Competence of Romanian Generals

[mabadesc]

A couple of years ago, MAPN conducted a poll among active officers as well as veterans. Among the questions posed, one of them was to name the most worthy Romanian generals from 1830 - 1989. Criteria for being "the best" consisted in competence, morality, bravery, patriotism. The results were as follows:

1. Ion Dragalina
2. Alexandru Averescu
3. Eremia Grigorescu
4. Constantin Prezan
5. Vasile Milea
6. Stefan Gusa
7. Gheorghe Avramescu
8. Leonard Mochiulschi
9. Nicolae Sova

Since this is a WWII forum, let's eliminate pre-WWII and post-WWII generals and focus on the commanders active during the war. The list then becomes (according to number of votes):

1. Ion Dragalina
2. Gheorghe Avramescu
3. Leonard Mochiulschi
4. Nicolae Sova.

What do you think of the list? Any additions you think should be made?

Personally, I don't understand how Dascalescu and Dumitrache were ommited. The first was an example of morality and competence, while the second was the image of bravery and heroism.

Let's get some opinions going.

P.S. The poll was conducted by Cpt. Marian Predoaica through the MAPN, and the article indicating the results was also authored by Cpt. Predoaica and entitled "Comandantul si Calitatile Sale".

[Victor]

QUOTE

Since this is a WWII forum, let's eliminate pre-WWII and post-WWII generals and focus on the commanders active during the war.  The list then becomes (according to number of votes): 1.  Ion Dragalina 2.  Gheorghe Avramescu 3.  Leonard Mochiulschi 4.  Nicolae Sova.

Then why did you leave WWI hero Ioan Dragalina there? :?: He was KIA in 1916.

[Florin]

QUOTE

Then why did you leave WWI hero Ioan Dragalina there?  :?:  He was KIA in 1916.

Victor is right.

And if we start a discussion about the best Romanian generals of the modern times, why we should forget the WWI?
Especially when we think that the doctrine and ideas of the leadership of the Romanian Army at the eve of 1941 was still close to the one of WWI. The infantry was still seen as the backbone of the army. In 1940-1941 the world was still in the process of learning from the fall of France, and from Blitzkrieg in general.

Saying this, I think Averescu was a great general: the mastermind of organizing the Romanian Army at the beginning of the 20th century, the mastermind of the successful rapid campaign against Bulgaria in 1913, and an important figure of WWI.
Well, he was also politician, but let not mix them.

Florin

[mabadesc]

1. About Ion Dragalina, sorry, I confused him with CORNELIU Dragalina, WWII commander of 6th corps.

2. About including WWI generals, I'm all in favor of it. I just thought users on this forum wanted to discuss mainly WWII topics...

So, getting back to the issue, WWI included, let's get this discussion going. I'm sure everyone has a favorite officer who's not on the list. Personally, mine are Dascalescu and Dumitrache.

Opinions, comments, agreements, disagreements?

[Florin]

QUOTE

..........I'm sure everyone has a favorite officer who's not on the list.  Personally, mine are Dascalescu and Dumitrache. ................................

Hi,

General Dumitrache, the leader of the division which included my grandfather, was quite a figure. . .

I wrote few posts about his Russian driver, but this just a "spice", not important in the general picture.

The troops under his command really liked him, and respected him.

He was a short stature man, but not shy in making his points. Few times he successfully argued with German generals about the mistreating of Romanian troops on the Russian front.

The following is well known: His division conquered Nalchik in 1942, the furtherst advance point ever to be reached by an Axis unit on the Eastern Front.

Regards,
Florin

[Victor]

QUOTE

QUOTE Then why did you leave WWI hero Ioan Dragalina there?  :?:  He was KIA in 1916. Victor is right.

Actually my idea was different. I was drawing attention to the fact that Ion Dragalina was not a WWII general. Corneliu Dragalina was.

Yes, Dascalescu should also have been on that list, as he was one of the most capable commanders we had. I would also like to nominate brig. gen. Corneliu Teodorini and Radu Korne (we can't leave the cavalry out, can we? ).

[Der Maresal]

Shouldn't Antonescu be on the list as well? He was a General AND a Marshall, he was in World War 1 AND in World War II. And also I think he qualifies somewhat for the qualities mentioned above,...I think he had a bit from each one of these (ie: competence, morality, bravery, patriotism...etc ...etc) :shock:


:?: well?

"We've forgotten about him..haven't we"

*PS: by the way, I found another Aviator in my familly, (WW2!!!) His name was Gogu Antonescu(tough I'm sure he's not related to the famous Marshall.. ) Victor and Dénes, plese help.
:roll:

[Dénes]

Was 'Gogu' the nick-name for Gheorghe or Grigore?

I havee found the following 3 entries in my losses database:
1939 Sept. 19 Avia lt G. Antonescu acc. la aterizare

1940 Aug. 27 P.Z.L P.37B Gr. 4 bomb. lt. pil. Grigore Antonescu acc. la aterizare tren cedat, capotat

1942 Nov. 23 He 111H-3 Gr. 5 bomb. cpt.obs. Gh. Antonescu+ disparut, nu se cunoaste cauza

Is any of the above airmen your relative?

[mabadesc]

Other generals nominated for the list by the officers/veterans taking the poll are: Nicolae Macici, Ion Antonescu, Constantin Rascanu.

Ironically, Antonescu is also present in the LEAST desirable/competent officer list (the "bad" list). Some of the generals present are:

Platon Chirnoaga - mentioned for cowardice (lasitate)
Constantin Teodorescu - cowardice on the front line ("lasitate pe cimpul de lupta")
Nicolae Tataranu - cowardice (lasitate)
Ion Antonescu - for being considered a dictator and "xenophobe"


I think this just goes to prove how divided and passionate most people are when evaluating Antonescu. This holds true even for veteran and active officers. They either admire him highly or they cannot forgive him for taking complete control of the country.
That's the reason it was possible for him to appear on both the "good" list and the "bad" list, using different criteria.

[inahurry]

What has the political role or the "xenophobia" (that's why Antonescu was married with a Jew, no doubt to study the "enemy") to do with military competence ? Mixing apples with oranges as always. MacArthur was quite xenophobe but was a good general and then assumed a rather dubious political role, so ? Ah, I forgot, the winners of yesterday and the "superiors" of today decide how long is a yard.

[mabadesc]

You are correct. Xenophobia shouldn't matter in this poll. But I wasn't the one taking the poll.....I just posted the results.
Personally, I think Antonescu was a very competent general, although at times a bit too stubborn in his views. But that's a different story...

[inahurry]

I wasn't thinking you are to blame on that, mabadesc, was thinking of the political intrusion within the armed forces or the fear of possible consequences if some military researchers get too close to delicate topics. Delicate for the rulers of today but necessary for military history and not only.