Ok, here's an interesting question;

What is your three favorite generals of all times (in ranking) and why?

If you must add one more general to your list, you may but you must put a description of each one to do so.

Mine is;

1. Alexander the Great- The king of Macedon after his father died. He conquered most of Asia Minor and used some trademark strategies that we still use today.
2. Julius Ceaser- Roman conquer/politition, conquered almost all Europe and North Africa.
3. Napoleon- Conquered most of France and was its dictator during the Industrial Age, he was exiled after a large defeat in Russia due to its "winter".
4. Sun Tzu - May not be a general but would have been a fantastic one if you read his "Art of War". Napoleon read it also.

Those are mine, what about you??

napolean- at war with most european powers his whole career and sucessful for the majority of it.

belisarios-byzantine general who defeated the persians, vandals, goths and franks for justinian.

gustavus adolphus-swede who turned sweden into a power.

The Duke of Wellington - The only general who consistently defeated the French during the Napoleonic Wars.

William Sherman - The first modern general.

Fredrick the Great - Wasn't called "the Great" for nothing.

What part of Conn. do you live in YNCS???

1. Stadhouder Prince Maurits of Orange - revolutionized warfare during the early 17th century, and not incidentally, helped preserve the newly founded Dutch Republic's independence against the Spanish
2. Quintus Fabius Maximus the 'Procrastinator'- defeated the Carthaginians by not fighting them
3. Slim - defeated the Japanese in the CBI theater in next to impossible circumstances and terrain

Originally posted by jack merchant
1. Stadhouder Prince Maurits of Orange - revolutionized warfare during the early 17th century, and not incidentally, helped preserve the newly founded Dutch Republic's independence against the Spanish
2. Quintus Fabius Maximus the 'Procrastinator'- defeated the Carthaginians by not fighting them
3. Slim - defeated the Japanese in the CBI theater in next to impossible circumstances and terrain

Hmmm... I never heard about those generals before???

Originally posted by amirsan


Hmmm... I never heard about those generals before???
prince maurice- good leader

fabius-i believe his nickname was the delayer ( same thing) opposed hannibal

slim was the british commander in burma in wwII

ohhhhhhhh...

Originally posted by jack merchant
1. Stadhouder Prince Maurits of Orange - revolutionized warfare during the early 17th century, and not incidentally, helped preserve the newly founded Dutch Republic's independence against the Spanish
2. Quintus Fabius Maximus the 'Procrastinator'- defeated the Carthaginians by not fighting them
3. Slim - defeated the Japanese in the CBI theater in next to impossible circumstances and terrain

Fabius Maximus didn't so much defeat Carthage, as he made it possible for other Romans to do so. After Cannae, Fabius just avoided decisive battles against Hannibal until Rome could rebuild her strength. It was Scipio Africanus who defeated Hannibal in Africa, ending the war.

1. Robert E. Lee

Great general that constantly mauled the union with inferior numbers, but I admire even more his character. He (like Jackson) had a very strong ethical code and was in my opinion one of the greatest men who ever lived.

2. George S. Patton

Not necessarily one of the best but for shere grit and determination I think he gets one of my picks.

3. George Washington

Again not maybe one of the three greatest, but defineately one of the best and a favorite of mine. He didn't just know how to win battles but also how to hold an army and a nation together in the toughest of times.


Runner Up: William Tecumseh Sherman

For this great quote that I believe has been forgotten by most major media networks and army public relations

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast.

I think I understand what military fame is; to be killed on the field of battle and have your name misspelled in the newspapers."


Read this CNN

1. Hernán Cortéz - conquered the Aztecs
2. General Patrick Gordon - Scottish soldier of fortune; fought for the Swedes and Poles, and became Peter the Great's chief general and pioneer of his military reforms.
3. Antigonus Monophthalmus - started off as an obscure petty noble in the Balkans but became the world's most powerful man in his day; started his career-proper in his 60s; died in his boots in his 80s.
4. Genghis Khan - history's most successful conqueror!
5. Narses the Eunuch - general of Justinian; succeeded were Belisarius failed. And he was a Eunuch!

