EPTGreat Military leaders of History? - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
craz3d
Bulgaria856 Posts
| ||
|
don_kyuhote
3006 Posts
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/Gre.jpeg) Surely this guy, General Grievous, is the greatest ever. | ||
|
threehundred
Canada911 Posts
i salute you general! gg. + Show Spoiler + (gg) girls generation: kim taeyeon ![[image loading]](http://static.allkpop.com/wp-content/uploads/old/2009_stories/20090618_snsd_indiv_taeyeon.jpg) | ||
|
Paperbackwriter
Netherlands17 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Waterloo | ||
|
Enderbantoo
United States465 Posts
| ||
|
InfeSteD
United States4658 Posts
He pretty much gave independence to all these south american countries (check below) just riding a horse back then just recruiting people ... I mean, the description kinda says it all... he was the George Washington of South America LOL but of course they fuckd him over and no1 kept the mentality and south america is all corruption, but the ideas from its roots were just as good as the United States ones. This is gonna sound hella fuckd up, I dont feel any pride any more in being a Venezuelan because we are bunch of idiots getting fucked over by Hugo Chavez, but when I think about Simon Bolivar I feel proud to have been born there. I love the United States!  (Im a citizen of the US and Venezuela both) ![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Simón_Bol%C3%ADvar_2.jpg) Simón Bolívar is regarded in Hispanic America as a hero, visionary, revolutionary, and liberator. During his lifetime, he led Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, and Venezuela to independence, and helped lay the foundations for democratic ideology in much of Hispanic America. For this reason he is often considered the George Washington of South America. + Show Spoiler + I guess he was inspired by Napoleon too, I forgot my history, I cant recall if Bolivar went to school in Paris or Spain. At the age of fourteen, Bolívar's private instructor and mentor Simón Rodríguez had to abandon the country, as he was accused of being involved in a conspiracy against the Spanish government in Caracas. Thus, Bolívar entered the military academy of the Milicias de Veraguas, which his father had directed as colonel years earlier. Through these years of military training, he developed his fervent passion for armaments and military strategy, which he later would employ on the battlefields of the wars of independence.[7] A few years later, while in Paris, Bolívar witnessed the coronation of Napoleon in Notre Dame, and this majestic event left a profound a impression upon him. From that moment he wished that he could emulate similar triumphant glory for the people of his native land.[7] | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6255 Posts
On February 15 2011 15:14 Adaptation wrote:Edit: in terms of admiral, i can tell you that its clearly Yi-sun-sin of... KOREA! Yes the ancestor of slayer boxer and Oops reach! He's the only guy i put ahead of Admiral Nelson. Take time to research what this guy has done and believe me, he's your no.1 admiral. Way Way ahead of his time. I read about him and WOW! Quite an accomplished admiral! | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
George Alexander Ballard wrote: "This was the great Korean admiral's (Yi Sun-Sin's) crowning exploit. In the short space of six weeks [actually about 9 weeks, May 7, 1592 – July 7, 1592] he had achieved a series of successes unsurpassed in the whole annals of maritime war, destroying the enemy's battle fleets, cutting his lines of communication, sweeping up his convoys, imperilling the situation of his victorious armies in the field, and bringing his ambitious schemes to utter ruin. Not even Nelson, Blake, or Jean Bart could have done more than this scarcely known representative of a small and cruelly oppressed nation; and it is to be regretted that his memory lingers nowhere outside his native land, for no impartial judge could deny him the right to be accounted among the born leaders of men." | ||
|
Bartuc
Netherlands629 Posts
![[image loading]](http://souklaye.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/charles-martel.jpg) Charles 'The Hammer' Martel Trained an army and against all odds stopped the Islamic invasion of Europe during the dark ages. Was basically undefeated in battle until his death at Cologne. All that, in addition to being Charlemagne's grandfather and laying the foundation for the Carolingian Empire. | ||
|
NoobieOne
United States1183 Posts
#5 Genghis Khan- He revolutionized mounted warfare, took down the Chin Dynasty in China (which had more people technology and the fucking great wall in his way. He also was one of the first to use Bio-warfare #4 Hannibal- This guy didn't loose. He beat the Romans multiple times despite the odds against him. When he fought battles he won them. It finally took years, a genius flank attack which other generals couldn't hold, and 2 (not one but 2) trips over an impassible mountain range to defeat him. His only fault was not being able to win the war, only battles #3 Alexander The Great- As stated earlier in this thread he is just great with the use of his tactics and cavalry when outnumbered 3 to one made it look easy. He took down the greatest empire of his time #2 Napoleon- I think every post pretty much covered him, hes amazing at supply and mobility, yet his army was always better trained, better equipped, and had more experience than whoever he was fighting. He made mistakes fighting battles he shouldn't have and his pride keeps him out of the #1 spot. #1 Robert E Lee- Despite the fact that his side in the war might have been wrong he was in all aspects the perfect general. He fought against a better supplied, more populous, and more industrialized army. He won every battle except Antietam (draw where he almost broke the union army and secured victory for the south. Gettysburg which i will explain later, and Appomattox Courthouse which