Strongest Wwii Soldier?

[hunter07]

Originally posted by GUMALANGI+Jun 22 2005, 04:23 PM-->

think you missed the point, this not about which nation is the best.. but simply which soldiers YOU think could outperform others with your own arguments,..

Quoted post

[/b]

It is possible, however, I don't think I missed the poin. I was trying to say that Russian, Germans, Americans, French soldiers are all the same. France lasted only a week against Germans. Does that make French the worst soldiers in WWII? I think soldiers are the same, no matter who they are. They bleed the same, they die the same. I think the correct question would be: which country had the best training? or which country had better resources? or which country had better logistics? or which country had better strategy? According to a couple of books that I've read British used to think that American soldiers were worse than Italians. I think it is completely wrong way of looking at things. Americans were just at a disadvantage because they had Patton on their side. (sorry, could not resist).
Something else to remember, there were a lot of different nationalities fighting for Germany: Romanians, Slovaks, Italians, Russian, Ukranians, French. As for the Soviet Union, there were over 200 different nationalities fighting in the Soviet Army: Russians, Ukranians, Kalmiks, Gergians, Chechnians, Polish and so forth. So, how can you determine which soldier is the best?
However, as I said, I might be wrong, English is not my native language and I might be misunderstanding the question. But if I had to answer the question as is, I am gonna have to say that Russian soldier is the best. Let me make an analogy. Alekhin, one of the best chess players at the turn of the century, when he was asked, why Russians make such a good chess players, he answer: "Russians are able to make a sacrifice to win at the end". We were able to sacrifice millions of people to win at the end and in my opinion any army that is willing to do so can not be defeated.

[cwcheng]

I suppose the strongest soldier has to be the smartest and also the luckiest to come out alive. From this angle, he has to be one with well balanced training, with brawn and brains, with initiatives, motivation and importantly knowing when the odds to the cut loss and run. The American soldier!

[nolanbuc]

All good points. As for myself, I can't even begin to answer a question like this.

[spidge]

Originally posted by GUMALANGI+Jun 23 2005, 11:16 AM-->

How about Iwo jima,.. 2400 death to 7000 US marine lost

Quoted post

[/b]

It seems from this that ryobreak posted these figures which as stated below are very much incorrect.

The official figures for Iwo Jima show:

Of over 20,000 Japanese defenders, only 1,000 were taken prisoner.

Casualties to the US Marines were 25,000 casualties, with nearly 7,000 dead.

Similar figures to those of Guadalcanal

24,000 Japanese - United States 6,000


Too many on both sides!

[ryobreak]

Originally posted by spidge+Jun 24 2005, 03:10 AM-->

It seems from this that ryobreak posted these figures which as stated below are very much incorrect.

The official figures for Iwo Jima show:

Of over 20,000 Japanese defenders, only 1,000 were taken prisoner.

Casualties to the US Marines were 25,000 casualties, with nearly 7,000 dead.

Similar figures to those of Guadalcanal

24,000 Japanese - United States 6,000


Too many on both sides!

Quoted post

[/b]

I don't remember writing those numbers?
The garrison at Iwo Jima, led by Kuribayashi was averaged to number 22,000. Allied bombing and malnutrition caused minor losses before the Americans arrived.

I don't remember the exact number, but I believe it was roughly 300+ Japanese soldiers taken prisoner in the battle there.

American fatalities were in the 6,000's, and if the wounded were included, the number factored something fairly close to the Japanese troops stationed there.

Points of reference--
Mt.Suribachi, 1200 Japanese defenders. After 6 days of fighting 150+ troops retreat, amazingly 58 made it back to friendly lines, although lieutenant Nishi came close to beheading them for being 'cowards,'

The meatgrinder was another place of heavy fighting, Kyushu boys (known to be the strongest + headstrong soldiers) protected hill-38, where they held their position for three days..

If the navy was included the American task force numbered over 100,000, compared to the 22,000 Japanese troops dug deep within natural caves + tunnels at Iwo... the outcome of the battle was apparent even before it began.

Historically, Iwo Jima was noted as the start of an inland defense- artillery no longer concentrated at stopping the enemy at the beach-- instead the strategy was concentrated more on causing casualties. Okinawa followed similarly-- American troops participating in operation Iceberg were surprised that the beaches were silent.

[ryobreak]

Spidge, It was GUMALANGI who wrote those numbers, not me. <_<
Please don't blame wrong numbers on me, I wouldn't write something (especially numerical figures) if I didn't know them

[Downeaster]

The "strongest" soldier would certainly be relative to the theatre in which he fought, wouldn't it?

[spidge]

Originally posted by ryobreak@Jul 29 2005, 12:57 AM
Spidge, It was GUMALANGI who wrote those numbers, not me. <_<
Please don't blame wrong numbers on me, I wouldn't write something (especially numerical figures) if I didn't know them

Quoted post

My apologies.

Gumalangi was the culprit.

[Stich]

Strongest? Could this question be more vague? Strongest what? Physical strength? Mental? Weapons? Tactics? Support?

This question is laughable as there's so many areas of strength.......

[spidge]

Originally posted by Stich@Aug 9 2005, 05:55 PM
Strongest? Could this question be more vague? Strongest what? Physical strength? Mental? Weapons? Tactics? Support?

This question is laughable as there's so many areas of strength.......

Quoted post

Agree with you wholeheartedly Stich. See my post #3.

The poster was pushing his own barrow, looking for a bite and he got a few.


Geoff