Greatest Military Leaders of all Time

ha ha ...no

China entering the war is the whole reason we didn't with the Korean War. And if we invaded China and gained success, you bet the Soviets wouldn't just stand idly by. Welcome to World War 3.

We could have stormed China while we had the offensive. Their forces were in the middle of demobilizing from the civil war, and only remobilized after Truman fired MacArthur and we decided to attempt to negotiate instead of invade China. We could have even legally justified a whole UN intervention since the UN recognized the ROC over the PRC. We should have handed over China to the ROC, and then we could have invaded the Soviets from the south in China and through Mongolia if need be, and if they responded militarily. They were expecting another war in Europe, not Asia. They wouldn't expect an attack from the south so quickly, we could have just had one grand offensive from Pusan to Moscow, and ended the Cold War immediately. Remember, at this point, so early in the Cold War, conventional warfare was still the norm, as neither side had enough nukes, or even missiles, for a total nuclear war.

If I remember correctly he also wanted more nukes droped on Japan before the planed invasion of Japan in 1946.

I've never heard that, in fact most American commanders were appaled by the use of nukes. And the invasion wa splanned for '45, not '46.

Well the Invasion was planed in two steps. Operation Olympic Set to begin in October 1945, Operation Olympic was intended to capture the southern third of the southernmost main Japanese island, Kyushu. Later, in spring 1946, Operation Coronet was the planned invasion of the Kanto Plain, near Tokyo, on the Japanese island of Honshu. Airbases on Kyūshū captured in Operation Olympic would allow land-based air support for Operation Coronet.

Also I was mistaken it wasn't MacArthur, but it was an idea they were thinking about. On Marshall's orders, Major General John E Hull looked into the tactical use of nuclear weapons for the invasion of the Japanese home islands (even after the dropping of two strategic atomic bombs on Japan, Marshall did not think that the Japanese would capitulate immediately). Colonel lyle E Seeman reported that at least seven bombs would be available by X-Day, which could be dropped on defending forces. Seeman advised that American troops not enter an area hit by a bomb for "at least 48 hours".

I've always been a fan of William T. Sherman. His methods were... questionable... but his clarity of vision in how to bring the American Civil War to a decisive end gives him an edge over many other leaders, at least to me. He understood that simply defeating Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia would not bring the war to an end much sooner. In fact, he understood that defeating Lee wasn't the key to victory at all. It is a vision that most commanders lack, and makes Sherman one of the greats.

Hannibal knew how to win a battle, but he didnt know how to win a war. --> not the greatest of all time

Alexander was a decent commander, but incredibly lucky. More than one time, the persians could beat him easily, but Dareios was a coward, and pussied out to much.

William the Bastard was a good commander. I still think that namintg him the greatest of all time is a stretch though, because his "conquering" was made easy when Harold died in the Battle of Hastings. Now, he would have won it without that coincidence, I'm sure, but the subsequent conquest of England would be alot harder!

I chose Hannibal because simply put when you are able to decisively defeat the largest empire of the time you are entitled to be remembered in history as a great leader.

Alexander managed to almost completely conquer what is now the Middle east and plus is luck not always in the favor the greatest men in history?

William managed to not only take advantage of the situation to turn it towards his own favor he also used a perfect feigned retreat maneuver that broke the Norman shield wall but was also able to adapt the longbow into the most powerful weapons in the medieval world.

The point is, he didnt defeat the largest empire of the time. He beat them battles like Canae, but lost the war. Thus, he knew how to win a battle, but not a war.

I said he was good, but nowhere near that good that he is perceived today. He could have easily be beaten at Gaugamela, if Dareios had the balls not to flee like the woman he was. Also, keep in mind that with the victories against the Persians, there was noone else to conquer till he reached modern day Afghanistan. It is an accomplishment to beat the greatest empire man has seen to that day. Luck was involved, to an extent that disqualifies him for beeing "the greatest ever". His father Philipp was definitally the better military leader. Julius Caesar would have beat him in a straight up battle too IMO.

Again, William is the one nearest to deserve the title of the three you named. Yes, he was genius. But we cant name him the greatest ever, because there still is the possibility that he would be known as William the Bastard today, had Harold not died at Hastings.

@DutchMasterRace

To name one who is the greatest is not easy. I will try to name one in the future, but I dont have that much time tonight, my wife is waiting

Even Julius Caesar himself said he would never be as good as Alexander.

You have to take that in context. Caesar wanted to be the next Alexander, the great conqueror and war hero. He actually was quite depressed that Roman laws. you had to pass through all 4 "higher positions" before becoming trusted as a great commander, hindered him to repeat Alexanders success. He admired him, he was a god to him. To most romans tbh, because he had all the qualities Romans loved, like bravery etc.
It is only logical that Caesar thought himself inferior to someone who conquered the whole known world at age 26, when he had to wait to his late 50s to do it... On the battlefield however, most historians believe Ceasar was the better commander.

I don't know. I think Alexander would win in a straight up fight on even grounds. I mean Caesar is great, but I think 1v1 Caesar vs Alexander, it would be extremely close, but I think Alexander would win in the end. But we will never know...

Georgy Zhukov, patton, and Erwin Rommel, are some of my favorite military leaders.

You just opened up a shitstorm, my friend.