I see Washington and Lee being quite the opposite. Washington was not a great tactician but a great strategist. Washington understood he had to keep the Continental Army alive in order to wear down the British and win the war. Lee was a brilliant tactician on the battlefield, but a disaster as a strategist. His two invasions of the north wasted resources the South couldn’t afford. His neglect of what was happening in the Western Theater arguably cost the South the war. Washington saw the big picture, while Lee was concerned only with a narrow focus on his own theatre.
In fairness to Lee, it is often overlooked that he was the leader of the Army of Northern Virginia.
Quote: “I see Washington and Lee being quite the opposite.”
It is the difference between an Eisenhower and Patton. But you do need both to achieve victory. You need the strategist who recognizes the need to address all aspects of war both on the battlefield and in the political arena. This is the person who sees the big picture and keeps his subordinates focused. But you also need the brilliant and daring field commanders to execute the plan and, where appropriate, adapt it to changing circumstances on the ground. As a nation, we have always been blessed from the start with having both components working in concert.