Who are the great generals?

[Fred III]

I'm thinking this thread has pretty much run it's course.

Unfortunately, I tend to agree. I would, however, like to get one last opinion. The Germans had a field marshal during WWII by the name of Ferdinand Schörner. I am reasonably sure Schörner made his rank by virtue of the fact he was supposed to have been a Nazi stalwart, though I am not positive of that. He rose up in rank with much of the old guard of the Prussian general corps (he was born in 1892, making him a few years younger than some), so he probably wasn't incompetent, but I just wonder how good he really was. Despite his closeness with Hitler, the man ran his own show and on more than one occasion, defied the "great" general/politician/idiot/madman. With v. Manstein's departure, Schörner seemed to be the superstar of the Eastern Front (such as anyone could be in 1944-1945).

So... with that in mind, I wonder how good a general this guy really was. Any opinions... ?

Best wishes,
Fred.

[Distiller]

Since #1 post in this thread called for generals, I'm not sure about including state leaders, like Alexander the Great, Darius the Great, or Frederick the Great. Ceasar is a border case, as at the time of his conquests he was in a triumvirate with Crassus and Pompeius.

Going strictly for generales, a number of WW2 Germans sure do qualify.
And Islam produced a whole range of incredible successful generals like Khalid ibn al-Walid (I think he was mentioned), Timur (also a border case, as he was not a state leader, but acted as one, and founded an empire), and also not yet mentioned I think Robert Guiscard.

Also I think the Spanish conqistadores were not yet mentioned, even though their rate of utilized assets vs gains (or whatever you might call it) is absolutely unique, winning a whole continent with only a handful of men.

I personally like Wallenstein, even though his impact was rather regional.

And on this U.S.-heavy forum Douglas MacArthur was not yet mentioned?

[Gian P Gentile]

I personally like Wallenstein, even though his impact was rather regional.

How about the generalship of Osama bin Laden? His impact is certainly way beyond regional, and, like Wallenstein and the effects of the Thirty Years War, many see him and his war of terror as evil.

[slapout9]

You are right Colonel but People don't like to admit that. He understands EBO and he understands Targeting. His failure for us fortunately was he could not continue to press the attack or we would have been in deep trouble.

[Jayhawker]

Well if the criteria are understanding the war you're in, and implementing a strategy to win it, then my list is below.

Gen Washington has my vote for best in American history. Consider what he had to work with, where he had to go, and what he accomplished. Yes, I know, he only won three battles, if you don't count the successful evacuations, but the man understood the nature of his war and kept that always in mind. He also coordinated with Allies (French and various Indian tribes) to include the French Navy. Now that, for 1783, was a grand accomplishment.

I think old George gets completely ignored. My list is American only as I don't feel competent to go abroad.
1. Washington
2. Grant
3. Marshall
4. Pershing
5. Eisenhower
6. Winfield Scott
7. Sherman
8. LeMay (both during WWII and Cold War)
9. Jimmy Doolittle
10. Vinegar Joe Stillwell

All these guys showed imagination, innovation, took risks and understood the nature of the war they were in. And, all except Grant, Scott, and Sherman had to handle Allies.... which is truly an art form. Previous comments have Zinni on peoples' lists. I'd concur and think that if we had him there instead of Franks, it would be a very different ball game now.

All this is a fun parlor game, but the real issue Yingling's article got me thinking about is why, with all our professional education, service Academies, and other "challenges" and "opportunities" do we have so precious few around like these today?

Perhaps its because they, had careers filled with innovation and risk, just showing up for normal duties in their peace time army? I don't know but I wish someone would figure it out.

[Rifleman]

10. Vinegar Joe Stillwell

Did Vinegar Joe misuse or have unrealistic expectations of Galahad? Or were his orders just the nature of the war in Burma and what had to be done?

Scott R. McMichael in comes down pretty hard on Stilwell in his work A Historical Perspective on Light Infantry.

Charles Ogburn states in The Marauders that Stilwell had to assume deputy duties from Mountbatten once for 22 days and "it was said the senior staff, American as well as British, were dismayed to find him (Stilwell) at sea in high-level administration and to be incapable of taking charge or giving any useful directions."

