Sorry it was just a typo and your assumption was correct.
Anyway; here are my five votes for the next round:
Zachary Taylor - 2 votes.
John McCain - 2 votes one of many US admirals in the Pacific.
Josip Broz Tito - 1 vote - as pointed out by others, not really a commander as such.
Sticking with:
Titokowaru – 2 points
Gabriel Dumont – 2 points
Going with the flow:
McCain – 1 point
2 - Titokowaru
2 - Tito
1 - Lemay.
Tito - 2
Kesselring - 1
LeMay - 1
Taylor - 1
Still trying to push out Tito, whose main military claim to fame is holding together until the Red Army’s advance ended the German occupation. Kesselring did a decent job of holding the spine of Italy, but that was the easiest campaign objective in World War II.
Adding LeMay, whose area bombing campaign against Japan far exceeds in savagery anything Sherman ever contemplated, with ambiguous military results to boot, and whose borderline insane postwar advice to actually use nuclear weapons justifies the nasty parodies of him Hollywood has presented us (Dr. Strangelove). And jumping on the Taylor bandwagon for no good reason.
McCain 2
Charles de Gaulle 2
Albert Kesselring 1
The votes in our fourth round:
Josip Broz Tito - 9
Zachary Taylor - 7
John S. McCain Sr. - 7
Titokowaru - 6
Charles de Gaulle, Albert Kesselring - 4 each
Gabriel Dumont, Curtis LeMay - 3 each
Flavius Aetius, U.S. Grant - 1 each
The top four are gone. The next round will conclude at noon EST on Fri. Aug. 27. Same rules as before.
Gabriel Dumont – 2 points
I keep voting for him. Hope this’ll be the last round I have the chance to do so.
Albert Kesselring – 2 points
He shouldn’t be holding the spine of this thread much longer.
Flavius Aetius – 1 point
I wasted an early vote on him. Hope this effort is more productive.
Here are my votes for this round.
Curtis LeMay - 2 points; orchestrating the destruction of Japan’s cities was effective I guess but more a funciton of technical and logistical superiority than any great leadership form Le May.
Sun Tzu - 2 points as with Clausewitz more a theorist than a leader.
Albert Kesselring - 1 point competant but uninspiring in my view.
Albert Kesselring - Still hate Nazis, and he wasn’t their best field commander - 2
Charles de Gaulle - did much more as a politician than as a military leader - 2
Gabriel Dumont - just not in the same league as the others - 1
Okay, my tenuous grasp of military history is starting to fail me here - could someone make a pitch for Flavius Aetius and Dumont?
I’ll leave Dumont to someone else - I’m not particularly well read on the Metis rebellions. Dunno that I’m exceptionally well read on late Roman history either, but I’ll say a few words for and against Flavius Aetius.
The biggest single most famous moment on his resume is the battle of Chalons where he defeated the Huns ( or at least was the guiding hand, if not sole commander ), which has caused some to hail him as a great hero. However other more revisionist voices have pointed out that said battle is similar to a few others like Poitiers in that it may not deserve the prominent place some older historians like Gibbons once gave it. Less the defeat of an all-conquering horde than a check of a large-scale razzia. Indeed there is an argument to be made that Aetius may have deliberately prevented the destruction of the Hunnic army, which actually makes a fair bit of sense as he had historically leaned heavily on Hunnic forces to keep various Germanic tribes in check.
But really the biggest strike against Aetius is we just don’t have much details on most of his numerous campaigns ( at least according to Bury, I’d welcome some correction ). It’s hard to say just how he won some of the campaigns credited to him ( and at least a couple we know were actually conducted in the field by his second, Lictorius ). Could be some were walkover punitive expeditions or decided more by a combination of show of force + politics. Could be some were brilliantly and hard fought against steep odds. In many cases it isn’t clear.
But at the very least he appears to have been a capable commander. Beyond Chalons, he is credited with repeatedly beating various Germanic tribes/states ( orchestrating a particularly huge slaughter of the Burgundians with a Hun army, inspiring the Ring Cycle ), including both the formidable Visigoths and Franks more than once ( apparently in pitched battles which we know very little about as above, some are essentially unnamed ). He definitely appears to have more or less stabilized and in some places even slightly re-expanded the WRE borders in Europe ( North Africa was a different story ). And at a distance he certainly seems to show great ability as a grand strategist and generalissimo - he repeatedly played one “barbarian” state off against the other over decades ( and moved them around ) and successfully held the WRE together.
He doesn’t deserve to take the crown here, but I think I’d drop a few others before him. Might give him primacy over his famous adversary Attila for example.
Sun Tzu - 2 (historians aren’t even sure whether he actually existed or not)
Zhuge Liang - 2 (much of his reputation for greatness is due to fictional embellishments from Romance of the Three Kingdoms)
O’Kane - 1
Kesselring - 2
LeMay - 2
Sun Tzu - 1
Kesselring continues his dogged defense of the spine of this thread. I’ll land some marines behind his main line of defense and see if I can cut him off.
LeMay’s vision was almost post-military: using technology to evade, as much as possible, direct contact with enemy armies and air forces, and simply render the entire enemy nation-state nonexistent. He came closer than anyone else on this list to destroying his own side along with the enemy and everything else of value – an apotheosis not of men but of violence itself.
