PDA

View Full Version : History Buffs - Millitary Commanders



Ltlabner
02-07-2007, 05:06 PM
Which millitary commander do you feal....

1) Was the most effecient/proffecient on the battlefield?

or

2) Had the most impact both millitarilly and historically?

HumnHilghtFreel
02-07-2007, 05:16 PM
Given those criteria, I'd say Sun Tzu.

reds1869
02-07-2007, 05:29 PM
Given those criteria, I'd say Sun Tzu.

I would have to second that motion.

dman
02-07-2007, 06:00 PM
Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, though he was on the wrong side.

UKFlounder
02-07-2007, 06:22 PM
Which millitary commander do you feal....

1) Was the most effecient/proffecient on the battlefield?

or

2) Had the most impact both millitarilly and historically?

What about Napoleon, at least for the 2nd question?

RedFanAlways1966
02-07-2007, 09:03 PM
(1) Gen. George Patton
> Despite his lack of people skills, he knew how to get the job done.

(2) Gen. Dwight Eisenhower
> Leader of perhaps the most important invasion in our country's history. Not only our country, but the entire continent of Europe.

Highlifeman21
02-07-2007, 09:17 PM
1. Ghengis Khan
2. Charlemagne (sp?)

SunDeck
02-07-2007, 09:17 PM
I'll second the nomination of Eisenhower for #2.
It is nearly impossible to imagine the magnitude of the invasion of Europe and skill it took to keep the Allied forces pointed in the same direction. And speaking of, although he's been severly discredited in recent years, I highly recommend Ambrose's biography of Eisenhower. I think it's probably his best work.

reds1869
02-07-2007, 09:42 PM
#2: It is hard to grasp just how big an influence General W.T. Sherman had on modern warfare. His early advocacy of total war (and his tremendous success with its tactics) foreshadowed things to come.

Newport Red
02-07-2007, 09:50 PM
1. Ghengis Khan
2. Charlemagne (sp?)

Ghengis Khan for his oganizational and personnel skills.
Jebe for sheer military brilliance.

flyer85
02-07-2007, 10:02 PM
Alexander

Ravenlord
02-08-2007, 03:03 AM
Which millitary commander do you feal....

1) Was the most effecient/proffecient on the battlefield?
MacArthur before politics sapped his effectivness.


2) Had the most impact both millitarilly and historically?

Alexander the Great as he formed the first true combined arms army. General Rommel's tactics from his book Infantry Attack! are used heavily in training modern armies.

savafan
02-08-2007, 04:54 AM
General Chamberlain, a personal hero of mine, tends to fly under the radar.

RedsBaron
02-08-2007, 06:23 AM
Alexander was called "Great" for a good reason. He meets both criteria.

ochre
02-08-2007, 09:04 PM
1) Stonewall Jackson
2) Heinz Wilhelm Guderian (From wiki) was a military theorist and innovative General of the German Army during the Second World War. Germany's panzer forces were raised and fought according to his works, best-known among them Achtung - Panzer!

Guderian pretty much owned on the invasion of France.

reds1869
02-08-2007, 09:49 PM
General Chamberlain, a personal hero of mine, tends to fly under the radar.

I've always admired him, but don't know that he is truly in the same league as men like Alexander, Napoleon or Rommel. His defining moment on Little Round Top was one of the more remarkable moments in 19th Century warfare, though.

OldRightHander
02-09-2007, 08:42 PM
Nobody mentioned Hannibal?

Ravenlord
02-10-2007, 03:27 AM
Nobody mentioned Hannibal?

Hannibal was brilliant offensively. but when it came to having to defend Zama and other battles in North Africa, he became outmatched by his slight better, Scipio Africanus. if Cano (Hanibal's brother) had been able to keep his Celtic conscripts from deserting, Carthage would have probably conquered Rome in the Winter/Spring of 148(?) BC.

OldRightHander
02-10-2007, 10:09 AM
Hannibal was brilliant offensively. but when it came to having to defend Zama and other battles in North Africa, he became outmatched by his slight better, Scipio Africanus. if Cano (Hanibal's brother) had been able to keep his Celtic conscripts from deserting, Carthage would have probably conquered Rome in the Winter/Spring of 148(?) BC.

I know he had his shortcomings, but I just found it odd that he didn't at least get a brief mention. If people are still studying his offensive tactics, that has to count for something.

Other than him, I would have to mention Lee and Jackson and maybe even Wellington to a certain degree.