Three Military Commanders

[Azunite]

There was a debate between me and several of my friends about military commanders and we eventually tied up by Napoleon, Hannibal of Carthage and Alexander.

Napoleon was against the whole Europe and eventually he conquered his way to "ends of the Europe" ( that being Russia ) and found "Code Napoleon", his military successes are many but he also made many serious blunders.

Hannibal, as you people know, crossed the Alps with his war elephants. What you don't know is that he defeated the Romans three times. His last victory, Cannae, is considered one of the greatest tactical feats and annihilations in military history, destroying the entire Roman army while being outnumbered 2 to 1. Unfortunately, like Maharbal said "He did not know how to use a victory" and eventually got beaten at Zama.

Alexander, with his small army, departed for Persia, his sole aim conquering the "known world". His first great military victory against King Darius III was the Battle of Issus, the second one being Gaugamela. It's one of my favourite battles in world history. With his battle, Alexander proved that he is one of the greatest military commanders in the world. It is one of the few battles that timing was so brilliant that it eventually led to the full rout of enemy's forces. His untimely dead, unfortunately, led to his empire's collapse, torn asunder by his lusty generals.

[huginnmuninn]

http://listverse.com/2008/10/11/top-10-most-successful-military-commanders/

i personally like this list. the three you mentioned are in it and many more very good military commanders

[Syntax]

IMO, my best generals (in no particular order) are Aleksandr Suvorov, George S. Patton and Alexander the Great.

[Genghis Khan]

Genghis Khan was an asshole.

Fuck me oh great Khan you're so divine and great at military stuffs.

[Jean Poutine]

Napoleon was against the whole Europe and eventually he conquered his way to "ends of the Europe" ( that being Russia ) and found "Code Napoleon", his military successes are many but he also made many serious blunders.

As resident of a country that applies a modified version of the Napoleonic Code in civil matters I can tell you I wish he didn't invent it. :(

[huginnmuninn]

Genghis Khan was an asshole.

Fuck me oh great Khan you're so divine and great at military stuffs.

he knew how to strategize and he and his family created a land empire larger than any other in history.

and how was he an asshole?

[Genghis Khan]

he knew how to strategize and he and his family created a land empire larger than any other in history.

How does this not make him an asshole?

[Azunite]

Genghis Khan's empire is a lot different than others.

Normally, an Empire conquers a place, makes good use of it's resources, invests in the land to get more resources the next year, forcibly immigrates it's people to this newly conquered land to mix populations and prevent rebellions.

Genghis Khan simply raped, burned and murdered his way from Mongolia to Poland.

http://listverse.com/2011/01/06/top-10-military-field-tacticians/

[Maxxie]

The only good thing Chinggis Khan did was allow for a proliferation of trade between the West and the East. He was by no means a great military commander, only good at an early form of Blitzkrieg (i.e Horses and rape).

[Azunite]

The only good thing Chinggis Khan did was allow for a proliferation of trade between the West and the East. He was by no means a great military commander, only good at an early form of Blitzkrieg (i.e Horses and rape).

Which means...

Hitler reincarnation of Genghis? :O

[Syntax]

Actually, it was Guderian. Hitler was indeed good in persuading the masses etc. but was in no means good in managing a war.

[Azunite]

Actually, it was Guderian. Hitler was indeed good in persuading the masses etc. but was in no means good in managing a war.

Actually, when you look from a certain perspective, fascism is the shortest and most effective way to carry a country to a superpower status. Fascism efficiently destroys the enemies found within the state and people, enforces laws that speeds up mass production and boosts economy.

Of course, a fasicst country wouldn't be intellectually advanced, but hey, thanks to Hitler Germans are now the fathers of technology.

[trooneh]

Actually, when you look from a certain perspective, fascism is the shortest and most effective way to carry a country to a superpower status. Fascism efficiently destroys the enemies found within the state and people, enforces laws that speeds up mass production and boosts economy.

Of course, a fasicst country wouldn't be intellectually advanced, but hey, thanks to Hitler Germans are now the fathers of technology.

It was also Hitler's mismanagement of the war that doomed Germany. Declaring war on the United States, while invading the Soviet Union, while insisting on campaigning in Africa, while killing millions of able-bodied citizens? That sounds like a huge mistake for a country with the resources and population of Germany.

[Azunite]

It was also Hitler's mismanagement of the war that doomed Germany. Declaring war on the United States, while invading the Soviet Union, while insisting on campaigning in Africa, while killing millions of able-bodied citizens? That sounds like a huge mistake for a country with the resources and population of Germany.

Hitler didn't declare war on the States.

[trooneh]

Hitler didn't declare war on the States.

This says different. (http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/germany-declares.htm)

Though the United States was openly hostile on Nazi Germany, it was Hitler that officially declared war. Read any of the multitude of statements by people like von Papen and von Neurath in Nuremberg Diary, and you will see that it was Hitler's decision.

[Azunite]

This says different. (http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/germany-declares.htm)

Though the United States was openly hostile on Nazi Germany, it was Hitler that officially declared war. Read any of the multitude of statements by people like von Papen and von Neurath in Nuremberg Diary, and you will see that it was Hitler's decision.

Oh, I just thought the Americans supplied the British and joined the war with the Pearl Harbor

[Texas warrior]

If you want to learn good tactics learn how these men fought there battles

1. Genghis Khan, he slaughtered every thing he met , excepting Japan. If you take the time to learn his tactics you would know that he was a genius.

2. Robert E. Lee, his battle tactics were good, but thats not why he is number two. He is number two because of his ability to lead his men. Lee was a truly great leader of men and thats what lead to his victory's on the battle field .

3. J.E.B. Stuart, he is the best cavalier in American history.

Now before you call me a raciest son of bitch because I put a Confederates on my list, look up quotes from Lee and Stuart and tell me to my face they were slave owning kkk members.

[trooneh]

If you want to learn good tactics learn how these men fought there battles

1. Genghis Khan, he slaughtered every thing he met , excepting Japan. If you take the time to learn his tactics you would know that he was a genius.

This one is understandable, entirely. I believe Genghis can have a place on this list.

2. Robert E. Lee, his battle tactics were good, but thats not why he is number two. He is number two because of his ability to lead his men. Lee was a truly great leader of men and thats what lead to his victory's on the battle field .
Yet he didn't win the war, and though he was a great general, he wasn't on the level of many great generals in history. Think of the double-envelopment used by Hannibal at Cannae, and you know he was a strategic and tactical genius. Lee was good, but he wasn't top three.

3. J.E.B. Stuart, he is the best cavalier in American history.

This one is completely out of left field. What about Rommel, Caesar, Alexander, Napoleon? There are so many generals more qualified.

Now before you call me a raciest son of bitch because I put a Confederates on my list, look up quotes from Lee and Stuart and tell me to my face they were slave owning kkk members.

My problem with your post is how American centric it is. You should take into considering ancient and modern history in all the world, not just focus on one aspect of history, such as the Civil War.

[Texas warrior]

Yet he didn't win the war, and though he was a great general, he wasn't on the level of many great generals in history. Think of the double-envelopment used by Hannibal at Cannae, and you know he was a strategic and tactical genius. Lee was good, but he wasn't top three.


You my be right but I still think that Lees ability to lead men puts him in the top three.


This one is completely out of left field. What about Rommel, Caesar, Alexander, Napoleon? There are so many generals more qualified.


Was Napoleon more qualified, yes. But give each of them 500 cavalrymen and Stuart would route him. Yes he is not top 3. But he is top 5 and thought he would be a interesting name to throw out.


My problem with your post is how American centric it is. You should take into considering ancient and modern history in all the world, not just focus on one aspect of history, such as the Civil War.


You are right, plain and simple .

[trooneh]

You my be right but I still think that Lees ability to lead men puts him in the top three.

What about the great organizer, Dwight Eisenhower, then?




Was Napoleon more qualified, yes. But give each of them 500 cavalrymen and Stuart would route him. Yes he is not top 3. But he is top 5 and thought he would be a interesting name to throw out.

I don't think he would be top 10 even, to be honest. There are many names that are above him.




You are right, plain and simple .

Thanks :P

[Texas warrior]

I will say that you made okay arguments, but I still like my list. I would continue are argument but I will not troll my opinions.

[trooneh]

I will say that you made okay arguments, but I still like my list. I would continue are argument but I will not troll my opinions.
My closing statement then is: If you gave Stuart and Napoleon each full armies, who do you think would win? That shows who is a greater military commander.

[kalolin]

IMO, my best generals (in no particular order) are Aleksandr Suvorov, George S. Patton and Alexander the Great.

[Commander Thor]

IMO, my best generals (in no particular order) are Aleksandr Suvorov, George S. Patton and Alexander the Great.

Please don't bump old threads.
This one is from January.

:locked: