[Hootowl]

Kinda sorta disagree. Grant's campaigns in the west showed that he had a good grasp of both tactics and strategy. His campaigns in the east simply took advantage of the vastly greater resources he had to wear down the enemy in the quickest possible way. That, in itself, isn't bad strategy or tactics.

[NorthEastRepublican]

Grant was a great general in the west. He turned the war around.

Also a not about Washington. Washington was not a good general. He was one of the greatest Americans but look at is military history. Washington was embarassed everytime he fought a battle in the French and Indian War and he was bad in the revolutionary war.

If I had to make a list

Hitler- He fought 3 superpowers simultaneously. Had Hitler concentrated on the western front and defeated the French and invaded Britain, then he focused on Russia, he would have been victorious. Instead he fought Russia in the dead of winter and experienced the same fate as Napoleon. The Japanese then attacked us and the rest is history.

Napoleon

Robert E Lee-Best American

Patton

Hannibal

Alexander