Poll: Best War Leader

[erto101]

Blas De Lezo, who went without credit for winning a battle against all odds. With 2.800 soldiers 6 ships and a fort he defeated a British army with 23.700 soldiers and 186 ships. All the credits was stolen by Sebastian de Eslava, who lied about his own role in the battle and about de Lezos.
By winning this battle he also saved the colonies of Spain

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I have a soft spot of General Sir John Monash. Basically made the modern army <.<

That and he was an civil engineer.

 

[Serenegoose]

Suprisingly few people saying Hannibal.

Damn impressive of him to conquer so much of Rome/Italy with so few, but couldn't there have been an easier way to go around then that hellish pass? He could have had so much army it was ridiculous. And going BACK to Carthage when Rome attacked it was stupid. He could have taken Rome, and then gone to invade Carthage. But despite those few stupid things, he MORE than makes up for it with his impressive battle tactics and ability to cripple the "greatest" (debateable) ancient empire.

Taking the alps was the point. You do not expect your North African foe to attack from Switzerland. Further, it had the unintentional bonus of killing off all but one of his elephants, a tactical liability in battle against the Romans. (look at Zama.) Hannibals decision not even to lay siege to Rome is a curious one, but certainly by the time the Romans had crossed to North Africa to attack Carthaginian holdings there it was out of the question. The only time it was a viable option was immediately after Cannae, and even then had no guarantee of success. The Romans, by and large, formed our view of warfare. Before this, most tribes and city-states had a tendency to raise an army, have a fight, then discuss peace terms. Protracted wars were highly uncommon. The Romans all but invented the idea that any war they got involved in would end in their victory, and so their absolute refusal to discuss peace at any time beyond the utter capitulation of their foes was massively confusing to city-states like Carthage that anticipated that after a few kickings, Rome would offer to surrender. Indeed, it's important to remember that whilst Hannibal was rampaging up and down the south of Italy, Rome invaded and conquered Spain and Greece. Once that singular opening at Cannae was gone, Hannibals hopes of defeating Rome vanished.

 

[Oly J]

Gen. Robert E. Lee
Genghis Khan
Alexander the Great
General Jack Pershing

These are my favorites.

But the ultimate leader...

SUN TZU

THANK YOU!! I was reading this thread and thought "I cannot beleive nobody said Sun Tzu" I mean the guy literally wrote the book on battle strategy

also though Alexander the Great was pure awesomness, most people want to take over the world, he actually did it, the known world anyway

also Vlad the Impaler, c'mon he inspired Dracula

 

[Oly J]

Gen. Robert E. Lee
Genghis Khan
Alexander the Great
General Jack Pershing

These are my favorites.

But the ultimate leader...

SUN TZU

THANK YOU!! I was reading this thread and thought "I cannot beleive nobody said Sun Tzu" I mean the guy literally wrote the book on battle strategy

also though Alexander the Great was pure awesomness, most people want to take over the world, he actually did it, the known world anyway

also Vlad the Impaler, c'mon he inspired Dracula

 

[Oly J]

Gen. Robert E. Lee
Genghis Khan
Alexander the Great
General Jack Pershing

These are my favorites.

But the ultimate leader...

SUN TZU

THANK YOU!! I was reading this thread and thought "I cannot beleive nobody said Sun Tzu" I mean the guy literally wrote the book on battle strategy

also though Alexander the Great was pure awesomness, most people want to take over the world, he actually did it, the known world anyway

also Vlad the Impaler, c'mon he inspired Dracula

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Erwin Rommel comes to mind.

I wasn't sure if he counted, but since you already threw him out there I'm going to agree.

But he got his arse kicked by a bunch of angry Aussies and a handful of British artillery units despite having more troops and tanks x.x

 

[drivel]

Roosevelt. He made the world his ***** during World War II.

 

[michiehoward]

Gaius Julius Caesar, brilliant stand alone General, and amazing statesman.

Conquered all the provinces of Gaul, made a smart alliances when necessary and beneficial. Entered into battle himself to keep up morale of his men. My favorite man of history.

 

[spartandude]

Revan

He was such a tactical genius that even the Mandalorians respect him for how badly he kicked their arses.

[sub]You never said it couldn't be fictional history...[/sub]

epic win

I'd say Churchill, i've studied enough to know he would have been a terrible peace time leader but in war he was brilliant.

 

[indiangrunt91]

I have a top five for war leaders:
1) Napoleon Bonaparte (The Napoleonic Wars): A young french general who seized control of his homeland and built one of the most powerful empires on the planet. That alone is enough to make the list, but Napoleon went further, revolutionizing warfare as he went. Admittedly he suffered the fate of many overly ambitious warmongers, but that only serves to elevate him in my eyes, because ambition is always a quality to be respected.
2) George S. Patton/Erwin Rommel (World War 2): A very close second and tie. Two very brilliant and daring officers who could easily be said to be nemeses. Both were unrelenting in combat and brutally efficient.
3) Ulysses S. Grant/Robert E. Lee (The American Civil War): Again, two mortal nemeses. Lee was a great war leader because he kept the South's fledgling confederate army together in the face of insurmountable odds. ultimately, he was defeated by the total lack of resources that the Confederacy could field. The sheer fact that he kept the war going as long as he did was remarkable. Grant didn't have to take the long chances that Lee did, so he wasn't as brilliant, but he was deadly efficient. Grant didn't care about battles, losses, or politics, he cared about winning. He ground the Southern military into the dust and broke the back of the Confederate war machine. Despite the amazing gap in style between these men they really measure up quite well to each other taking a spot beside each other on the list.

(Yes, there are only three spots for five people, but I couldn't really choose between the latter four)

Everything you just said except replace Napoleon with Belisarius of the Byzantine Empire
Other than that those are my four most favorite generals ever
each was so awe inspiring in his own way

 

[fenrizz]

Hitler was okay, but he was very lazy once he got to power. Basically he did what every good leader does, which is 'leave it to the experts'. He simply stated what the overall goal is, and got the people best at achieving that goal to plan it. Also, Blitzkrieg was (sort of) his idea. (it was kind of stolen from the British offensive in WW1, the Somme.)
Apart from Hitler I'm not very good at all this history stuff. I'll go with some of the Roman dudes. those guys were awesome. Particularly that one Carthaginian guy. Hmm, Hannibal? Yeah, he was great. Go round, recruit an army, take Rome, get betrayed by Carthage. All in a days work for that guy.

Apologies but a history major rant here
You know if he had left it too the experts the Germans probably would have won.
Hitler micromanaged everything from troop movements to individual generals and what they should do.
He even had an entire army in Russia move several hundred miles from there designated attack point on a whim

And Hannibal never got betrayed by Carthage but thats minor

I'll have you know that it was Heinz Guderian that developed Blitzkrig into what the Nazi's used, and not Hitler.

OT:
I always liked Julius Caesar.
Great general and glorious emperor.

 

[indiangrunt91]

Hitler was okay, but he was very lazy once he got to power. Basically he did what every good leader does, which is 'leave it to the experts'. He simply stated what the overall goal is, and got the people best at achieving that goal to plan it. Also, Blitzkrieg was (sort of) his idea. (it was kind of stolen from the British offensive in WW1, the Somme.)
Apart from Hitler I'm not very good at all this history stuff. I'll go with some of the Roman dudes. those guys were awesome. Particularly that one Carthaginian guy. Hmm, Hannibal? Yeah, he was great. Go round, recruit an army, take Rome, get betrayed by Carthage. All in a days work for that guy.

Apologies but a history major rant here
You know if he had left it too the experts the Germans probably would have won.
Hitler micromanaged everything from troop movements to individual generals and what they should do.
He even had an entire army in Russia move several hundred miles from there designated attack point on a whim

And Hannibal never got betrayed by Carthage but thats minor

I'll have you know that it was Heinz Guderian that developed Blitzkrig into what the Nazi's used, and not Hitler.

OT:
I always liked Julius Caesar.
Great general and glorious emperor.

right but why quote me in this?

I also like Caesar,
good promotor of himself, more than adequate general, excellent logistician
but never emperor, that didnt exist until Augustus but thats also a minor quibble

 

[FalloutJack]

Hmmm... Moe, Larry, and Curly? [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg_3qEf3ahU]

Nah, only kidding. I just feel the thread needs this is all.

 

[fenrizz]

Spoiler

Hitler was okay, but he was very lazy once he got to power. Basically he did what every good leader does, which is 'leave it to the experts'. He simply stated what the overall goal is, and got the people best at achieving that goal to plan it. Also, Blitzkrieg was (sort of) his idea. (it was kind of stolen from the British offensive in WW1, the Somme.)
Apart from Hitler I'm not very good at all this history stuff. I'll go with some of the Roman dudes. those guys were awesome. Particularly that one Carthaginian guy. Hmm, Hannibal? Yeah, he was great. Go round, recruit an army, take Rome, get betrayed by Carthage. All in a days work for that guy.

Apologies but a history major rant here
You know if he had left it too the experts the Germans probably would have won.
Hitler micromanaged everything from troop movements to individual generals and what they should do.
He even had an entire army in Russia move several hundred miles from there designated attack point on a whim

And Hannibal never got betrayed by Carthage but thats minor

I'll have you know that it was Heinz Guderian that developed Blitzkrig into what the Nazi's used, and not Hitler.

OT:
I always liked Julius Caesar.
Great general and glorious emperor.

right but why quote me in this?

I also like Caesar,
good promotor of himself, more than adequate general, excellent logistician
but never emperor, that didnt exist until Augustus but thats also a minor quibble

It would seem I have made a slight mistake when quoting here.
The comment was of course directed at PatrickXD.

But you are right, he was never emperor.
He was dictator, was he not?

 

[Quazimofo]

Napoleon, fantastic war leader, garnered the adoration of his people, built a powerfull empire.

i will agree to this. he had to get basically the rest of the world to gang up on him for him to loose a land battle.

 

[Quazimofo]

Spoiler

Hitler was okay, but he was very lazy once he got to power. Basically he did what every good leader does, which is 'leave it to the experts'. He simply stated what the overall goal is, and got the people best at achieving that goal to plan it. Also, Blitzkrieg was (sort of) his idea. (it was kind of stolen from the British offensive in WW1, the Somme.)
Apart from Hitler I'm not very good at all this history stuff. I'll go with some of the Roman dudes. those guys were awesome. Particularly that one Carthaginian guy. Hmm, Hannibal? Yeah, he was great. Go round, recruit an army, take Rome, get betrayed by Carthage. All in a days work for that guy.

Apologies but a history major rant here
You know if he had left it too the experts the Germans probably would have won.
Hitler micromanaged everything from troop movements to individual generals and what they should do.
He even had an entire army in Russia move several hundred miles from there designated attack point on a whim

And Hannibal never got betrayed by Carthage but thats minor

I'll have you know that it was Heinz Guderian that developed Blitzkrig into what the Nazi's used, and not Hitler.

OT:
I always liked Julius Caesar.
Great general and glorious emperor.

right but why quote me in this?

I also like Caesar,
good promotor of himself, more than adequate general, excellent logistician
but never emperor, that didnt exist until Augustus but thats also a minor quibble

It would seem I have made a slight mistake when quoting here.
The comment was of course directed at PatrickXD.

But you are right, he was never emperor.
He was dictator, was he not?

yeah he was a dictator, because he knew the romans would never go for a ruler by the title or king, and was afraid emperor was too close to that (or am i speculating? i havent studied roman history in a while). i wonder how much further he wouldve gotten in his reign had he not been assassinated? my money is on all of modern germany at least, perhaps even to poland. though he wasnt stupid, he likely wouldve stopped on purpose before there to develop infastructure.

 

[KwaggaDan]

William Wallace, anyone?

Not really, his big plan was to funnel troops down a bridge. That's so Sparta

 

[indiangrunt91]

Spoiler

Hitler was okay, but he was very lazy once he got to power. Basically he did what every good leader does, which is 'leave it to the experts'. He simply stated what the overall goal is, and got the people best at achieving that goal to plan it. Also, Blitzkrieg was (sort of) his idea. (it was kind of stolen from the British offensive in WW1, the Somme.)
Apart from Hitler I'm not very good at all this history stuff. I'll go with some of the Roman dudes. those guys were awesome. Particularly that one Carthaginian guy. Hmm, Hannibal? Yeah, he was great. Go round, recruit an army, take Rome, get betrayed by Carthage. All in a days work for that guy.

Apologies but a history major rant here
You know if he had left it too the experts the Germans probably would have won.
Hitler micromanaged everything from troop movements to individual generals and what they should do.
He even had an entire army in Russia move several hundred miles from there designated attack point on a whim

And Hannibal never got betrayed by Carthage but thats minor

I'll have you know that it was Heinz Guderian that developed Blitzkrig into what the Nazi's used, and not Hitler.

OT:
I always liked Julius Caesar.
Great general and glorious emperor.

right but why quote me in this?

I also like Caesar,
good promotor of himself, more than adequate general, excellent logistician
but never emperor, that didnt exist until Augustus but thats also a minor quibble

It would seem I have made a slight mistake when quoting here.
The comment was of course directed at PatrickXD.

But you are right, he was never emperor.
He was dictator, was he not?

yeah for life, however short that life may have been.
if he had lived longer he probably would have been some kind of rex or princeps