Excellent General, casualties were lower then other Soviet commanders, Brilliant tactician and advanced the Soviet cause.

There is no denying that Zhukov was an adequate general, but I think he is overrated. Whether this is done for revisionist history or Russian propaganda, he did not have as a successful record in battle as others. He suffered heavy losses during several battles in Ukraine. He was probably the best the Russians had because Stalin exterminated most of the Russian officer corps.

If anyone deserved the title of "The Man who defeated Hitler" it was Zhukov. He defeated the Japanese (who claimed to be undefeated for the last 1000 years) at Khalkin-Gol. This victory not only caused the Japanese to never even consider attacking Siberia again, it allowed the transfer of 500,000 battle hardened troops to Moscow in Dec 1941 to inflict the first major defeat of the Germans. He saved Moscow and shortened the war. He saved Leningrad, and wiped out (along with Vaselevsky)50 German divisions at Stalingrad. He was the primary architect of Operation Bragation which is considered the best managed major campaign in WWII. When Stalin knew the Germans were all but defeated he made Zhukov lead a front (equivalent to an army) in the capture of Germany including the final battle in Berlin. He is accused of winning with high numbers of casualties but his rate of casaulties was lower than almost any other Soviet field commander.

The General who never lost a battle. First to defeat the Japanese at Khalkhin-Gol in 1939, where the Kwantung Army suffered 50,000 casualties. First to defeat the Germans in front of Moscow. First to place his country's flag over the capital of Nazi Germany. Not a lot more he could have achieved.

Pit Bull tough. One of the greatest tacticians in armored (tank) maneuver warfare. Winning Stalingrad has to rank up there with battles that changed the events of World History.

Zhukov WAS that good. Almost singlehandedly saved Russia, as most historians will tell you. He had to, because all the other decent generals had been shot. Zhukov himself came close on several occasions if I recall correctly. Anyway for those who think he butchered too many men, blame the soviet system, not the generals who often had their orders countermanded by their NKVD watchdogs..

I gave him a three because of his brilliant victory at Stalingrad! Other then that, the man was nothing more then a murderer! He sent more Soviet soldiers to their death then any other commander! Take Berlin for example: The Soviets had a 3 to 1 tactical advantage but they still lost 300,000 men! His brutal commanding skills at the Seelow Heights were shown. Berlin was the same, Chuikov deserved Berlin more then Zhukov did. If Chuikov had the same firepower Zhukov did, he would have made it to Berlin quicker! Zhukov had an entire Army Group at his disposal. Chuikov had a Corps and they still basically met at Berlin in the exact same time!

Fought for Stalin and Bolshevisn.

Probably not a military genius, but it's hard to think of a general with more guts and toughness. Here's a guy who had to deal with the German assault on Stalingrad, possibly the single most brutal battle of WW2, and - according to many historians - the real turning point of the entire war. If the Germans had taken Stalingrad, the theory goes, Russia might have fallen, and if Russia fell, then Germany would have been free to concentrate on knocking the British out of the war. So there was this bloody street-to-street battle in Stalingrad, in the middle of a freezing winter, with both sides short of food and medical care. Just about as grueling a battle as you can imagine, and Zhukov was the guy Stalin trusted to make sure the Germans were defeated. And not only did they defeat the Germans, but they used a bold pincer movement that cut off and slaughtered the entire German Sixth Army. Zhukov was about as tough as they come.