Who Were the Greatest Military Commanders (Of All Time) ?

[Cyropaedia]

In light of the upcoming film Alexander (the Great), who in your opinion were actually the greatest military commanders our world has known...?

Mine are Genghis Khan, Alexander, and U.S. Grant.

[kennedy]

Patton.

[CondiArmy]

I think the question should be whether a cavalry troupe of 30,000 equipped with compound bows fighting under the Genghis Khan would defeat a cavalry troupe of 30,000 equipped with compound bows fighting under Alexander or Hannibal or whoever else.

[TFMcGuire]

Good inclusion.

[dougd]

Monty's defeat of Rommel was nothing short of brilliant, although I have to reconsider him as part of the "Greatest" list.

Schwartzkopfs envelopment and distruction of a large modern army in such a short time will go down in history as one of the greatest military actions of all time; comparable to D-Day, Shermans March, etc.

Franks, while I respect him tremendously, fought two pi$$-ant enemies with overwhelming force. A 15 year old paintball-battle-fighter could have done as well.

Monty's defeat of Rommel was almost entirely due to enigma intercepts. He knew virtually everything. Hard to lose when you get to see your opponents hand.

Schwartzkopf, I think, merely benefitted from a technological advantage with rather pedestrian tactics. Plus, if you include the months of aerial bombing preceding the ground war, it was hardly either a rapid engagement, nor a terribly large modern army by that time.

Franks too had technological advantages, however his enemies were hardly pissant - the first having defeated the Russians and every would be invader since Alexander; and the second only defeated outside their boundaries in a relatively small invaded area. Moreover, Franks had to accomplish his victories at incredible numerical disadvantage of 'boots on the ground'. His war plans truly achieved force multiplication by creative use of both his technological superiority, speed of operation and inherent flexibility.

[TFMcGuire]

Good inclusion

[NorCalRepub]

you're a pistol Mr. Christian!!!!!!!!

[McCloud-Strife]

Well since someone already stirred the Southerners, I suppose Adding Sherman to the list along with, Hannibal, Patton, Sun Tzu, Yamamoto, Cornwallace, and Caeser cannot do any harm.

[TFMcGuire]

Stephen Hall and Lord Nelson, too?

[jocon307]

"but I don't know if you can even be a great general when your motivation is a murderous tyrant like Stalin."

Oh of course you can be, look at Rommel, how many times he is mentioned here. This is a non-partisan thread, who is a great warrior, not who has a great cause.


A wee bit of Tennyson, shall we:

Theirs was not to question why
Theirs was just to do or die

I am sorry, but it is ever thus.

[RJS1950]

Alexander because he was a true leader of men

Sherman and Grant because they understood the enemy and knew what it took to beat them after others had failed

Lee because he was a brilliant strategist and leader of troops, but one who became too much like McClelland, a staunch believer in his own reputation

Patton, who despite his arrogance was able to lead troops in the field and make them want to follow his lead

Joshua Chamberland for the same reasons as Alexander

Napoleon, MacArthur and Mongomery are near the bottom of any list because they were arrogant self-serving, self-promoting asses who never failed to take the credit for the work of their subordinates who did the real planning and leading

[MagnumRancid]

Love him or hate him, Sherman was good at what he did.

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

this up coming film makes me so mad because of all the historical lies making Alexander look like a lover more than a brilliant general

Colin Farrell plays Alexander. I recently read that Colin Farrell was a heroin addict at one time - that's disturbing. Oliver Stone is directing - expect more fiction rather than fact.

[DuncanWaring]

I'm glad to see Curt LeMay made the list.

If you hadn't added him, I would have.

[mirkinmuffley]

Buck Turgidson. I liked him. But he could not stick to the point.

General Jack Ripper on the other hand was bad, bad.

[DuncanWaring]

For the Russians: General Winter.

[agesilaos]

I'd have to say Julius Caesar, Gustavus Adolphus, Alexander, and Napoleon. Grant was hardly a strategic or tactical wizard, Lee was too dependent on the incompetence of his opponents and once he faced competent generals, starting with Meade he collapsed. Rommel was an exceptional Army commander as was Jackson. Guderian and other Wehrmacht generals were also very good. But with the exception of Rommel they were products of their system, you can say our current generals are products of the current US system.

Other greats were Frederick the Great and Hannibal. For small theater warfare Paul von Letteck-Vorbeck never lost a battle and fought with odds 20:1 against him and caused 60000 deaths on the Brit side altho he never had more than 14,000 men in his force.

Agesilaus

[nuke rocketeer]

I would agree with that. Lee was better. Grant deserves commendation for his recognition that a bloody war of attrition was the only way to win an early modern industrial age war. The Civil War presaged WW1 by showing how a war between 2 big industrial powers would be waged.

[snowsislander]

Toyotomi Hideyoshi

[section9]

In the following order:

1. Julius Caesar

2. Alexander the Great

3.Feldmarschall Erich von Manstein.

4. Napoleon Bonaparte

5. General Douglas MacArthur

[Hank All-American]

I think Robert E. Lee is one of the most underrated generals in history. He certainly had a lot more honor than most of the Union generals (e.g., he specifically forbade any confederate forces from looting or pillaging and made sure civilians were spared harm). Lee was largely responsible for the confederacy winning most of the battles. That is not meant to take anything away from Grant, whom I also think was quite competent.

MacArthur was certainly someone I'd like to have on my team. Eisenhower wasn't too bad, either. Patton seemed to be a charge-the-objective, punch-a-hole-through-'em-where-it-hurts kind of guy, which I admire. We Americans love to fight, remember.

For sheer instinctive strategery, Spartacus sure managed to do a lot with a little. So he has to be ranked very high in my book. if you count him as a general.