Top 100 Generals

Originally posted by nomooon Originally posted by Tiger of Kai There's no way Ieyasu should be ranked higher than Nobunaga or Hideyoshi. yeah the list of japanese commanders is rediculous, hideyoshi and ieyasu are not even top tier commanders in Sengoku Era.  Uesugi, Takeda, Hojo, Sanada and Mori all have produced better top tier commanders than the two unifiers

I don't really have a problem with Hideyoshi being ranked. His consolidation of power was an amazing feat. Not to mention his conquest of Kyushu. Of course, the Korean Invasions are a black mark on his record.

I wouldn't include the Sanada with the likes of the Takeda, Uesugi, Hojo and Mori. While they were an important family, for the most part, they were vassals of the Takeda or Toyotomi. I would probably add the Shimazu to the families that you have listed.

Seems more a list of prominence than generalship.  Alexander, for example, was a magnificent figure and leader, but didn't have a good enough bull to ride in Cyrus to get a good score. No way I'd put Lee over Stonewall--again, a magnificent man, very pretty, but basically got in over his head at Antietam and at the Wilderness, not to mention Pickett's Charge, still, a fine gentleman.  I don't see Rommel in the top 1000 (yes, that's one thousand) of all time.  He was a good division level tank commander, and like Alexander, Monty wasn't all that great a bull.  There is actually a memo either to or from Goebbels, I think--I can't exactly recall, where they dictate that they will make Rommel into a hero through the propaganda machine.  As for Ghengis Khan, it wasn't him--he had several unbelievable generals--who used explosive missles, diverted rivers to destroy walled strongholds, and other incorporations of the diverse technology they had picked up.  Now if you want to include THOSE at the top, I vote yes.    For modern, I'd probably go with Napoleon, Stonewall, maybe  Swartzkopf, or whoever was the mastermind behind D.S.   As for Patton, he really didn't have much of a challenge, he was superbly supplied in men and armor, although he did push his fuel on occasion.  I guess that is the most lopsided enemy casualty vs enemy inflicted casualty ratio I know of--it dwarfs The Battle of New Orleans.  Zukhov was also more than just brutal and fear-instilling; he was a smart dude.   Ancient, I like Hannibal, since he proved himself against a lot of real competition.  I'm sure Alexander would have proven good to, given the  opportunity.  Probably only the "Great" generals peers knew how good they were or weren't.

Check out the debate on Greatest military commander of all time here:

Amen

I agree

Originally posted by felixmt Check out the debate on Greatest military commander of all time here: http://www.military-times.co.uk/category/intel experts arguing the case for Washington, Alexander the Great, Otto Von Bismarck, Augustus Caesar and many more!

Would you please give their English name equivelents that i might research them?

Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 05-Apr-2011 at 04:53

How is Alexander the Great who maybe could have conquered most of the known world at that time a better General than Temujin who did Conquer most of the world known at his time.

Temujin should be number 1 in my opinion.

Edited by shikra - 27-May-2011 at 11:03

Yeah I'd have to sya Alexander the Great as #1.  I definitely think William Wallace should be in with a shout