The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Leadership Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Greatest Military Leader Of All Time
Ad    11/30/2003 11:19:39 AM
This counts for everyone, from Hannibal to Paton.
My personal choice would be Wellington, as the only defeat was suffered in the siege of Seringapatam in 1799 when he was a 29 year old colonel of the 33rd. He successfully defeated all of Napoleans Marshells and the little Corsican himself.
However, if you disagree post your choice and your reasons. Cheers
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
StudentofConflict    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/12/2003 12:34:33 PM
Interestingly, in a recent poll featured in the Daily Telegraph, 27 per cent of Germans voted the UK as the dominant european power,26 per cent voted France, and only 19 per cent Germany. Compare this to ten years ago, when 57 per cent voted Germany. It is highly unlikely that the US/UK will become observers, given the fact they are separated from other major powers by seas, they would have no permanent commitment of land forces to defend their borders, thus giving them greater freedom of action. I think the UKs recently announced defence overhaul is a recognition of this. Also mitigating Germanies' growth in power is its lack of a nuclear deterrent. All continental European powers are also handicapped by their adherance to the outdated European Social Model, which with too secure job protection, limitations on working hours and overgenerous welfare payments has put them into economic straits compared to Britain or the US. It has also been the basis of US national strategy for the past century that no one power should dominate Asia, stopping Germany in WW1/WW2 and the Soviets in the Cold War. In a way, this is just the British strategy of keeping Europe divided writ large.
 
Quote    Reply

StudentofConflict    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/12/2003 12:38:25 PM
Correction:when I say Asia, I mean Eurasia of course. What price a 21st century strategic environment resembling Orwell's 1984, with three superstates/alliances dominating the world:US/UK (Oceania),the EU(Eurasia) and China (Eastasia)?
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aus    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/12/2003 6:21:45 PM
When I say observer, I don't mean it as a neutered geopolitical entity. It is in the context of being separate powers with a common interest. Irrespective of how Europe sees the UK in a "euro" sense, emotionally wouldn't you say that the UK still sees themselves as a distinct autonomous entity? geographically, as an island nation, the UK's perspective is different from europes continental neighbours. Its interesting for me as I see that the UK, US (emotionally an island nation as it sees as itself as isolated) and australia as an island nation all behave similarly at the political level. (eg the Iraq War in 99). Australias behavioural footprint has changed in the last 7 years. Australia is not a world power, but I think that its behaviour is a micro reflection of how our principle allies view the world as well. The world is not uniting under a utopic UN perceived model, if anything I see it as sectioning into 4 distinct blocs. For all intents and purposes those blocs will all have strong centrist leaders.
 
Quote    Reply

StudentofConflict    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/13/2003 1:25:06 PM
I'd say that Britain (or at least British people who aren't part of the decadent Europhile liberal elite)definitely sees itself as 'in europe, but not of it'. Culturally, politically and economically, I think the UK has a lot more in common with the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand then continental Europe. I think given Australia's recent raising of its international political/military profile, we will see these english speaking powers working in closer harmony. Just so long as the Yanks don't try and get us to play their crappy sports, I'd much rather Britain was the 51st state than a province of Europe.
 
Quote    Reply

Ad    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/13/2003 4:24:04 PM
Very interesting, but greates military leader, is an eclectic view of strategy, leadership and tactics. Theory? Talk as they say is cheap, or actions speak louder than words (which ever you like best). Time for me to sound the horn for good old Aurther. Wellington's strategy through ou the peninsular war was to keep the Spainish on his side. Napolean negated this issue and incurred the wrath of the Gureilla's. Wellington paid for everything, something Napolean also failed to do, which didn't indere him to the locals. Napoleans strategy in Russia was very amatureist. The fact that he allowed his supply chain to be come so stretched, his tactics at Boradino (the Ivans are other there, go get em lads) and they way he allowed his army to literally freeze to death in Moscow, shows that he wasn't all he was cracked up to be. There's a saying in football that your as only as good as your last game. Wellington was successful from his first real command at Seringapatamn in 1799 right up to Waterloo in 1815. Some 16 years of success, where he defeated the cream of Imperial France, with out a bleamish on his career. Impresive to say the least..
 
Quote    Reply

Ad    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/13/2003 4:27:38 PM
To drift into the sub conversations. I'd much rather keep my soverign status, than be apart of any other nation or organization! I agree with your points however. Interesting to see if Blair gets these red-line vetoes. Why he isn't holding a referendum is an insult to our inteligence and democratic rights. The only way i'll accept Britain as being fully submereged into th EU and using a single currency; is if they use the Pound and call it the British Empire!.
 
Quote    Reply

StudentofConflict    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/14/2003 2:27:55 PM
anyway, it looks like with the collapse of the recent EU summit, Britain's chances of being subsumed into an EU superstate have got smaller. Maybe its an irony of history that the Poles may be responsible for Britain keeping its sovereignty!.
 
Quote    Reply

Elite_heroes    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/21/2003 5:34:37 PM
um well I would choose the greatest military leader of all time would be Alexander the Great he didnt lose 1 battle and he was a genus plus a king and conquared an empire only Ghenis khans but see ghenis lost 1 battle vs. the Romans and i think Alexander had greater tactics and trust in his men
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/26/2003 1:52:39 PM
What battle did Ghengis Khan lose against the Romans? Given that about 500 years elapsed between the fall of Rome and the rise of the Mongols.
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/26/2003 2:00:11 PM
..What battle did Ghengis Khan lose against the Romans? Given that about 500 years elapsed between the fall of Rome and the rise of the Mongols ... I agree. I think he was probably referring to Attila the Hun at the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields near Chalons in 451. swhitebull
 
Quote    Reply

Ad    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/28/2003 8:05:18 PM
Yes but the Romans won that battle.
 
Quote    Reply

polyarmus    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/29/2003 1:16:23 PM
Problem with comparing military leaders from different periods is that the very substance of leadership changed. The "anciant" leaders were not only commanders in the field but also rulers or they greatly influenced development of the army (or in some cases they build the army) + we tend to neglect the influence of lower ranking "officers" - simply those people who were behind. This is becouse of lack of information about past + probably the influence of these men behind was smaller. Today? It is quite hard to be greatest military leader today, when the "levels of war" (strategy / operations / tacticks) are pretty much separated. Rommel for example was probably one of the best field commanders of all times, but to compare him with Subodai or Alexander Great is quite difficult - he fought where hi was said to fought with the forces he got from upper command with minimum chance to influence this. Or even in comparison with Wellington - Wellington was fighting the war, Rommerl only battles. I think that in the end you would pick someone from deep past - modern military commanders does not have a chance.
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   12/30/2003 4:45:17 AM
I agree, which is why I place Subotai so highly. He was a general, not a ruler. The Mongol army system was fully developed before he was in command. He just took the Mongols, split them into two armies and invaded Europe , co-ordinating 2 armies thousands of miles apart. The only reason that they didn't follow though and conquer the rest of Eurpoe was that the Ka Khan died and a successor was needed. All the main candidates were with Subotai but needed to get back to Karakorum for the vote. They went and took with them their private armies. This was a substantial proportion of the total army and there were no longer enough troops to continue the campaign, nor was there a Ka Khan to authorise the invasion. Christendom may owe its existence today to the death of Ogedai Khan.
 
Quote    Reply

Ad    RE:Greatest Military Leader Of All Time   1/2/2004 8:04:45 AM
That isn?t so as many Mongols, including Subotai (I?m not 100% sure) were Nestorian Christian?s. What was Subotai facing? A federal Russia, which was as rotten then as it was when Hitler invaded, and they only defeated Hungry because the Sarajevo bridge collapsed. Wellington however was facing the worlds ultimate power, commanding a small army, which was always able to out manoeuvre the greater French numbers. He was also able to win the peace, paying for everything and introducing the Provosts. Subotai lost battles, Wellington didn?t.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aus    Subodai - Ad   1/2/2004 8:36:34 AM
Did Subodai lose any battles? The issue for Subodai is that he managed to armies totalling a quarter of a million men thousands of kilometres away from each other with a conjoining outcome. Ie he planned a thousand plus kilometre flanking manouvre. The fact that he was studied with positivity by luminaries such as Napoleon, Clausewitz, Hart, Patton and even Schwarkopf is no mean feat. I think it was Schwarzkopf who tagged him a 20th century general in 13th century clothes. The mongol invasions were the precursor of jointness. That is not to belittle wellington etc.. but where as the english were defining what infantry would do in the early 1800's, Subodai was implementing cohort manouvre, artillery, ballistics, etc... In a real sense his art of warfare was the grandfather of establishing war doctrine. I don't think you see a field army displaying such a multiude of disparate technologies integrated into manouvre warfare until the advent of the american civil war. In the context of him being in the 13th century, that is no mean feat.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy