Greatest Military Leader of all Time

Mark

Trying to leave a bit of wiggle room to include Admirals

Im voting for Alexander the Great for his almost constant victories during his reign- Crowned in 336 BC, invaded Persian empire 334 and campaigned until his death in Babylon 323 BC

That someone so young (died at only 32!) and somewhat...lacking in stature could grow to such heights(no pun intended) to create a great empire is a source of constant astoundment to meh

On a side note Alexander had a habit of founding cities called Alexandria after most of his battles (going from memory here may be inaccurate) and afaik theres something like 40 Alexandria's in the Middle East. Pwned


If I had a second vote Napolean would get it for teh sheer sex beast factor tbh

ykt0di9url7bc3

Zhukov would be my first vote...as the man who never lost a battle

Patton falls under that category too, his speed on the battle field is nearly incomparable......


noted exceptions
Wu Tzu..if he existed?
Genghis Khan
Lord Kitchner

Mark

Originally posted by SearrarD
[noted exceptions
Wu Tzu..if he existed?
Genghis Khan
Lord Kitchner [/B]

Hey give me a break here its hard to get in a list everyone will like

Though a firm slap to me for forgetting Genghis Khan. Not familiar with Lord Kitchner, perhaps a quick lesson if someone has the time?

ozt9vdujny3srf

Theres a few good generals that you missed up there, but you still put up Zhukov, so I'm happy. Ta

Manesni

heheh go rommel! damn that guy was good... to bad he was on the wrong side eh?

Manesni

Sev

Vlad Tepes (the Impaler) was pretty smart.

Mark

*raises eyebrow (Elrond style tbh)


Micheal Collins -23.08%
Alexander the Great -23.08%
Napolean Bonaparte- 0%

A bit of voting with the hearts instead of minds eh lads?

DadaKopf

Ghandi.

spaczed

mmm i would say rommel, or maybe even zhukov but my no.1 goes to Trotsky.

He was genius during the russian civil war, although he really expected a lot from his soldiers. It's a pity, it would have interesting to have had him in control of Russia in WWII instead of stalin.

GreenHell

Rommel, the dude was class and like your man said shame he was on the wrong side, you have to wonder how much longer world war 2 would have been if he had a free hand in europe.

Dunno why Micheal Collins is there, if I had to pick an Irish person to fit in with all those military people it would have to be Tom Barry.

DadaKopf

And what about all those slanty eyed generals who beat the socks off Uncle Sam and the French in Indochina?

Dónall

Mark said

A bit of voting with the hearts instead of minds eh lads?

Well, I was going to vote for Mick too, then faintheartedly went for Napolean.

Greenhell said

Dunno why Micheal Collins is there, if I had to pick an Irish person to fit in with all those military people it would have to be Tom Barry.

Tom Barry was more directly involved in the "action" on the ground of course. But I suppose most of us have that photo of Mick Collins in his nifty new Free State uniform in mind, or something ... and the film.
Speaking of great Irish millitary heroes there is Patrick Sarsfield, he ultimately lost of course but not without a fight. Or what about Brian Boru?:cool:

I had to google Zhukov, having never heard of him before. Interesting guy.

Manach

Nelson for his victories at the Nile and Cophenhagen, his campaign to make the Med. an English lake, and his final masterpiece battle at Trafalger, which broke the combined French/Spanish fleet.

I'd have voted for Wellington if he was on the list, or else US Grant.

-edit-
PS I bow to Dadakopf for reminding me of Vo Nian Giap, the Viet victor at Diem Bien Phu, brillant but brutal.

logic1

Kenshi Miyamoto Musashi.

.logic.

DadaKopf

Originally posted by Manach
PS I bow to Dadakopf for reminding me of Vo Nian Giap, the Viet victor at Diem Bien Phu, brillant but brutal.

That's the battle I had in mind. Vo Nian Giap was superb.

GreenHell

"But I suppose most of us have that photo of Mick Collins in his nifty new Free State uniform in mind, or something ... and the film."


To be honest I think the only time Micheal Collins was involved in the "action" was when he got shot. Oh ya and the in the impressive tactical display which was 1916.

ozt9vdujny3srf

Oh yeah, 1916 :P
Tactical genious, amazing stuff.


But more seriously, the guerilla tactics employed by the IRB in The War of Independance were very effective (as we all know). The hit and run kills were an excellent way to use the support of the populous.

