Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Rokossovsky vs. Zhukov

 Post Reply Post Reply
Poll Question: Who was or who contributed more to the war effort for the Soviets?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
3 [100.00%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Sarmata View Drop Down
Consul
Consul

suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 314
  Quote Sarmata Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Rokossovsky vs. Zhukov
    Posted: 18-Aug-2014 at 23:14
Who was the better General or who contributed more to the Soviet war effort?
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2014 at 23:35
All of them in proportional measure.

The whens, hows, and whys are well known. The better question perhaps is when did any of them specifically impact the war effort and why. And that in and of itself is again based on the when initially.


Tactical-Strategic-logistic-Command and Control-Operational Planning-Leadership-Motivation of the military and civilian population. etc.

And then there is perspective or aspect. In which arena of influence specifically are we addressing. To say generalship or the military is insufficient as then as now the Soviet military was an apparatus of the government...like it/them or not.

Iow. the system in effect didn't allow for individualism to a greater degree than what was tolerated by the same..that is to say Stalin.
One can then make the claim that he and his approved and trusted apparatchik clearly held sway and dominance.

The record clearly shows it.


In the end it always remains subjective to a degree.

CV


Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 18-Aug-2014 at 23:48
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
Sarmata View Drop Down
Consul
Consul

suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 314
  Quote Sarmata Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Sep-2014 at 00:17
Im not sure if I entirely agree. To make a case for Rokossovsky,

A passage from the book "Warsaw 1944: Hitler, Himmler and the Warsaw Uprising" by Alexandra Richie,
On 14 May 1944, Stalin summoned his commanders to formulate a plan of attack. It was the most ambitious task he had yet set for the Red Army, and he assembled an extraordinary team with which to achieve it. One of his greatest strategists was the complex and controversial General Konstantin Rokossovsky, who had recently proven himself both at Stalingrad and at Kursk. In his surprisingly high voice for such a bearlike figure, he told Stalin that his 1st Byelorussian Front should attack Bobruisk along both sides of the Berezina River, creating a giant pincer to hit the flanks of 3rd Panzer Army and the 9th Army, and then encircle the 4th Army and destroy it. Stalin, who believed that there should be a single thrust against the German lines, disagreed, and twice sent Rokossovsky out of the room to 'think it over'. Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and Georgy Malenkov tried to convince him to toe the line, but Rokossovsky stood firm, declaring that he would rather be relieved of his command than attack as Stalin wanted him to. After the third discussion Stalin walked over to him and put his hand on his shoulder. The room froze, with those present convinced that Stalin was about to tear the epaulets from his shoulders. Instead he smiled. Rokossovsky's confidence, he said, 'reflected his sound judgement', and he was to attack as he wished. Stalin also made it very clear, however, that Rokossovsky would be blamed for any failure.

Rokossovsky was entrusted to eventually be in charge of the battle at Stalingrad and he was largely important to Russia's Operation Bagration. Stalin in fact had said, "I have no Suvorov, but Rokossovsky is my Bagration."
The realtionship between Zhukov and Rokossovsky was one of friendly competition in my opinion, both having command over the other at some point during campaign. It should be remembered though that whatever disagreements they had they both always remained respectful of one another.
It should also be stated that Rokossovsky was larely mindful of trying minimize casualties as much as possible under his command. Most soldiers felt reassured when being put under Rokossovsky.


Edited by Sarmata - 08-Sep-2014 at 00:18
Back to Top
washere View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 08-Oct-2014
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
  Quote washere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Oct-2014 at 23:10
by far Zhukov.
Back to Top
Drang nach Osten View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jan-2015
Location: Wladiwostok
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 22
  Quote Drang nach Osten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2015 at 05:03
 My vote for Rokossovsky. My grand-grandfather served in his army. Though Zhukow was a great general too but not without the disadvantages of course. 
There is nowhere to retreat - Moscow is ahead of us!
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2015 at 19:00
Originally posted by Sarmata

Im not sure if I entirely agree. To make a case for Rokossovsky,

A passage from the book "Warsaw 1944: Hitler, Himmler and the Warsaw Uprising" by Alexandra Richie,
On 14 May 1944, Stalin summoned his commanders to formulate a plan of attack. It was the most ambitious task he had yet set for the Red Army, and he assembled an extraordinary team with which to achieve it. One of his greatest strategists was the complex and controversial General Konstantin Rokossovsky, who had recently proven himself both at Stalingrad and at Kursk. In his surprisingly high voice for such a bearlike figure, he told Stalin that his 1st Byelorussian Front should attack Bobruisk along both sides of the Berezina River, creating a giant pincer to hit the flanks of 3rd Panzer Army and the 9th Army, and then encircle the 4th Army and destroy it. Stalin, who believed that there should be a single thrust against the German lines, disagreed, and twice sent Rokossovsky out of the room to 'think it over'. Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and Georgy Malenkov tried to convince him to toe the line, but Rokossovsky stood firm, declaring that he would rather be relieved of his command than attack as Stalin wanted him to. After the third discussion Stalin walked over to him and put his hand on his shoulder. The room froze, with those present convinced that Stalin was about to tear the epaulets from his shoulders. Instead he smiled. Rokossovsky's confidence, he said, 'reflected his sound judgement', and he was to attack as he wished. Stalin also made it very clear, however, that Rokossovsky would be blamed for any failure.

Rokossovsky was entrusted to eventually be in charge of the battle at Stalingrad and he was largely important to Russia's Operation Bagration. Stalin in fact had said, "I have no Suvorov, but Rokossovsky is my Bagration."
The realtionship between Zhukov and Rokossovsky was one of friendly competition in my opinion, both having command over the other at some point during campaign. It should be remembered though that whatever disagreements they had they both always remained respectful of one another.
It should also be stated that Rokossovsky was larely mindful of trying minimize casualties as much as possible under his command. Most soldiers felt reassured when being put under Rokossovsky.


Much the same adulation can be given to Zhukov as evidenced by known and respected Allied leaders at the conclusion of the conflict.

For an excellent work on him see: ''Stalin’s General: The Life of Georgy Zhukov''.... by Geoffrey Roberts.
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.