Puller vs Chuikov (Round 2)

[Iron Brigade]

Curses! What a tough choice! They're evenly matched in my opinion. Maybe I'll close my eyes and chose one by pointing. Seriously though, what a toughy. I'm going to say.....Puller.

[Zapardo]

I voted the commy and CCCP hero

[Siberian HEAT]

Going with the Soviet on this one. Surviving Stalingrad is more than the equivalent of surviving Chosin - and then taking the ball to the hoop all the way to Berlin against fanatical defenders is the kicker for me.

Because his men were often forced into city fights, Chuikov did have to endure bloody campaigns - but he seemed to adapt his tactics to improve the survivability of his men (keeping close to Germans to avoid their artillery, fighting at night for the same reason, and using strong points to channel enemy attacks).

http://www.theeasternfront.co.uk/Com...an/chuikov.htm

[Axis of Evil]

Chesty... My honorary grandfather would disown me if I didn't vote for him.

[Swampwolf]

Originally Posted by Siberian HEAT

Because his men were often forced into city fights, Chuikov did have to endure bloody campaigns - but he seemed to adapt his tactics to improve the survivability of his men (keeping close to Germans to avoid their artillery, fighting at night for the same reason, and using strong points to channel enemy attacks).

But at the point of Stalingrad, how much difference did any Commander make on the will of his men? That was a fight for survival of a nation, and the heroes who held off for so long did so by the courage they gained from every victory they had, no matter how small it seemed, and from each other.

Puller inspired men in a way that no staff officer could imagine, and had them ready to fight as savagely and bravely as ANYONE in the world even on some island they couldn't even pronounce. He was greater than any officer the Marine Corps ever had. The Marine Corps is made by its NCOs but Chesty was the model officer that a corrupt government wouldn't allow, even though he came through still.

[tigersqn]

Originally Posted by Swampwolf

But at the point of Stalingrad, how much difference did any Commander make on the will of his men?

At that point in Stalingrad your commander is your only lifeline.

The commander, in a situation such as Stalingrad, is the only thing the men in those isolated, scantily supplied buildings can hope for.
That their boss will get them out of this fix or send them some help to hold out a little longer.

That was a fight for survival of a nation, and the heroes who held off for so long did so by the courage they gained from every victory they had, no matter how small it seemed, and from each other.

And the courage those men gained at Stalnigrad was due a great deal to Chuikov's efforts.

Puller inspired men in a way that no staff officer could imagine, and had them ready to fight as savagely and bravely as ANYONE in the world even on some island they couldn't even pronounce. He was greater than any officer the Marine Corps ever had. The Marine Corps is made by its NCOs but Chesty was the model officer that a corrupt government wouldn't allow, even though he came through still.

Very, very true.
Puller was essentially a Marine's Marine and he and Chuikov are both very similar in command style. That's why this is IMO a somewhat difficult choice.

I have to go with Chuikov though.

Chuikov put action into Stalin's words and inspired a nation by it.

Although, given the opportunity (and in some ways he did at Guadalcanal and Peleliu), I'm sure Puller would have done much the same, but his feats just don't measure up to the scale of the Stalingrad battle or the impact it had on the outcome of WW II.

[Swampwolf]

That's convincing. If they would have kept Chesty around, his impact on the Marine Corps would have been even greater. Now we are just running on his fumes. They should have made him Commandant and then General of the Armies (yes, like Washington). Then we'd have prevented the collapse that came in the 70's and wouldn't have anything to slide back into like we have now.