1756304232
1756304232 Conquer Club • View topic - Top 5 Generals in the world. (Past of Present)
Conquer Club

Top 5 Generals in the world. (Past of Present)

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Top 5 Generals in the world. (Past of Present)

Postby war_bloodline on Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:56 pm

Lay them out, who are the best 5 generals.
If you want to, lay down who you think are the worst 5 generals.

This is your opinion.

I have heard Rommel, and Suz-tzu......and others.
Last edited by war_bloodline on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Image
User avatar
Cadet war_bloodline
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:30 am
Location: At the Left Handers Meeting.

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:04 pm

1. Napoleon Bonaparte
2. Julius Caesar
3. Hannibal Barca
4. Alexander the Great
5. Scipio Africanus
6. Erwin Rommel
7. Duke of Wellington
8. Bernard Montgomery

Note: I am writing this list after being to a wine bar...I am sure I forgot someone!
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Postby Colaalone on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:04 pm

Image
User avatar
Cook Colaalone
 
Posts: 1660
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:57 pm
Location: Checking into a Las Vegas hotel with the intent of committing capital fraud and a head full of acid

Postby war_bloodline on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 pm

Thats good, thats a very strong general.

But Jesus is a stronger general yet.

Just not in a military stand point.
User avatar
Cadet war_bloodline
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:30 am
Location: At the Left Handers Meeting.

Postby everywhere116 on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:21 pm

You better put Patton in the list.
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
User avatar
Corporal everywhere116
 
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Somewhere on this big blue marble.

Postby RenegadePaddy on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Saladin
Robert E. Lee
Rommel
Lord Malborough
Suz-tzu


Napolean was not a great general - his inflexibility cost him an Empire, and the lives of hundreds of thousands of troops
Wether you think you can, or think you can't - you're right

Won 3 : 5 Lost
User avatar
Private 1st Class RenegadePaddy
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: Birmingham Uni (UK)

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:27 pm

RenegadePaddy wrote:Saladin
Robert E. Lee
Rommel
Lord Malborough
Suz-tzu


Napolean was not a great general - his inflexibility cost him an Empire, and the lives of hundreds of thousands of troops


Every general loses troops. Napoleon was a military genius. Even the Duke of Wellington admitted that the presence of Napoleon on the field was like fighting against 50,000 more troops. Tactically Napoleon was the best commander of all time. Just look at the battle of Austerlitz...superb. Of course he was also a megalomaniac and that led to his demise, but that doesn't mean he wasn't the greatest general of all time.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Postby RenegadePaddy on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:29 pm

I'd counter that he was fine until a counter was found to the column, after which, as Wellington put it, "They came on in the same old fashion, and we saw them off in the same old fashion" (paraphrasing, can't remember the exact quote). I should've added the word unneccessary to my original post.
Wether you think you can, or think you can't - you're right

Won 3 : 5 Lost
User avatar
Private 1st Class RenegadePaddy
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: Birmingham Uni (UK)

Postby war_bloodline on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:41 pm

He just needed to stay out of Russia and he would have been fine.
I think so, I don't know what you think.
User avatar
Cadet war_bloodline
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:30 am
Location: At the Left Handers Meeting.

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:44 pm

RenegadePaddy wrote:I'd counter that he was fine until a counter was found to the column, after which, as Wellington put it, "They came on in the same old fashion, and we saw them off in the same old fashion" (paraphrasing, can't remember the exact quote). I should've added the word unneccessary to my original post.


Hmm I think he was referring to the battle of Waterloo there? A close win but a decisive one. Don't forget the British had the help of the Prussians and of the Batavians. Also part of Napoleon's army didn't come back to reinforce him due to a stupid Marshal whose name I can't remember right now. And Marshal Ney made mistakes in that one as well. Wellington was great in that one though. That's why we have the fillet, boots and a place in New Zealand named after him. :)
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:48 pm

war_bloodline wrote:He just needed to stay out of Russia and he would have been fine.
I think so, I don't know what you think.


No one can beat Russia. Napoleon failed, and Hitler didn't learn from that mistake. They say history repeats itself. In my opinion the defeats in Russia where the turning point of the Napoleonic Wars and of World War II. Napoleon at least managed to conquer Moscow for a few days although the Russian capital was St. Petersburg at that time...

P.S. you can add Zhukov and Konev to that great general list as well...
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Postby RenegadePaddy on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:49 pm

Well, the quote comes from the Peninsula campaign I believe, and I was referencing his whole career.

In my eyes, Napolean started brilliantly, but when his original methods were countered, proved unable to find a new way to win, and continued to use tactics that had been defeated time and again (column vs line), to the eventual boredom of Wellington!

But hey, its all a matter of opinion.
Wether you think you can, or think you can't - you're right

Won 3 : 5 Lost
User avatar
Private 1st Class RenegadePaddy
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: Birmingham Uni (UK)

Postby RenegadePaddy on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:53 pm

I should add that the loyalty of the French armies, the Code Napolean etc shows Napolean's abilities as one of historys greatest leaders, just not one of historys greatest Generals!
Wether you think you can, or think you can't - you're right

Won 3 : 5 Lost
User avatar
Private 1st Class RenegadePaddy
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: Birmingham Uni (UK)

Postby johnnyrotten on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:54 pm

Georgy Zhukov
Erwin Rommel
Bernard Montgomery
Douglas Haig
Hannibal

In no particular order.
User avatar
Sergeant johnnyrotten
 
Posts: 2883
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:42 pm
Location: Poole, England

Postby Kahless on Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:57 pm

Surprised to see no mention of Cromwell yet, took on the crown and won
User avatar
Cook Kahless
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 5:43 am
Location: Belfast

Postby Kahless on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:00 pm

Ruben Cassar wrote:
war_bloodline wrote:He just needed to stay out of Russia and he would have been fine.
I think so, I don't know what you think.


No one can beat Russia. Napoleon failed, and Hitler didn't learn from that mistake. They say history repeats itself. In my opinion the defeats in Russia where the turning point of the Napoleonic Wars and of World War II. Napoleon at least managed to conquer Moscow for a few days although the Russian capital was St. Petersburg at that time..


Napoleon had the excuse that he also had to fight Germany (well, Prussia), you could argue that Hitler also had to fight France, but the French army of 1940 couldn't be compared with the Prussians of 1812 :wink:
User avatar
Cook Kahless
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 5:43 am
Location: Belfast

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:06 pm

Kahless wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:
war_bloodline wrote:He just needed to stay out of Russia and he would have been fine.
I think so, I don't know what you think.


No one can beat Russia. Napoleon failed, and Hitler didn't learn from that mistake. They say history repeats itself. In my opinion the defeats in Russia where the turning point of the Napoleonic Wars and of World War II. Napoleon at least managed to conquer Moscow for a few days although the Russian capital was St. Petersburg at that time..


Napoleon had the excuse that he also had to fight Germany (well, Prussia), you could argue that Hitler also had to fight France, but the French army of 1940 couldn't be compared with the Prussians of 1812 :wink:


Hmm. I think...Prussia and Austria were allied (forcefully) with Napoleon when he attacked Russia and might even have supplied some troops for the campaign! Napoleon at times had to face coalitions of several European nations.

Of course the two eras cannot be compared. Germany had Britain, America and Russia against it. France didn't really have any impact on WWII. The Germans annihilated them at the start.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Postby johnnyrotten on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:07 pm

Kahless wrote:Surprised to see no mention of Cromwell yet, took on the crown and won

I always thought Cromwell was a complete prick though :)
User avatar
Sergeant johnnyrotten
 
Posts: 2883
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:42 pm
Location: Poole, England

Postby RenegadePaddy on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:07 pm

French army didn't, French resistance did
Wether you think you can, or think you can't - you're right

Won 3 : 5 Lost
User avatar
Private 1st Class RenegadePaddy
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: Birmingham Uni (UK)

Postby Kahless on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:08 pm

Ruben Cassar wrote:Of course the two eras cannot be compared. Germany had Britain, America and Russia against it. France didn't really have any impact on WWII. The Germans annihilated them at the start.


Napoleon also had the British against him, what about Wellington's armies forcing him out of Iberia and eventually defeating him at Waterloo?
User avatar
Cook Kahless
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 5:43 am
Location: Belfast

Postby Kahless on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:09 pm

RenegadePaddy wrote:French army didn't, French resistance did


great comment Paddy, the resistance did far more than the "offficial" army
User avatar
Cook Kahless
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 5:43 am
Location: Belfast

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:10 pm

RenegadePaddy wrote:French army didn't, French resistance did


To what are you referring here?
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:12 pm

Kahless wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:Of course the two eras cannot be compared. Germany had Britain, America and Russia against it. France didn't really have any impact on WWII. The Germans annihilated them at the start.


Napoleon also had the British against him, what about Wellington's armies forcing him out of Iberia and eventually defeating him at Waterloo?


Yes what about them? I told you Napoleon faced entire coalitions against him. I think one of the coalitions comprised Russia, Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, Sweden, Holland and some other country all against France.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Postby RenegadePaddy on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:14 pm

Ruben Cassar wrote:
RenegadePaddy wrote:French army didn't, French resistance did


To what are you referring here?


WWII
Wether you think you can, or think you can't - you're right

Won 3 : 5 Lost
User avatar
Private 1st Class RenegadePaddy
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: Birmingham Uni (UK)

Postby Ruben Cassar on Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:18 pm

RenegadePaddy wrote:
Ruben Cassar wrote:
RenegadePaddy wrote:French army didn't, French resistance did


To what are you referring here?


WWII


Ah you mean de Gaulle's Free French. Some French supported the Germans.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Colonel Ruben Cassar
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:04 am
Location: Civitas Invicta, Melita, Evropa

Next

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users