Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire U. S. Generals; Best and Overrated.

Keep it to one each.

My choices:

The best: John J. Pershing. His leadership ability recognized as early as West Point. Promoted from Captain to Brigadier General skipping all field grades. Promotion recommended by Generals who knew him as an officer. Literally organized the U. S. Army from scratch during WW I. The staff he took to France to accomplish this organization reads like a Who�s Who of future American Generals, Patton and MacArthur among them.

The Most Overrated:

Robert E. Lee. (Hands down winner.)

Robert E. Lee opposed secession, did not approve of slavery, but was willing to fight for both.

Betrayed his oath to defend the United States Constitution and took up arms against the Country and the Constitution.

Lee invaded the North in an effort to show the Confederacy�s strength and viability as a nation. He hoped with a demonstration of that viability, either England or France, or both, would recognize the Confederated States of America as an independent nation. The invasion led to defeat at Gettysburg and that defeat began the decline of the South�s War of Oppression. Lee�s invasion and hoped for recognition show his shortcomings as a student of history, as a thinker, and subsequently, as a military leader. For decades before Lee�s invasion, England had been a staunch enemy of slavery, using its navy to eradicate the slave trade on the high seas. For Lee and the Confederate government to think England would recognize a slave holding nation was pie in the sky at best, a delusion at worst. Why would England eradicate the slave trade on the high seas, and then recognize a slave-holding nation?

History remembers Lee as a brilliant, decisive leader. However, until Grant took charge of the Union Armies, Lee faced timid and incompetent generals who gave battle, and when they had the advantage, still retreated to lick their wounds. Grant didn�t do that. He fought, took his licks, and then fought again. Grant took command of the Union Armies in March of 1864. Lee surrendered in April of 1865. Time elapsed: 13 months. Faced with a general willing to fight him and press him without mercy, Lee and his army quickly collapsed.

Okay, Ready, Aim, Fire!

General Walter Kruger, 6th Army,Pacific,WWll. His skill was the reason MacArthur was successful. Kruger formed the Alamo Scouts,the best recon outfit in the war, and had the 6th Ranger Bn under his command. The boys who pulled off the raid on Cabanatuan.

Roger, you've obviously been reading Lee Considered or one of the other revisionist Lee-bashing tomes so popular in a society that can't tolerate icons.

Lee was not a saint, but together with Jackson, he was more than a match for a far more numerous better armed, fed and paid Yankee force. And your excuse is, well, we didn't have good generals. Well, the south had a few turkeys too, but at least we didn't make them general-in chief. Grant finally buried Lee in a sea of bodies, using the North's overwhelming advantages in manpower and logistics to grind the Army of Northern Virginia down and force it into the Petersburg lines, where the outcome was only a matter of time.

Your complaints about the South's war aims and/or Lee's politics have zero to do with the analysis of his skill as a general.

Clearly, together with Jackson, the best this country produced in the 19th Century.

I just can't resist these "historical" questions and I concur about R.E. Lee being far too highly rated in U.S. popular history. Regardless of his other qualities, the man was a senior serving officer who betrayed his oath and acted in violence toward his loyal brother officers; he would have been shot in Canada or the British Empire for such infamous behaviour. I also consider Jackson to be primarily the beneficiary of the courage of his troops and he was, again, a traitor, something I despise.

The single greatest American general was George Washington, hands down, without his leadership and fortitude, I think that the Continental Army would not have held together until the ruinous cost of the Revolution to Imperial interests, the strong empathy among "Whigs" in Parliament and the English people as a whole for the "Americans" and the general lack of interest concerning the North American Colonies motivated the Crown to end the war. Washington, a former officer under Sir Edward Braddock, does not, in my view deserve the opprobrium of being called "traitor" although he broke his oath to the Crown as his circumstances were far different than R.E. Lee's. Many of my ancestors fought as officers against the "damYankees", but, I tend to respect Washington, Jefferson and some of the others of The Founding Fathers.

The WORST American general, IMO, was the egomaniacal "Dougout Doug", but his colleague, Admiral Chester Nimitz was the finest "flag" commander of the 20th Century in the U.S. forces and among the top in ANY forces. I don't think much of Patton or Mark Clark, but, I highly respect Wainright, Ridgeway, Truscott, Kruger and eeven Eisenhower who had a job that would have crushed a lesser man. Imagine having to deal with two monumental azzholes like Patton and Montgomery almost every day!

Ok so Lee was a bad general?
He had limited supplies, untrained men and officers, and no navy. Yet he managed to give the yankee generals a merry run for their money for over 4 years. The only reason the south lost was because as Steve pointed out the north buried them with men and supplies.
tom

Best: Gen. Thomas Jackson. As an operational level commander, he has no peer.

Worst/overrated? Gen. Mark Clark. The Italian Theater was a bloodbath...and then there was the Po River fiasco.

By that analysis we shouldn't honor Rommel because he broke his oath by conspiring against the Fuhrer.

'When the southern states seceded, the oaths that bound their officers to the Union of which they were no longer members were no longer binding. We need not debate here, in this holiday season, whether the South's reasons for departure were sufficiently compelling, but most felt they were at the time, and hundreds of thousands died to arbitrate that question. Having put the issue to the bayonet a hundred and forty years ago, I don't think we're going to resolve it now on an internet chat room.

