History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum Lockedmost over rated general

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Direct Link To This Post Topic: most over rated general
    Posted: 28-May-2009 at 23:15
i think montgomery even a monkey could have won at in egypt and after that he did nothing till his disaster at arhnem
Back to Top
Dolphin View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Níl a fhios agam cad ata ag tharlu

Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 1554
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 00:16
Eoin O'Duffy
Am not I Dametas? Why, am not I Dametas?
Back to Top
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 08:02
who is that
Back to Top
Peteratwar View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 579
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 08:21
Originally posted by hiddenhistory hiddenhistory wrote:

i think montgomery even a monkey could have won at in egypt and after that he did nothing till his disaster at arhnem
 
Usual rather silly monty-bashing that might be expected.
 
Clearly you need to read his biography
Back to Top
Wulfstan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 15-Feb-2008
Location: Mercia
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 19:42
Montgomery played an important role in the Battle of Normandy 1944. As Bedell Smith Eisenhower`s chief of staff said : " I don`t know if we could have done it without Monty. It was his sort of battle. Whatever they said about him, he got us there."
From Woden sprang all our royal kin.
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 901
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 20:14
Douglas "American Ceaser" Macarthur....
 
Phillipines, 1942... His men were unprepared for war.  Cornered, they fight heroically in trenches while "Dug out Dug" shelters on Cooregidor island. Macarthur then abandons his men and escapes in a P.T. boat.
 
Return to the Phillipines. 1944-45.... Macarthur's publicity machine goes into high gear, proclaims his genious when in fact, the Japanese were a beaten enemy and had lost all operational and strategic mobility.
 
Korea... Once again Macarthur's forces are unprepared for war. After a near disaster, Macarthur lands at Inchon (good move). But... he then  arrogently ignores intelligence reports about Chinese troops and his men nearly expereince another disaster as Chinese counter attack begins. Mcarthur then wants to widen the war with nuculear weapons.
 
 


Edited by Cryptic - 30-May-2009 at 15:42
Back to Top
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 00:32
really good sugesstion about macarthur. just want to say in reply to the monty fans before el alemin monty had total superiority in every area, rommel was absent on sick leave and the brits had broken the german codes so he knew exactly what was going on in there command post. and he still almost lost. in relation to his biograpy who cares what an egomaniac writes about himself. and as for normandy his essentail contribution is just  that master diplomat eisenhower trying not to offend. im not saying he did not make conrtibutions but so did hundreds of others. as a general in charge alone in battle he was only just able to win when all the cards were in his favour. and then only just
Back to Top
Sun Tzu View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 31-Oct-2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 03:09
Patton was never a military genius in my opinion, he was more of a "bulldog" Ike would use to do the dirty work that noone else wanted to do hence the name ol blood n guts.
Sun Tzu

All warfare is based on deception - Sun Tzu
Back to Top
Wulfstan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 15-Feb-2008
Location: Mercia
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 19:13
Robert E. Lee
 
Without the help of "Stonewall" Jackson, Robert E. Lee was a mediocre general. The British historian, J. F. C. fuller described Lee as "one of the most incapable Generals-in-Chief in history".
From Woden sprang all our royal kin.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 19:54
Originally posted by Wulfstan Wulfstan wrote:

Robert E. Lee
 
Without the help of "Stonewall" Jackson, Robert E. Lee was a mediocre general. The British historian, J. F. C. fuller described Lee as "one of the most incapable Generals-in-Chief in history".
 
The more recent assessments of R. E. Lee seem to be in agreement with that view.  Lee was a popular leader of men, and a fine man, but he was a throwback to pre-industrial military times.  His sanctification after the war was part of the South's myth of the honorable lost cause. 
 
Lee's Napoleonic tactical thinking (he was hardly alone in that) caused him to seek battles of annihilation, but he was never able to pull them off - Sharpsburg/Antietam; Chancellorsville; Gettysburg.  It is hard to do that anyway when the enemy's resources are much greater, and the casualties of the South in all three of these battles were unacceptably high.  By summer, 1863, the South was running out of it's best, most experienced troops.
 
Possibly the greatest criticism is that when it was obvious the Confederacy was beaten, Lee, as the unquestionable first man of the South, did not surrender on the best terms that could be had and spare Virginia and other localities the destruction and useless loss of life that occurred.
 
As far as J. F. C. Fuller, I don't know that he commanded any armies in great wars, so his literary posturing can be dismissed.  Lee has been over rated, but he was not incapable. 
 
Beside that, who would have been better - Johnston, Longstreet, Hood, Beauregard?  That is doubtful.  All the best generals were in the Union army, but that is another topic, isn't it?  Wink
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 30-May-2009 at 19:55
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 20:09
Originally posted by Cryptic Cryptic wrote:

Douglas "American Ceaser" Macarthur....
 
