaded Greece.
 
phoenix80 said:
I have been trying not to post in here but well there you go...

The largest army ever commanded by one was the Army of the Persian king Xerxes (800'000 men) that invaded Greece.

Do you mean actually led into battle by one man? If so, that figure is beaten by several of the German and Soviet Army commanders during WW2, who being field commanders actually moved into the field of operations with their troops. The German Army Group Centre for example, personally commanded by Generalfeldmarschall Fedor von Bock, contained well over a million men when it marched into the Soviet Union on June 22nd, 1941.

As a sidenote, I'm sceptical about the accuracy of details concerning ancient battles. IMO there is a degree of exaggeration when it comes to those details. We are talking about events that took place a long time ago, and in many cases the facts have been distorted and twisted through the ages.
 
Back
Top