Originally posted by Orange@Jun 7 2005, 02:57 PM Allthough I am not overly knowledgable on the quality of the different outfits mentionned in this thread, I will agree that the finnish forces had some of the best infantry of WW2. Also, for what it's worth, I have always heard that the 2nd New Zealand Expeditionary Force(I don't know any of its inner outfit) was held in high regards by Rommel and that their infantry was very fierce and tenacious. [post=35115]Quoted post[/post] Not only did Rommel respect the 2nd New Zealand Division, but so did its adversaries in Italy. Kesselring once signalled, "The Allies are getting serious, they've put in the New Zealanders." One advantage the division had was that "extra" 28th Maori Battalion. After 1942, it had one brigade of tanks, with 18th, 19th, and 20th Battalions converted to armor. By 1945, it had three extra infantry battalions, with 27 Machine-Gun and Divisional Cavalry converted to infantry. Very powerful outfit with high morale and unity.
XXX Corp were definitely up there with the best. Has anyone read 'Irish generals in the Second World War' by Richard Doherty? Lots of options in there for saying who were the best.
Yah the 101st didnt win very many battles butwere there when it actually counted to the greatest so i would have to go with them
I would have to say the Japanese troops originating from the Kyushu area. Only the Japanese infantry truly followed the lines of, "fight to the last man," and their devotion to their country, as well as being adept to any form of environment would prove them superior against other infantry units, although they ultimately lost the war against the allies in the pacific theater, its amazing that Japan, with only one-tenth of America's industrial power, was able to prove victorious for one and a half years, and then withstand the enemy for another three.
Originally posted by ryobreak@Jun 22 2005, 04:56 AM I would have to say the Japanese troops originating from the Kyushu area. Only the Japanese infantry truly followed the lines of, "fight to the last man," and their devotion to their country, as well as being adept to any form of environment would prove them superior against other infantry units, although they ultimately lost the war against the allies in the pacific theater, its amazing that Japan, with only one-tenth of America's industrial power, was able to prove victorious for one and a half years, and then withstand the enemy for another three. [post=35617]Quoted post[/post] No arguments here. In most instances the Japanese infantry, especially the elite marines, were largely unstoppable until September 1942. In New Guinea, where they suffered their first significant defeats, it was only the failure of their own supply system, the terrible terrain and a better supplied enemy that defeated them. Rgds Tim
Originally posted by ryobreak@Jun 21 2005, 06:56 PM I would have to say the Japanese troops originating from the Kyushu area. [post=35617]Quoted post[/post] Japanese Infantry... did mentioned earlier on the other post.... particularly kagoshima,.. place where fine swordmans originated for centuries....
I think German infantry were the best in the war, due to traditional German obeidience to command and also to desperation later in the war. They felt if they lost, German civilization would also be lost.
(angie999 @ Jul 25 2004, 05:48 PM) [post=27074] Overall, though, I am going to nominate the German field divisions. Without the technical resources of the western Allies and without the sheer mass of numbers of the Red Army, soldier for soldier they simply outfought every army they ever faced and they did it with less of everything. In particular, the quality of the German junior leaders was far superior. And if they were frequently placed in a hopeless situation, then the blame rests with their higher commanders, notably Hitler. [/b] I agree with this 100%. Having served in the modern american army for 8 years I can say that it is a fact that our modern army still incorporates many of the tactics developed by the Wehrmacht. Soldier for soldier they were indeed the superior fighter. My order would go like this of the major powers. (leaving smaller nations like Finaland out) 1) Germany 2) England 3) Russian 4) American 5) Japanesse 6) China 7) Italy But #'s 2-4 were very close and there sint much seperation.
German Waffen SS grenaders were best/first. Especially units that was staffed with the solder from those countrys that Soviet Union occupied in 1939. They were full of angry against the red army. If they didnt´t won the war then surely have change to pay back! I agreed about Finnish! They were good solders and protected they homes/country! But! They couldn´t win! Soviet would conquered them sooner or later in 1939/40 or41! Finnland also lost Hanko and Karjala! Soviets took the bases anyway! Next step would be! And finnish courage wouldn´t help them! That is truth!
I'm torn really....The U.S. 1st Marine Division was excellent. They fought on alone at Guadalcanal even though the U.S. Navy had abandoned them and held against everything the Japanese threw at them, even the Ichiki Regiment, Japan's most elite infantry, most hardened veterans from the China campaigns. The Marines were for the most part untested, and at the time of the Battle of Tenaru they were short on ammunition, and had been on half rations for quite sometime. Over 90% had by weakened by or were still under the effects of malaria. At one in the morning of August 21st Ichiki's men charged into the Marine lines. About 200 of the 700 killed never made it to the Marine MLR (main line resistance). The other 500 managed to make it within point blank range of the Marines where they were then killed by small arms fire, bayonets, and rifle butts. The Marines lost 34 killed and 75 wounded. All 700 of the Ichiki Regiment including Ichiki died. Next on my list is the 12th SS Hitler Jugend. For the most part they were under the age of 20, and also untried in battle. On June 7 the Hitler Jugend went into battle against the Canadians, their overall objective to prevent Caen from falling. On June 7 Panzer Regiments 25 and 12 held against an armored assault, destroying 28 Canadian tanks and wiping out a company of the Nova Scotia Highlanders for the loss of 6 men. They fought until their tanks were destroyed and then continued to fight against overwhelming odds. 17 year old boys would repeatedly attack Canadian armor with Panzerfausts and anti-tank mines. Sometimes nothing more than grenade bundles. By August 22nd the 12th SS consisted of 10 tanks, 300 men, and no artillery. They had started with roughly 16,000 men. Next on my list is the 101st Airborne. No need to elaborate much on this one as everyone knows their story. They took on the elite 6th Fallschirmjager at Carentan and beat them. They held out at Bastogne despite the fact that they were undersupplied, malnourished, had little armoured support, no artillery and air, and were under constant attack by German tanks and artillery. The entire division was awarded the presidential unit citation. The American 505th P.I.R. was another elite unit. In 1943 they held Biazza Ridge against an assault by the Herman Goering Panzer Division which was supplied with Tiger tanks. With no armored support the paratroopers repulsed the attack. The British 1st Airborne at Arnhem was also superb. They fought against odds as tough as the 12th SS fought and with every bit as much fanaticism. The paras held longer than anyone could have expected and would've accomplished their objectives if the XXX Corps had moved faster. Well those are my picks for best infantry.
