West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: Entreri117 on June 26, 2003, 11:42:45 AM
-
In my opinion, the best general of all time would have to be either Napoleon or Julius Ceasar. Both men conquered new land for their existing empire, and both men used brilliant battle-field tactics to lead their men to victory. I would lead a lil towards Julius Ceasar because I know for a fact that he fought in battles right along with his men...I'm not sure if Napoleon did.
Another honorable mention to me would be General George S. Patton of the US Army during WWII. True, there was a lot of controversey surrounding him, he was very flamboyant, and in essence didn't play a huge role in the Allied victory, he was still a military genious. He could strategize and plan battlefield tactics like a machine.
Please give your opinion on who was the best General of all time. I'm very interested in finding out who you all think was the best.
-
I'm gonna go with Patton. He's not the best of all time, but my personal favorite.
Have you read his battle Memoirs called "War as I Knew it?" If you've got a fairly good grasp on the history of the war, It's a VERY interesting look at what went on and what a smart leader he was.
-
Edward I
He kicked so much Scottish, Welsh and French ass
-
Stonewall Jackson
For sheer brilliance of mind, TJ was easily the best around.
Napoleon
Obviously.
Ahmed Shah Massoud
First he beat the Russians, and then, before the Yankees started helping his guys, started to push back the Taliban.
-
the greatest of all time are:
Alexander The Great
Julius Caesar
Napoleon
-
Maestro, interesting picks.
-
Also without Patton, much of france and North Africa would be speaking German right now...
I'd say that killing 1,500,000 Germans is quite a task. I'd also say that what he did when he reached Buchenwald was quite heroic.
This is just another example of Tai-Bo trying to make himself feel better by belittling individuals who he will never compare to.
Let's look at some of his medals and commendations...
United States:
American Defense Service Ribbon
Distinguished Service Cross with One Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster
Distinguished Service Medal with Two Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters
Distinguished Service Medal (U.S. Navy)
One Silver Star
Three Bronze Stars
Legion of Merit
Mexican Service Badge
Purple Heart
Silver Life Saving Medal
Silver Star with One Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster
Victory medal (WWII)
Victory Medal with Four Bronze Stars (WWI)
Sons of the Revolution Medal
Great Britain:
Most Honourable Order of the Bath
Order of the British Empire
Enteur Pin of Malta
France:
Croix de Guerre of 1939 with Palm
Croix de Guerre with Bronze Star
Medal of the Legion of Honor
Medal of Verdun (WWI)
Metz Medal of Liberation (1944)
Commemorative Medal, City of Nancy
Commerative Medallion, City of Metz (1944)
Commerative Medalion Cities of Fontainebleau and Barbizon
Gourmier Pin of Morocco (French)
Grand Officer of the Legion of Honor
Liberation of Tours "Patton" Medallion
Liberation Medallion, City of d'Epernay
Liberation Medallion, City of Metz (1918)
Medallion of the City of Rheims
Belgium:
Croix de Guerre of 1940 with Palm
Grand Officer of the Order of Leopold with Palm
Civilian Shield
Czechoslovakia:
Military Cross
Order of the White Dragon
Luxembourg:
Croix de Guerre
Order of Adolphe of Nassau, Grand Croix
French Morocco:
Grand Officer of the Order of Leopold with Palm
Russia:
Guard's Badge
Order of Koutouzov, 1st Grade
Sweden:
Commemorative Medal of the V Olympiad (1912)
Armiens, Under Officers Skola
Kunge Sodermanlands Pansarregemente (Commerative Token)
Kungl. Krigs Skolan (Commemorative Medal)
Kungl. Upplands Regemente (Commorative Token)
Vatican:
Pope Pius XII Medallion
-
Also without Patton, much of france and North Africa would be speaking German right now...
No, they wouldn't. Monty and Anderson did most of the work in North Africa. It would be more accurate to say Sicily/Italy would still be fascist strongholds, and France would have fallen far slower (Omar Bradley was the prime Yankee general in the D Day landings and the first two months of the liberation oif France).
-
Ahmed Shah Massoud
First he beat the Russians, and then, before the Yankees started helping his guys, started to push back the Taliban.
Whoa, now you're just mumbling nonsense.
-
Oh yeah, my picks for best General ever.
Its not easy comparing generals cuz you have different circumstances, methods, terrain etc. Ill just list random favourites
Saladin Bin Ayubi (Crusades)
Nguyen (Vietnam)
-
Whoa, now you're just mumbling nonsense.
Says the guy who mentioned Nguyen but not Giap...
-
Ahmad Shah Massoud is the darling of the West for his opposition to the Taliban, but there are alot of things about the man, that is not promoted in the media.
-
Ahmad Shah Massoud is the darling of the West for his opposition to the Taliban, but there are alot of things about the man, that is not promoted in the media.
You mean, he was the darling of the west after 9/11. I followed his career long before then. And being a ruthless and sometimes callous man does not stop him being a great general.
(watch Robert Peltan Young's journey to interview him, for interest's sake more than anything)
-
He was a darling ever since the Afghan resistance erupted.
Fluent in French, well read etc. However, while his work against the Soviets is commendable, he had nothing on the Taliban. Massoud was held to his own Panjsher Valley, a tiny strip of land. But its surprising how strong the Northern Alliance became after 5 weeks of carpet bombing Taliban front lines.
-
Tech is correct on this one. Massoud had nothing on the Taliban. At their peak, the Taliban controlled 95% of the country, which is saying very little for Massoud. Massoud was pleading for help, and like Tech said, he received it when Afghanistan (Taliban) was carpet-bombed. Then he gained some control. However, the comment Owen made about Massoud fighting off the Russians is correct (I don't know if Tech was disagreeing with that, but I'm just justifying Owen's statement)
-
Even Massouds work against the Soviets, while commendable, was tainted by the cease fire he had against the Soviets.
Strategically, it allowed Massoud to rest, and re arm his soldiers, and bring in reinforcements etc. However, the rest of the Mujahideen were not big on cease fires during an invasion.
-
We can all agree that it's.... PRUNING TIME :D
-
Massoud, at his peak, had 25,000...He was making advances before 9/11 (albeit small ones). Oh, and that number includes the Uzbeks, who pretty much refused to take orders from him. It doesn't include the Hazaras (5,000 of them fought the Taliban, calling themselves the "Eastern Alliance"). Nor does it include the 1000 men or so that were in Pakistan, under the auspices of the Royal Guard.
The Taliban, before 9/11, had over 60,000 regular troops facing him, along with a similar number of militia.
-
We can all agree that it's.... PRUNING TIME :D
Pruned. :)
-
Massoud, at his peak, had 25,000...He was making advances before 9/11 (albeit small ones). Oh, and that number includes the Uzbeks, who pretty much refused to take orders from him. It doesn't include the Hazaras (5,000 of them fought the Taliban, calling themselves the "Eastern Alliance"). Nor does it include the 1000 men or so that were in Pakistan, under the auspices of the Royal Guard.
The Taliban, before 9/11, had over 60,000 regular troops facing him, along with a similar number of militia.
The Hazaras did not consititute the "Eastern Alliance". Hazaras are located in central Afghanistan, and belong predominately to Hezb I Wahdat. The Eastern Alliance consisted of Pashtun tribes in the East and South East that were either pro- King Zahir Shah, or anti Talib Pushtuns. As for Massoud, he was experiencing his worst defeats leading up to his assasination. He lost Badakhshan to the North East, and was relegated to JUST the Panjsher Valley.
-
So, one defeat means a man is not a great general? Caesar, Saladin, Jackson, Patton, Alexander...they all experienced defeat. In fact, Saladin was pushed back onto JUST Jerusalem at one point, remember? Did you list him purely because he was a Muslim who beat Christians?
-
The Hazaras did not consititute the "Eastern Alliance". Hazaras are located in central Afghanistan, and belong predominately to Hezb I Wahdat. The Eastern Alliance consisted of Pashtun tribes in the East and South East that were either pro- King Zahir Shah, or anti Talib Pushtuns.
My mistake. I should have said "Western Alliance" (recently released American maps show they were fighting more near the Iranian border, as the Iranian opposition were supplying them).
-
I never stated that one defeat means a man is not a great general. I just said Massouds accomplishments were over rated.