Pompey Magnus

How about Saladin, the great iraqi military commander from the town of Tikrit (btw Saddams home town) whose jihad against Western invaders lead to the reclaimation of practically all Christian crusade gains in the region and routing the Knights Hospitaller and Templar . Also showed a hell of a lot more mercy to the Crusaders than they did to the Arabs!

CuLT

Isn't is obvious? The founder of Apple Computers...

Freeshack

its gotta be zhukov, pure genius,

also what about that guy from china or japan who wrote all them war books. sung zu or something like that (was he a military leader?)

Mark

Originally posted by Freeshack
its gotta be zhukov, pure genius,

also what about that guy from china or japan who wrote all them war books. sung zu or something like that (was he a military leader?)

One quick google later:

The earliest known work on military strategy and war, The Art of War consists of 13 short chapters attributed to a man named Sun Tzu, also known as Sun Tzi or Sun Wu. Little is known about the man, but it is widely believed he was an accomplished general when he wrote the text, which emphasizes surprise and deception ("When capable, feign incapacity; when active, inactivity."). The work became known in Europe in the 18th century, and something of a manual for U. S. military strategists in the 20th century, popularized by Henry Kissinger, among others.

And heres the actual text itself

The Art of War

Freeshack

thats good work there mark

i'll rest easy tonight now, thanx bud

Mark

Originally posted by Freeshack
thats good work there mark

i'll rest easy tonight now, thanx bud

Teh welcome

Clintons Cat

Ghengis Khan built and ruled the mongol empire that spanned asia and encroached upon europe.

Clintons Cat

I think Guardarian had the edge on Rommel,

Mark

Do you mean Guderian?

If so,while he did excel in the field with his Panzers (notably in France 1940 in which his rapid advance to encircle the Foreign Legion was a key element in Frances downfall), Id have to agree with Ragnorak_ie on Rommel.

His genius was unrivalled in North Africa and his character makes him an appealing figure

One programme I remember illustrated but a small tactic of his, in which he ordered a wooden tank shape built around Germany's regular jeeps and whatnot down in the desert, in order to give force the enemy to both overestimate his strength and grant them false targets.

Just a small yet memorable example of his brilliant mind

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by Freeshack
its gotta be zhukov, pure genius,

also what about that guy from china or japan who wrote all them war books. sung zu or something like that (was he a military leader?)

I dunno about Zhukov he never seemed that special to me. Just finished that book "The Fall of Berlin 1945" by Antony Beevor and he doesn't come across as a genius by any stretch of the imagination.

Clintons Cat

"Do you mean Guderian?"

yes appologies for the spelling.

The Guy Pioneered and championed the methods of Blitzkrieg,overran Poland and France and was responsible for the opening stages of Barbarossa.

Guderian faced numerous obstacles within the Wehrmacht’s hierarchy. He was told that an attack on Belgium and France would falter because of the river systems that flowed through the region. How could tanks cross rivers – especially the wide River Meuse?

Guderian’s plan included the use of specialist engineering units that could assemble pontoon bridges quickly that could take the weight of tanks and supporting vehicles. In this way, his Panzer units crossed rivers with ease

Link

Éomer of Rohan

Undisputedly Leonidas is the Greatest Military Commander of All Time, though if you really insist on this being based on victories and so on, then Sir Arthur Wellesey probably. As for Zhukov being the greatest, no offence Truckle but Zhukov was the biggest incompetent of Soviet Russia - he got things done by scaring the living beejeesus out of his commanders - one of whom far outshone anything Zhukov did - Chuikov - and even then, his approach to supplies and the logistics of war was often erratic - read Antony Beevor "Berlin, The Downfall 1945" for a good analysis.

Éomer of Rohan

[Intense Sarcasm]I am surprised no one has voted for GROFAZ (Hitler) [/Intense Sarcasm]

Talliesin

I think the comments against Collins are unfair. He developped tactics that became the stock-in-trade of guerrilla, terrorist and espionage groups the world over (including S.O.E. in WWII) and rather than place the blame for the failure of 1916 at his feet (blame the romantic fool Pearse instead) you should note his opposition to the attack on the Customs House.

That said I'd either vote for Saladin or Ghengis Khan.

I had been surprised that the Iraqis hadn't made more propaganda use of the example of Saladin, but then I remembered that he was a Kurd.

Gandhi is an interesting possibility. Maybe DadaKopf was joking, but even if Gandhi hadn't held the anti-violence beliefs that he did his strategy of non-violence was the correct one from a purely military point of view (assuming that the military point of view seeks to win one's objective, rather than get a knighthood and be buried in St. Paul's Cathedral).

When it comes to Axis leaders, I'd rate Isoroku Yamamoto above Rommel. Yamamoto did more with less.

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by Talliesin
I think the comments against Collins are unfair. He developped tactics that became the stock-in-trade of guerrilla, terrorist and espionage groups the world over

Like what? Some one recently claimed to me that US Militia invented these kinda tactics during the US war of independance. But I reckon they've been going on a lot longer than that. I'm sure someone somewhere was doing it against the Romans if not even earlier than that too!

But what specific tactics are you talking about?

Éomer of Rohan

As for guerrilla tactics and terror tactics and so forth, does no one remember Gideon and the Midianites? The Jugurthan War? The 1st, 2nd or 3rd Mithridatic Wars? I could give a list as long as your arm of wars which set precedents for guerrilla tactics and so on.

Flashman

Shame about Rommel alright, but how can you have a thread like this and not include Julius Caesar, the greatest of the Roman generals!

Éomer of Rohan

Julius Caesar was probably not even the greatest of Roman generals just the best known courtesy of Shakespeare. Claudius was a better General than Caesar, so was Cornelius Marius (though the latter is my opinion). Pompey in his youth was better than Caesar as well though by 49BC his youthful decisiveness and energy was gone, hence the outcome of the second civil war.

Manach

Eomer, I know we're not on first name basis, but permit me to disagree with you on a few matters.
Firstly, whilst Caesar did not contribue as did Marius to the Legion's tactial doctrine, he did conquer Gaul <his Commentries alone mark him out for greatness>. Also unlike Marius, he only lost one battle, whilst Marius was beaten by Sulla.
Besides, why bother talking about Romans, when the best ancient generals were Greek, Parmenion for example, who was the brains behind Alexander.

RicardoSmith

Have to admit I don't know my ancient history well enough. More of a WWII buff myself. Any good books on these guys?

Éomer of Rohan

Firstly, whilst Caesar did not contribue as did Marius to the Legion's tactial doctrine, he did conquer Gaul <his Commentries alone mark him out for greatness>. Also unlike Marius, he only lost one battle, whilst Marius was beaten by Sulla.

Are you confusing Cinna and co with Marius? Marius died before the inevitable conflict with Sulla occurred. It was his followers that then proceeded to fight the civil war against Sulla (and wiped out half the Senate for that matter!)
As for Caesar, you do not mention the comparison I made with Pompey - any ideas on that? I have read Caesar's commentaries - I am a doing an honours degree in Ancient History at QUB - but I still disagree that the 58-51BC Campaigns were really anything other than pacification - and he failed miserably in Britain. If anyone succeeded in Gaul it was Marius against the Teutones and the other tribe that was on the move at the time - I can't remember the name but I am sure it will come. Also, regarding Caesar, I think, reading Plutarch, there is a lot of exaggeration that went on surrounding the campaigns in Gaul.

Besides, why bother talking about Romans, when the best ancient generals were Greek, Parmenion for example, who was the brains behind Alexander.

My preferences for Greek generals lie pre-Alexander starting with Leonidas, Brasidas, Cimon, Pericles (especially if you count the political manipulations that he mustered), Alcibiades (who was undisputedly IMO the greatest strategist EVER but also one of the most flawed personalities), Epaminondas of Boeotia (who practically trained Philip II of Macedon in the art of war) and of course Pausanias (though this is really limited to the Battle of Plataea. I genially dislike Macedon and her generals, much preferring Athens and Sparta, biased I know but it is just a personal foible.

Éomer of Rohan

Have to admit I don't know my ancient history well enough. More of a WWII buff myself. Any good books on these guys?

For Caesar, read his accounts of the 'Civil War' and the 'Conquest of Gaul' or Plutarch, the 'Fall of the Roman Republic.' For Marius read Sallust's 'Jugurthine War' and for the other consulships, a modern book would probably be better and more interesting than contemporary sources. For Pompey, read Plutarch again, same for Sulla (though I think Sulla is in 'The Makers of Rome' possibly so is Marius - it has been ages since I have done that). For the Greeks, contemporary sources are the best with the exception of Thucydides 'History of the Peloponnesian War,' Herodotus' 'History' and Plutarch's 'Rise and Fall of Athens - Nine Greek Lives.' If you want something to read on Alexander's age, Plutarch has one called 'The Age of Alexander - Nine Greek Lives'

Éomer of Rohan

And Manach, you never mentioned the Emperor Claudius who far outshone Caesar! Compare the two campaigns in Britain!

