Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

US All-Time Army Commanders

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

  • US All-Time Army Commanders

    New to the forums, apologies if this is posted in the wrong place...

    Using the best commanders from throughout its history, how would you construct the US Army?

    US 1st Army - Washington
    Corps Commanders
    - Longstreet
    - US Grant

    2nd Army - Robert E Lee
    Corps Commanders
    - Truscott
    - Crazy Horse

    3rd Army - MacArthur
    Corps Commanders
    - Schwarzkopf
    - Zachary Taylor

    4th Army - Patton
    Corps Commanders
    - Andrew Jackson
    - Stonewall Jackson

    5th Army - Pershing
    Corps Commanders
    - Winfield Scott
    - Ridgway

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    MacArthur and Zachary Taylor are a bit overrated IMO, and I wouldn't put Washington in charge of an army as he proved to be subpar on the battlefield as a military tactician.

    1st Army- Winfield Scott: extremely undervalued, his Mexican campaign was brilliant and superior in every way to Taylor in their respective theaters.

    Robert E. Lee
    Sherman

    2nd Army Andrew Jackson
    William H. Harrison
    Lafayette

    3rd Army Eisenhower
    Patton
    Truscott

    4th Army Pershing
    Stonewall Jackson
    Petraeus

    5th Army Stormin' Norman
    Washington
    Cleburne

    Again, it's all pretty subjective, because these were all commanders in different times, with different technologies, weaponry, and tactics at their disposal; nott to mention the ever-evolving battefields they had to fight on.
    "The time for war has not yet come, but it will come, and that soon; and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard."

    -Thomas Jonathan Jackson-

    Comment


    • #3
      Nice to see Sherman get the nod belatedly, but I'm surprised no-one has found a place for Thomas. Cool & methodical works for me.
      Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Plutarch View Post
        MacArthur and Zachary Taylor are a bit overrated IMO, and I wouldn't put Washington in charge of an army as he proved to be subpar on the battlefield as a military tactician.
        Where Washington would belong is in the slot not mentioned yet; Chief of Staff.
        And give Eisenhower's job to Stilwell, like it should have been.
        "Why is the Rum gone?"

        -Captain Jack

        Comment


        • #5
          A mix of the older and not so old:

          First Army - George Washington
          I Corps - Robert E. Lee
          II Corps - J. Lawton Collins

          Second Army - U.S. Grant
          III Corps - James Van Fleet
          IV Corps - Hunter Liggett

          Third Army - Douglas MacArthur
          V Corps - Bob Eichelberger
          VI Corps - James Longstreet

          Fourth Army - Winfield Scott
          VII Corps - Creighton Abrams
          VIII Corps - Lucian Truscott

          Fifth Army - Matthew Ridgway
          IX Corps - John Lejeune*
          X Corps - George Thomas

          *Yes, I know Lejeune was a Marine, but he commanded US Army troops so I thought it was fair to include him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Do you really think Crazy Horse would be a decent corps commander? Why did you even use him? It goes against the very question posed in the thread - "Using the best commanders from throughout its history, how would you construct the US Army?" When was he ever in the US Army? At least when Ibis used Lejeune he had qualified it quite well. Crazy Horse never even had allegiance to the United States. Out of the hundreds of qualified possibilities you put an enemy of the United States who wasn't even technically an American simply because he was born in a physical location? Was this just to be "edgy" or "controversial" or to seem "cool and unorthodox?"

            Defend your choice and explain how he is an "American Commander" and his qualifications to be a Corps Commander.
            Кто там?
            Это я - Почтальон Печкин!
            Tunis is a Carthigenian city!

            Comment


            • #7
              In My opion :
              Geroge Washington
              Robert E. Lee
              Thomas " Stonewall " Jackson
              U.S. Grant
              John J. Pershing
              Lenard Woods
              Dwight Esinhower
              Douglas MacArthur
              Willialm Westmorland .
              Thank You .

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Stryker 19K30 View Post
                Do you really think Crazy Horse would be a decent corps commander? Why did you even use him? It goes against the very question posed in the thread - "Using the best commanders from throughout its history, how would you construct the US Army?" When was he ever in the US Army? At least when Ibis used Lejeune he had qualified it quite well. Crazy Horse never even had allegiance to the United States. Out of the hundreds of qualified possibilities you put an enemy of the United States who wasn't even technically an American simply because he was born in a physical location? Was this just to be "edgy" or "controversial" or to seem "cool and unorthodox?"

