Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Worst General in History

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Worst General in History

    Everyone loves a winner.

    What about the losers!

    Monty
    McClellan
    Ike in Africa (at least in the early days)
    Charles Lee, Revolution (America's), Battle of Monmouth
    Maj Gen Horation Gates, Battle of Camden, retreated 40 miles and forgot to bring his army with him!

    Just thoughts,

  • #2
    Hitler for Stalingrad
    Hitler for El Alamein
    Hitler for Tunisia
    Hitler....etc.
    Our forefathers died to give us freedom, not free stuff.

    I write books about zombies as E.E. Isherwood. Check me out at ZombieBooks.net.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hitler was no General, he was a Private and called himself "Gröfaz"

      Comment


      • #4
        Monty....Keller runs a close second.

        Comment


        • #5
          Who was the genius in charge of the Egyptian army in 1967? Ahmer? I'd say he's about the worst ever.

          Comment


          • #6
            How 'bout the Roman General Varus. Granted he was betrayed by Arminius, but if you have three whole legions and end up wiped out nearly to the man, that's a pretty poor showing. Losing a battle is one thing, getting beaten so badly that the numbers for the legions you took into the fight are never used again, that's above and beyond.
            So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Worst General in History

              Originally posted by Hinton6969
              Everyone loves a winner.

              What about the losers!

              Monty
              McClellan
              Ike in Africa (at least in the early days)
              Charles Lee, Revolution (America's), Battle of Monmouth
              Maj Gen Horation Gates, Battle of Camden, retreated 40 miles and forgot to bring his army with him!

              Just thoughts,
              Montgomery, worst general ever??

              C'mon, this is just .... well, there's no other way to put it: stupid.

              One day, someone is going to have to explain to me this kneejerk reaction in americans. It seems to go hand in hand with kneejerk adoration of Patton (which tends to say a few things about the entire issue).

              I'm not Montgomery's fan by any stretch of the imagination but let's get real here:

              - Other than M-G, he was pretty much victorious in every battle.
              - Many people are not aware of it, but his performance in France prior to Dunkirk was quite good. Good enough to get him noticed in the midst of a general disaster.
              - He taught an army that had previously had it's ass kicked all over North Africa that it could win.
              - He planned the largest invasion ever attempted in history, possibly the most complicated military project ever attempted, period.
              - He did this with an nation that was pretty much bled white and could not afford high casualty rates.

              He was not a great general. But worst? Please.

              Comment


              • #8
                I could name some French generals. From 1870 to the WW2 the French had a very large bunch of stupid general.
                To give ones of them :

                1870 : Mac Mahon.
                WW1 : Nivelles (1917 offensives).
                WW2 : Gamelin, the Commander in Chief.

                Otherwise, after having read a book about the ACW I would say that McClellan win a price, for sure.

                LaPalice.
                Monsieur de La Palice est mort
                Mort devant Pavie.
                Un quart d'heure avant sa mort
                Il était encore en vie...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Haig.
                  Scientists have announced they've discovered a cure for apathy. However no one has shown the slightest bit of interest !!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Re: Worst General in History

                    Originally posted by DingBat
                    Montgomery, worst general ever??

                    C'mon, this is just .... well, there's no other way to put it: stupid.

                    One day, someone is going to have to explain to me this kneejerk reaction in americans. It seems to go hand in hand with kneejerk adoration of Patton (which tends to say a few things about the entire issue).

                    I'm not Montgomery's fan by any stretch of the imagination but let's get real here:

                    - Other than M-G, he was pretty much victorious in every battle.
                    - Many people are not aware of it, but his performance in France prior to Dunkirk was quite good. Good enough to get him noticed in the midst of a general disaster.
                    - He taught an army that had previously had it's ass kicked all over North Africa that it could win.
                    - He planned the largest invasion ever attempted in history, possibly the most complicated military project ever attempted, period.
                    - He did this with an nation that was pretty much bled white and could not afford high casualty rates.

                    He was not a great general. But worst? Please.


                    Settle,

                    First, I was born in England, now a natrualized US citizen. Parents still live there.

                    Second I was putting it out there. You make some good points, that I won't debate. Because I agree.

                    My idea is this, EGO and DARING are essentional elements in a General. But they must be balance those characteristics with concern for the men, call it compassion and patience, attacking at the right time.

                    I am no expert, but ego and daring, in monty's case, cost a lot of other men their lives. Take Market Garden.

                    That said, monty, like most leaders at that level possess brilliance and/or genius, but they also possess less benificial traits.

                    It is pretty hard to classify worst/best given the complexitiy of what these men are asked to do.

                    I would say Patton and Monty didn't get along because they were so alike.

                    Thoughts?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Monty. As you all know i hate him. And Brian not a big fan of Hitler I see. Even though he was solely responsible for the destruction of millions of people you have to admire him for his ability to motivate people.
                      Hell was full, so I came back.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        worst generals? where to begin.

                        Westmoreland
                        fredendal
                        von paulus
                        graziani
                        badoglio
                        budeny
                        french (bef ww1, not nationality)
                        chelmsford
                        custer
                        burnside
                        butler
                        santa ana
                        the american who led the 1812 ivasion of canada, can't recall his name.
                        darius II
                        jovian

                        I'd better stop I could go on for hours, think about a few of them.

                        I have to agree Monty was quite a good divisional commander, but he did tend to stay on the cautious side with the exception of MG as an army and army group commander.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Worst?

                          Westmoreland

                          Totally unsuitable for the uncoventional war he was running.

                          Couldn't deal with the politics, a JCS that stradled the line.

                          From Ia Drang to the Tet O was longer that Ike had to win in Africa and Europe, not the same war but the myth that they didn't have the time and resources to win in Vietnam should not be perpetuated.

                          Againt just thoughts not heart felt convictions

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            General Elphinstone:

                            7:5 Flashman sums up the leadership ability of General Elphinstone: Only he could have permitted the First Afghan War and let it develop to such a ruinous defeat. It was not easy: he started with a good army, a secure position, some excellent officers, a disorganised enemy, and repeated opportunities to save the situation. But Elphy, with a touch of true genius, swept aside these obstacles with unerring precision, and out of order wrought complete chaos. We shall not, with luck, look upon his like again.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Re: Re: Worst General in History

                              Originally posted by Hinton6969
                              Settle,

                              First, I was born in England, now a natrualized US citizen. Parents still live there.

                              Second I was putting it out there. You make some good points, that I won't debate. Because I agree.

                              My idea is this, EGO and DARING are essentional elements in a General. But they must be balance those characteristics with concern for the men, call it compassion and patience, attacking at the right time.

                              I am no expert, but ego and daring, in monty's case, cost a lot of other men their lives. Take Market Garden.

                              That said, monty, like most leaders at that level possess brilliance and/or genius, but they also possess less benificial traits.

                              It is pretty hard to classify worst/best given the complexitiy of what these men are asked to do.

                              I would say Patton and Monty didn't get along because they were so alike.

                              Thoughts?
                              Apologies. Bad day at work. I should have just pushed myself away from the keyboard.

                              That said, I agree with you that Patton and Montgomery were a lot more alike than a lot of people would want to admit. Patton wouldn't have felt the need to compete so fiercely with Montgomery if he felt he was totally incompetent.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X