(Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

bis71 -> (10/6/2001 4:50:00 AM)

I'm surprised none of the European members have mentioned: John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlburough, circa 1690- 1700
Helmuth von Moltke, the Elder, circa 1860 - 1870. It's come to a pretty pass when a Yank must remind you.



Sultan -> (10/6/2001 7:49:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Dan in Toledo:

JAPANESE:
Yamashita defeat of British 1941
Takeda Shingen ??
Hidoyoshi ??
Takeda Singen was a great general and the way he ruled his land was the model for Japans Tokugawa period. His strongest point was 1547 to his death in 1573. I really dont think that Toyotomi Hidoshi was that great of a general. Singen was a class above him.

One that should be in the list is Uesugi Kenshin. Hes the only reason that Takeda Singen didnt crush Oda and Oda's general Hidoshi. His battles with Singen are legendary. He was reguarded as the best general of the time by the generals of the time.



Drex -> (10/6/2001 10:10:00 AM)

I have to admit complete ignorance of Japanese generals so please enlighten me. It is difficult to rank generals across cultures. Was Japanese warfare in the 16th and 17th centuries more sophisticated? How did these generals win their victories? by manuever? by leading their troops? I agree Marlborough was adept at manuever warfare and should be included in any list.



msvknight -> (10/6/2001 5:28:00 PM)

I am absolutely flabbergasted that not a single person has mentioned Frederick. You know "the great" or Charlemagne. Surely the true greats are the ones who carved out an empire and then held it against all odds. Alexander
Gustavus Adolphus
Julius Caesar
Frederick the Great And with the greatest respect to Stonewall Jackson (who was undoubtably a fine general) he died before the Union marshalled their finest generals. How would Napoleon's reputation been had he died on the last day of Wagram and never went on to Russia and Waterloo.
Mind you. Like all of these names, this is purely subjective.



Sultan -> (10/7/2001 8:50:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Sultan:

One that should be in the list is Uesugi Kenshin. Hes the only reason that Takeda Singen didnt crush Oda and Oda's general Hidoshi. His battles with Singen are legendary. He was reguarded as the best general of the time by the generals of the time.
In Japan that is



Sultan -> (10/7/2001 9:20:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Drex:
I have to admit complete ignorance of Japanese generals so please enlighten me. It is difficult to rank generals across cultures. Was Japanese warfare in the 16th and 17th centuries more sophisticated? How did these generals win their victories? by manuever? by leading their troops? I agree Marlborough was adept at manuever warfare and should be included in any list.

I'd say its was at least equal to what was going on in europe at the time. Most of the great generals of the time had read "The art of War" and the armies that they fielded for battles sometimes numbered over 60,000 on a side unlike the smaller european armies. Takeda and Uesugi both were well versed in manuever warfare. Takeda had the most well trained troops of anyone in Japan of the time and if it wouldnt have been for Uesugi he would have unified Japan instead of Toyotomi and would have ruled it far better than Tokugawa did. Uesugi was a great tactical general and even though his troops were not up the same standard as Takeda's the five major battles they fought (all at the same spot, in different years) ended up as draws.
Toyotomi Hidoshi was more of a slugger and for the most part outnumbered his enemies and was just able to outlast people. One thing I will say is that Toyotomi wasnt noble born and worked his way up the ladder from a common soldier to being a general, then the real leader of Japan via a puppet.



Dan in Toledo -> (10/8/2001 11:33:00 PM)

General Vasey: thanks for bringing up Frederick the Great and Charlemagne. I cant believe I forgot them: I'm of German decent!! All in all this is a brainstorming list. With military history spanning thousands and thousands of years and 6 continents its easy to see why some get passed over. As for Stonewall. I still think he was a great general even though his career was abbreviated. The Union did not produce the calibre of Generals that the South did. Lee, Jackson, Longstreet, Stuart, Forrest, and others were all superior to their union counterparts. The best that the union produced was Sherman and Sheridan. If the South had the men and material that the Union did the war would have lasted only a few months. But you are right; its all subjective. SULTAN: wow that info on Japan was great!! thanks for the info!!



Edo -> (10/10/2001 8:24:00 AM)

Didn't you all forgot Sun Tzu Wu? And although Hannibal was defeated, it wasn't that much his own mistake, as it was lack of support from homeland. Carthaginians were only too happy to forget about him once he went to Italy, but were very quick to recall him back to Africa to repulse Romans, and quell internal rebellions. He was also betrayed by his allies who didn't show up (Nubian cavalry, I think).



Drex -> (10/11/2001 10:35:00 AM)

Hannibal maybe didn't have the support he wanted but everything was orchestrated by Scipio who never lost a battle. Scipio probably comes close to equalling Alexander in greatness. But Alexander and Genghis Khan have to be the greatest generals of all time in amount of territory conquered. Is that how we measure a General's greatness? By the extent of territory taken?



Shiva -> (10/12/2001 1:07:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Edo:
[QB]Didn't you all forgot Sun Tzu Wu?
[QB]
You know I read a while back that there was quite a debate going just how much generaling he actually did.



Heinkel -> (10/15/2001 6:33:00 PM)

How could be:
Ernst Ruben Lagus, commander of 1st jaeger brigade and commander of armour bataillon Lagus, that got itīs first battle experience on Tuulosjoki,sept.4. 1941 Vilho Petter Nenonen,also Finnish artillery general, who developed artillery techniques scientifically as well as technically. www.mannerheim.fi/tori_e/sivukart.htm
donīt be afraid...itīs in english.



mammoth_9 -> (11/9/2001 5:03:00 PM)

hello this is my first time and i would humbly add: Yue Fei, Song Dynasty, who almost threw out the Mongols from China until betrayed by politicians (isn't that usually the case) Henry Gurney and Gerald Templar, (the former was assasinated, or was it the latter ?) for what i believe to be the only successfull defeat of a communist insurgency



toundra -> (11/29/2001 8:39:00 PM)

3 Of the best French generals are missing =/ Duguesclin http://duguesclin.free.fr/page7.html Davout http://perso.club-internet.fr/ameliefr/Davout.html Charlemagne http://membres.tripod.fr/~apsall/Histoire/800_1000.htm
Oh and of course one of the very best
General Leclerc. BTW don't mention US Civil war Generals among the best, because they are certainly the worse...
The use of Napoleonic tactics with modern weapons give the result we know... [ November 29, 2001: Message edited by: toundra ] [ November 29, 2001: Message edited by: toundra ]



achappelle -> (11/30/2001 12:13:00 AM)

If I may humbly add Alchibades the Athenian general of the Pelopenesian War. Gotta Love a guy who whips one side's ass, then gets kicked out of his own city, joins his former enemies and kicks even more butt. Victim of his own pride and bad choice of friends(Polemides)



achappelle -> (11/30/2001 12:20:00 AM)

Also, in the classic general vein, Leonidas of the Spartans. Obviously his stand at Thermopylae is legendary, but he was in his sixties by then and had been campaigning, and winning for almost fifty years.



appunk -> (12/1/2001 10:51:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by toundra:
3 Of the best French generals are missing =/
How can you forget the latest but greatest of Napoleon's marshals??? Suchet!! Had he been in command over all of spain instead of just catalonia...



Oberbefehlshaber -> (12/2/2001 8:52:00 AM)

My two cents...
How can anyone forget Ulysses Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman..... In fact Shermans method of making war would be very "socially acceptable" today. Hermann Balck - consistently the most overlooked German General of WW2 ... Zhukov, Chuikov (for Stalingrad), Rokossovsky for the Soviets... LeClerc is NOT even close to being one of the best French Generals...that is an outrage! He walks into Paris and is a great general of all time??? NOT. Joss



Yabunchanatsies -> (12/2/2001 6:33:00 PM)

Without a doubt, an English plantation owner, name of George Washington. His campaign in New York was amazing. He was beaten time and time again, wound up leaving, making a crossing into New Jersey and encamping his beaten army on the other side of a ridge the British were on the other side of, he wound up with interior lines that his troops could easily respond to a British army which, normally could outmaneuver his, with it's navy. But twas winter approaching and the British had to go bye byes and retrograded toward (Philadelphia?? or Boston). How a general can take a series of defeats, with a thoroughly unproffessional force, while maeuvering for victory, as that guy did, just floors me. He is like a Chess master who trades his rooks and bishops for two pawns and wins the game because of some exotic trap involving a USUALLY disastrous exchange. Washington was brilliant, simply brilliant.



toundra -> (12/3/2001 6:41:00 PM)

About Leclerc
He is a PURE tactician and certainly one of the very best, if you don't believe me read more about him.
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/stephane.delogu/leclerc44.html sorry i have nothing in english =/
And now about Davout this is almost the same answer, he is an elite tactician too.
His victory over the prussian guards is simply awesome (auerstadt) (sp)



GuntherX -> (12/7/2001 11:57:00 PM)

What about air Generals. Adolf Galland comes to mind.