In no Particular order:

1. Themistokles- saved Athens and all of Hellas on insisting on building a naval fleet to protect against the Persians.
2. Belisarius- protected the Byzantine Empire repeatedly freom invasion and allowed Justinian to rise to fame as a Great Emperor on Belisarius' shoulders.
3. Scipio-was a dictator amd then retired to private life giving up the dictatorship. A really honorable man that the Romans could have used later on. Oh, and he kicked butt!

PS- i didn't put some great leaders on here because they were kings and not generals. Alexander fought for his own kingdom as did Chandragupta Maurya. They did not fight for some other ruler or gov't but their own. Therefore i believe that great generals deserve a certain distinction of fighting for their nation and not themselves. That's a reason Julius Caesar is not on here as well. He fought for his own glory not Rome.

Originally posted by calgacus
And he was a Eunuch!

So what? That actually might help. Just the head to do the thinking... :D

Napoleon: not much to say, everyone knows him.
Afonso de Albuquerque: built much of the portuguese empire in Asia in early 1500.
Julius Caesar: not so much the just the general, but the whole character.

1. George S. Patton: because he believed in tanks when no one else would
2. Edwin Rommel: first person to use tanks effectivly in the Blitzkrieg manner
3. Casimir Pulaski: Polish general during the American Revolution who is known as the Father of American Cavalry.

1. Pyrrhus He could do things with elephants that Hannibal could only dream about.

2. Henry V His choice of where to draw up his lines at Agincourt was absolute genius and not all obvious from the film I have seen of the battlefield. And also given that the French had been lying in wait for him and that they had first dabs on the best spots.

3.Samildanach For my Always War game on Emperor on a panagaea map. I just have to be up here.

Originally posted by Toast


Fabius Maximus didn't so much defeat Carthage, as he made it possible for other Romans to do so. After Cannae, Fabius just avoided decisive battles against Hannibal until Rome could rebuild her strength. It was Scipio Africanus who defeated Hannibal in Africa, ending the war.

Good point, but I daresay it was due to Fabius Maximus Cunctator's strategy that the Carthaginian army's strenght in Italy withered away enough for the Romans to even contemplate sending an army to Africa in the first place. Avoiding defeat is a kind of victory too ;)

Originally posted by jack merchant


Avoiding defeat is a kind of victory too ;)

how true, at the time fabius was buying time, that was exactly what rome needed-time

Originally posted by samildanach
1. Pyrrhus He could do things with elephants that Hannibal could only dream about.


What's that supposed to mean? ;)

Subedei: The second greatest Mongol general IMO (behind GK). He was a general during Genghis Khan's and later Ogadai Khan's armies. His main claim to fame is that in 1327 (or thereabouts) he began to march against the last forces of the Khwarazmian Shah Mingburnu. Although Mingburnu had been desicively beaten before by Genghis Khan, Khwarazm was still a strong empire confined to western Iran and the Caucasus. Subedei defeated him quickly, but instead of stopping, marched north through the Caucasus Mountains subdueing every state, then marched north into Russia with his 60,000 or so troops and desicively defeated the massive Russian army of 700,000+! There has never ever been a general since him to cross the Caucasus with such success, nor even come close to defeating an army of such enormous size comparable (10x +) after such a long and hard march. Subedei was also studied extensively by Mehmed II the Conqueror, Gustav Adolphus, Napoleon Boneparte I and Rommel to name but a few.

1. Frederick the Great- first of all played the flute :D, and also was the master of the carless attak (Napoleon once said that eve he though is was a bit to risky to try some of ol' Fritz's stratigies)

2. Napoleon- During those war, military uniforms were at their height, still today most of our modern dress uniforms still have many aspects of the ones then.

3. Gustavus Adolphus- Made Sweden into a World power. As well as being extreamly well edecated , he was also fluent in English, French, German, Latin and Russian

Originally posted by jack merchant
1. Stadhouder Prince Maurits of Orange - revolutionized warfare during the early 17th century, and not incidentally, helped preserve the newly founded Dutch Republic's independence against the Spanish
2. Quintus Fabius Maximus the 'Procrastinator'- defeated the Carthaginians by not fighting them
3. Slim - defeated the Japanese in the CBI theater in next to impossible circumstances and terrain Slim I'll buy, and while the Prince of Orange is a stretch, I can certainly acknowledge the impact of his innovations in fortifications, but Fabius Maximus? Hannibal was never going to beseige Rome anyway. Finding someone who was smart enough not to get an army shot out from under him is laudable, but hardly top three material, even in a personal preference test like this isnt it?

Mine
1) Gustav Adolph - King, statesman, general, innovator.
2) Hannibal - The best that has yet lived
3) Nathan Bedford Forrest - Uneducated private who carved his way to Major General by sheer dint of arms at all levels. Possibly the most personally reprehesible man listed so far.

J

Nathan Bedford Forrest - Uneducated private who carved his way to Major General by sheer dint of arms at all levels.

Who also just happened to have raised a huge fortune from the slave trade which he used to raise his own cavalry battalion- kind of makes for a speedy ascent up the ranks.


Possibly the most personally reprehesible man listed so far.

Do you think that the massacre at Fort Pillow is a real event? I mean he didn't eactly get on with his subordinates. Why didn't the Union hang him after the war.

I'll just throw in one for consideration.

Sir John Monash.

If you have never heard about him you read a bit here (http://www.worldwar1.com/biocmon.htm)

and here (http://www.awm.gov.au/1918/people/genmonash.htm)

if were goin back to WWI how bout General Pershing

Originally posted by onejayhawk
Slim I'll buy, and while the Prince of Orange is a stretch, I can certainly acknowledge the impact of his innovations in fortifications, but Fabius Maximus? Hannibal was never going to beseige Rome anyway. Finding someone who was smart enough not to get an army shot out from under him is laudable, but hardly top three material, even in a personal preference test like this isnt it?

Mine
1) Gustav Adolph - King, statesman, general, innovator.
2) Hannibal - The best that has yet lived
3) Nathan Bedford Forrest - Uneducated private who carved his way to Major General by sheer dint of arms at all levels. Possibly the most personally reprehesible man listed so far.


We should probably start a thread on the Second Punic War to discuss Fabius and Hannibal :) Also, as you pointed out, this thread is about favourite generals, not on the best. Hence my inclusion of Prince Maurits - even I am occasionally guilty of chauvinism :D
Bash my personal favourites all you like, but then don't be surprised if I bash your inclusion of a man who by your own admission was reprehensible !

1. Fredrick Williams the Great- the dude was really weak in one arm, but he managed to keep the French, Austrians, and Russians at bay for a while, but he was losing until Russia got a new leader who liked Fredrick and signed a peace treaty, Fredrick's 250,000 men versus more than half a million! He expanded Prussia's territory and made the army the greatest in Europe.

2. Maharaj Ranjit Singh- expanded his kingdom's territory in every direction until he had to sign treaties he abided by. Had some of Napoleon's generals and was even called Napoleon of the East. Unlike Napoleon however, the Maharaj was a great ruler. His army was the only army in India that was feared by the British

3. Suleyman the Great- expanded Ottoman empire's territory all the way to Austria and was nearly undefeatable. Muslims say he was the greatest Islamic ruler in history with his just ways. And he wasn't that evil at home.

I don't agree with Hernan Cortez being a great general. Because the only advantage he had on the Aztecs was technological in guns. The Aztecs were a glorious civilization that only lost because provinces previously conqered rebelled and that they welcomed the invaders into the city of Tenochitlan.

Originally posted by onejayhawk


2) Hannibal - The best that has yet lived

J

well wouldnt Scipio, the man who defeated him in open battle, with the carthaginians even having the advantage at Zama, be his better? There is no such thing as the "best general
", save a general who can garuntee victory with ANY force in ANY circumstances