who to you is the greatest leader of an army in history?

Answer 1

Definately Julius Ceaser!!

Answer 2

Patton definitely had the best potential but was defeated by a number of factors.

Firstly, his social skills were disgraceful, and while there is no doubt that he was a terrific wartime officer, at his rank he also needed to be a terrific politician, which he wasn't. He continuously hacked off his superiors and on more than one occasion, directly or indirectly, brought the US Army into disrepute. When competing for supplies and support from superiors, he was almost always beaten by Montgomerie. This was not because Monty necessarily deserved them, but because he always had a better sales pitch than Patton, who was thought of by his superiors as abbrasive, brash and somewhat of a political liability. Also, he had little time for worrying about logistics, and only took notice of them when his supplies dried up.

But for all those shortfalls, Patton was without doubt an outstanding soldier.His ethos was "Audacity, audacity, always audacity."He was a pioneer of modern armoured tactics and could have potentially led his Third Army straight into Germany before the end of '44. Feared by German generals, his presence in France was initially hidden from the public to keep the Germans guessing about where his fictitious army was going to land. His aggression was legendary and he was an expert motivator - sometimes leading with magnificent morale raising speaches and at other times literally taking a hands on approach to leadership - directing traffic, controlling fire fights and slapping a couple of soldiers who had shell shock.

Without doubt, Patton was the greatest leader of an army at war.

Answer 3

If you look at history two empires stand out from a military stand point. The Macedonians under Alexander the Great and the Romans. No other man has ever achieved as much as Alexander the Great did on the battlefield. So he would be the greatest military leader.
The Romans had many great generals, but if you asked a Roman from that period who was the greatest military leader that Rome ever faced they would give back two names - Pyrrhrus and Hannibal. Both of these military leaders were had a string of victories against the Romans.

Answer 4

it would have to be lord nelson by far,he led the most powerful navy in history and won the most famous naval battle off all time when the british won the battle of trafalger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Trafalgar. other then that it would be washington and churchill.there is hundreads from differnt nations and the list could grow forever.oh yeah if you want to bring nation leaders into it you carnt forget queen victoria no one has ever ruled as much square land as britain wel there empire was going.

Answer 5

Patton was feared and respected, but he didn't call the shots. Eisenhower did, and Ike hated dealing with Patton. Patton didn't get the fuel he needed to push straight across the Rhine, mostly because he was such an abrasive personality and got along so badly with everyone else, especially Montgomery. If he had a tenth of the diplomatic skills that Eisenhower had, he'd have been the first one in Berlin, not Zhukov, not Konev.

Hannibal was a great tactician and had flashes of strategic brilliance (crossing the Alps) but he was terrible at taking advantage of his victories (failing to march on Rome after Cannae, for instance). Most of the original troops under his command ended up getting killed; he filled his ranks with mercenaries. Worse, he was such a bad negotiator he couldn't get the Italian tribes to commit fully alongside him against Rome.

Lee was great, but he let personality issues within his subordinates get in the way of his decisions. Rommel was great, but he never got the support he needed for his Afrika Korps or his defense of Festung Europa, partly because he was such a strident anti-Nazi, and partly because he was so intolerant of dealing with Hitler that he never did get priority for anything. Washington had the advantage of facing the British while they had bigger concerns with the French. Against the likes of Wellington, Washington would have likely folded.

Caesar was brilliant, but he had personality issues (ego) and relied too much on personal magnetism, and was blind to both professional jealousy and the fatigue of others going along with his plans. Hence, Legions IV and X bucking him. Hence, him being assassinated. Alexander of Macedon? His entire army rebelled against him at the Indus. He was so unstable he got drunk and murdered one of his generals. He lost a good deal of his army stupidly marching across the desert en route back from India. Nelson was an admiral, not a general. Hitler micromanaged his troops and contributed to disaster more than once with his "no retreat" orders.

Sargon the Great is a good candidate. So is Napoleon, but the prize should probably goto Chingghis Han (Jenghiz Khan). Largest ever military force fielded in antiquity. Relationship with subordinates was superb, orders followed flawlessly even order long distances. Largest land empire in history, governed brilliantly by literate bureaucracy. Assimilation of conquered people into military forces was efficient and astounding. Undefeated during his lifetime.

Other empires took generations to form. He did it in one.

Answer 6

Alexander - took Macedonian army and conquered the known world as far as India

Answer 7

Sargon the Great-Iraq but in the time before it was Iraq or Babylon. I believe he was Sumerian. He was the first to raise a true "standing army" and establish an "empire"

Answer 8

Robert E. Lee
and George Washington

Schwartzkopf did a pretty good job too by the way

Answer 9

Without doubt - Otto Scorzeny. He is the father of mad elite units, the father of usage of helicopters raids. Heck, he even made all the long way from a decorated Nazi officer - to a Mossad agent!
And that scar! Who can handle this.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Scorzeny

Answer 10

General Dwight D.Eisenhower who was the commander-in-chief of Allied Force during the WWII