Greatest Military Leaders of all Time

Why would you even bring up Naval battles. Napoleon never fought a naval battle. Many times Napoleon saw the big picture. His empire is proof of that. He didn't see the big picture in one instance, and even there he was counting on a common scenario to play out which would have allowed him to obtain ultimate victory. He achieved ultimate victory all the time, in Austria, in Italy, in Prussia, and various times in those places. Also Borodino was not a flawless victory, but it would have allowed Napoleon to finish off the Russians should they had fought him again.

He was not destine for defeat. If Napoleon's only conducted minor military action from 1807 forward the Empire would have been preserved. His victories were not empty, without them the empire would have been destroyed a lot sooner.

Nobody could win against the British navy. they had more ships than anyone else. not to mention their ships were some of the finest ever. no one of course, except the US (we had several naval victories during the War of 1812)

I have five military leaders, which I think are mostly ignored, although they were amongst the best:
- Conrad von Hotzendorf, leader of Austrian-Hungarian army in WW1, I value him for his inovative thinking (his plan of attack against russians was just great). Unfortunately, his plan counted with concentration of forces on serbian front, with significantly smaller force holding russians in Carpathian mountains, but Franz Joseph I wanted to hold Galizia, so he was forced to split his forces. And at the end, Serbia was still undefeated and Austrians had to retreat to Carpathians anyway.
- Svetozar Boroëvić von Bojna, another WW1 austrian general, he was a strategical mastermind, and his plan of three-wave attack on Italians on Piava river could succeeded, however Charles I prefered two-wave attack with stronger assault, which unfortunately failed.
- Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, the only undefeated german general in WW1. Fighting in eastern Africa with no supplies and only a handful of man (about 10 000 at its peak), his superior tactical and strategical genius forced entente to deploy a whole 300 000 contingent - and even when he was so outnumbered, they still couldn´t defeat him. He performed the most perfect and successful guerrilla warfare ever, and he was also a great moral authority, so even british soldiers respected him (ironically, the leader of entente corps standing against him was his good friend, Jan Smuts), and he openly spoked against Hitler, who couldn´t kill him because of his popularity.
- Radola Gajda (Rudolf Geidl), he originaly fought in Austrian military during WW1, but after a year or so, he escaped to Serbia, where he joined Czechoslovakian legion. Then he started his career as an officer, and he leaded te second wave of attack in Battle of Zborov after his russian superiors got drunk (they really did). He was in charge of many operations of Czechoslovakian legion during the escape from the bolsheviks. He was, alongside field marshal Krejci, general Syrovy and general Vojcechovsky (those are they ranks later in Czechoslovakian military) mastermind behind famous operation, in which about 20 000 Czechoslovakian troops, alone in a country destabilized by revolution(s), took control over the whole Trans-Siberian Railway. Thanks to that, hundreds of thousands of German soldiers, POWs in Russia, never made it to Germany (they were to be released, and armed(!) by Bolsheviks, according to Brest-Litevsk peace treaty). So in crucial days of final german push on western front, those, about 500 000 soldiers were lacking. Also, with another about 300 000 austrian-hungarian POWs, war in Italy could go much worse for entente, maybe it would even lead to final destruction of italian military (after Battle of Caporeto, about 70% Italian army were anihilated by austrians, and they progress was stopped thanks to reinforcements from UK and France, and mass mobilization in Italy, and also because austrians were not prepared for such a masive breaktrought). Later, Gajda entered service for Admiral Kolchak, who led monarchistic Siberia from Omsk. He became his most important general and he won battle after battle, but paranoid Kolchak feared, that he could overthrown him, and so he was exiled (after that, basically everybody just always kicked Kolchaks ass ). He returned to Czechoslovakia, where most of his old friend changed. Syrovy became a slimy, backstabbing asshole and puppet of Edvard Benes, because he lacked military qualities; Krejci didn´t wanted to be associated with him - he wanted to be in charge of the whole Czechoslovakian army (so Syrovy wouldn´t) and Gajda was monarchist in young republic (although our "founding father", president T. G. Masaryk, was de facto a monarch), so politics didn´t liked him. Vojcechovsky was a close friend to Krejci, but he was less ambitius and concentrated on military theory (he had very similar thoughts to Guderian). His only friend was general Lev ("Lion") Prchala, who was, I think, the only general in Czechoslovakian army with balls. He even yelled at president Benes, when he accepted the Treaty of Munchen. Unfortunately, Prchala was moved to the worst post in Czs military - easterm "army" in Uzhgorod (but this is another story )
- zeman Jan Zizka z Trocnova, skilled mercenary (he fought at Agincourt), later he lead a "black ops" group under the bohemian king Vaclav IV. (he attacked powerful, rebelius nobles). But as Vaclav IV. was losing his power to nobles, he became a husit zealot, creator of famous "battle wagon" tactics, propagator of firearms. You know, situation in Bohemia was pretty grimm back then. Skirmishes of nobles, growing power (and wealth) of Church... So a preacher, Jan Hus, started preaching basically protestant ideas (about a hundred years before Martin Luther). He gained a wide audience, and Church noticed him. They have a Council of Constance, when they have burned him to death. After that, a lot of bohemians rose up in armed revolt against the king, Church, and catholics as general. And it was Zizka and his tactics, that kicked asses of thousands of crusaders (yop, the pope declared several crusades against these "husits"). He was also one of the first, who showned, how ill-armed, ill-trained, foot-soldier based army can defeat heavily armored knights, enev outnumbered.

I see that someone knows their World War I history.

God damn it. Why won't you shut up about WW1?

There were no great military minds during WW1. That's why literally nothing happened. In fact, I'd argue that there were little to no great military leaders from Napoleon all the way up to WW2.

Oh, and not only that
I guess that when you are at 2nd best high school in your country, attending a special history class (you know, for "créme de la créme") and you are still bored at that class (and allowed to do anything, like sleep, or reading,...), you can tell, that you know long history of a lot of nations

Well, I can disagree, but if you don´t respect even von Lettow-Vorbec, than there is no point in arguing.
Adn how is it, that nobody ever mentions some general between Napoleonic wars and WW1/WW2? I know, it is not very interesting era, but what about Rober E. Lee? Or Joseph Radetzky von Radetz?

Unfortunately, I have to agree with that...

Robert E. Lee commanded 13 battles. He only actually won 5. He is just portrayed as a "hero" by backward Southerners who have no other heros because the Confederacy was a terrible fighting force and had no hope in hell of winning the Civil War.

Joseph Radetzky von Radetz was present during the Napoleonic Wars, meaning that I do not exclude him.

You know who a great military mind was? Erwin Rommel. I doubt you could compare anybody from after Napoleon to the end of WW1 to him.

Toast I'm not talking to you if you're tired of me talking about World War I don't read my post than. If you don't like me don't comment on what I say and I will not comment on what you say and we can leave it at that. Can we at least do that and just respect each other? I don't think I have ever disrespected you in anyway or called you stupid our told you to shut up, and if I have I'm sorry about it, but why do you feel you have to attack me?

Well, I saw the next post after I send the first of my replies.
I know, it sounds arrogant, it wasn´t ment to be. Yes, I am proud for my knowledge of history, and sometimes I act arrogant. It´s one of my character flaws.
If my reply to Toast is offending - well, I am sorry, that´s just the way I feel it. Von Lettov-Vorbeck did some great job in WW1, and I really, really like him - not only as a general, but also as a person, and I am sorry, that he is ignored by so many people, books, documentaries,... of course, I respect that you don´t know him, or you don´t find him important enough or good enough, but if this is the case, and if you don´t feel like there was some great general between Napoleon and WW2, I can´t argue with you about whether there was any great military leader in WW1.
Of course I don´t think you´re dumb for not respecting any WW1 commander, that would make me super-dumb

So I´m sorry if I offended anyone.

Because you are far too obsessed with World War 1. I actually feel remorse for you. How anybody could find such a great interest in such a depressing and uninteresting conflict confuses me. Almost everything you post revolves around it. In that respect, I feel the need to tell you to stop it.

You are right, I was wrong about Radetzky. At least we can agree, that he was pretty good leader (I hope )

Yes, Lee is controversial, but I find it curious, that he actually managed to won 5 of these battles with the little he had and I find his tactical abilities superior to Grants and other generals of Union.

Lee once had command of 15,000 troops. He lost to 2,000 Union troops. Battle of Cheat Mountain. If you want to compare Lee to another military leader of the same conflict, look at General Sherman. I still wouldn't call any "great military leaders" but Sherman was certainly a solid guy.

Argue your point. Don't just apologize. If it's correct in your eyes, don't just stand down from it. I doubt anybody's going to get offended debating about history.

OK, if thats your opinion that's your opinion. I'm just asking for you to show some respect, thats all. I have never personally attacked you and all I'm asking is that you don't do the same to me.

Allright then.
I agree, that Hotzendorf and Bojna are still pretty conventional WW1 generals, but von Lettow-Vorbeck and Gajda fought on whole another fields.
Lettow-Vorbec managed to disturb British supply lines in Kenya for about 2-3 years, he also fought at battle of Tanga, where about 1.000 of his troops, mostly exhausted due to quick, last-minute move from the north, stood against 8.000 men strong British force. Before this battle, he said one of my favourite quotes ever, it was something like that:
10:00 AM - germans outnumbered 4:1 - officers of Lettow-Vorbeck want him to attack - he said: "We´ll just wait for a while..."
12:00 AM - 6:1 - the same situation as at 10:00AM, with the same reply of Lettow-Vorbeck
15:00 AM - 8:1 - British fully deployed their troops - L.-V.: "And now we shall attack!"
He was so confident, that he let british fully deploy! And he repelled their attack with small casulties (about 70 dead or injured), british casulties were never verified, estimates are from about 300-2000 (and 2000 injured); I believe that about 3.000 dead/injured is pretty accurate.
Then he fought only two more major battles, always vastly outnumbered, but - always victorious.

Afterwards, he decided for guerrilla warfare, and he did so well, that his about 5.000 men "big" army (and it kept getting smaller...) tied up to 300.000 soldiers of entente! And that´s a great achievement.

I acnowledge, that Gajda is not that great, but if you put what Czech Legion did on trans-siberian railway is just awesome. Blocking about 800.000 POWs from being repatriated to Austria or Germany, and fighting masses of bolshevik armies (huge, but undisciplined and ill-leaded armies) with just 20.000 troops is a great accomplisment, and it was acomplished by Gajda, Syrovy and Vojcechovsky with contribution of Krecek (meaning "Hamster" xD) and elite Ushakovs (don´t know if it´s right, it´s written Ušakov, but its pronounced like Ushakov) storm troop batallion.

Guerrilla warfare? Shoot and run away? That's not very great. Not to mention that Africa was worthless during WW1, the Entente naturally did not put much commitment into it. The Germans were just trying to desperately hold their last colonies. The resistance might have been somewhat surprising, but I'm guessing he never really got into any decisive battles and just kept plucking people off. That's not very great. Even I can do that.

As for his "confidence", he was wrong to do that. That's overconfidence. He endangered the lives of his own men to gain a more prestigious victory. That's arrogance, too much for a simple guerrilla annoyance.

Cutting down hordes of Russians while entrenched isn't hard. Undisciplined is a key word here. The Russian Army of WW1 was such a bad fighting force. I would be impressed if they went up against other elite troops, but not against unorganized rabble.