who was a better general, patton or rommel?

Answer 1

Both were overrated, but Rommel far more than Patton.
He beat the Brits, and they considered themselves wonderful, so he had to be even more wonderful. The same with the Americans when the Brits called them 'our Italians'. When the Brits got a decent general and the Americans toughened up, Rommel was finished.
In fact, he was a divisional general promoted beyond his capacity. He couldn't delegate well and during a battle he was always haring off and couldn't be found.
Patton was far from the military genius of the media, but he was a competent general. Rommel was a Prince Rupert.

Answer 2

First off Rommel was not a Nazi! He new how to play politics but had no desire second the movie Patton is a terrible source the movie is so inaccurate on so many level. For example the scene with the German tank division in the valley, the Germans did not move in those kind of formations. Just because Patton beat Rommel does not make him better! Rommel was absent towards the end of the North African Campaign due to illness but was called back when his replacement died of a heart attack. In summation both Generals were good but technically Rommel was field marshal but its the same thing.

Answer 3

Each were good generals in World War II. What people forget is Patton had an exponetionally larger amount of manpower, artillery, and tanks then Rommel had.

Rommel drove his Afrika Corps to Algiers and would have captured the Suez Canal (essentially cutting off one of Russia's major supply routes) if Hitler had given him the forces he requested.

Patton understood the importance of speed better than any other American general. However, he is know to have been selfish in battle. He sacrificed an enitre regiment to try and rescue his son-inlaw in a POW camp (which failed). A popular line from soldier's is, "Ya, he's old blood and guts, OUR blood and guts".

I would say Rommel is the better general based on his successes with inferior supplies and men. Although, many historians will tell you they are both overrated compared to other WWII Generals.

Answer 4

Both were great generals although they didn't meet each other at their best.

Rommel's best command was his breakout of his panzar division through the low countries during as Germany opened up its front with France. He pushed an undermanned faster and further than any commander did or thought was possible up to that point.

Patton's best moment was the 3rd Army coming to the rescue during the battle of the bulge. He disengaged an entire army and turned its flank and rengaged faster that anyone else every did or thought was possible. He did by staying in touch in intelligence reports for the entire theatre and having the forsight to see the German's counter attack plan. When he told the assemble staff that his plan to counter the Germans new offensive he was scoffed at. He did it and this was his greatest moment.

The thing to remember is their greatness comes in two different qualities. Rommel was one of this centuries greatest tacticians. He had a clarity of thought for how to respond to situations and how to gain tactical advantages. Patton was a great trainer and motivater. While Gen. Bradley was called by the press the "soliders General" when Patton died tragically over 1000 soilders volunteered to be pall bearers. He set up the tank corp for the US and we have him and Eisenhower to thank for the preperations we made on this front.

Answer 5

You're funny! Who won? Actually, they were both big admirers of the other, but clearly after his defeat of Rommel (by reading Rommel's book) all of Nazidom was afraid of Patton, for good reason clearly.

By the way, you should watch the movie "Patton." It won all kinds of awards and is regarded as one of the best war movies ever made. Ironically, it was written by the same guy who wrote (and directed) Apocalypse Now, also one of the best war movies ever made. That would be Francis Ford Coppola, by the way.

Answer 6

General Patton and Rommel was some what two of a kind.as general go. they could not get the backing they needed. if Rommel recived the supplys & men he ask for.Well thank God he did not. and Patton could have recived the supplys he ask for and if the outher units could have keep up with him.the war may have ended sooner.but that history now.we will never know for sure.

Answer 7

Rommel lost, patton won.

Answer 8

I would have to say Patton. But then again, I am a little biased being an American. Both were very skilled and courageous combat leaders, though.

Answer 9

yeah, patton won, but i think rommel was a better thought out general, even tho he was a nazi

Answer 10

I think George Patton was better, he just could take a deficient troop for a few weeks and turn it into a marvelous military prepared troop.