The general feeling seems to have been that Stilwell was fine at division level, maybe in a little over his head at corps level, and that "the requirements of an army command were entirely beyond Stilwell's scope."

[Jayhawker]

I had not seen those comments about him before, and they could very well be justified. The joke was that CBI did not stand so much for China-Burma-India theater, but rather Confusion Beyond Imagination! "Working" with Chaing Kai-Shek and the British provided a level of complexity that I think most do not recognize. You know the Brits, often repeat the old Montomgery/Alanbrooke saw that Ike was no battlefield commander, but rather an "Allied administrator...." Which demonstrates their lack of understanding of the complexities and challenges of being a Supreme Allied Commander, in any theater of war.

No rocks thrown at my Air Force generals? All you army guys....where are you?

[Norfolk]

Unfortunately, I tend to agree. I would, however, like to get one last opinion. The Germans had a field marshal during WWII by the name of Ferdinand Schörner. I am reasonably sure Schörner made his rank by virtue of the fact he was supposed to have been a Nazi stalwart, though I am not positive of that. He rose up in rank with much of the old guard of the Prussian general corps (he was born in 1892, making him a few years younger than some), so he probably wasn't incompetent, but I just wonder how good he really was. Despite his closeness with Hitler, the man ran his own show and on more than one occasion, defied the "great" general/politician/idiot/madman. With v. Manstein's departure, Schörner seemed to be the superstar of the Eastern Front (such as anyone could be in 1944-1945).

So... with that in mind, I wonder how good a general this guy really was. Any opinions... ?

Best wishes,
Fred.

Fred, what I know about Shoerner is scant, although he did have a terrible task to perform when he commanded German and Finnish Mountain troops on the Murmansk Front, and it is not clear that anyone could have done much better. I remember reading about German and Finnish operations on the Kola Pensinsula, and it is almost impossible to think of a worse place to have to fight - countless giant boulders blocking the passage of almost any vehicle without road-construction, which itself bordered on the impossible under the prevailing climatic conditions; no vegetation or natural cover aside from said boulders; inadequate clothing, shelter, and rations, and of course, inability to adapt to the conditions of life in a Polar region, until the Germans learned from the Finns how to wage Arctic Warfare; and finally, being at the wrong end of a grossly overlong supply "route", made Operational-level action effectively impossible. Even Tactical action was difficult in the extreme.

He and Rommel were competitors, and both were old Gebirgsjaegars; and both won the Pour le Merite in WWI. Schoerner must have had something truly exceptional about him to share in that very rare honour.

But it was under his command on the Eastern Front that the Battle of Targul Frumos was fought by German and Rumanian troops, and the actions of the GD in particular have been studied by NATO for decades now. Whether such studies focusing on Targul Frumos to the detriment of what else was going on on the Eastern Front in the months just before Operation Bagration are useful is admittedly arguable.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

As for great Air Force generals, Lord Dowding for his innovations in Strategic Air Defence (the "Dowding System"), and his performance leading up to and during the Battle of Britain.

[wm]

Fred, what I know about Shoerner is scant, although he did have a terrible task to perform when he commanded German and Finnish Mountain troops on the Murmansk Front, and it is not clear that anyone could have done much better. I remember reading about German and Finnish operations on the Kola Pensinsula, and it is almost impossible to think of a worse place to have to fight - countless giant boulders blocking the passage of almost any vehicle without road-construction, which itself bordered on the impossible under the prevailing climatic conditions; no vegetation or natural cover aside from said boulders; inadequate clothing, shelter, and rations, and of course, inability to adapt to the conditions of life in a Polar region, until the Germans learned from the Finns how to wage Arctic Warfare; and finally, being at the wrong end of a grossly overlong supply "route", made Operational-level action effectively impossible. Even Tactical action was difficult in the extreme.

He and Rommel were competitors, and both were old Gebirgsjaegars; and both won the Pour le Merite in WWI. Schoerner must have had something truly exceptional about him to share in that very rare honour.

