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 LockedTop 100 Generals

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 118119120121122>
Author
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Apr-2009 at 13:34
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

Hello to you all
 
While Attaturk was a good leader and military commander, I doubt he would qualify to the top 100 generals. He was much better than most WWI generals fom both sides but again, even those who I think outrank him don't qualify to the top 100. Remember Gallipoli was as worse a slaughter as the trenches in the west and it was the bravery of the Turkish soldier that won the battle not the excellent generalship.
 
As for the Greco-Turkish war while the operations were impressive and the victory was total, still I think there were many mistakes that Attaturk commited that nearly lost him the war.
 
Al-Jassas
Hello Al jassas
             
                    What were the mistakes of Atatürk during the greco turkish war?  I think you mean in the first phase of war
Back to Top
Young Tatar View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 22
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Young Tatar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Apr-2009 at 16:01
Al Jassas, Commander of the Gallipoli war was Limon von Sanders, a German General. Ataturk was the backup commander. His tactics helped for winning. Turkish soldier's bravery was an important factor, but his tactics were really important, too.

"Independence and Freedom are my character."
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

-----------------------------
Crimean Tatar Independence Movement
Back to Top
MythTR View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 17-Feb-2009
Location: Türkiye
Status: Offline
Points: 73
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MythTR Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Apr-2009 at 21:03
Atatürk grew up a sapling from the ashes. This should be objective point.
We Turks are a people who throughout our history have been the very embodiment of freedom&independence
Mustafa Kemal ATATURK
Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 603
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Apr-2009 at 16:52
Originally posted by Young Tatar Young Tatar wrote:


And Temujin, there is a saying about Ataturk: " He was a great commander, but a better leader."


I agree with that quote.  He is not a top 100 general, but will likely be on the Top 100 leaders, if I ever get around to finishing that list!
The Top 100 Generals | Leaders



God is my Judge
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Apr-2009 at 16:57
Originally posted by DSMyers1 DSMyers1 wrote:

Originally posted by Young Tatar Young Tatar wrote:


And Temujin, there is a saying about Ataturk: " He was a great commander, but a better leader."


I agree with that quote.  He is not a top 100 general, but will likely be on the Top 100 leaders, if I ever get around to finishing that list!
I think he was a better general than a lot of generals in the list. He created a republic against the allied powers
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Apr-2009 at 17:59

Hello to you all

 
Precisely! The guys leadership helped prevent western intervention in Turkey during the conflict because if they did, Turkey would have never survived.
Also One reason why western powers didn't go to war with Attaturk was the event that was ended 4 years earlier called WWI. After such massive losses (much of it was in the east against the Turks) add to it the excesses of the Greeks all made public opinion against intervention. If the west intervened, and it could have, Attaturk would have probably been defeated (the odds were against him fighting the greeks, the weakest of the allies let alone the Brits and French).
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 10:35
The grreks were weaker than the brits and french but their dedication to occupy their old homeland was powerful so this make them a harder enemy. Atatürk created the state against greek, armenian, allies and internal enemies. He pushed the greeks from anatolia in a 15 day period which the greeks occupied in 3 years.
Back to Top
Brainsucker View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 05-Apr-2009
Location: Indonesia
Status: Offline
Points: 33
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brainsucker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 18:50

Hallo, I'm new here and I interest with this 100 top generals topic. Before i say to agree to disagree with the people choice of their 100 top generals version, I want to ask, what is the criteria about this list? Archievement? their might? their number of winning? their unorthodox method to find new kind of battle tactic or tradition? Or what?

Because for me, I don't think that Alexander the Great was greater than Genghiz Khan, nor Hannibal and Scipio were greater than Julius Caesar.
 
If you use the archievement as the basic, then you must consider the mongol Khans and Generals as the top ten of the military geniuses for all time, as no one can match their archievement, even in today era.
 
If you say about the unorthodox method / military genius who find new warfare docrine, then you must put people like Sun Tzu, Clausenwitch (sorry, his name is difficult to me to spell), Philip of Macedonia, Gaius Marius, and Napoleon to the top of the list. Because these people are the first who adopt new battle tactic that make their kingdom has advantage over their enemies.
 
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Status: Offline
Points: 5237
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 19:38
welcome to AllEmpires, nice first post. Smile


Originally posted by Evrenosgazi Evrenosgazi wrote:


 I think he was a better general than a lot of generals in the list. He created a republic against the allied powers


i agree, he was arguably the best 20th century general but there are still other generals of the 20th century in front of him
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 23:56
I have looked in on this thread a number of times, but have not posted (at least I don't remember doing so).  Our new member "Brainsucker" (strange name, but so is mine) asks about what criteria are these top 100 generals evaluated.  I want to be a Devil's Advocate and state that for the last 150 or so years, the defining characteristics of greatness for a general have changed from the aspect of battlefield valor; from flamboyant plumage and the inspiration of fighting men to something more mundane, and something more modern.
 
Napoleon Bonaparte was the last "great captain."  In the last 150 years, the top generals have been the least glorious, and the least romantic of military men.  They have been the new breed of military technocrats whose purpose in professional life has been to manage and to plan for, not to command, armies.
 
Accordingly, I would add to the list two generals who did not command armies in the field but who provided for the successes of others who did:
 
1)  Generalfeldmarschall Helmuth von Moltke (the elder), Chef der Generalstab of the Prussian army and of the army of the German Reich.
 
2)  General of the Army George Catlett Marshall, Chief of Staff of the US army in world War II.
 
Neither of these generals may have been good as a field commander - we will never know, but in the industrial age, the skill sets they possessed were more crucial than that, and the importance of their professional contribution cannot be underestimated.
 
By the mid 19th century, the military profession had become more a public office; a trust of public policy and an aspect of national interest rather than a warrior's glorious career.
 
The most important generals became those who the public never really knew.
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 06-Apr-2009 at 00:00
Back to Top
Brainsucker View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 05-Apr-2009
Location: Indonesia
Status: Offline
Points: 33
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brainsucker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 03:45

Well, I agree with Pikeshot1600 :)

The Top Military General should be the military geniuses who change the tradition of military warfare during their era.
 
Napoleon is a genius who change the course of European War during his era. Before him, lots of European general use the more traditional warfare that limit the line of supply, but with his grande army or something (I forget the name because I just browse this fact in the internet two days ago and haven't study it well), Napoleon has change the tradition of military warfare in Europe (and the world)
 
Sun Tzu is a military Genius. Because of him, the docrine of ancient China change forever. According to chinese people I know, they even use this docrine to today business practice too.
 
Gaius Marius is a military Genius. Because of his military reform of the Roman Legion, Rome become the most powerful country in Europe at it's time.
 
Clauzenwitch or something (the writer of the book "On War") is a military genius too. His docrine has been used by European Army since then.
 
I don't know the other name, but I know that there are a lot of military geniuses of all time.
The problem is who is the top 100 military geniuses of all time that their though has change the course of history around their whereabout. Because if you want to consider Gaius Marius as the top 100 of the world, you must consider the Han Chinese Generals and military thinker (who's the thought had the same glorious archievement as the Roman Empire)
Back to Top
tigloon View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 06-Apr-2009
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tigloon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 05:20
Hi all;
As a Turkish history student I can say that Atatürk is the best leader in the period between 1900 and  today.Founding a country from ashes in the 20th century and changing the people and their life stile from islamic to democratic and laic is nearly impossible. But this topic is about top generals. He was a governer, and a manager more than a general. As he says :' War is murder if it is not necessary.'  So in my opinion he was a good general but not at top 100.History has many great generals, born for war.I would say Attila or Alexander.
Thanks.
'Peace at home, Peace in the world' Gazi M. Kemal ATATÜRK
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 05:48
Hello to you all
 
About Ataturk, again I didn't say he wasn't good, I said he was good but not good enough. When we assess him we should take all his capaign in perspective.
 
While his performace in Libya was top rate his performance in Mus and east Anatolia in general was not good. He was defeated and outgeneraled by the extremely underated Yudenich who does by the way deserve a place on the top 100.
 
In The greek war his performance was excellent but there was nothing out of the ordinary that makes him outstanding from all the generals.
 
I know little about most of the 100 but if he does outclass them then he does deserve a place there but the greatest general? I don't think so.
 
He is however definitely one of the top 100 leaders. It was his leadership that united the Turks in opposition to the treaties. He reinvigorated the sense of national pride in Turkey and for the first time brough stability to the country.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
SappeR View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 07-Apr-2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 8
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SappeR Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2009 at 15:33
G'day all...
 
I have read the first 10 pages of this Particular Topic and have come to this conclusion...
The list could change, but mostly on oppinion, and without seeing all the wars in history, and even then, the list would still be so. (Some Generals are simply more likeable)
 
There is one thing people are forgetting about Alexander though.
 
