Which country's Soldier was most efficient?

Looks like we need a good defintion of efficient. You could phrase the above in such a way to make the opposite case as well depending on your defintion of "efficient".

 

Hello Iwd,

then you would have to change the headline into; Which country's Army was most efficient.

Regards
Kruska

 

Hello guys,

Just take a look at my avatar and you'll see the answer!

Well, here it is in bigger size, so you can see the actual figures...

 

Hello edhunter,

you mean RUSSIA?

Well if you want figures to decide then a comparrison of the German figures in all aspects via the combined Allies figures - the answer would still be the Germans

Regards
Kruska

 

No way, no Russia. Take a closer look at the figures, mate. The answer will come to you.

 

Hello, look at my avatar mate, just look at it... there's no need to arguing anymore...

 

What about Japan? After all they started in the mid 30s and lasted several months after Germany quit, not to mention it took 2 bombs to make them yield.

 

Japanese were fanatic, tough and really eager to die for their Emperor, but were they efficient? I don't think so. In my opinion their succes (if you can say so) is based on fanatic and really tough fighting will. To be killed after a hard fight for their Emperor was so huge honour to them so that drove them forward.

 

Hello Skipper,

good point, BUT - who did they fight?

China - no match at all
Indochina - no French troops really
Singapore Malaya - okay, well done
Phillipines - no US troops really
Pearl - a one day affair
Indonesia - no Dutch troops really

And after that - the Americans plus the ANZUC's were enough to push them back.

Japanese effient against poorly or non existent armies - thats about it.

Nope the Germans will and shall retain that title - maybe we share with the Finns - but just a bit

Regards
Kruska

 

Ok, we have a deal!

 

hölkynkölkyn, skool, kippis

Regards
Kruska

 

Anzucs?? aww ...can feel 'the force' starting flowing already ..lol

 

Talking effiency ..we Dutcho's held ze huns off for at least three whole days ..with just one tank wich wasnt even operative ! Hooah ! (...and then they cheated by potholing Rotterdam ) .

 

Hello Heinrich,

An efficient Dutch Army would have held off them Hun's for at least 3 and a half days - so no efficient sorry

But them (1000?) Hun paratroopers south of Amsterdam will be for ever gratefull to the Dutch for sending them to beautiful Canada. - many stayed.

Regards
Kruska

 

didnt even knew the Amsterdam area was involved in any activities in the blitz at all ..Besides some people seeing a few Fokkers in the air and a lot of noise on the radio it passed us bye quietly here .. Rotterdam, Den Haag and the defense line cities around the grebbeberg (Rhenen/arnhem) werent so lucky .

 

They were efficient in that they could work with very little yet get a good enough job done. After reading a few Japanese memoirs there are cases where leaves, bamboo, etc were used to make clothing, shoes, shelter, etc, ways to start a productive fire without letting off very much smoke, living off small portions, etc. Take Hiroo Oonda for instance, it took the world over 30 years to find the guy and even then it was because Oonda wanted the world to do so.

And then there's the infamous example of simply rushing at the enemy with your Katana in hand when you run out of ammo, have your back to the wall, etc.

 

You just knew I'd appear Kruska...You missed my grandad out...They beat the hell out of him too...Well him and his mates..Caused us the longest retreat in British military history..Mind you we were busy elsewhere playing at amateur war buggers for a while...But he did get together with some new mates and dodging the dirty spear traps retook Burma...Well not just him...Wltd45s lot helped too...And I'm sure one or two others...But yep the opposition was not anything like the Germans were facing at same time. Well I suppose when Germans first took on us in west it was similar to Japanese taking us on to begin with..We were not as good as we thought we were or we thought we should be. This takes nothing from Germans in Russia of course and resistance to west when we got our act together....Man for man....German soldier...Sailor I'll go Britain and Canada...but close with Yanks...Airman...I'll give it to yanks without doubt.

 

Hello urgh,

well thumbs up to your granddad - he fought in one place I certainly would not have wanted to be.

Efficiency (the ratio of input to output (RIO)- whereas replace output now with result) (RIR)= (the lower the input and the higher the output (result) defines the rising grade of efficiency) as such the efficiency by soldiers who in view of their equipment and logistics in numbers (Let's term it ELN) manage to get their objectives done (OD) before ending a war or surrendering towards the enemy.

The Finns succeeded in this and so did the Germans way better then the allies.

The allies never lacked (input), so where is their (result) towards their enemy's (RIR) and ELN? It was the larger input that assured any allied victory from Winter 1942 till 1945 - thus low efficiency on behalf of their soldiers.

It took the Wehrmacht to achieve its initial goals a meere 5 month of total action to occupy (Poland, Western Campaign, Balcans and Crete), more or less all of continental Europe besides Spain and the neutrals.

The ELN of the Wehrmacht did never exeed the ELN of the combined allies throughout the entire war. = high efficiency of its Soldiers

It took the Western allies with a huge input (Ignoring North Africa - thus counting from Tunesia onward) almost 24 month of total action to get to Berlin - thus liberating the former conquered German territories in Western Europe - besides missing out Holland, Denmark and Norway. = low efficiency

It took the Wehrmacht (IMO less ELN then the Soviets in 1941) 16 month of total action to reach their furtherst extend of occupied territory.= high efficiency

It took the Soviets with a huge input from 1943 onwards, a total of 40 month to fight off the Wehrmacht in their own country and another 6 month to get to Berlin.= total 46 month = low efficiency

Where is there any superior efficiency in comparrison to ELN and RIR on behalf of the allies compared to the Wehrmacht?

For the allies it is superior input and thus superior output which had a low efficiency in regards to OD

Hmmm.. ...does anyone understand me?

Okay example:

Taking the expenditure and output of the Axis and Alies as 1:2 - which of course was exeeded by far.

The axis racing team (Schickelgruber racing)-(two drivers) invested 1000 million $ to obtain 12 WCTitels - the German Driver took 11 titels, the Italian driver won the Abessinia cup )

The allied racing team (V-team)-(four drivers) invested 2000 million $ to regain 13 WCTitiels - Britain 2 titels, France 1 title, USA 4 titels, Russia 7 titels.

Now everyone will understand that the ALLIED racing team won the WC since they won 1 more race which also happened to be the German cup.

However who's driver (Soldier) was more efficient?
Certainly not an allied driver

Oh I forgot (Lappland racing) took a title as well

Regards
Kruska