Best military commander?

Question

Soldiers fight battles, but no battle can be won without a good commander.

Who for you was the best commander? It can be anyone throughout history.

And why?

Answer 1

Now if I name one particular person I am going to open a can of worms and enter a pit of scorpions. I would have half the earth disputing with me and calling me names. However I will attempt to answer it.
If you count the military commanders in history who fought extensively and were not defeated then you would have four.
SUN WU TZU
The Chinese military philosopher and strategist of the army of the state of Wu in the Warring States Period. Defeated army after army and whoes career was only ended when he was executed by Lu Pi the ruler of Wu (a long story) He wrote the art of war. : Fifth century B.C.

ALEXANDER THE GREAT
The Macadonian conquere who conqured the Persian empire and most of the known world at the time. Won many battles against far greater numbers and many difficult sieges. Considered by many to be the greatest because of this
Fourth century B.C.

SCIPIO AFRICANNUS
The Roman commander who defeated Hannabul and destroyed many Carthaginian armies: 3rd century B.C.

GHENGHIS KHAN
Mongol conquerer who began the Mongol empire, the largest land empire in history. Although was drubbed in one battle by Jamugha he recovered, escaped and fought back to win. Smashed army after army and conducted many brilliant campaingns in Asia. Especially his campaign against Mohommed Shal Al Din, the Kwarisarm shar of Persia.
Late 12th and early 13th centuries.

Although you could add a fifth: JULIUS CEASAR if you count his setback before the walls of Gergovia as just a setback and strategic withdrawal.

However in an effort to at least answer this a bit there are three whoes records are absolutely spotless. Sun Wu Tzu, Alexander the Great and Scipio Afracannus. Little is known of Scipio but the argument usually boils down to the other two. And one was an absolute expert and the other had so many campaingns over ten years. My personal view is Sun Wu Tzu. Because he not only planned and won so many battles(his general Wu Chi being the field commander) but also at one campaingn smashed six armies one after the other and very close together. However most people say Alexander the Great. Because not only for the extent and number of his battles, sieges and campaigns but also because of his ability to improvise(eg the Massagatae beyond the Oxus river.)
So althought the final answer comes down to these two, most people would argue for one of the two, I think that Sun Tzu would pip the prize for his precision and expertness in war. However I would ackowledge Alexander the Great as well. Hope this helps.

Answer 2

1) Patton how far could he have gone given a free hand in france during 1944?
2) Rommel what could he have done had he more than 25% of the force required to win in africa plus his defense of france and the conquest of france.
3) zhukov the defender of russia and did well in the east prior to facing the germans
4) Paul Hausser for his tactical leadership of the II SS Panzer Corps, he restored the sagging front after Stalingrad and Kursk, beating Soviet Armies 7 times his size.
5) napolean master of land and sea warfare egypt and russian were his for a while. He was left chomping on the bit along the English Coast the same as Hitler tho.
6) thomas jackson, for his tactical victories in the Shenandoah Valley and Chancellorsville. He made bobby lee look good and if he was alive, could've won at Gettysburg too.
7) macarthur same as napolean but not the size of scale of conquest. A free hand could've won the Korean Conflict, either that or a direct confrontation with China...who knows?
8)Moltke first used the practice of mobility with railroads and the use of commanders to figure out the best way to take an objective
9)Sherman author the first demonstation of total warfare with march through the south to atlanta
10)genghis khan able to go from mongolia to europe a large undertaking considering his time. His empire was larger than Hitlers, Alexanders, and the Roman Empire combined.
11) charlemagne last big empire of europe until napolean. Without him, Europe would've been overrun by the Moors/Saracens (You'd be praying to Mecca each day).
12)Gauis Julius Caesar, especially for his exploits in Gaul and Britainnia...

Answer 3

Alexander the Great of Macedon (4th cent. BC). He never lost a battle and he always devised battle tactics to best utilize his army when facing his opponents. He fought so many different foes with so many different types of troops and weapons - a lesser commander would have been defeated at least once when faced by a totally new foe, but Alexander always prevailed.

Second place is John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough (17th - 18th cent. AD) He, too, was never beaten in battle and he captured every fortress he invested.

Hard to argue with a perfect record.

Answer 4

Hannibal of the Carthaginians was the greatest military commander ever, bar none. He squeezed 110% out of every possible resource he had at his disposal, and was a strategic and tactical genius for which Rome had no match, save Scipio's overwhelming numbers. He seized a big chunk of southern Europe in very quick time and had the Romans shaking in their boots for more than 30 years, with an army 1/10th the size of Rome's. A modern equivalent would be Egypt beating the U.S. over and over again in combat. Sounds impossible, right?

Answer 5

Hannibal Barca

Hannibal lead a mostly mercenary force into Rome via land route through the Alps, then led a sustained campaign in Italy without support from home. His lessons in war are still studied today by military strategists.

Crossing the Alps, being able to maintain the loyalty of mercenaries, having the ability to operate in hostile territory, and consistently winning against a numerically superior opponent are often cited as his major accomplishments.

Answer 6

How about one of the Kahns...Ghengis or Kublai. Both controlled a huge empire, known as the Golden Horde. Also, don't forget how large that Empire was. Probably 5 times the size of the Roman Empire. It encompassed all the lands from China to Europe and up to the Artic.

Answer 7

Nelson is maximum in lots of cases recognized because of the fact the terrific British commander of all time, in all probability even the terrific admiral of all time. even nonetheless, he replaced into in the main progressed army in the international on the time. in terms of unity, hygeine standards, logistics, proffessionalism and an emphasis on education and talents, there replaced into no person to examine them. Britain additionally occurs to be an island with 7700 miles of coast, and you're by no ability greater suitable than 70 miles far flung from a sea that's no stranger to typhoon stress winds. for this reason it has a wealthy maritime way of existence, and naval heritage dating back to a distinct large commander, Alfred the large. It replaced into for those reason that Nelson could use such creative tactics, and wreck out with it. that would not take something far flung from Nelson, the son of a church rector who started in the Royal army as a scivy on the age of 13, and replaced right into a captain via the age of 20. One guy who's in lots of cases over appeared, and that i'm to make certain him already reported, is John Churchill the 1st Duke of Marlborough, who's mythical for the conflict of Blenheim.

Answer 8

The greatest commander in history was Alexander III of Macedonia. He destoyed the persian empire with 42000 men and he never lost a battle.

Answer 9

Genghis Klan===reasons are that he was able to unify nomad tribes in to a fighting army that conquered land stretching from eastern Europe to the pacific ocean and all of the middle east

Answer 10

Ghengis Khan.

Why....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghengis_Khan