He was the first GREAT conquerer in history, and here is my reasoning:
He, like the Persians before him assimilated various cultures and armies into his own, but far ahead of the Persian Medes, he successfully achieved greater heights with tactics he could have only imagined in Macedon. (Horse Archers from as far as present-day Afghanistan, Elephants from the middle east, Heavy Cavalry from the Parthian Steppes).
These units were all vastly different from the Macedon standard (Macedonian Cavalry did not use Maces for example) particularly in equipment these differences become apparant, and their strengths and weaknesses need to be accounted for.
He went on to use tactics with these units against their own, and often just in one battle would win convincingly.
 
I refuse to take any oppinion of the man himself, as all accounts from that time are biased. Greeks were Romanticising him (under Demetrius' successors) within 100 years.  (Greek Romanticising involved him being 'infected' with uncivilised ways of the Persian Medes, thus negative stories) All references to him from India are suprisingly well. The one setback often mentioned by authors who study Alexander for a living is this; he had no great historian or scribe, even the great Achilles had his Homer.
 
Fact of the matter, he is with all information taken into account, a harsh General, but the best.
 
For your information, if you are interested:
A majority of the areas he conquered were still speaking Greek around 1500 years later (after One thousand years of Roman rule, the courts and officials were using Greek)
 
Apart from Conversion to Christianity by about 450AD, A majority of the Territories he conquered still worshipped an exceptionally similar pantheon as what they were in the aftermath of Alexander.
 
Residual effect: Alexander's spread of Greek/Macedonian Culture paved the way for the Romans, who took a good 200 years to do what Alexander did in under ten (I take into account the Indias, where in Afghanistan there were Indo-Greeko rulers till around 200AD)
 
In my oppinion; end of story. (On another note, my dad is a history buff and he says Napolean) But I argue black and blue that for Tactics, and flexibility, Alexander is the best, even a hypothetical - against the Golden Horde, and Timurlane, Napolean and Hannibal, I doubt they could stand Alexander in his Tactical splendur.
 
Cheers...
 
-SappeR-
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2009 at 17:19
Originally posted by tigloon tigloon wrote:

Hi all;
As a Turkish history student I can say that Atatürk is the best leader in the period between 1900 and  today.Founding a country from ashes in the 20th century and changing the people and their life stile from islamic to democratic and laic is nearly impossible. But this topic is about top generals. He was a governer, and a manager more than a general. As he says :' War is murder if it is not necessary.'  So in my opinion he was a good general but not at top 100.History has many great generals, born for war.I would say Attila or Alexander.
Thanks.
Maybe not in top ten but he is obviously one of the top 100. Most of the members think his success ordinary but it is not. The gallipoli campaign and turco-greek war was great achievements. He succeeded as a soldier of ruined empire and new goverment. At least by his wars Turks are  one of the nations which did not ruled by imperial powers 
Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 603
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Apr-2009 at 16:37
Originally posted by Evrenosgazi Evrenosgazi wrote:

Maybe not in top ten but he is obviously one of the top 100. Most of the members think his success ordinary but it is not. The gallipoli campaign and turco-greek war was great achievements. He succeeded as a soldier of ruined empire and new goverment. At least by his wars Turks are  one of the nations which did not ruled by imperial powers 


Do you have some good (English) sources for his campaigns?  From what I have read, I don't see it.  The Gallipoli campaign was an absolutely terrible piece of generalship by the Allies...  It didn't take a brilliant general to halt it.  In WWI, a stalemate was fairly easy to achieve, based on the relative primacy of defense over offense in terms of the weaponry.  He delayed the Russians well in the Caucasus.  He proved an excellent leader in the Turkish War of Independence, but most of the actions of that war were more political than military, more decentralized than centrally commanded...  I appreciate the effort, but the opposition was hardly excellent.

I consider him between 100 and 200 on the list.  It seems that just about all of his supporters for the Top 100 list are from Turkey... has anyone else noticed that?  He is somewhat analagous to George Washington, who is not on the list either, and who faced a much more stubborn foe.
The Top 100 Generals | Leaders



God is my Judge
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Apr-2009 at 17:57
The critic day of the gallipoli campaign was the first day. The plan of the allies were not excellent but it was not bad either. They planned the disembarkment to the south and west coast of gallipolli peninsula. The major ottoman and german generals gave the priority to the north of gallipoli and thrace. Because of this the turkish armies major forces were stationed in the north. At 25 april 1915 the campaign initiated. The English and French forces started the attack. 
 
 
       There was only 1 ottoman divison with 3 battalions in the southwest of the peninsula. The division of mustafa Kemal Atatürk was a reserve division. The turkish division confronted the English division in the south but the ANZAC division in the west started to penetrate and their aim was to cover the ottoman division. What did Mustafa Kemal at this moment? He gave informatiobn to the center and he did not wait any orders and started to walk with his division against the ANZACS. He confronted them and prevented the coverage of the turkish division. If another commander was in charge and await orders from the center the first the ottomans would lost the south of the peninsula and the English divisions in the south of the peninsula would unite with the ANZACS  and the war will be diffrerent in all of the way. So the allied plans were not that bad and if there was a moderate soldier in the command of the reserve ottoman division the allies would have taken almost the half of the peninsula in the first day. With this manuever ottomans led their divisions to the south and the battle stabilised.
 
         In 1920 the treaty of Sevres gave the turks only the central parts of Anatolia. The French, English, Armenians, Kurds, Italians had shared all of the regions which were previous ottoman regions. He started the war from Samsun without any land and he made the allies to accept the independence of Turkey in Laussanne 1923
 
 
 
You see the difference I think Smile. He fought against the allies and the ottoman goverment . His job was hard. 
 
Dear DSMyers1, I have full respect to your general list but I think Mustafa Kemal Atatürk deserves to be in the top 100. His creation is the Republic of Turkey which he build mostly by wars not diplomacy 
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Apr-2009 at 18:04
Originally posted by DSMyers1 DSMyers1 wrote:

Originally posted by Evrenosgazi Evrenosgazi wrote:

Maybe not in top ten but he is obviously one of the top 100. Most of the members think his success ordinary but it is not. The gallipoli campaign and turco-greek war was great achievements. He succeeded as a soldier of ruined empire and new goverment. At least by his wars Turks are  one of the nations which did not ruled by imperial powers 


Do you have some good (English) sources for his campaigns?  From what I have read, I don't see it.  The Gallipoli campaign was an absolutely terrible piece of generalship by the Allies...  It didn't take a brilliant general to halt it.  In WWI, a stalemate was fairly easy to achieve, based on the relative primacy of defense over offense in terms of the weaponry.  He delayed the Russians well in the Caucasus.  He proved an excellent leader in the Turkish War of Independence, but most of the actions of that war were more political than military, more decentralized than centrally commanded...  I appreciate the effort, but the opposition was hardly excellent.

I consider him between 100 and 200 on the list.  It seems that just about all of his supporters for the Top 100 list are from Turkey... has anyone else noticed that?  He is somewhat analagous to George Washington, who is not on the list either, and who faced a much more stubborn foe.
I dont remember any English sources but most of the english sources give priority to the tactics of the allies and the heroism of the allied soldiers. He won the war millitarily not diplomaticly. His briliiance was accepted by the English primeminister Lloyd George.  If anyone else advocated a Turk to be in the list I would notice that alsoLOL
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Status: Offline
Points: 5237
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Apr-2009 at 23:33
Originally posted by DSMyers1 DSMyers1 wrote:


Do you have some good (English) sources for his campaigns?  From what I have read, I don't see it.  The Gallipoli campaign was an absolutely terrible piece of generalship by the Allies...  It didn't take a brilliant general to halt it.  In WWI, a stalemate was fairly easy to achieve, based on the relative primacy of defense over offense in terms of the weaponry.  He delayed the Russians well in the Caucasus.  He proved an excellent leader in the Turkish War of Independence, but most of the actions of that war were more political than military, more decentralized than centrally commanded...  I appreciate the effort, but the opposition was hardly excellent.

I consider him between 100 and 200 on the list.  It seems that just about all of his supporters for the Top 100 list are from Turkey... has anyone else noticed that?  He is somewhat analagous to George Washington, who is not on the list either, and who faced a much more stubborn foe.


i don't considder him great based on his ww1 record (at Gallipoli he was subordinate to Liman von Sanders, in Palestine he was severely defeated by Allenby but again overall commander was Kress von Kressenstein or again Liman von Sanders). either way, i give him most credit for the Turkish War of Independence and i think one cannot give enough credit to him. English sources on the war are difficult to come by and i have to say i used also Turkish sources whenever i got some translations. either way based on the superficial info i have it is enough to say he was one of the best 20th century generals.

and btw i'm not Turk.
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Apr-2009 at 00:19

Beating the Ottomans forces in 1918 was not that difficult. Let us switch the generals, Does anybody think that Allenby would win again. The ottoman forces were exhausted by multiple wars(Balkan, WW1). They were inferior in all ways. In Atatürks memories he mentioned the defeat as inevitable. Because of this he retreated to the anatolian line and tried to preserve the ottoman forces.  

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 118119120121122>
  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 0.109 seconds.