Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Great Military Strategists---
Herc the Merc    9/21/2005 3:13:18 PM
Plz list great Military strategists (Battle situations, not entire war planners or simply executors of the plan) & their work literary or literal..2 come to my mind immediately... Sun Tzu - Art of War Rommel, the desert Fox of course for his famous Panzer battles across North Africa.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
JIMF    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/21/2005 3:27:04 PM
The Master, Napoleon Bonaparte. Austerlitz 1805, where he defeated the combined armies of Russia and Austria is frequently cited as his greatest victory.
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/21/2005 3:33:14 PM
Slim 1944-1945
 
Quote    Reply

shek    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/21/2005 5:56:20 PM
This is easy. Braddock. He rules all!
 
Quote    Reply

mightypeon    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/21/2005 6:59:35 PM
Well, you exactly do you define strategist? From the ancient times I would say: Caesar, Alexander the Great, Aetius. Maybe add Herrman(the only one who permanetly defeated rome at its prime) and Perikles I am not sure about Sun Tzu, when it comes to the actual amount of warfare he was involved in, as the sources concering this vary greatly. For the middle ages, Dschingis Khan and Saladin. for the Renesaince/Absolutism: Friedrich II, Napoleon. Would have been interesting to see them spare off. Early Modern Ages: In General, this wars were more lost by one side than won by the other. I recon that the Prussian/German military leaders in this perios where quite good as they did not loose a single of their quite numerous wars. I do not know jack about the US civil war so I cannot comment on the Generals there. Wolrd War 1: Brussilow did have some merit, and independently from Ludendorf invented the "Stoßtruppen" Taktik. However, making a sound tactical invention does in my book not classify for beiing a great strategist. World War 2: Now it gets difficult: Several Nazi Generals have enjoyed succeses more or less unrivaled. The most feared German during WW2 was von Manstein, who, among other things captured a heavily fortified island that was garrisioned with more troops than he did have. He also masterminded the destruction of the french army. I would also rate Zhukow quite highly, in addition to beating the German forces back, he had also given the japanese a world class bloody nose at Calchin Gol (spelling?) which was a strong detterent from attacking Russia during the critic times of 41/42. Regretfully, I have no profound knowledge of the pacific war, and therefore cannot evauluate the prowess of the generals of either side. On the western allied side, Montgommery seems to strike out, however this war was decided on the Eastern front, (84% of German casulties have been done by Russians). Post World War 2: As their have been no decievly won wars between Nations of remotely equal power, it is hard discern a great strategist out of this period.
 
Quote    Reply

the British Lion    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/21/2005 9:52:03 PM
Well, first of all i'll agree with good ol' Albany and pick Slim as one of my top choices. Certianly the master of doing more with less... And while i'm busy flying the flag for the U.K, i'll add in; Sir Arthur Welsley, the "Iron" Duke of Wellington. Never lost a battle (well, unless you count a small night-time scirmish in the days before he rose to prominence) and the man Europe tuned to when Napolian re-apeared on the scene. Lord Nelson. The question stated "military strategists" so Nelson would qualify. Nile, Copenhagen, Trafalger.... says it all really. Okay, moving away from my ilses... i'll throw in the usual suspects: Napolian, Alex the Great, Gengis Khan, J. Ceasar, Atilla the Hun, Sun Tzu, Saladin, Rommel and so on so forth... But i'd also like to throw in General Lee (not forgotten to most American's i'm sure, but to many outside just a name). From my P.O.V, a more talanted Commander than Grant, and the north should count themselves lucky he didn't have enough rescorces or manpower... the civil war could have gone terribly wrong had he done. B.L
 
Quote    Reply

paul1970    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/22/2005 5:27:55 AM
Alexander, Caesar, Belasarius, Charlamaine, Ghengis... too many others... Marlbourgh, Napoleon, Wellington (has to get in for India, Peninsular war above Waterloo) Nelson. same as the other guys forr 20thC but Guderin has not been mentioned for WW2 yet??? maybe too low level...? what about air war guys???? do any of the WW2 mob deserve a mention or were their actions dictated too much by the circumstances... a question... can you really include someone who was in total charge of a failed strategy??? ie does Napoleon actually deserve to be near the top??? he was a great strategist and brilliant on field commander... but he lost... arguably to lesser ment than himself....
 
Quote    Reply

bigfella    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/22/2005 6:37:07 AM
I think we do one of these once or twice a year. I'll stick with more modern generals. Napoleon: Bad case of overreach, but it took his enemies almost a decade of fighting to match & eventually defeat him. Even then, without that disastrous invasion of Russia he might have held on... Wellington: Probably the only commander of the age to equal Napoleon. Showed the mark of a great commander by not only innovating intelligently, but by learing from both success & failure (rare though it was). US Civil War: This one throws up a bunch of brilliant generals from Army commanders on down. Lee was brilliant, though he had take long chances against a bigger enemy. Blessed with poor opposing generals until Grant came along. I rate grant as highly as Lee because he used his resources just as wisely. if he had been in command in the Penninsular Campaign the war would have ended VERY early. Jackson was a lunatic, but a brilliant motivator of men. Sherman was as good a general as either side produced. There were also brilliant cavalry commanders like Forrest, Stuart & Sheridan. Moltke: I think he is very much the forgotten man of modern warfare. Against a large & well armed French army he won the most stunning of victories. Brusilov, Hindenburg, Ludendorff: The only WW1 commanders to reach senoir level who showed much imaginiation or even competence (until the last 12 months, anyway). I rate Brusilov most highly because he led what was essentially an ill-armed & ill-trained rabble, and yet did remarkably well. WW2: Quite a few to choose from here. Allies - Montgomery & Slim are about the only ones from the British side. Patton was talented too. MacArthur was very able when his ego didn't get in the way, but he made too many mistakes before, during & after WW2 to really rate a spot here. At sea Cunningham swept the Italians from the Med (never underestimate the value of this) while Nimitz & Halsey gave stirling service in the Pacific, wiping out the Japanese from a poor starting position. In the air the only ones who really stand out for me are Dowding & Park. I have no time for advocates of strategic air power - a more complete mixture of incompetents, butchers & outright nutters is hard to find. Unfortunately Russian commanders are not as well known, especially air commanders. On the ground, however, they produced the outstanding generals of the war for mine. Rokossovsky, Chuikov & Bagramyan are just a few of the better known. Towering above all is Zhukov. Fought on virtually all fronts in WW2 and lost very few battles despite being in a terrible position at the start. As effective in defence as attack, and uterly ruthless. One of the few men who could contradict Stalin without being shot in the back of the head. Axis - The Germans had a crop of excellent generals. Unlike many, i don't get a hard-on for Rommel in particular. I don't think he was any better at his job than Manstein, Guderian, Model, Kesselring, Manteuffel, von Runstedt or Kleist. The Japanese had Yamaa, a general of rare ability who did a great deal with inferior numbers & crap logistics. I'm not so sure about naval commanders, but it is hard to go past Yamamoto for planning ability (though he wasn't a field commander as such). Post WW2: A bit harder to find here, as there are fewer 'conventional' wars. France finally produced a couple of outstanding generals in De Lattre de tassigny & Challe, though both fought in losing causes. Templar: ran a brilliant conunter-insurgency campaign in Malaya that the Americans were unfortunately unable to replicate in Vietnam (not entirely their fault). Giap: Turned a rag-tag bunch of rebels into a huge & well trained army & then stitched up the French with it. had less to do with the 'American War', but ended up on the winning side, which is all that counts in the end I suppose. Dayan: There should probably be a few more Israeli commanders here, but he is the only one I can think of off the top of my head. Given the numbers against them & the lack of 'strategic depth', israel's victories have been remarkable indeed. Any other post WW2 suggestions? I discounted Scwartzkopf because his forces were a generation ahead of Iraq (at least), likewise GW2.
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:Great Military Strategists---   9/22/2005 6:51:21 AM
The Under-appreciated and under-estimated General George Washington ranks up there. He seems to have been more recognized for his military ablities in Europe and Asia than in his own country. Even Mao studied him.
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    RE:Great Military Strategists---Shek & British Lion   9/22/2005 8:26:10 AM
Shek, I just sprayed coffee all over my computer and have to call tech support!!! Too FUnny BL, I disagree on Lee for a couple of reasons: 1. Malvern Hill Lee issued poor orders and failed to supervise his subordinates, he fixated on the hill top (with a bunch of Union artillery) and took 5,500 needless casualties. (BTW, Jackson comes out of this not looking his best, either) 2. After losing Jackson at Chancellorsville, he reorganized his Army into three corps from 2. His next campaign was Gettysburg. He failed to supervise and advise his 2 newest corps commanders, Ewell and Hill. And then he fixated on Cemetary Hill with a bunch of Union artillery on it (see Malvern Hill). And he failed to give clear orders to Stuart. I think Grant gets nowhere near the credit he deserves. Most folks have no idea what he was dealing with in the Wesern Theater and how much politics had to enter into all of his decision, particularly when he was promoted to lieutenant general and took over the whole shebang. I'll have more to write after mid October. I am attending a symposium called Great Controversies of the Civil War. 2 topics are "Confederate Defeat at Gettysburg: Who’s To Blame?" and "General Grant’s Generalship in the Overland Campaign: Butcher or Brilliant?" I should have something to say then!
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    RE:Great Military Strategists---Ambush   9/22/2005 8:26:41 AM
Good call...and I would add Natrhaniel Greene
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics