Military Leaders.

Hannibal invaded Italy through the St. Bernard pass (Napoleon Followed), but unlike Napoleon, with elephants. Since he is an ancient ruler I'd expect that many don't know that much about him. He probably did the most with the least on this list. 

Edited by Winterhaze13

I chose Alexander the Great due to the fact that he improvised most of the tactics he used... for example, during the siege of Tyre, he built a landbridge linking the old city with the new city over a natural moat over five hundred meters long.  When he marched south to Gaza the walls were too high for his siege engines, and thus, he ordered for the piling of sand and dirt to make the walls "lower".  What he did on the field was even more genius - his ability to forsee things made him one of the best military commanders in known history, and his ability to improvise quick battle maneuvers is what earned him his victories.

Alexander is obviously the most overrated...

he did not ensure sucession, he only fought three battles of which he won all, that's the basis for calling him the best commander ever. Thomas Jackson also won three battles before he was killed, yet he is hardly mentioned in any best listes...besides, napoleon has won at least 10 battles before his first defeat, and he did defeat mroe than one empire and fought multiple empries at a time.s ame goes for Chinggis, he did also conquer various empires and won many batttles, even when his military career started rather abd for him, he lost quite a few battle in the campaigns to unify the Mongolian tribes. so all Alexander did was winnign three battles and conquering a signle emprie which fragmented shortly after his death and died early enough to never face defeat or any other setback.

Originally posted by dark_one Napoleon. Underestimated Britain and Russia, but otherwise a great leader.

Napoleon was ultimately defeated not by the strength of his enemies but by his pride. He should never had invaded Russia, if he chose not to Napoleon would probably be first on his list. The fact that he was defeated hurts him in the eyes of history.

The only thing that prevented Britain from suffering the same fate as Prussia or Austria was British naval power and the Engliah channel. While, Russia was able to defeat Napoleon through a clever tactic by Alexander I, who abandoned Moscow in an attempt to force the French army to retreat.

Originally posted by Genghis Originally posted by Winterhaze13 The only thing that prevented Britain from suffering the same fate as Prussia or Austria was British naval power and the Engliah channel. I know the French had a saying "let us be masters of the Channel for six hours, and we shall be masters of the world." I always wonder what Europe and the world today would look like if a Napoleonic Empire had been created.

When asked about crossing the English Channel Napoleon remarked that "it is nothing but a ditch".

agree about Alexander possibly being overrated. A great explorer more than anything perhaps, though i do admire some maneuvers he made.
Greece and Persia were exhaused then he inherited a great army.
Cesaer who admired Alex and raised himself in his own writings(Gallic Wars,ect.) would still get more points from me considereing his military and political career.   

I believe Hitler was a good general ( if you could call him that) even tho he was evil.

what about Hydaspes, that is one of my favorites?

Originally posted by DuxPimpJuice Battles of Alexander the Great: Granicus River (victory) Siege of Helicarnarsus (actually it might be a different city, but close enough) (victory) Issus (victory) Siege of Tyre (victory) Siege of Gaza (victory) Gaugamela (victory) Battles to Susa (victories) Battles to Persipolis (victories)  [these two weren't really pitched battles, just a lot of guerilla warfare] Guerilla warfare in Afghanistan (a whole lot of improv. here) (victories) Battles with the Scythians (victories) The Siege of Pir-Sar (victory) Jhellum (in India) (victory) Further warfare in India on his naval expidition (victories) That's way more than three battles... -------- And his lack of successor has no effect on his abilities as a general.

 

there's Granicus, Gaugamela, Issos and the sieges of Halicarnassos, Tyre and Gaza, everything else in the Persian campaign were mere skirmishes and minor actions that do not count.