But it was under his command on the Eastern Front that the Battle of Targul Frumos was fought by German and Rumanian troops, and the actions of the GD in particular have been studied by NATO for decades now. Whether such studies focusing on Targul Frumos to the detriment of what else was going on on the Eastern Front in the months just before Operation Bagration are useful is admittedly arguable.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Shoerner commanded Army Group Center in the end days. I believe his failure to commit the AG reserves allowed the Russian to force a penetration south of Heinrici's Army Group Vistula at the Seelow Heights, which in turn force Heinrici to abandon a set of positions from which he had stopped Zhukov cold. Shoerner also had something to do with the Courland defense IIRC, but my memory is very sketchy here. I think he reached his Peter Principle level of comptence at the Regimental or division commander level in Finland. BTW, regarding Targul Frumos--having Hasso von Manteuffel as a division commander could probably have made even George McClellan or Ambrose Burnside look like an operational genius.
Regarding the Blue Max--from my read of Rommel's Infantry Attacks and other WWI German memoir materials, receiving that award would have no correlation with one's ability to perform well as a general officer. The German mountain troops had a "death-defying" aura or charisma about them similar to German aviators, the main winners of the medal. Perhaps that explains the medals more than anything else.

[Norfolk]

BTW, regarding Targul Frumos--having Hasso von Manteuffel as a division commander could probably have made even George McClellan or Ambrose Burnside look like an operational genius.

At the very least, it is quite the Ace to have up one's sleeve. Not to mention having certain Formations of the quality of the GD...

[Tempest1991]

O.K don't shoot down this addition to the list too quickly but i'd like to make it

David Stirling.

I know he wasn't an actual general by rank but he did command an unit during the Africa campaign of WW2 that chose their own targets and so it was him, with help from his subordinates, that decdied where to take risks.

Also he showed considerable abilty to adapt as after Op Squatter went completely wrong he understood that it was time to change tactics and start to use the LRDG (Long Range desert Group, i think, can't be sure right now) to ferry his men to their targets.

Also the unit he created was credited with disabling more Axis aircraft over a 6 month period than the entire Allied air force in the area. Stirling took his orginial idea and created a unit that is commonally accepted to be the best special forces unit in the world.

oh and Sabutai obviously.

Scott.

P.S if any of these facts are wrong i apoligise.

[LetUsHavePeace]

To appreciate what Ike and Grant accomplished, you have to know how much direct experience they had with logistics. It explains why Eisenhower was chosen to command the largest seaborne invasion of all time and why Grant was able to defeat every Confederate Army that he faced. Eisenhower commanded the first transcontinental truck convoy - what was literally the motorized equivalent of the Lewis and Clark expedition. Grant was a teamster by the time he was 9; by 12 he was making overnight deliveries for the family tannery and being sent alone to do horse buying. (One of Grant's favorite jokes on himself was the story he told about his first negotiation with a man who wanted to sell a horse. "I told the man that my father had said that I was to offer $12 and if he wouldn't take it, I was to pay $14. I paid $14.") In the Mexican War Grant literally had to sneak forward to join the actual fighting because he had been assigned to supply - not as punishment but as an acknowledgement of his ability to get the job done.
An earlier post suggested that Ike and Grant "both enjoyed their time in the Army when working for people who let them use their imagination to think and solve problems and when it went bad, they didn't get fired for their efforts." That was not true about Grant. He had to quit the Army because he was threatened with a court martial if he did not resign - allegedly for being drunk but, in truth, for repeatedly trying to do something about the shabby state of the enlisted men's quarters. Eisenhower did not "get fired" but he spent nearly two decades wishing that he could quit. He found working for MacArthur so maddening that it drove him to develop his 2-pack a day smoking habit. When he was on Staff in D.C., he read all of Zane Grey's novels - TWICE - while waiting for something to do. Ike stayed because he felt he had no choice - he had to support his family. Grant left for the same reason; he could not make enough in the Army to have his family with him.
Both men were constitutionally incapable of taking much crap. That was the key to their eventual success, but it made neither man's career easy.

[Ceaser]

I would say some of the best generals of all time would be
Alexander the Great
Napoleon
Julius Caesar
Hitler
Eisenhower
Robert E. Lee
Sun Tzu
Hannibal