was mostly a technicality where he knew he was surrendering, every other battle he fought he either crushed the union army or withdrew his army to another position (after Gettysburg). In Gettysburg Lee did not make a single mistake. All he had to do was scatter the union army and he would be able to march into Washington and secure victory. The first day his attacks were barely held off and even then only by luck it seems. Day 2 he almost broke the union line, again tales of disbelief come from places like little round top where a bayonet charge when the union ran out of ammo was needed to stop his advance. Now comes day 3 where people said he made his fatal mistake of Pickett's charge. Until day 3 his cavalry had been unable to participate in the battle. Finally Stuart arrived with them and Lee presented probably one of his best and most underrated plans of all time. First Stuart flanks and fights with his heavy Dragoons against a small union force with a known coward as commander and an unknown named George Armstrong Custer as his subordinate. Once that is complete he moves with a group of mounted engineers around the union's short flank to the unguarded union artillery where his cavalry are either able to destroy it or Confederate mounted artillery men are able to turn the guns against the union line. With enough time given for Stuart to complete, Pickett, one of Lee's subordinates who has led charges before will attack the union center and break through scattering the union army. However Stuart was unable to eliminate the small 7th Union Cavalry under the Command of Custer after his commander left the field. Hence the guns were not silenced and the Union shattered the charge. If anyone is to blame for the failure it is the success of Custer not a mistake Lee made. Honorable Mentions Sun Tsu- He wrote the book (litterly) Patton- His tactics and command made him a feared attacker who never failed to achieve objectives Gustavus Adolphus- He really made the switch to firearm based warfare possible with his standing army and organization tactics when war was chaos. | ||
|
Scheefe
Netherlands226 Posts
The Art of War is one of the greatest thing ever created. | ||
|
vyyye
Sweden3917 Posts
On February 15 2011 18:02 Paperbackwriter wrote: What happend to Wellington and von Blucher? They won the battle of Waterloo and defeated Napoleon. Should earn them some credit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Waterloo You're one of the greatest if you manage to win victories against all odds, not if you win victories where the opponent barely stands a chance before one shot has been fired. | ||
|
thesighter
United States347 Posts
Conquered half the known world with armies 3x-10x smaller than his enemies. | ||
|
Loanshark
China3094 Posts
On February 15 2011 18:05 Enderbantoo wrote: My vote goes to Cao Cao or Liu Bei. Within the 3 Kingdoms world, I think Zhou Yu and Zhu Ge Liang were much better than those two. | ||
|
Derminator
27 Posts
| ||
|
CuttyFlam
Belgium523 Posts
On February 15 2011 14:03 Blasterion wrote: Undoubtly it's Oda Nobunaga ![[image loading]](http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f17/Ronin_kyo/nobunaga.gif) THIS°!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oda_Nobunaga ![[image loading]](http://brian.hoffert.faculty.noctrl.edu/HST263/Oda.Nobunaga.jpg) | ||
|
Go0g3n
Russian Federation410 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On February 15 2011 13:46 ZlaSHeR wrote: Robert E. Lee over G Dub any day. Given that Lee has next to nothing, a spread out force and shitty resources and everything to deal with, he was clearly the best general in American history, even if his side lost. Lee, and Southern generals in general (no pun intended), is hugely overrated and is precisely the reason the South lost. Tactically he might have been fantastic but he had no concept of strategy, which is why the South never had a shot to begin with. It makes a cute story to say the ragtag Southern Generals almost clawed themselves to victory, but truth be told, the North had far more excellent Generals and Grant was a much better Supreme Commander because he understood the big picture. To put it in SC terms, Grant was like Jaedong while Lee was like a WC3 player, microing his dying units while supply capped at 60 and at 1000/1000. All he had to do was scatter the union army and he would be able to march into Washington and secure victory. This is not true at all. Winning Gettysburg would've had zero impact on the rest of the war, because the South couldn't move to Washington. It would've been a symbolic victory, cut short by their weakened (non-existant) supply chain and lack of reinforcements. The group that could've moved would've been too small, isolated and exhausted. No chance of taking a capital city.Not only that, but pushing into the North is exactly the terrible strategy I was speaking of. The South didn't lose simply because of starting conditions (history has told us time and time again that bean counting means absolutely nothing in war), it lost because it tried to push North instead of pursuing a better strategy of holding the West, where the resources were. The underdog doesn't need overwhelming victory to win a war, it simply needs to make it too costly for the more powerful side to continue. The Southern strategy was unable to do that. | ||
|
TrinitySC
101 Posts
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Hán_Xìn.jpg) Oh my god, is everyone seriously ignoring Han Xin? I've read through a large part of this thread and nobody mentioned him. Once. Wth? For the record, this is the guy who invented micro, circa 200 BC. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
Nestor Makhnov, general of the Makhnovchtchina, a "black" army (anarchist) in Ukraine. Fought against the "white" during the russian revolution, helped to prevent the "red" (bolchevik) from failing with an army full of volonteer. The makhnovchtchina got destroyed by the same bolchevik in the end | ||
| ||
