For PanzerJaeger, comparing the armies of WW2

[rotorgun]

Rotorgun, call me a stubborn Finn, but please define best, before calling the Germans as best.

OK.....if you must lock me down then I will define best as most capable of performing combined arms warfare in WW2.
I will admit to you proud Finns, that after looking at all of the many excellent sources presented in your argument, I shall agree that Finland may indeed have had the best army in terms of consistent performance. Man for man the Finnish Army of WW2 was the toughest set of hombres in the land.

Have you ever played Advanced Squad Leader? (ASL) The Finnish squads are represented in the game as Ubertruppen who don't even need leaders to rally, have very good morale, and a good mixture of support weapons (many of the German) to equip them. They get bonuses for winter warfare, and most can use skis. Many of the scenarios are from the war with the Russians, and in most they are victorious if played by a competent player. They are a joy to play, and a challenge to play against. They just keep coming back at you relentlessly. If ASL has depicted them right, I would dread to face soldiers such as these.

Of course this is a matter of opinion, and I still feel that for overall innovation and technique, the German Army was the best. I can at least admit that I might be wrong however, and am glad to concede to one who argues so thoughtfully.

[Kagemusha]

OK.....if you must lock me down then I will define best as most capable of performing combined arms warfare in WW2.
I will admit to you proud Finns, that after looking at all of the many excellent sources presented in your argument, I shall agree that Finland may indeed have had the best army in terms of consistent performance. Man for man the Finnish Army of WW2 was the toughest set of hombres in the land.

Have you ever played Advanced Squad Leader? (ASL) The Finnish squads are represented in the game as Ubertruppen who don't even need leaders to rally, have very good morale, and a good mixture of support weapons (many of the German) to equip them. They get bonuses for winter warfare, and most can use skis. Many of the scenarios are from the war with the Russians, and in most they are victorious if played by a competent player. They are a joy to play, and a challenge to play against. They just keep coming back at you relentlessly. If ASL has depicted them right, I would dread to face soldiers such as these.

Of course this is a matter of opinion, and I still feel that for overall innovation and technique, the German Army was the best. I can at least admit that I might be wrong however, and am glad to concede to one who argues so thoughtfully.

Its a complex issue what makes men hard to win. I doubt that it is inherit to any set of peoples. When it comes to Finnish army of WWII, i would point two main reasons. First, the doctrine. When the overall command encourages soldiers to be creative from the single trooper level and show in their strategic decisions that they care about the soldiers they are commanding by not getting them killed in vain, because of heroism or stubborn principles which have no room in mobile warfare. There is enough heroism in dying for your country, there is no need to make heroes more then its absolutely necessary.
To point into this, my instructor when i was at petty officer school, put it like this:

"Motti, starts from a single individual soldier, if the enemy who you are facing cant predict your next move, you have the advantage, then its up to you how you use it. Out manouvering many men starts from out manouvering one man."

The second and more important reason in my mind was the early success in defensive victories. When a individual or group, no matter if its a squad, platoon, Battalion or a division, is successful, they start to think they are good in what they do and when a group thinks its good (in case its not hybris, but they have a reason to think so), suddenly it starts outperforming itself and indeed becomes better. When you combine, rugged training, with open atmosphere of inspirational thinking, with high self esteem and will to fight, such group is hard to beat, not impossible, but hard.
Now if Soviets could have been able to overrun Finnish like they planned in the start of Winter War, the morale would have probably collapsed and so would have Finland. There are many examples in history, when men from a certain countries have outperformed themselves, while in another war and time, have shown little spirit to fight. During WWII Finnish had the will and the determination to fight, but it doesnt change the fact that it could have been just as well otherwise.

But what i know for fact is that the "teräsmyrsky", steel storm like Finns call the fourth strategic offensive left a mark to every man who was there. As a little story i can mention my own grandfather, who fought both in Winter War and Continuation War. Before the war he liked to hunt, but when he came back from Continuation War he dismissed his hunting rifle and since then there wasnt any firearms in his farm. I guess he had shot enough for one life time. Also when i was a child i can still remember when some nights, in middle of the night suddenly he yelled in his dreams and that sounded like a yell of a wounded animal, not like a man yelling. I guess from that experience i think nothing creates pacifist like war, its just a shame that in this world we are, one can only hope for a peace, but have to prepare for war.

And about ASL, nope i havent played it. As Finland has still a citizen army,my experiences of Finnish infantry come from my military service in Karelian Jaeger Brigade as Sergeant of mechanized Jaeger infantry. Novadays im staff Sergeant in reserve, one more re-rehearsal and promotion to Warrant officer in reserve might take place with some luck.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Now .. a little bit off topic but I id the test what I found on the first page and ...

