I'm pretty sure a great military leader doesn't need adult supervisionHung Low wrote:Me.![]()
Just kidding. Otto Skorzeny's one of my fav's.

Moderator: Site Admin
I'm pretty sure a great military leader doesn't need adult supervisionHung Low wrote:Me.![]()
Just kidding. Otto Skorzeny's one of my fav's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangas_Coloradas" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;panthersix wrote:Don't forget the Native American Warrior Leaders:
Geronimo
Sitting Bull
Chief Joseph
Crazy Horse
Cochise
TECUMSEH
Just to name a few.
Two of my favorite characters in history are Truman and MacArthur, who clearly butted heads on major issues. MacArthur's bravery in combat is well documented as he was the most decorated soldier in World War I, and many stories abound about his flair and courage. Although he antagonized many of his peers & FOGs, he was single handedly responsible for modernizing the Academy to produce better officers to lead the country in modern times. During the Great Depression he forewarned about facism. MacArthur may have made his greatest contribution to history in the next five and a half years, as Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers in Japan. By force of his personality, he shaped the rebuild of Japan. Although the able leadership of General Matthew B. Ridgway stabilized the military situation near the prewar boundary at the 38th parallel, MacArthur earlier reversed the dire military situation in Korea with a brilliant amphibious assault behind North Korean lines at the Port of Inchon. The bickering with Truman culminated in his being relieved over his convctions in opposition to Truman.K.Ingraham wrote:One of the greatest phony self-seeking imitations of a good leader there ever was.garyedolan wrote:General of the Army Douglas MacArthur
His rep as a good leader is unsupported by evidence!
Outstanding leader from his era, and one who stands up to any scrutiny is one of our greatest generals and one of the least known is Mathew Ridgeway.
I agree, Ranger Caruthers. You are one or two stages ahead of me. :D Right now we are casting a wide net - every major battle, every major tactical method, every great leader, weapons, etc. Without regard to anything, except that we capture all pertinent info. This stage of info gathering gets overwhelming, fast. But, I am fortunate enough to have some excellent historians and specifically war historians on this. I am using your guidance to 'point' them to information that you and others feel is important. Then we will let it "fall" into categories... this is where the "type" of war will come into play. We are a looong way from elegance. Many months, if not years. But, we rush it now, and we will have crap to work with later.Caruthers wrote: Problem is depending on the Standing army use of strategy.........What commander do you want? What are you facing? Personal favorite will be chosen upon learning of what type of "WAR" I would be engaging.
It would always boil down to a blend of Sun Tzu, Scipio Aricanus, Genghis Khan, Leander McNelly, Omar Bradley.
DrD wrote:I agree, Ranger Caruthers. You are one or two stages ahead of me. :D Right now we are casting a wide net - every major battle, every major tactical method, every great leader, weapons, etc. Without regard to anything, except that we capture all pertinent info. This stage of info gathering gets overwhelming, fast. But, I am fortunate enough to have some excellent historians and specifically war historians on this. I am using your guidance to 'point' them to information that you and others feel is important. Then we will let it "fall" into categories... this is where the "type" of war will come into play. We are a looong way from elegance. Many months, if not years. But, we rush it now, and we will have crap to work with later.Caruthers wrote: Problem is depending on the Standing army use of strategy.........What commander do you want? What are you facing? Personal favorite will be chosen upon learning of what type of "WAR" I would be engaging.
It would always boil down to a blend of Sun Tzu, Scipio Aricanus, Genghis Khan, Leander McNelly, Omar Bradley.
Thank you!
DrD
DrD wrote:All;
From another source, I got this military leader: Adolf Hitler. This person's opinion was that although he was reprehensible, he was an extremely good military leader.
What do you think? Should he be included, or not?
Thank you!
DrD
Germany would have been very difficult to defeat if at all, but for Hitler's meddling with military actions, policies, and decisions.Caruthers wrote:DrD wrote:All;
From another source, I got this military leader: Adolf Hitler. This person's opinion was that although he was reprehensible, he was an extremely good military leader.
What do you think? Should he be included, or not?
Thank you!
DrD
My humble opinion is that Adolf Hitler was a politician..........not a "Great" military leader. He did have some brilliant military leaders in his command. Hitler, lost more battles, do to his direct leadership, and compartmentalization of chain of command, than he ever won.