12-08-2002 17:41									#61
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by The Mad Monk Given what he did with what he had, I would give the title to Rommel.

I guess you never heard of Alexandr Suvorov, who didn’t lose a single battle during his career and who f*cked 100 000 Turkish army consisted of cavalry only with 15 000 of his infantry and 10 000 of cavalry. And who done it while he was in offence.


P.S. As long this poll don’t have Suvorov, Kutuzov and Zhukov (which I consider as total discrimination against Russians, because no way that Shaka Zulu is greater leader then Kutuzov, who kicked Napoleon’s ass) I’m with Paiktis. Alexander is the greatest.

	12-08-2002 17:48									#62
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Suvorov I agree with, buth not Kutetzov.

He was defeated by Boney at Austerlitz (with lots of help from Alexander, tis true), and never beat the French before his death, but he was a fine general.

Zhukov should be there, best Russian general, and top allied man in WWII.

	12-08-2002 18:06									#63
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

You must be joking, right? You just can't agree with me. It's simply impossible. You agreed with ME? I thought you would reply with your famous-" Serb, stop being an ass, everyone knows that Russians can't fight properly".
I'm shocked.

	12-08-2002 18:18									#64
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I never said such a thing, that Russia couldn't fight, all of that was in your assumptions.

I tried to tell you that last time, but you were to busy flag waving and accusing me of being an ultra-nationalist.

	12-08-2002 18:23									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Alexander without question. He led from the front, and defeated a mighty empire through simple force of leadership.

Napoleon was definitely a great leader, but it is a myth that he invented new strategy. He simply knew how to use existing strategies well.

General Lee deserves honorable mention for his incredible ability to hold the army of Northern Virginia together while in the west and all along the coast, the southern armies crumbled. The East was at its height while Grant was mopping up along the mississippi

	12-08-2002 20:07									#66
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

My three favorites are Hannibal, Lee and Rommel. I tend to like those who are facing insurmountable odd and, even though they are ultimately defeated, emerge with a more glorious reputation.

I think Rommel is the best of the last century, both for his sheer military brilliance and his particular humanity as a general while under a regime known for its horrific atrocities.

	12-08-2002 20:23									#67
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Why does Lee have such a teflon reputation?

	12-08-2002 20:25									#68
	Tired of ads?

It's the aura, DD. I think he really was quite a brilliant leader, and then you throw in that genteelism, and he becomes a legend. He did make a pretty stupid choice to fight at Gettysburg, though...nobody's perfect!

	12-08-2002 20:40									#69
	Got spare money?

Lee- Lost
Rommell-Lost
Hannibal-Lost

I think to be considered you have to have won, althought o be fair to Hannibal he came close.

	12-08-2002 20:51									#70
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by TheStinger I think to be considered you have to have won,

Not really. It's what you do with what you have that puts you in the running.

Otherwise, if we follow your line of reasoning, Pyrrhus would be in the running.

	12-08-2002 20:54									#71
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I think some of those who lost were really good generals, its just when you are considering the best of all time I believe they should have won.

This actually gets rid of the tiny corsican bloke who i think might have been the best, so i'm probably talking b******s.

	12-08-2002 20:57									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

For me, Lee gets disqualified because he was poor on offense. He was downright brilliant on the defensive, but the two offensive campaigns he led went badly.

Alexander was amazing, but his judgement wasn't always that great, particularly toward the end. How about that march back from India straight across a desert? A good percentage of his army didn't survive that. And why were they returning from India? The men mutinied because he'd had them campaigning for years on end in lands distant from their homes. I'd give him an A+ for tactics and personal bravery, but much lower grades for strategic thinking.

Ghengis Khan was impressive. The conquest of China... I wonder what the numbers were like in those battles? I think he wins.

Sun Tzu wrote on of the best (if not the best) books on warfare ever, but I wasn't aware that he actually led troops into battle. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Shaka is an interesting example... because he thrashed all opposition that was on his technological level. The Zulus didn't lose until they ran into people with guns. When the techonological odds were even, Shaka's training techniques and tactics rose to the top.

Caesar wasn't that great a general... and he had the Roman Legion to work with.

Napolean showed brilliance, but the catastrophic Russian campaign disqualifies him for me. Wars are won be those who make the least mistakes... and Nappy made a HUGE mistake invading Russia.

Rommel was very good, but not great.

I think Admiral Nelson deserves to be on the list, along with Zhukov (*nods to Serb*).

-Arrian

	12-08-2002 21:05									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: They never bothered with siege equipment

Actually the Mongols had quite sophisticated siege operations manned largely by the Chinese they had conquered who were quite good at that sort of thing.

	12-08-2002 21:45									#74
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Lee only gets that many votes because he was an American. Nobody in Asia and Europe would ever bother to mention his name. For me he disqualifies himself for his disastrous decision of invading Pennsylvania and letting Vicksburg be captured.

Besides, losers should never be considered the "best".

	12-08-2002 21:47									#75
	Increase Your PM Length

Did Lee have anything to do with Vicksburg? AFIK, he was the commander of the eastern CSA army. I don't think Vicksburg was his military decision. Wasn't that the CSA government's fault?

	12-08-2002 21:53									#76
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Boshko Actually the Mongols had quite sophisticated siege operations manned largely by the Chinese they had conquered who were quite good at that sort of thing.

Incorrect Boshko.

Your thinking Kublai Khan, which would be correct, not Chengis Khan, which is incorrect.

	12-08-2002 21:53									#77
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Lord Merciless For me he disqualifies himself for his disastrous decision ... letting Vicksburg be captured.

Lee wasn't at Vicksburg.

	12-08-2002 22:00									#78
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Lee wasn't at Vicksburg.

Oh, Dino. Don't you realize he was the only general in the war?

	12-08-2002 22:05									#79
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I want to throw in G. Washington. He lost some battle here and there, but in the end he force the surrender the greatest army of his day and drove the English out of the later, United States.

Actually you guys did not list any Generals/Admirals from the British Army/Navy over the history of planet earth. They did have the greatest empire at one time on earth.

	12-08-2002 22:08									#80
	Got spare money?

British army was crap, never very big.

It was the Navy that made the British Empire great.

	12-08-2002 22:08									#81
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by joseph1944 I want to throw in G. Washington. He lost some battle here and there, but in the end he force the surrender the greatest army of his day and drove the English out of the later, United States.

Actually, he lost most of his battles. His main virtue was keeping the Revolution alive- British Vietnam. Definitely a great leader, but hardly a military genius.

	12-08-2002 22:13									#82
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Actually, from a military standpoint, Washington is severly underated, he pulled off a masterful retreat accross New Jersey in 76, launched a sucessful winter counter attack across a water obsticle, his battle plans at Brandywine and Monmouth were very sound, and with better subordinates would have given the British pause.

His Chessapeake campaign showed he had a firm grasp on combined land/maritine strategy, something that cannot be said for any other officer of that war, abd he carried off a thousand mile march, coordinated it with a French fleet, and launched a victorious seige at Yorktown, all fine feats of arms.

	12-08-2002 22:24									#83
	Suffering from ads?

I think Lord Merciless was saying Lee should have marched to the relief of Vicksburg rather than invading the North. (I doubt if he's have had the authority to do that. His job was to oppose the Army of the Potomac.)

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Sir Arthur Wellesley. Do his victories in India, in the Peninsula Campaign and at Waterloo count for nothing?

	12-08-2002 22:25									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Lee wasn't at Vicksburg.

Of course I know he wasn't there. When Lee decided to invade North, Grant's army was already besieging Vicksburg, and there were lots of disputes within the CSA on whether to carry out Lee's plan or relieve Vicksburg. Lee could have recognized the severity of the situation in the west and agreed to abandon his plan. Well, since he was the most respected commander in the South, his plan got the approval. In the end, Vicksburg along with an entire army, surrendered, while Lee himself was beaten at Gettysburg. This strategic mistake alone disqualified Lee as the "BEST" military leader.

He was great, but he was not the best.

	12-08-2002 22:34									#85
	Put an end to popups!

i was torn between nappy and rommel, but Romell did it with a lot less.

heil the desert fox.

	12-08-2002 22:34									#86
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Vicksburg was outside of his theater of opperations. If you want to blame someone for the Confederate defeat there, blame the Western commanders.

	12-08-2002 23:21									#87
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 I tried to tell you that last time, but you were to busy flag waving and accusing me of being an ultra-nationalist.

Oh, excuse me I didn't noticed. You know, flag waving is a damn hard work.

	12-08-2002 23:25									#88
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Your forgiven.

	12-08-2002 23:25									#89
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I think Lee knew the CSA was doomed whether Vicksburg fell or not unless they could somehow give a huge, demoralizing blow to the Union via a major victory on their own soil. His aim was strategic--Vicksburg wasn't critical to Southern hopes at that moment. His plan was more risky and ultimately failed, but it certainly didn't ruin the South...the South was already on its way to losing the war.

	12-08-2002 23:44									#90
	Put an end to popups!

One of the South's major mistakes was the failure to choose a Supreme Commander until it was pretty much over (1865 - Lee). Jefferson Davis fancied himself a good strategist, and figured he could handle things. The South never really had a coordinated strategy, and suffered because of it. The North, after a terrible start, got its act together.

Lee was merely the commanding general of the Army of Northern Virginia (he refused to be posted anywhere else, IIRC). So you can't blame Lee for Vicksburg, unless you argue that he should have accepted a command anywhere. You CAN blame him for insisting on invading PA, choosing to fight at Gettysburg, and ordering Picket's charge.

-Arrian