Manach

Eomer,
I agree with you on your assessment on Pre-Macedon generals, though you missed out Themisockes (Salamis Commander).
A good book on the Greek Hoplite period,
"The Western Way on War" - Victor Hanson.

Sorry for any mistakes in the Roman era, as I am quoting from memory, and doing Greek History this year in my OU course, next year Roman. At the end however, it was Caesar who was victorious over the Senate's forces. His British expedition was really a raid in force (honest ).

Finally, I always thought that Emporer Cladius was more into making political descions rather than the actual military side, which he left to Vespasian or Platious(?? misspelt).
I am reading currently a fictional account of the 42AD Conquest, by Steven Scarrow, "Eagle's Conquest", recommend it.

stira64

obviously rommel cos he was completely outnumbered in north africa.

Éomer of Rohan

obviously rommel cos he was completely outnumbered in north africa

That is rubbish!! When Rommel arrived in North Africa, it was the British who were outnumbered by the Italians and yet still Auchinleck was kicking ass. Then Rommel pushed them back - using German reinforcements to Cairo from where the British the forced him back right to El-Alamein.

red vex

true. but when you see the extent of that push it still was a fantastic feat...this was the only offensive he made with superior forces. the italian were quite pathetic and dont really warrant much comment.

Éomer of Rohan

this was the only offensive he made with superior forces

It was the only offensive with much degree of success either!

red vex

hes not a miracle worker tho ....i think napoleon shud be higher up too. he seems to suit the word great military leader well

RicardoSmith

How does Napoleon rate. I don't know that much about him either. He seemed to get lucky a lot, and had some idiots as opposition in the early days. Once the opposition copped on he didn't fair too well.

Hairy Homer

This is a red herring. What really decides wars is the superior technology that one side can bring to bear over another. The Normans crushed the gaels because they had bows and arrows and the Paddies hadn't. The Brits/Yanks beat the Iraqis because they had guided missiles and plenty of them, and the Iraqis didn't.

The great humourous writer of the late nineteenth century, Hilaire Belloc, put it rather succinctly, talking about (I think) the Matabele war when a tiny British force subdued an entire African tribe from what is now Zimbabwe:

'Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim Gun and they have not.'

Of course the militarists didn't believe him. It was British mettle, values and discipline not to mention ferocious courage and a sense of fair play that was crucial in spreading the 'white man's burden'

The same moral superiority was going to see them administer a sharp lesson to the Kaiser when World War I broke out in August 1914. 'It will all be over by Christmas,' said the sages.

But to their chagrin they found out
Though they had machine guns, so had the Krauts'

Four years of utter futile slaughter ensued.

So the greatest military leaders ever are, in no particular order:

The bloke who invented ironwork - swords and spears better than clubs and cudgels.
The bloke who invented the bow and arrow
The bloke who invented gunpowder
The bloke who invented the firearm
Gatling and Maxim for the machine gun
The bloke who invented the submarine
The Wright brothers, for the airplane
The bloke who invented radar
Oppenheimer for the atom bomb
Shockley for the solid-state transistor
Kilby and Noyce for the silicon chip
And the bloke who put those last five together.

RicardoSmith

Utter tosh. Theres numerous times where superior weapons and technology haven't won. Vietnam and WWII are two obvious examples. Afghan war in the 80's?

Hairy Homer

I look in vain for a Vietnamese or Afghan candidate for the title.

Why weren't they, if they were the only people to beat each of the 20th century superpowers?

Zhukov Zhmukov.

Do you even know who the military leaders of Afghanistan or Vietnam were? Does anyone?

Éomer of Rohan

Ho Chi Minh took a large part - as head of the Vetnamese version of the Stavka, did he not?

hes not a miracle worker tho ....i think napoleon shud be higher up too. he seems to suit the word great military leader well

Napoleon was far too reckless to be one of the greatest commanders - consider the Russian campaign and then Waterloo - it was the sheer iron logic of Wellesley that broke Napoleon's Army.

Zhukov Zhmukov

Let's be fair now, the Russians weren't a patch on Guderians Panzers - nor was Zhukov a patch on Von Manstein, but yet the Russians annihilated several German armies.