Blackhorse -> (12/8/2001 4:57:00 AM)

Allow me to second the nomination of von Moltke (the elder). He orchestrated the Prussian invasion and defeat of Austria in six weeks in 1866. In 1870, he organized the Prussian victory over France, defeating France's field armies in about two months' time. These rapid victories ocurred despite the use of the same weapons that made much of the American Civil War a war of attrition. Nor did the Prussians have a technological edge: in the Austrian war, the Austrians had better-quality artillery to offset the Prussian advantage in small arms (the breechloading "needle-gun"). In the French war, the Prussians fielded better artillery, but the French chassepot rifle was superior to the "needle-gun," and the French fielded batteries of mittraleuse (sp?) machine guns, against which the Prussians had no counterpart.



Blackhorse -> (12/8/2001 5:11:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by toundra: BTW don't mention US Civil war Generals among the best, because they are certainly the worse...
The use of Napoleonic tactics with modern weapons give the result we know...[/QB]
Actually, U.S. Civil War Generals are due some deferrence, since they had to discover the effects of these "modern" weapons as they went along. The best of them (Lee, Jackson, Forrest; Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, Thomas) developed effective new strategies or tactics. The "worst" generals would be those English, French, and German commanders who were still using Napoleonic tactics during World War I -- 50 years after the American Civil War had demonstrated their folly.



toundra -> (12/10/2001 6:06:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Blackhorse:

The "worst" generals would be those English, French, and German commanders who were still using Napoleonic tactics during World War I -- 50 years after the American Civil War had demonstrated their folly.

Hehe yes very true =/ (Mitrailleuse)



Fredde -> (12/10/2001 6:23:00 PM)

Hjalmar Siilasvuo, with weak Finnish troops holding, encircling and finally crushing two Russian divisions in the Suomossalmi area. This with extremely little air support, hardly any heavy weapons and facing a well-equipped tank-using Russian army. Isn't that a hero... ! Mannerheim.. for both Winter War and the Continuation War. Only two major Russian offensives that was halted in 1944 were both directed against Finland. Afterwards, he ended by throwing out the Germans as well.. Controversial perhaps.. good old Monty. Not as glorious and reputation-seeking as Patton, but one who really really knew his work. Excellent historian, slow and methodical approach, keeping to his own tactics and believing in it. What did he do? Stopping Rommel and throwing him out of Africa. Invade Italy successfully, after a very hard political battle to have plans after his own mind.. and they were successful. He went on directing the Overlord landing as well.. and of course, made it successful. His worst failure came when he for once abandoned his own tactics in Market-Garden.. but i forgive him Another often forgotten Brit in WWII is Alan Brooke.. keeping the ties together, fighting Germany all alone. Wallenstein. Should he really be on that list? Despite loads of money and resources he was not successful. When it comes to the Swedes. Gustav II Adolf was a good man yes.. but as military leaders I would rather push forward Karl X, Karl XI and Karl XII. All of them genious in their own way.. Karl XII, despite losing, putting Sweden on the same list as Napoleon.. Before that he did miracles with extremely limited resources.



JC -> (12/11/2001 3:30:00 PM)

And what about all these generals of the French Revolutionary Armies : Jourdan, Marceau, Kleber...etc... Building the bases of the Empire against all odds and overshadowed by another General(Bonaparte)later on in history ?



JTGEN -> (12/18/2001 9:48:00 PM)

I would put Siilasvuo in front of Mannerheim too, on the finnish side. And Nenonen sure was a great artillery general, job where few can make a name for themselves. But wasnt Napoleon artillery man originally? Good question would be also if the guy who led the south american independence battles. Name does not come to mind. Did he lead the troops in battle. And who on the english side came up with the use of longbows against french knights. That was revolutionary.



toundra -> (12/19/2001 8:16:00 PM)

Edward, prince of Wales, known as the Black Prince.
We have been beaten by Welsh archers and not by the brits Yes i know i am an hypocrite =P



Drex -> (12/20/2001 1:55:00 AM)

Wasn't it Simon Bolivar in South America?



Fredde -> (12/20/2001 4:14:00 AM)

Hmm.. just saw that I forgot to mention another thing about Siilasvuo. He did just about the same in the Kuhmo area after the Suomussalmi battle. Not as well known and reputatious as the Raate road battle, but also a great achievement. For those of us who know Swedish or Finnish, there are two books to read written by Silasvuo himself (have no clue if they have been translated to other languages). Take the chance to get to know this part of history.. extremely interesting. [ December 19, 2001: Message edited by: Fredde ]



JTGEN -> (12/20/2001 11:18:00 PM)

Thanks Drex, Bolivar is the man. My name memory sucks and I could not remember it. And thanks Toundra. Those bows sure were a revolution, and the french did get slaughtered at Crezy(sp).



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.1875