Phillipines, 1942... His men were unprepared for war.  Cornered, they fight heroically in trenches while "Dug out Dug" shelters on Cooregidor island. Macarthur then abandons his men and escapes in a P.T. boat.
 
Return to the Phillipines. 1944-45.... Macarthur's publicity machine goes into high gear, proclaims his genious when in fact, the Japanese were a beaten enemy and had lost all operational and strategic mobility.
 
Korea... Once again Macarthur's forces are unprepared for war. After a near disaster, Macarthur lands at Inchon (good move). But... he then  arrogently ignores intelligence reports about Chinese troops and his men nearly expereince another disaster as Chinese counter attack begins. Mcarthur then wants to widen the war with nuculear weapons.
 
 
 
You need to read more and question popular history mythology.  Why not check out the article written for the AE magazine a few years ago? 
 
MacArthur had his faults, but overall, his strategic thinking was very sound.
 
 
Back to Top
Wulfstan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 15-Feb-2008
Location: Mercia
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 20:11
To dissmiss J. F. C .Fuller`s study of military history simply because he did not command an army in warfare is ridiculous. He was an intellectual, a military thinker, who made a life long study of the history of war which culminated in his great work "The Decisive Battles of the Western World ".This great work is today studied in military academies all over the world.
From Woden sprang all our royal kin.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 20:30
Originally posted by Wulfstan Wulfstan wrote:

To dissmiss J. F. C .Fuller`s study of military history simply because he did not command an army in warfare is ridiculous. He was an intellectual, a military thinker, who made a life long study of the history of war which culminated in his great work "The Decisive Battles of the Western World ".This great work is today studied in military academies all over the world.
 
I have nothing against intellectuals, but I have my opinion.  Incidentally, one of the great military intellectuals of earlier times maintained that the art of war was learned and refined "in the field, with the men, sweating and freezing."  Quite different than having a scotch in the faculty club while waiting for tea time.
 
Decisive Battles of something-or-other is a title that appears constantly on the clearance rack at Barnes and Noble.  The few really decisive battles that have ever occurred are the ones that have had far reaching effects other than ending a war. 
 
Waterloo, for example, really did not defeat the French Revolution.  That was not done until the Paris Commune in 1871.  There were not glamorous cavalry charges, but it was almost as bloody, (EDIT) and it was more decisive.
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 30-May-2009 at 22:16
Back to Top
Wulfstan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 15-Feb-2008
Location: Mercia
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 21:13
Pikeshot1600:
 
Have you read Fuller`s "Decisive Battles of The Western World"? If not, then I suggest you do so. Moreover, Fuller actually served in the First World War, and he was also an early advocate of armoured warfare. As I suggested, he is an highly respected figure in military circles throughout the world. 
From Woden sprang all our royal kin.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 22:34
I have read some of Fuller's work, but such an all encompassing comment as his on Lee is very suspect.  Fuller served in the first war...along with how many other soldiers and sailors?  So what?
 
As I recall, Fuller was something of a crypto-Nazi and an occultist.  That in itself makes him suspect, and he seems to me to be rather more forgotten than anything else.  He has fallen into the category of Clausewitz - once well thought of, but now no longer relevant.
 
  
 
Back to Top
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 23:27
im probably going to get some abuse for this but what about alexander the great. you have to judge a commander by the quality of his oppenents. compared to the army that philip developed the persians never stood a chance. look what happened 100 years before when 10,000 merceneries fron greece marched right through the persian empire and that was without a leader. even his close friends said that he was not a great general compared to his father
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 18:29

Lee was a good general and probably the best of the civil war. People who criticise him for searching for a decisive battle simply don't understand the situation on the home front in those days.

The south simply had no means for a total war in the way that it was fought then. They had no real navy, a small population half of which were slaves who didn't fight and most importantly little industrial resources. Fighting a prolonged campaign to achieve final victory was simply out of the question and beyond the capability of the south. The only choice was to distroy the North in a series of major engagements so either the European powers will intervene and force the North to accept the confederacy (which was almost going to happen in 1863) or waite for elections which would have definitely lead to the loss of Lincoln, and he nearly did in 64 despite almost total victory then. Lee saved the south in the Peninsula campaign and prolonged the war for two more years. Now that is an achievement.

Also Monty wasn't bad, he was a good tactician and strategist. It was logistics that failed him in Market Garden but he also helped distroy the SS in Caen and give the Americans time to breakout from Normandy which was guarded by 2nd rate german divisions.

As for most overrated generals, I think there are many good generals that were made absolute geniuses although there are not like Wellington, but the most overrated general in my opinion should Julius Caesar. I simply don't get why people like him. Pompey outclassed him yet he is not considered among the great Roman generals.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Status: Offline
Points: 5237
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 20:48
we already had this topic, use teh search function
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.