Greatest millitary leader ever?

Question

I'd go with Hitler, because he was a great speaker and was very effective in what he wanted, I have nothing against Jews though. He was a bad man but you can't deny he was the last great leader. By the way I'm not a ******' nazi or racist, I respect everyone.

Genghis Khan, Saladin, Churchill, Alexander the great, Julius Caeser, Napolean, Patton, Saddam Husein, Nelson, Cyrus the great, Attila the Hun, Oliver Cromwell, Stalin, Eisenhower, Hitler, George Washington.

Answer 1

In a way I agree with Adolf's charisma, but that is what makes ANY leader - well - a LEADER, isn't it? Some of the names you've listed would give Adolf a run for his money in the madness and fanatic departments, for sure! To answer this, one probably has to define "Great" firstly. If by great you mean being able to lead a bunch of other people by the nose, then probably your list should include the likes of Olaf the Red (Viking), Shaka Zulu (also called the African Napoleon), Genl. Redvers Buller (Anglo Boer War Field Marshall 1899 - 1901), Roman Emperor Nero (the mad violinist), Emperor Hailee Salasse of pre-colonial Ethiopia, Cecil John Rhodes and even Queen Victoria of the British Empire "upon which the sun never set, and which ruled the waves!", and the Japanese Emperor who bombed Pearl Harbor and sent the Americans to war in WW1, oh, and don't forget Joan of Arc - vive la France! - to name but a few of the more charismatic (and probably maddest) ones in recent history.
Ironically my personal favourite is a rather "unsung hero" - the Scotchman William Wallace (remembered in the movie "Braveheart" with Mel Gibson). He didn't receive as much fame as even half the above ones did, yet if there ever was a man whom truly lead a devided nation of squabling farmers into battle against overpowering odds, purely because he couldn't stand the wrongs being done to his fellow man anymore, it was Wallace. The odds were stacked against him 100 to 1, yet he truly believed if the Scots stood firm and above all stood together, they too could, like a Joshua of old (Israel Biblical times), take on 10 000 enemy soldiers with a mere 300 men. Joshua too should count as a true leader for exactly that same reason, as should the Boer pioneer leader Sarel Cilliers, who - also with only 300 men, women, children and a hand full of emancipated slaves - took a stand against the mighty Zulu warrior nation, at the Battle of Blood River in 1836, and defeated 30 000 blood thirsty impis (Zulu name for soldiers). That took some doing!
The question again is: how to define GREATNESS in military terms? The successes "against all odds" (as shown above), or merely charisma?
I'd go for the first one, especially if the leader did so through the conviction of his/her beliefs (either religious, humanitarian, or patriotism/nationalism). Numbers are fine, but if the deck is loaded against you, and you STILL take on the big guns, you surely must have leadership capabilities beyond question!

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)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.

10) 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).

11)Gauis Julius Caesar, especially for his exploits in Gaul and Britainnia...

Answer 3

As military leaders go, Hitler wouldn't make the top 5 million dude. He may have been a good political leader, but he knew absolutely nothing about strategy and tactics. I'd say the tops were, in no particular order:

Alexander the Great
Julius Caesar
Trajan
Frederick the Great
Erich von Manstein
Gerd von Runstedt
Robert E. Lee
Gaius Marius
Marshal Davout
Duke of Wellington
Saladin
Hannibal
Duke of Marlborough
Lord Horatio Nelson
Marshal Zhukov

I know I'm leaving out a great number of excellent leaders, but there's a start.

Answer 4

Alexander the Great. He was a great general, overcoming much larger armies through force of will and combined arms tactics to conquer the world, personally courageous, innovative in tactics, founded great cities (Alexandria, Egypt), spread Greek ideas of philosophy, democracy, science, etc, led his army all the way from Greece to India, against larger armies, with exotic weapons like elephants, and conquered the world, all the while maintaining the loyalty and respect of his men.

Examples: At Issus, he landed his Greek army in the face of a much larger Persian force and, with his back to the water, he won. Again at Gaugamela, against Darius of Persia, he again faced a larger army. During the fight, it appeared lost, until seizing on an opening in the Persian lines, Alexander personallyd a cavalry charge right for Darius. Darius fled and instead of pursuing the emperor, Alexander turned around and took the Persian infantry from the rear, routing the larger army. Then at Tyre, he was faced with a fortress on an island in the Mediterranean, he didn't have the fleet to attack the island, so he built a bridge by moving earth...he created a land bridge, this act of ingenuity and sheer willpower has never even come close to replication. These are but three examples of a brilliant military career, all the more amazing that he did it all before dying at age 33, who knows what he may have done had he lived as long as most.

Answer 5

I would NOT go with Adolf Hitler, and anyone who does because he was "a great speaker" needs to read more on what makes a good MILITARY leader - not what makes a good orator. Hitler only achieved the rank of Corporal during the Great War, and corporals do NOT make good Commander-in-Chiefs, and should NOT be put in charge of a nation's military forces. Why else was Germany's military defeated in under 6 years?

For a truly great MILITARY leader, try Gustavus Adolphus, I noticed he wasn't even on your list.

Answer 6

You are correct. The US has turned into an imperialist power and it wants to hold on to Iraq as a strategic military base. If there is a Presidential candidate who can withdraw ALL troops it's Ron Paul. Others would reduce forces but would not pull them out totally. The whole turmoil in the Middle East is about Arabs/Persians//Afghans/Pakistanis hating Western Powers for dominating their region.

Answer 7

Captain Hank Glindeman, USN. My commanding officer aboard the USS Ranger CVA-61. We completed our mission without losing a single sailor or aviator. How many of the men listed above can say that?

Answer 8

I'm going with Napoleon or more likely, Alexander the Great.

Answer 9

I think Hitler was a self serving B-----d ---A mad man with charisma ,nothing at all good about him -nothing.
Well I'm gonna screw up the 'history ' category here
To me the greatest leaders ore the ones out there right now , putting there lives on the line for us .

Answer 10

My first choice would be General George Patton. He was brilliant with maneuver warfare, he forced the people he captured to fight on the front lines and he was delightfully politically incorrect.