Sun Tzu would have claim to a high ranking on this list if we had confidence he existed as more than just a rhetorical device.
2 - Sherman.
2 - Mitscher - incompetence at Midway.
1 - Kesselring - not very successful.
Just under the window, I think…
Mitscher - 2. Did mishandle the Hornet’s air wings at Midway.
LeMay - 2. Eh.
Upham - 1. Minor tactical leader.
I’ll count your votes, Tamerlane, since voting is light, you weren’t that late, and you gave us such a useful summary of Flavius Aetius’s career.
The votes in our fifth round:
Albert Kesselring - 8
Curtis Le May - 6
Sun Tzu - 5
Gabriel Dumont, Marc Mitscher - 3
Charles de Gaulle, Kong Ming/Zhuge Liang, William T. Sherman - 2 each
Flavius Aetius, Richard H. O’Kane, Charles Upham - 1 each
The top three are now gone.
Rule change: Please use the full names of each person for whom you’ll be voting, just as they appear below, on our list of surviving nominees. You need not use the five-word descriptions:
Akbar the Great: Conquered much of India
Alexander the Great: Conquered the known world
Attila the Hun: Scourge of God, and Rome.
Belisarius: Justinian’s hammer
Napoleon Bonaparte: Conquered most of Europe
Sir Isaac Brock: Saved Canada against overwhelming odds
Arthur Currie: Vimy Ridge; only sane WW1 leader?
Moshe Dayan: Eye-patched Israeli commander
Charles de Gaulle: Led Free French forces
Michiel Adriaenszoon de Ruyter: Dutch admiral, naval star
Hugh Dowding: Won Battle of Britain
Gabriel Dumont: Metis guerrilla warfare strategist
Dwight D. Eisenhower: Defeated Nazis in Western Europe
Flavius Aetius: Scourge of Attila
Frederick the Great: Prussian king and battlefield genius
Gaius Marius: Most important military reforms ever?
Genghis Khan: Built the perfect war machine
Vo Nguyen Giap: Won Dien Bien Phu, Vietnam
Ulysses S. Grant: Won final victory for Union
Gustavus Adolphus: Made Sweden a great power
Hannibal: Greatest tactical genius?
Henry V: Warrior-king; won at Agincourt
Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson: Embodiment of maneuver and offense
John Paul Jones: Great American, Russian naval commander
Julius Caesar: Rome’s most brilliant commander
Paul von Hindenburg: German field marshal
Khalid ibn al-Walid: Architect of the Arab conquests.
Kong Ming/Zhuge Liang: Great Chinese tactician
Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck: Evaded the British in Africa
Erich von Manstein: His plan conquered France
Duke of Marlborough: Master of early modern war
Mehmet the Conqueror: Took Constantinople
Marc Mitscher: Master of operational carrier warfare
Bernard Montgomery: British commander at El Alamein
Lord Nelson: Royal Navy admiral; Trafalgar victor
Oda Nobunaga: First great unifier of Japan
Richard H. O’Kane: Top U.S. submarine captain, WW2
George Patton: Armored warfare advocate
Phillip II of Macedon: Alexander’s father, set the stage
Pyrrhus: King of Epirus; opposed Rome
Erwin Rommel: Germany’s Desert Fox
Scipio Africanus: Stopped Carthage and Hannibal
Philip “Little Phil” Sheridan: Grant’s troubleshooter; Indian fighter extraordinaire
William Tecumseh Sherman: Logistics, maneuver as strategic warfare
Subutai: Genghis Khan’s top general
Themistocles: Victor of Marathon, Artemisium, Salamis
Timur-e-Lang: The scourge of Western Asia
Togo Heihachiro: Japanese naval victor against Russians
Tsao Tsao (also Cao Cao): Chinese emperor, general
Charles Upham: Modern hero in ancient mould
Sebastien Le Prestre de Vauban: Great French military engineer
George Washington: Determined general; won American independence
Duke of Wellington: Successes in India; thrashed Napoleon
Orde Wingate: Unorthodox leader in Africa, Asia
Yamamoto Isoroku: WW2 Japanese naval leader
Yi-Sun Shin: Noteworthy Korean admiral
Georgy Zhukov: Led from Moscow to Berlin
Eliminated so far:
George B. McClellan
Charles the Bold
Hernan Cortez
Douglas MacArthur
Pompey Magnus
Carl von Clausewitz
Robert E. Lee
Josip Broz Tito
Zachary Taylor
John S. McCain Sr.
Titokowaru
Albert Kesselring
Curtis Le May
Sun Tzu
The next round will conclude at noon EST on Mon. Aug. 30. Same rules as before.
Gabriel Dumont - 2
Charles Upham - 2
Charles de Gaulle - 1
Sticking with:
Gabriel Dumont – 2
Flavius Aetius – 2
Introducing:
Charles Upham – 1
Gabriel Dumont - 2
Charles de Gaulle - 2
Charles Upham - 1
Charles Upham - 2. Minor tactical leader.
Paul von Hindenburg - 2. Hey, how’d he slip through? Most of his military successes were owed more to the ability of others, especially Ludendorff. He wasn’t at all incompetent, but he certainly wasn’t brilliant either. That he ended his days a front man for the Nazis is almost neither here nor there - he just wasn’t that exemplary of a general in of himself.
Marc Mitscher - 1. Flubbed big time at Midway.