(bloodytarawa @ Oct 14 2005, 06:36 AM) [post=40038]the crack troops from kagoshima, the same men who defended iwo jima, were definitely the best [/b] Welcome to the boards, BloodyTarawa! Do tell us about yourself!
I have to disagree with Dessert Fox on the Russians being superior soldiers to the Americans. The Russians were terrible soldiers, they just had large numbers. For the most part they were untrained conscripts given only the rudiments of handling a weapon. Also the Japanese Marines are highly overrated. When up against an enemy as tough as themselves (the U.S. Marines) they weren't nearly as effective as against poorly armed Chinese soldiers. The Japanese on Iwo Jima weren't very good either. They were fanatic and very brave but as for being good soldiers they weren't. The Bushido code isn't an effective military strategy as it only wastes men. The Japanese never inflicted more casualties than they received and were almost always wiped out to the last man. At Iwo Jima the Americans lost 7,000 men killed and another 19,000 wounded. The Japanese had 21,600 men killed and 200 taken prisoner.
In my opinion the whole red army where the best with defending Stalingrad. Also easy company from the 101st was so brave. When in bastonge even though they were out of ammo and outnumberd they held the line. Also there magnificent performance in brecourt. Thanks, Lt. Winters
(Dessert Fox @ Oct 20 2005, 05:16 AM) [post=40258](angie999 @ Jul 25 2004, 05:48 PM) [post=27074] Overall, though, I am going to nominate the German field divisions. Without the technical resources of the western Allies and without the sheer mass of numbers of the Red Army, soldier for soldier they simply outfought every army they ever faced and they did it with less of everything. In particular, the quality of the German junior leaders was far superior. And if they were frequently placed in a hopeless situation, then the blame rests with their higher commanders, notably Hitler. [/b] I agree with this 100%. Having served in the modern american army for 8 years I can say that it is a fact that our modern army still incorporates many of the tactics developed by the Wehrmacht. Soldier for soldier they were indeed the superior fighter. My order would go like this of the major powers. (leaving smaller nations like Finaland out) 1) Germany 2) England 3) Russian 4) American 5) Japanesse 6) China 7) Italy But #'s 2-4 were very close and there sint much seperation. [/b] Good on you Dessert Fox, I see you couldn't find a place for the commonwealth troops. Don't worry, I am only being facetious. I find "best infantry" questions to be difficult due to the uneven advantages or disadvantages that many countries infantry were presented with. Time, place, conditions, supply logistics, opposition, weaponry, support, good & bad Generals & Officers and planning structures etc etc. (Russia V Germany 1941 compared to 1943 & 1944)
Only 7 nations made the list? I would have thought the commonwealth nations like New Zealand and Australia would have been ranked equal to those of the rest of the Allies. Never saw anything that contrasted them from the British or Americans. That has to make them feel good. I would like to point out what I believe is a myth. That infantry was better or worse than the others. How would you ever know? If you were supported by artillery, air power and armor then you looked like a dominant infantryman. It’s easy to look good when you are overrunning a routed enemy. If the German's were the best fighters, then why did they get mopped up and driven back into their homeland? While I don't believe it was due to the fighting abilities of the German soldier, it certainly does not make a positive statement either. If there is an inference that one soldier is braver than the others, I think it would be difficult to prove and be very subject to opinions. You might as well ask who had the best uniforms. There is not an infantryman of any nation who body does not "sheer in half" when a splinter of artillery hits near them. Not a one that does not bleed to death when a bullet punctures an artery. All of them will fight until it becomes futile and the intelligent ones will surrender when it is hopeless in order to tie up the enemy's resources in POW camps rather than just dying for a "noble" reason. The Germans prepared their army for years. They had war in mind all along. They dedicated their nation to the execution of war. Had the other nations have done the same then the Germans would have looked unprepared. But I think you have to consider results. An intelligent soldier is of far more use than a brave soldier. The Japanese and the Russians were brave as to charge machine gun fire. And how did this accomplish their objective? The Germans fought with their lives to protect a cruel and insane madman. Was this brave or stupid? The Germans also were placed in desperate situations. This means they were forced to fight to survive. They often had no options but to fight. Does this mean they were better? Is it also saying that other infantry with their backs to the wall would not do the same? Do we exalt them because their poor decisions constantly left them in dire straits? Just something to think about.