                Defend your choice and explain how he is an "American Commander" and his qualifications to be a Corps Commander.
                Well technically Crazy Horse is the only true American military commander in the list.

                This is quite amusing poster I saw in Seattle..

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                  Where Washington would belong is in the slot not mentioned yet; Chief of Staff.
                  And give Eisenhower's job to Stilwell, like it should have been.
                  Marshall would also make a great Chief of Staff. Stilwell would have sucked at Eisenhower's job - not enough of a diplomat.
                  Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                    Well technically Crazy Horse is the only true American military commander in the list.

                    This is quite amusing poster I saw in Seattle..

                    Saw it a while back myself - rather liked the irony.
                    Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                      Well technically Crazy Horse is the only true American military commander in the list.
                      No, technically he is not. I know what you are saying is tongue in cheek, but it is a really stupid comment people make often and are being serious. Its like saying unless you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt each and everyone of your ancestors can be traced to the original inhabitants of the British Isles you aren't truly British or English or Welsh or whatever even though those countries didn't even exist when half your ancestors arrived.

                      You realize when you say stuff like that you are calling people 'not true Americans' when they certainly are. Where does it end? How far do we go back? Are descendants of the Normans in France 'truly French' ? How about the ones that were in England? Are they truly English? Truly French? Truly Norsemen? What about Russians? Who are truly Russian? Is Istanbul "Truly Turkey" even though it has basically been since 1453?

                      Crazy Horse was not an American commander. Period. He has no possibility to claim that title, especially in the context of this thread which says US Army commanders. Never once was he in the United States Army, never once did he swear allegiance to the United States, and he was an enemyu of the United States. In this case American is an adjective meaning commander in the United States Army. So how 'technically' is he the only 'true' American Commander?
                      Кто там?
                      Это я - Почтальон Печкин!
                      Tunis is a Carthigenian city!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Stryker 19K30 View Post
                        No, technically he is not. I know what you are saying is tongue in cheek, but it is a really stupid comment people make often and are being serious. Its like saying unless you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt each and everyone of your ancestors can be traced to the original inhabitants of the British Isles you aren't truly British or English or Welsh or whatever even though those countries didn't even exist when half your ancestors arrived.

                        You realize when you say stuff like that you are calling people 'not true Americans' when they certainly are. Where does it end? How far do we go back? Are descendants of the Normans in France 'truly French' ? How about the ones that were in England? Are they truly English? Truly French? Truly Norsemen? What about Russians? Who are truly Russian? Is Istanbul "Truly Turkey" even though it has basically been since 1453?

                        Crazy Horse was not an American commander. Period. He has no possibility to claim that title, especially in the context of this thread which says US Army commanders. Never once was he in the United States Army, never once did he swear allegiance to the United States, and he was an enemyu of the United States. In this case American is an adjective meaning commander in the United States Army. So how 'technically' is he the only 'true' American Commander?
                        Yes it's tongue in cheek..............therefore lighten up. The rest of your post wasn't necessary...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                          Yes it's tongue in cheek..............therefore lighten up. The rest of your post wasn't necessary...
                          Try being told 40,000 times in your life "you aren't a real______" It gets old fast and it borders on insulting. So the more stuff like that gets said, the less I'm going to lighten up. The opposite is going to happen.
                          Кто там?
                          Это я - Почтальон Печкин!
                          Tunis is a Carthigenian city!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                            Marshall would also make a great Chief of Staff. Stilwell would have sucked at Eisenhower's job - not enough of a diplomat.
                            Couldn't agree more. How did I forget Marshall.
                            "The time for war has not yet come, but it will come, and that soon; and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard."

                            -Thomas Jonathan Jackson-

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Stryker 19K30 View Post
                              Try being told 40,000 times in your life "you aren't a real______" It gets old fast and it borders on insulting. So the more stuff like that gets said, the less I'm going to lighten up. The opposite is going to happen.
                              You been counting?

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X