Was Stalin a good war leader?

Answer 1

I would call him an effective leader who wasn't very nice.

Answer 2

This is highly debated and opinional. Many consider Stalin to be selfish, ruthless, and a cruel tyrant.

On the other hand, many consdider him to have been a very effective and capable leader.

Answer 3

I think it's likely that Stalins defects of character make him out to be no good at anything other than what was good for Stalin. WW2 in the East was a huge conflict. The Russians suffered terribly, but one cannot help wondering just how much of the suffering was to do with Stalins internal politics & determination to hold power irrespective of the good of his nation.

Answer 4

He was a good war leader in one respect. He had just enough sense to let his generals (those he had not already executed) make most of the military decisions. Stalin seems to have had no more compassion for Soviet civilians than for his soldiers. Stalingrad could have been evacuated, but Stalin would not allow it because he believed the soldiers would fight harder for the city which bore his name if the civilians remained. Stalin's methodology certainly made more sense in the Communist mindset than it would have in most other countries, but in the end he was successful.

Answer 5

I would call him an effective leader who wasn't very nice.