Greatest Military Leaders of all Time

And since when Leonidas is considered one of the greatest military leaders of all time? Only you apparently.

You completely and utterly contradicted yourself here.

What?

First of all, how does that make Lee arguable? And two, you don't seem to understand the Civil War. They won on mass charges. That got them butchered! Total war tactics had already been in place before the Civil War, and is a valid strategy. Furthermore, what about Petersburg, or Vicksburg, or Chattanooga, or the blockade of the South? I think that had more to do with the South losing than mass men charges. I also want to point out your flawed logic on that victors write history. While yes, that is true, it doesn't apply to great generals. Rommel, Lee, Jackson, Guderian, Pericles, Hannibal, Joe Johnston, Louis XIV (yes he was a general), Vauban, Bonaparte, and many others were on the losing side, and yet we remember them. Some could call Rommel and Guderian Nazi lovers and anti-semites and blah blah blah, yet books are written about them, and their accomplishments, so I really don't see why you say that, unless your logic applies to the shit generals (Santa Anna for one) in which case, yes, we forget them because they were worthless and is silly to remember those who had little impact.

Because i already made a point about it's not the country or the flag he fights for, it's the general himself. Rommel = Not loser. Nazi germany = Loser. If you read only a couple post above im sure you'd know what i'm saying. rommel was a victor, so he had stories written about him. you made the point your self, losing generals aren't remembered. My point exactly. The country doesn't have to be the victor, it help's, but it doesn't have to be.

No. Generals that accomplish nothing aren't remembered.

What the hell are you talking about? Rommel lost. Napoleon lost. Lee lost. Leonidas lost. Pyrrhus lost.

In the end. It only takes one win to be a winner. They won at least once. Simple. If history is written by the victors, than history is written by those who won, they are people who won.

Leonidas did not win, but his people won the war. It goes either way on the victor. If the nation wins then there generals also become winners, but its the general that does the most that is remembered.

You did see I had that in there right?

Well generals who didn't win aren't really good or great now are they

Your original quote. Please just restate your position at this point, because I am totally confused.

You are saying we can't say who is the greatest general because history is written by the victors. Your original quote said we can not tell who is the greatest general, because some generals were on the losing side. Now you are saying that even though some generals are on the losing side, they are still remembered as great generals if they won at least one battle. You just completely contradicted yourself.

Also, like thelisener said, if you never one any battles to begin with, there is a reason you aren't considered a greeat general. And that is because you lost all the battles you fought in.

And how the fuck you can consider Rommel a winner and Nazi germany a loser? Rommel fought for the nazis and please never ever try to separate a country from the subordinate generals it has, you can't simply say that Nazi Germany is a loser because Nazi Germany is a state, not a person, or the point of the thread...a military leader.

To add to that, Rommel himself lost in North Africa.

Yet is considered a military genius of World War 2 along with Zhukov.

Oh and don't forget the Japanese general in world war 2 who;s name escapes me.

And Guderian!

Admiral Yamato?

FIRE THE YAMATO CANNON!

Yes.

I;m not the one who named these people. others did.

And i'll re-word my statement:

History is written by those who can write it. See if you can understand at least that.

Oh please, you come here, state an argument and contradict yourself shortly after and now you're trying to play Mr.Smartpants? seriously, fuck off