![]() |
| |||||||
| WW2 General Every WW2 related discussion besides aviation. |
| View Poll Results: Patton v Rommel | |||
| Patton | | 10 | 38.46% |
| Rommel | | 16 | 61.54% |
| Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: A Swede living in Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 15,144
| Patton v Rommel.... Who was the better tactician?
__________________ ![]() JAN "Felicis Tredecim" "I´m going back to the front to relax" "THE BLACK CATS FLIES TONIGHT" "Find your enemy and shoot him down - everything else is unimportant!" "When you're out of F-8's... You're out of fighters!" ![]() |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Vojvodina, Serbia
Posts: 1,307
| I would say Rommel. He achieved impressive results in African campaign only to be outnumbered in the end. During all that time he had to cope with lack of men and materials. Patton never had that kind of problems...
__________________ ![]() "Find your enemy and shoot him down - everything else is unimportant." Last edited by imalko; 08-24-2009 at 01:02 PM. |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 4,346
| I'd have to agree with Imalko for the exact same reasons. Had Rommel received men and material the way Montgomery and Patton did, it would have been quite different.
__________________ |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 3,655
| I also have to go with Rommel, Patton had huge advantages in men and supplies when he made his advances, Rommel was normally at a disadvantage when he made his strikes. |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Senior Member | I think it's unanimous so far, I say Rommel. As all of them said, if he got the supplies he needed it would've been a much different out come, in my opinion, in North Africa. While commanding his Africa Korp his tactical awareness could change a possible defeat into a stunning victory. Since he didn't have numbers after the battle of Alam Halfa he had to attack because the allies would've had numerical superiority, the Afrika Korps days were numbered. Hitler (made yet another bad decision) to over rule Rommel's decision, Rommel started lacking supplies he needed to keep his Korp going. Don't get me wrong though Patton was a great tactician himself! Both men were well respected by there troops. |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado
Posts: 3,271
| I would go with Rommel also |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Hurst, Texas
Posts: 2,825
| Rommel's tactics vs. Patton's are like comparing a rapier to a halberd. Both have pointy ends, but one is made for feints and slashing and quick maneuvers, whereas the other is made for heavy-handed power-blasting through the defenses. Given equal supplies/men/material, I think that Rommel would've driven circles around Patton...but once Patton hit, hard, then all bets would be off. I guess, with the might of the US industrial machine behind him, Patton never really had to stretch his creativity as far as Rommel did. Who knows what would've happened if the situation had been reversed? We might be calling Patton the "Desert Fox" and praising his ingenuity and ability to keep running a machine that was continually shutting down on him. With history as it stands, I'm goin with Rommel.
__________________ ![]() Pillage, then burn. Argue not with dragons, for thou art crunchy and go well on toast. |
| | |
| | #8 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 10,283
| Patton for me. He seemed to have a knack at understanding on how to integrate all the facets of modern mechanized army ... armor, air and artillery. I would say that because he had so much men and material to work with, he accomplished things Rommel never did. We know what Patton did with it, but we can only speculate on what Rommel COULD have done. And thats a huge difference. And why would you suppose Rommel could have "run rings" around patton? Id say that Rommel would have made one flanking movement and then would be in one heck of a fight that he couldnt extricate himself from.
__________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" |
| | |
| | #9 | |
| Der Crewchief ![]() Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,152
| Quote:
As for me, my mind is not made up yet on this. I think both had their strong points and weaknesses. What is sad is that these two great Generals never had the chance to work together.
__________________ ![]() fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] | |
| | |
| | #10 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: St.john's Newfoundland
Posts: 160
| I luv them both. Old ivory handle's was no slouch just the same. He couldn't help that he was well equipped. Too close to call in my opinion.
__________________ Last edited by Coors9; 08-24-2009 at 04:23 PM. |
| | |
| | #11 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 10,283
| I based my opinion on how Patton fought at the Ardennes. He was of the mindset of "theres the enemy, go engage him and dont let go untill they have been destroyed". I also based it on how he pushed the 3rd army through France after their breakthrough in Normandy. Hes like a combination of Robert E Lee and Ulysses S Grant.
__________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" |
| | |
| | #12 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Dordrecht
Posts: 3,834
| I tend to agree with sys here, as I believe Rommel is a bit overrated. He usually made risky gambles which could have cost him (as it later did). But he had a bit of luck, helped by the incompetence of his British adversaries at the time, which all gave him some success in the beginning. But it didn't last. When the British sorted things out, they fought him back quite successfully. I'm not sure if Patton was such a brilliant general, but having to choose here, I would pick him if only for his spirit and attitude. But remember, this is only my opinion.
__________________ ![]() " The knack of flying lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." |
| | |
| | #13 |
| Senior Member | It could've been a whole different game if Hitler hadn't overruled his decisions. That's something to take into consideration. Last edited by B-17engineer; 08-24-2009 at 05:58 PM. |
| | |
| | #14 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Stafford Springs, Connecticut
Posts: 2,221
| I think Rommel was more creative with his planning, but Patton was plenty aggresive and wouldn't stop until he completed his objectives. Hard to say, I'm a fan of both.
__________________ "Never was so much owed by so many to so few"- Winston Churchill. |
| | |
| | #15 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki
Posts: 1,361
| A couple notices on Rommel Firstly how much of his successes in NA was in fact because of German Army’s combined arm doctrine was clearly better than that used by Commonwealth forces there in 41-42, especially latter's tank tactcs still included too much cavalry charge mentality? So Rommel had qualifiedly superior instrument. How much of the German successes in NA were in fact result of the tactical brilliance of Ludwig Crüwell the CG of DAK from Sept 41 to May 42? And on Rommel’s supply problems. Much of it was self-made. First of all he wanted frequently info on exact position of his supply convoys, on radio. British intelligence much have loved the man. He made the finding of the convoys so much easier. Secondly, he decided to use much of his heavy flak in front lines. They made great job in A/T work but because of that his supply harbours and supply depots had weaker AA protection. British decided otherwise and kept their heavy AA protecting rear areas. Both decisions had their pros and cons but one cannot complain too much that enemy a/c sunk his supply vessels in harbours if one had moved most of AA guns away. Juha Last edited by Juha; 08-24-2009 at 06:22 PM. |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |