Greatest Generals of All Time

Ranger-75 · Post by **Ranger-75** » Sat Sep 29, 2001 1:43 am

Dan,

O'Connor was captured in 1941, whereafter the British offered the Germans about 30 captured Italian generals in exchange. Naturally, the Germans refused, but O'Connor was eventually repatriated and saw service in 1944-45.

If O'connor wasn't captured, Montgomery might never have attained the stature that he did.....

US General Gavin deserves to be added to the list. He took over in Korea after "Dugout Doug" MacArthur weas booted by President Truman. Gavin (I think it was him) turned the demoralized US Army around in a matter of weeks, recapturing all of south Korea and pushing the Chinese back into North Korea.

Gavin was airborne, by the way..

USMC General VangeGrift also deserves to be on the list. He was extremely effective in 1942-43 in the Pacific, often against superior odds. He was largely responsible for the development of the Marine's concept of "Marine Firepower" which serves them well to this day. Later Vandgrift was the Commandant of the Marine Corps. I don't know if he was airborne or not..

Lee belongs on the list, Jackson does not.

Marty 1 · Post by **Marty 1** » Sat Sep 29, 2001 8:57 am

Originally posted by Mike Santos:
Dan,

US General Gavin deserves to be added to the list. He took over in Korea after "Dugout Doug" MacArthur weas booted by President Truman. Gavin (I think it was him) turned the demoralized US Army around in a matter of weeks, recapturing all of south Korea and pushing the Chinese back into North Korea.

Gavin was airborne, by the way..

Wasn't it Ridgeway who took over in Korea?

New York Jets · Post by **New York Jets** » Sat Sep 29, 2001 5:43 pm

Originally posted by Marty 1:

Wasn't it Ridgeway who took over in Korea?

Absolutelty. It was Matthew B. Ridegway not Gavin.

AbsntMndedProf · Post by **AbsntMndedProf** » Sat Sep 29, 2001 11:11 pm

Chris Trog posted:
Absolutelty. It was Matthew B. Ridegway not Gavin.

I believe that around that time Gen. James Gavin, the past commander of the 82nd Airborn Division, was made the first CEO of the World Bank, and later went on to be the President of the research firm Arthur D. Little. At the time of his passing, he still had an office at Arthur D. Little's Acorn Park facility in Cambridge, Mass., where he worked as a consultant following his retirement.

Eric Maietta

Dan in Toledo · Post by **Dan in Toledo** » Mon Oct 01, 2001 6:48 pm

So lets figure this out. Everyone has named so many and why.

ROMAN:
Julius Caesar campaign in Gaul
Scipio Africanus defeat of Hannibal at Zama

BYZANTINE:
Belisarius reconquest of Carthage & Italy

GREEK:
Alexander conquest of Achemanid Empire

CARTHAGINIAN:
Hannibal

AMERICAN/CONFEDERATE:
Washington defeat of the British
Lee keeping South in the war so long
T. Jackson Bull Run, Chancellorsville
Patton N. Africa, Italy, NW Europe
Vandegrift Guadalcanal
Marshall Marshall Plan
W. Scott defeat of Mexico 1846

Dan in Toledo · Post by **Dan in Toledo** » Mon Oct 01, 2001 7:20 pm

So lets figure this out. Everyone has named so many and why. I think I have everyone from the list. Let me know if I missed them.

The question is: who is the best (or at least the top 3)? Why?

ROMAN:
Julius Caesar campaign in Gaul
Scipio Africanus defeat of Hannibal at Zama
Trajan conquest of Dacia
Gaius Marius ??

BYZANTINE:
Belisarius reconquest of Carthage & Italy

GREEK:
Alexander conquest of Achemanid Empire
Thermistocles Salamis

CARTHAGINIAN:
Hannibal perfomance in Punic Wars

AMERICAN/CONFEDERATE:
Washington defeat of the British
Lee keeping South in the war so long
T. Jackson Bull Run, Chancellorsville
Patton N. Africa, Italy, NW Europe
Vandegrift Guadalcanal
Marshall Marshall Plan
W. Scott defeat of Mexico 1846
Swarzkopf defeat of Iraq 1991

ARAB/SARACEN:
Khalid conquest of N. Africa 630s
Saladin reconquest of Levant 1100s?

MONGOL/MOGUL:
Tamerlane undefeated in building his empire
Sabutai Genghis' guy
Chinson Bayan Kublai's guy
Genghis Khan duh

GERMAN:
Manstein east front 1943
Guderian east front 1941
Rommel France 1940, Africa

SWEDISH/FINNISH:
Mannerheim defeat of Russians 1939/40
Gustavos Adolphus

HUNGARIAN:
Hunyadi Janos defeat of Turks
Ziskos ??

BRITISH:
OConnor defeat of Italians 1940/41
Wellington defeat of Napoleon
Henry V i dont know?

FRENCH:
Napoleon duh

RUSSIAN:
Zhukov defeat of Germans 1941-45

POLISH:
Jon Sobieski saved Vienna from the Turks

JAPANESE:
Yamashita defeat of British 1941
Takeda Shingen ??
Hidoyoshi ??

VIETNAMESE:
Giap defeat of Americans

I DONT KNOW:
Wallenstein
James Graham

MY TOP 3:
3. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson
2. Julius Caesar
1. Alexander the Great

Xcorps · Post by **Xcorps** » Tue Oct 02, 2001 11:28 am

Chesty Puller was a good Marine, and a good Marine was he.

(That wasn't intended to be sarcastic, nor was it an effort to make light of the topic, simply my favorite General, although most of his exploits were made prior to him having stars)

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: Xcorps ]</p>

Matthias · Post by **Matthias** » Wed Oct 03, 2001 12:09 am

How anyone can not include Patton as one of the greatest Generals of all time is beyond me. He marched his army over something like a hundred, a hundred fifty miles in three days, then beats the daylights out of the German forces encircling Bastogne. This feat is comparable to Hannibal's march over the Alps because it should never have happened. Both of these relied on the willpower of the two generals, as well as the loyalty of the men to those generals. That is a measure of true greatness in a general, the willingness of the troops to follow him. Of course, he also has to justify that trust with victories, a thing that both Hannibal and Patton achieved.

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Wed Oct 03, 2001 12:12 am

Hi Dan. I agree with Julius and Alexander ( no-brainer) but Jackson did not live long enough to establish a career. He was a great tactician and his Valley Campaign was a masterpiece but he wasn't in the "game" long enough to be challenged by capable opponents. Now Scipio was never defeated in battle and he saved the Roman Empire from Hannibal and Carthage. Hannibal was a brilliant tactician but was out-smarted on the strategy end and was finally out-manuevered by Scipio so Hannibal should be eliminated from the list. I'm not too familiar with Trajan's exploits but I think they were too narrow and not long-lived in their effects. [*]Gaius Marius: He not only defeated the German tribes and kept them subjugated for a hundred years, he re-organized the roman army and developed it into a conquering machine.[*]Giap: I don't think he defeated the Americans. I think the Americans defeated the Americans in Vietnam.[*]Schwarzkopf: Why is he on this list? His only opponent was a joke.[*]Marshall: George Marshall was a great statesman but I don't think he led a field army in battle.[*]O'Connor: is limited by the fact that his only opponents were the Italians then he was captured so he never was able to become a great general that he might have.[*]Henry V: Henry only had Agincourt and while that was a great victory, it has short-term effects and I don't remember any more victories by Henry V. Not really a basis for being listed with Julis Ceasar, et.al.[*]Wallenstein: don't know too much about this guy but wasn't he defeated by Gustavus Adolphus? He was a famoos general but I wouldn't list him among the greats. [*]The rest of the list seems resonable.[/LIST]

Dan in Toledo · Post by **Dan in Toledo** » Fri Oct 05, 2001 6:35 pm

I think Patton was on the list but I forgot to add him to the final list by mistake. He definitely should be on the list.

Someone else mentioned Swarzkopf. Personally I dont think he qualifies as one of the greatest of all time. He is fine general, sure but you are correct in that Iraq was a weak opponent.

I was only listing everyone's ideas.

Stonewall did have a short career but it was brilliant and busy. He won more battles in a few years than many other generals do in their whole careers.

bis71 · Post by **bis71** » Sat Oct 06, 2001 1:50 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 · Post by **Sultan** » Sat Oct 06, 2001 4:49 am

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 · Post by **Drex** » Sat Oct 06, 2001 7:10 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 · Post by **msvknight** » Sat Oct 06, 2001 2:28 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 · Post by **Sultan** » Sun Oct 07, 2001 5:50 am

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 <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

Sultan · Post by **Sultan** » Sun Oct 07, 2001 6:20 am

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 · Post by **Dan in Toledo** » Mon Oct 08, 2001 8:33 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 · Post by **Edo** » Wed Oct 10, 2001 5:24 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 · Post by **Drex** » Thu Oct 11, 2001 7:35 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 · Post by **Shiva** » Thu Oct 11, 2001 10:07 pm

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.