I also will allow Generals from the Nations of independent Texas 1836-1845 and The Confedercy 1860-1864
2007-02-07 15:44:44 · 10 answers · asked by Willie 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
I would have to go with "Stonewall" Jackson.
I'll explain.....
Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson (January 21,1824 – May 10, 1863) was a Confederate general during the American Civil War.
With very little to work with in the way of men and material, he was able to confound outmaneuver and in some instances defeat an opposing force 3 times his forces size.
He roamed up and down the Shenandoah Valley and was able to inspire his troops to battle and stir them to victory over larger forces after force marching them for as long as 14 hours a day. He used a tactic that is known as "Hit em' where they ain't". And kept the Union Army of the Potomac tied up and unable to invade the South for many months, until he was shot and mortally wounded by one of his own men who was standing picket duty in the night. The soldiers had been warned about Union Calvary that might be roaming in the woods. Jackson went out with a small party to do his own reconnaissance to prepare for the battle that was to take place the next day. The soldier mistook him for Union Calvary.
He would move his infantry as much as 30 miles in one day. Fight a battle, then swing around and strike the Union Army at another place 60 miles away 2 days later. His men were known as "Jacksons foot Calvary" because they moved as fast as men on horseback in those days.
He was a great tactician.
2007-02-07 15:50:30 · answer #1 · answered by southwind 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Robert E. Lee. Perhaps his tactical blunders did cost him Gettysburg, however.....given the fact that his Army of Virgina was almost always outgunned and outnumbered, his successes were astounding. But even more than this, he wielded his military might always with the utmost desire for peace. His ultimate goal was a swift victory of independence to save lives on both sides.
I do agree that if Patton had been given carte blache throughout the European theater the war would have had a more expedient climax and who can say if there would have ever been a cold war. Just as MacArthur wanted to attack communism at it's sources, Patton would have loved to have continued rolling across the Russian steps. Perhaps millions of innocent lives could have been saved from Stalin's paranoia. JMO
2007-02-08 04:27:02 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Lemme see the candidates:
1) Patton how far could he have gone given a free hand in france during 1944?
2) 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.
3) 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?
4)Sherman author the first demonstation of total warfare with march through the south to atlanta
5) Bobby Lee, was more of a strategical genius more than a tactical one. His blunders at Gettysburg brought his ranking down.
6) Geo Washington, his initiative at Trenton and Saratoga gave him a shiny stay for daring...
2007-02-08 01:37:07 · answer #3 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
George Washington - he started with nothing and while he didn't win a lot of battleshe held his"army" togather long enough force the English to give up on their colonies.
Robert E Lee - he won many battles against the odds but in the end his battlefield success prolonged a war that devastated his country.
2007-02-08 04:27:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Eisenhower. Look at what he did in North Africa and the invasion of Europe. The Battle of the Bulge could have been a bigger disaster for the Allies. He had to deal with keeping the Allies together and making the commanders from the various countries: Patton, Montgomery, DeGaulle etc work together.
2007-02-08 01:53:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Gen.Patton. If only Eisenhower had allowed him a freeer hand and not allowed political pressure to support Monty dictate his actions, the War would have been over earlier and with lesser casualties on both sides.
2007-02-08 01:49:47 · answer #6 · answered by majorcavalry 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
General Douglas Mac Arthur
2007-02-08 00:50:51 · answer #7 · answered by bleacherbrat34 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
General George S. Patton---JR
2007-02-07 23:57:56 · answer #8 · answered by cheng 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
George Washington. Without him, there wouldn't have been a United States of America.
2007-02-07 23:52:45 · answer #9 · answered by Romeo 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
General Custard cause he always cut the mustard
2007-02-07 23:51:42 · answer #10 · answered by dove2surf 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