Poll: Best War Leader

[WaffleGod]

I also gotta go for Erwin Rommel. He is in my opinion one of the greatest (if not greatest) commander of all time.

 

[Chased]

First that comes to mind would be Admiral Ackbar, I mean after all he saw that the rebel alliance was about to enter a trap.

Err... No, he stated the obvious after they were already caught in the trap. He can however get points for winning anyways.

You're being ridiculous, he said, "It's a trap!" not "They're in trap!"

 

[indiangrunt91]

I want to say Patton or Caesar because i love those two so much but that would just be flat out wrong
I would probably have to go with Genghis Khan because
1.He united the splintered mongol tribes
2.He defeated nation after nation with his army
3.he successfully implemented an amazing logistics system that enabled riders to travel upto 300 miles a day on horseback
4.He organized a group of nomads into a regimented fast moving and disciplined army
5.He was awesome
6.He created an empire that would eventually be the largest contiguous empire in the world
7.And he was abandoned by his tribe after his father died so he helped his mother and three siblings live when they had absolutely nothing.
Pretty fucking awesome

This is my general understanding of Genghis Khan, and reasons I have him at or near the top of my list. I don't know much about him, but supposedly after he defeated a nation, he left them with a measure of sovereignty so he could keep his army moving, without tying up more and more troops with every city they capture. In civilization, the best I could come up with was to raze their sorry cities

Exactly and when he came to a city he couldnt take by force he used psychological warfare to take them down from the inside
in civ up until 5 i never had much of a problem with cities being unhappy, now in civ 5 the empire wide unhappiness just makes me unhappy
enough to cause my troops to have a negative combat modifier, so i guess i must be livid

 

[Jadak]

First that comes to mind would be Admiral Ackbar, I mean after all he saw that the rebel alliance was about to enter a trap.

Err... No, he stated the obvious after they were already caught in the trap. He can however get points for winning anyways.

You're being ridiculous, he said, "It's a trap!" not "They're in trap!"

Not really sure what the relevance of that is. How he stated it doesn't change when he stated it, and by the time he stated anything, everyone already knew it was a trap.

 

[LeeHarveyO]

Suprisingly few people saying Hannibal.

 

[DSK-]

Winston Churchill
Horation Nelson
Robert Henry Cain
John Malcolm Thorpe Fleming Churchill
Robert Blair "Paddy" Mayne
David Stirling
Arthur Wellesley
Hugh Dowding
George Cockburn
Robert Ross

To name but a few.

However, whoever wrote the original 'Art of War' should also have some credit. That book is my bible.

 

[PrimoThePro]

BTW: you may have gathered from this and other posts that as far as grand history is concerned, I am a Teutonophile (go Friedrich der Grosse!) so please don't hold that against me!

Barbarossa is my idol. Long live the Holy Roman Empire.
OT: Barbarossa. Unifying the loose Germanic confederate states and then making Europe tremble is pretty damn impressive.

 

[Nopraptor]

I second Moshe Dayan and add that I don't think Napoleon was that great, getting caught in the
russian winter is a pretty big mistake

 

[PrimoThePro]

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.

 

[Chased]

First that comes to mind would be Admiral Ackbar, I mean after all he saw that the rebel alliance was about to enter a trap.

Err... No, he stated the obvious after they were already caught in the trap. He can however get points for winning anyways.

You're being ridiculous, he said, "It's a trap!" not "They're in trap!"

Not really sure what the relevance of that is. How he stated it doesn't change when he stated it, and by the time he stated anything, everyone already knew it was a trap.

"It's a trap!" "Is in present tense!"

but the real question is why do you care...

 

[slimeonline]

Realistically I'd go with Julius Ceasar. He defeated the Gauls and then later led a revolt against Rome. Even though he was out numbered and branded a traitor, he still won. From there he greatly expanded the Roman Empire.

Yay sense, a genius who never failed even when he was called a traitor; didn't do a napolean and over extend himself, and leave france to deal with it for years after(they're not on their 5th republic for no reason).

Genghis Khan runs it close but he relied too much on Subutai for my liking. However if not for the death of Ögedei, the world would never have been the same.

 

[Jon Shannow]

post="18.269801.10358193"]Realistically I'd go with Julius Ceasar. He defeated the Gauls and then later led a revolt against Rome. Even though he was out numbered and branded a traitor, he still won. From there he greatly expanded the Roman Empire.[/quote]

Julius Caesar didn't expand the Roman empire at all after wining the civil war. he stayed in Rome passing laws before being assassinated.
My personal choice is William De Hautville, son of a minor Norman Noble who ended up becoming a major duke in southern Italy. He defeated the Italians, Lombardians, Saracens,Byzantines and other Norman mercenaries. Many other Lords in the surrounding area ended up paying him tribute and his brothers destroyed the Papal Army

 

[Twad]

Sun Tzu? His book (the Art of war) is a well known reference, and not just for all things warfare.

 

[Athol]

My top 3 would have to be Feldmarschell Erwin Rommel, Admiral Horatio Nelson gets my vote, and Gaius Julius Caesar.

 

[LongAndShort]

If we're talking generals I'm gonna go with Leslie Morshead (I'm a proponent of all things Aussie). War politicians I'm gonna say... hmmm... I'll get back to you on that.

 

[Fetzenfisch]

Paul Redeker
without him we would have lost the Zombiewar.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

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.

 

[Arrogancy]

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)