In which World War 2 army you should have fought?
You scored as a British and the Commonwealth
Your army is the British and the Commonwealth (Canada, ANZAC, India). You want to serve under good generals and use good equipment in defense of the western form of life.
British and the Commonwealth
100%
Poland
94%
Finland
75%
United States
69%
Italy
69%
Japan
69%
France, Free French and the Resistance
63%
Germany
50%
Soviet Union
44%

US and Japan are both 69%!!
Oh well .. it's good to be suicidal with good weapons .. right??

[rotorgun]

To point into this, my instructor when i was at petty officer school, put it like this:
"Motti, starts from a single individual soldier, if the enemy who you are facing cant predict your next move, you have the advantage, then its up to you how you use it. Out manouvering many men starts from out manouvering one man."

A very astute observation. I shall pass this on to my fellow NCOs and soldiers.

The second and more important reason in my mind was the early success in defensive victories. When a individual or group, no matter if its a squad, platoon, Battalion or a division, is successful, they start to think they are good in what they do and when a group thinks its good (in case its not hybris, but they have a reason to think so), suddenly it starts outperforming itself and indeed becomes better. When you combine, rugged training, with open atmosphere of inspirational thinking, with high self esteem and will to fight, such group is hard to beat, not impossible, but hard.

This reminds me of the mindset of some of our more famous units, such as the 101st and 82nd Airborne Divisions. They have a sort of never quit attitude that makes them difficult to defeat.

But what i know for fact is that the "teräsmyrsky", steel storm like Finns call the fourth strategic offensive left a mark to every man who was there. As a little story i can mention my own grandfather, who fought both in Winter War and Continuation War. Before the war he liked to hunt, but when he came back from Continuation War he dismissed his hunting rifle and since then there wasnt any firearms in his farm. I guess he had shot enough for one life time. Also when i was a child i can still remember when some nights, in middle of the night suddenly he yelled in his dreams and that sounded like a yell of a wounded animal, not like a man yelling. I guess from that experience i think nothing creates pacifist like war, its just a shame that in this world we are, one can only hope for a peace, but have to prepare for war.

Retired Major Dick Winters, of Band of Brothers fame, says he prayed after his first day in Normandy that if God would let him survive the war, he would "find a little piece of land someday and live out his days as a man of peace". This is exactly what he did, and a more gentle soul one rarely meets.
He and your Grandfather would have something in common.

And about ASL, nope i havent played it. As Finland has still a citizen army,my experiences of Finnish infantry come from my military service in Karelian Jaeger Brigade as Sergeant of mechanized Jaeger infantry. Novadays im staff Sergeant in reserve, one more re-rehearsal and promotion to Warrant officer in reserve might take place with some luck.

Congratulations! I too started in the Infantry many (too many) years ago. Now I am a Staff Sergeant as well in a National Guard Aviation Squadron. I hope to retire in 6 years. One or two more deployments should see me to the day.

[Kagemusha]

Retired Major Dick Winters, of Band of Brothers fame, says he prayed after his first day in Normandy that if God would let him survive the war, he would "find a little piece of land someday and live out his days as a man of peace". This is exactly what he did, and a more gentle soul one rarely meets.
He and your Grandfather would have something in common.



Congratulations! I too started in the Infantry many (too many) years ago. Now I am a Staff Sergeant as well in a National Guard Aviation Squadron. I hope to retire in 6 years. One or two more deployments should see me to the day.

Thank you for your kind words. My hat is off to you good sir, its one thing to talk the talk and another thing to walk the walk. (Hopefully i never have to walk the walk, because in that case the situation in world has changed drastically.)I have nothing but appreciation about the ones like you, who are ready to put their lives on the line, protecting their countries. I hope that you and your men will stay safe and one day when the time comes you can have your earned retirement and can pursuit other things in life.

[rotorgun]

Thank you for your kind words. My hat is off to you good sir, its one thing to talk the talk and another thing to walk the walk. (Hopefully i never have to walk the walk, because in that case the situation in world has changed drastically.)I have nothing but appreciation about the ones like you, who are ready to put their lives on the line, protecting their countries. I hope that you and your men will stay safe and one day when the time comes you can have your earned retirement and can pursuit other things in life.

That is most kindly said and gratefully received Sir! Thank you very much indeed. It's an honor to me to be able to serve my country. I wish it were for a better cause sometimes, but that can't always be helped. We fight for much more tangible things-the respect and love of our fellow soldiers. I wouldn't miss that for the world. We'll try to keep our heads down. With any luck, this will be our last deployment.

PS: I really enjoy our discussions.

[PanzerJaeger]

I would really like for you to give me one example of an Operation where a) Germans faced such odds,b) were able to move such percent of their forces across the field of Operations under battle conditions to another sector, c) Were victorious.

Well, first we must nail down exactly what kind of victory the Finns won. I would call it a tactical defensive victory, as the Finns defeated the Soviets by superior fighting skills (tactical), but only largley maintained pre-battle positions (defensive).

The Eastern Front is replete with German defensive tactical victories against much larger forces.

To begin, I'll throw out Operation Mars in 1942 - which gets way too little attention by historians. A Soviet offensive involving more men and armour than the much more famous Operation Uranus, and Zhukov's largest defeat.

Or, if you'd like a curveball that really demonstrates German coordination, even on a cross-national basis, how about Narva and Tannenberg in 1944?

I feel those examples meet your conditions as they were defensive victories against enormous numerical superiority where large movements of men and machinery were required to achieve victory.

But when it comes to the art of tactics,skill and strategy, or efficiency with the resources at hand, i cant accept your notion of Germany being superior, because if we want to go deeper into this we have the whole Northern front during Operation Barbarossa to talk about where Finnish and German armies were fighting alongside and comparisons of how normal Finnish infantry divisions performed compared to German Gebirgsjäger and SS formations can be easily made.

I would feel confident in comparing the combat performance of the original SS units against that of the best Finnish ones.

But that wasn't my point. The Finns simply did not engage in the type of large scale mechanized combat that required a higher degree of training, tactics, coordination and leadership - so I cannot say they were the best.

It is almost hard to compare Germany and Finland. Or the UK and Greece. Or the United States and Norway. The difference in the scale of operations is just too large.

I will say that the average Finnish soldier was the equal to his German all... co-fighter. ( ) That is a lot more that can be said for Germany's other allies.

[Veho Nex]

In which World War 2 army you should have fought?
You scored as a Finland
Your army is the army of Finland. You prefer to win your enemy by your wit rather than superior weapons. Enemy will have a hard time against your small but effective force.
Japan
94%
Finland
94%
Italy
81%
Poland
81%
British and the Commonwealth
69%
France, Free French and the Resistance
63%
United States
50%
Germany
44%
Soviet Union
13%

[LittleGrizzly]

I was 96% on poland and finland, the tiebreaker won it for poland, i like a heroic defense against the odds (in desperation)

[Oleander Ardens]

Personally I think that it is almost impossible to compare the performances of various armies given the vast inherent differences between them.

An example a statement from one of the first posts: Finnish conscripts were able to drive out German forces out of northern Finland even while they had to demobilize their army. So when even finnish conscripts were able to defeat the famous German army it must be the best of world, or?

And here come the problems in a whole basket. First what were the strategic intentions of both sides and the ressources on which they could draw? If you give a closer look on the specific situation on this front it is clear that a fighting retreat combined with delaying actions and scorched earth tactics was the strategic intention since there was the real possibility of the encirclement of the whole German arctic front. A possibility which almost became reality with a brilliant Soviet offensive, the Petsamo-Kirkenes Operation which started roughly a month after the first skirmishes between German and Finnish troops.

So one can actually say that the German army was able to preserve much of its fighting strengh retreating from a unholdable position and thus achieving its strategic intent. Equally the Finnish army was able to achieve their own objective by forcing the Germans slowly out of Lapland and avoiding a Soviet invasion. Ironically only the Soviet army achieved not the stated aim of their operation: to wipe out the whole 20th Mountain army. That they would push it into Norway was given in october 1944.

So how do you want to assess now the strengh of "the German Army" which consisted mostly of mountain infantry with no tank support and little artillery and wanted to retreat and used just a fraction of their strengh against the Finns because a mighty soviet offensive aimed at destroying them was under way and the "Finnish Army" which were mostly new conscripts, often underaged with light weaponry who wanted to drive the Germans out to avoid a Soviet invasion?

Actually there are some interesting papers concerning both the specific Petsamo-Kirkenes operation and German winter warfare and ski manuals which cover the adaption of German tactics to the specific challenges of winter and the various landscapes. I would highly recommend a read. Especially the ski manual might interest you, as it builds on German experience in mountain warfare, finnish expertise of the Winter War and insights gained in the hard winter battles against the Soviet. Especially in the Tundra there was beside the static warfare near the coast a very fluid winter warfare on skis and snowshoes full of skirmishes and raids.