# Greatest Military Leader of all time? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 15, 2005, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442 "2005-06-15T21:00:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![straight\_man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/straight_man/32/3027_2.png) [@straight\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straight_man)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/21 "2005-06-16T03:54:30Z")
**Gorsnak** , you can explain out Wellington, but considering that Nelson smashed him at sea, making TWO major battles that Bonaparte lost fair and square (and Trafalgar really was inexcusable)… well, I think the Napster is out of the running. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/22 "2005-06-16T04:15:13Z")
> [@stpauler](#): > > Here’s most of the list that’s been compiled so far: > … > Joan of Arc I’m not sure what she’s doing in this list. At best she won a couple skirmishes, even assuming she was actually commanding. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/23 "2005-06-16T04:16:11Z")
> [@eustachian≠fallopian](#): > > **Gorsnak** , you can explain out Wellington, but considering that Nelson smashed him at sea, making TWO major battles that Bonaparte lost fair and square (and Trafalgar really was inexcusable)… well, I think the Napster is out of the running. Sorry. I’m unaware of Napoleon having anything much to do with Trafalgar. Trafalgar is very good evidence that Nelson was a vastly better admiral than Villeneuve. This should come as no surprise, since Nelson was a vastly better admiral than any of his contemporaries (indeed, as **RickJay** suggests, Nelson is arguably the best naval commander ever). But Trafalgar is no more relevant to the relative merits of Nelson and Napoleon than Talavera, Salamanca, or Vitoria are to the relative merits of Wellington and Napoleon. These engagements are good evidence that Nelson and Wellington were excellent commanders, but they say nothing about Napoleon. If you want to make a case against Boney, you should focus on the Russian fiasco. ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/24 "2005-06-16T04:22:30Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I’m not sure what she’s doing in this list. At best she won a couple skirmishes, even assuming she was actually commanding. It’s a list copied from the other site’s poster. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/25 "2005-06-16T04:25:37Z")
> [@eustachian≠fallopian](#): > > **Gorsnak** , you can explain out Wellington, but considering that Nelson smashed him at sea, making TWO major battles that Bonaparte lost fair and square (and Trafalgar really was inexcusable)… well, I think the Napster is out of the running. Sorry. I don’t remember Napoleon being present at Trafalgar. On the other hand, he was defeated, for instance, at Leipzig. But of course, the british weren’t present… (it seems quite obvious to me, as I mentionned a number of times, that posters here being much more conversant with british history, are very biased on the overall, tending to overestimate the influence/power/importance/achievments of the UK as far as european history is concerned). By the way, Blücher was present both at Leipzig and Waterloo. How comes Wellington is mentionned and Blucher isn’t? ---
**Author:** ![straight\_man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/straight_man/32/3027_2.png) [@straight\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straight_man)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/26 "2005-06-16T04:55:13Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I don’t remember Napoleon being present at Trafalgar. :smack: :smack: :smack: Knew that, I swear. :smack: :smack: :smack: For what it’s worth, he was ultimately the dude in charge. That’s a lousy excuse, I know. But this does remind me, there _are_ two cases in which he clearly slunk back to France, _sans l’armee_. (end of the Egypt campaign and immediately after Waterloo. In the latter case, he was caught before he made it home). The main point stands, in that I don’t think he’s really in the running for best military leader. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/27 "2005-06-16T05:07:19Z")
Perhaps it’s worth distinguishing between two sorts of situations. Suppose we’ve got a military force and a logistical base, and we want a commander to take them and kick some ass. In this role, I think I’d probably pick Wellington over Napoleon. Possibly. Tough call, but the demise of la Grande Armee does give me pause. On the other hand, if what we’ve got is a country, and we want a commander to take it and beat the tar out of the neighbours, then I’ll pick Napoleon over Wellington every single time. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/28 "2005-06-16T05:09:44Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > Napoleon … but otherwise had a more impressive career than Wellington How do you figure? Wellington won every battle he fought, IIRC, while Napoleon lost at least two, not to mention leading his army into disaster in Egypt, Russia, and over a longer period Spain. Wellington’s timing, movement and instinct in India and Spain/Portugal are pretty much unmatched IMO. One not mentioned yet: [Marlborough](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Churchill%2C_1st_Duke_of_Marlborough) . ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/29 "2005-06-16T05:12:20Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I (it seems quite obvious to me, as I mentionned a number of times, that posters here being much more conversant with british history, are very biased on the overall, tending to overestimate the influence/power/importance/achievments of the UK as far as european history is concerned).? Until I mentioned Wellington and Nelson, no British commander had been cited. So, um, WHAT bias, dude? Given that nation’s rather illustrious military and imperial history, wouldn’t it be insane to NOT expect British generals to rank among the very best? I mean, we haven’t even mentioned Wolfe or Slim yet. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/30 "2005-06-16T05:23:17Z")
Who decided the tactics for the IRA? Or did terrorist techniques come about organically? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/31 "2005-06-16T05:27:31Z")
> [@](#): > > He took a ragtag, underarmed, mostly untrained army and came very close to creating a new country. Lee was given his first significant command in June 1862. At that point, the CSA had been around for sixteen months and the war had been going on for fourteen months. Presumedly, after a year of fighting, the “ragtag” days were over. ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/32 "2005-06-16T05:31:29Z")
I’m surprised Ho Chi Minh hasn’t been brought up? ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/33 "2005-06-16T05:35:30Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > Wellington won every battle he fought, IIRC, while Napoleon lost at least two Sure, but that’s kinda like going undefeated in the Mountain West and thinking you’re a better football team than the 11-2 Big 12 Champs. It’s possible, but the records themselves don’t prove it. The Peninsular War was a sideshow compared to the campaigns in the east, and Wellington never faced France’s first string prior to Waterloo. He was very good, as I’ve said, but he didn’t face the same level of testing as Bonaparte did. Or put it another way. Wellington was uniformly successful fighting a smallish portion of the overall French army. Napoleon was only mostly successful fighting all the military forces that England, Prussia, Russia, and assorted minor players could scrape together. Which is more impressive? Look, I probably wouldn’t put Napoleon into the top spot, or even runner-up, precisely because of the failings that have been mentioned. However, I think conquering most of Europe should probably rate higher than winning all of the battles in your relatively minor campaign, and so he’s going to be higher on my list than Wellington. This is arguable, perhaps, but my initial point was simply that the idea that the general who defeats a great general must be an even greater general is not correct. Monty was a serviceable general, but no way was he better than Rommel, despite the fact that he beat him. _Maybe_ Wellington was better than Bonaparte (though I’m not conceding that), but the mere fact that he beat him at Waterloo doesn’t prove the point. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/34 "2005-06-16T05:52:27Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > How comes Wellington is mentionned and Blucher isn’t? Wellington is generally considered a more imaginative commander. Blucher was capable and energetic - a good general, but probably not great. Another very fine British general - Marlborough. Though his French opposite, Villars, was also very good, as was his ally, the great Prince Eugene of Savoy. As for that list from above: > [@](#): > > Julius Caesar Solid candidate - combined military ability with political genius. > [@](#): > > Tadeusz Kosciuszko Interesting choice. Most folks picking Poles would have probably been tempted to go with the better known figure like Jan Sobieski ( wrongly, in that case ). Certainly quite capable, but I don’t know the details of his campaigns enough to attempt tojudge. > [@](#): > > Adolf Hitler Absolutely not, for reasons already enumerated. > [@](#): > > Hannibal Possible. To this day Cannae probably remains the most complete single battle victory in history. > [@](#): > > Joan of Arc No. An inspirational figure who had no particular military genius. > [@](#): > > Genghis Khan Arguable. Brilliant man, but in terms of pure campaigning, I’d incline slightly towards his general Subedei. It was Subedei that was primarily responsible for planning and orchestrating the two most brilliant Mongol campaigns, the invasions of Khwarizm and Europe. And as the primary battlefield commander, as at the Kalka River ( co-commander there, with another brilliant general, Jebei Noyan ) or Mohi/Sajo River, his armies performed flawlessly. As both a master tactician and superb strategist, he was a truly complete general. > [@](#): > > Atilla the Hun Nah. An impressive ruler in many respects, but probably not a real military genius ( though certainly at least competent ). > [@](#): > > Alexander the Great Certainly in the running. > [@](#): > > Napoleon Bonaparte Ditto. > [@](#): > > Eisenhower I’d be inclined to say no, but he certainly had a great strategic mind. > [@](#): > > Augustus Ehhh…Equal of Julius as a politician, probably not as a commander ( but certainly not inept ). > [@](#): > > Marcus Arelues Marcus Aurelius. In the top ten ( maybe five ) of Roman emperors overall and a fine commander but probably not the best of that lot. His victorius Parthian war was commanded by Lucius Verus and he himself suffered a major reverse in an attempted offensive across the Danube in 170. > [@](#): > > Peter The Great of Russia Very fine grand strategist. Tactically nothing to speak of. If not for the cupidity and corruption of the Ottoman commander who had surrounded him, he would have died or been taken captive on the Pruth in 1711. He had the good/bad luck in that his primary opponent was Charles XII of Sweden. Truly a tactical genius, the finest battlefield commander of his day. Also an utter crap grand strategist. In the end Peter won the war, despite the fact that Charles and his staff won most ( almost all ) of the battles. > [@](#): > > Robert E. Lee I prefer **Jonathan Chance** ’s choice of Stonewall Jackson over Lee. Gustaf Adolph was undoubtedly the best commander in the Thirty Years War and Justinian’s commander Belisarius is a great choice. There is also the eunuch Narses, Justinian’s other great general. That guy Timur wasn’t bad ;). Or just to throw out another obscure name, Nadir Shah, one of Persia’s greatest generals. Or howabout the Hussite general Jan Zizka? Cyrus the Great, founder of the Persian empire? Epaminondas? Miltiades, victor at Marathon? etc. 🙂 - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/35 "2005-06-16T05:53:57Z")
> [@devilsknew](#): > > I’m surprised Ho Chi Minh hasn’t been brought up? Giap before Ho Chi Minh as a general. Uncle Ho was more a political genius. - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![Strinka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/strinka/32/512_2.png) [@Strinka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strinka)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/36 "2005-06-16T06:04:54Z")
**Tamerlane** , what’s your analysis of Sun Tzu? ---
**Author:** ![Hung\_Mung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a88e4f/32.png) [@Hung\_Mung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hung_Mung)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/37 "2005-06-16T06:51:35Z")
Darius? Xerxes? Ozymandias? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/38 "2005-06-16T07:35:42Z")
Khalid bin Walid? ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/39 "2005-06-16T07:51:19Z")
Ghandi. Don’t bring an army to the fight and there’s no one to win against. ---
**Author:** ![Trillionaire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/aeb1de/32.png) [@Trillionaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trillionaire)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442/40 "2005-06-16T09:47:25Z")
Anybody else like **Shaka Zulu?** He didn’t conquer huge areas or have a particularly widespread legacy, but he did build the most feared and disciplined army in Africa out of virtually nothing, and the tactics and weaponry he developed have to be considered as revolutionary as anyone else mentioned here. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-military-leader-of-all-time/308442.md?page=3)