Merry Christmas to all of you: north, south and Canuck. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Is this a list of great American Military leaders or Great Canadian military leaders?.....oh wait....I forgot...

Ironically, I used to know a former Brig.-Gen. in the Jugend, who also served as a Major in the Wehrmacht 11th Armoured or Panzer division, the "Geist" who was wounded three times, met Hitler twice, was a personal friend of Skorzeny and so on. He came to Canada in the '50s and was an entomologist for the Forest Service, an erudite, charming and very courteous man who also know Rommel quite well and literally despised him for that very reason.

Rommel, again, has had a huge myth built up about him and he is, as is R.E. Lee, "good copy" for the movie industry. As an armoured commander, he was eclipsed by Guderian and especially Wittman, until this genius was killed by we Canucks at Caen. As a tough, never-surrender leader, he was bested by Sepp Dietrich and Panzer Meyer and as an over-all strategist, he did not equal Kesselring or Von Rundstadt. As the top German general of his era, he was not even close to Von Manstein (thank god) and his legend is rather exaggerated; Monty, Auchinleck and Wavel easily equalled or excelled him in the Western Desert.

But, WTF, this is all in fun and I also wish everyone a "Joyeux Noel"....it's a "Canuck" thing, eh!

Best, hmmm there are quite a few we could argue about...
Over rated, how about MacArthur? Sure Inchon was a shrewd move but he totally blew the march north, ignored reams of intel and got his crank in a jam.

Judas was a traitor, by all accounts selling out his friends for personal gain. Beyond that the line gets murky. The Officers in the South went with their people, and were willing to die in defense of those peoples' freedom, so I doubt that "traitor" applies, except as a legal technicality.

I would have to include Washington as among the top, even though I would probably have disliked him personally I do owe him an enornmous dept of gratitude.

If Washington blurred the line of General and Statesman, then Abraham Lincoln blurred the line between Statesman and General. I'm going to include Lincoln on the list of best Generals, his genius being a willingness to forgive insults and injury and appoint even his enemies to positions of authority, if they were able.

Some of the very best people, just like today, never made it to the very top. I'm going to include Forrest and Buford on that list. Got nothing bad to say about Jackson and Lee neither, but I will observe that Grant might have been given more credit by his enemies in that war than he did from some of his compatriots.

I get tired of hearing Grant referred to as a "butcher", "wearing down the south with bodies" yada yada yada....

As if ALL commanders in that era didn't order men to march in ranks into storms of flying lead, and as if ALL battles weren't ultimately won by sacrificing a good part of one's own men. Grant in 1864 did what had to be done to win the war, in a direct and unambiguous manner. His detractors also commonly choose to overlook the brilliance of his prior campaigns in the western theater. Yepper, I'd put him right up there with the rest.

Worst Generals? I'd start with the Brits in WWI, my Irish grandparents having lost family to their particular brand of callous incompetence.

Birdwatcher

The Yankees were the traitors. They betrayed the Consititution and the intents of the founding fathers. Slavery was just an excuse for them to lay waste to the Confederacy.

You may think Lee wasn't a good General, but just remember...

"Three hundred thousand Yankees lay stiff in southern dust

we got three hundred thousand before they conquered us

they died of southern fever and southern steel and shot

I wish it was a million instead of what we got."

heh, heh

Dixie forever...

...the Brits in WWI...gawd, don't get me started, especially on Gough and the idiotic insistence by Haig to continue into Oct-Nov and take Passchendaele. However, the WORST leaders in that horrible, useless slaughter were the French, who let their own courageous men be killed in millions due to an insistence on using stupid tactics.

BTW, as to my "right" to an opinion on this topic, my direct ancestors fought in BOTH the Revolutionary War and the Civil War as my family came to Pennsylvania circa 1650; I have a rather unusual Swabian surname and have traced it to verify this. So, I think that my opinions are pertinent, even tho' I am but a "Canuck".

Best U.S. General...Most overrated? How bout Lee for both. Certainly a military genius, What he accomplished with what he had has to make him one of the best. And then historians commenced to overrate him and have never stopped. He was just a man, nothing more.


Honorable mentions for best:

Forrest
Chamberlain
Clebourne

I would rate George Marshall as a great US general. The overall strategy of the USA in WW2 was quite a success considering that Germany and Japan are at peace with us today.

"Few Americans in the twentieth century have left a greater legacy to world peace than George C. Marshall (1880-1959). As chief of staff of the United States Army during World War II, it fell to Marshall to raise, train, and equip an army of several million men. It was Marshall who selected the officer corps and it was Marshall who played a leading role in planning military operations on a global scale. In the end, it was Marshall whom British Prime Minister Winston Churchill hailed as "the true organizer of victory."

As to the worst general I would rather not pick one but when you get into a war and then give up some of the blame for the bad result has to go to the top brass. Lucky for the USA that has not happened much at all.

Col. William Clark Quantrill was a great officer. It is a shame that President Davis didn't promote him to General and give him the whole of the western theatre instead of a measly Colonel's commission. Quantrill stayed on and warred with the Yankees as the rest of the Confederate Army retreated to Arkansas and Texas. He successfully took the war to the Yankees when he made his famous strike on Lawrence, KS. He tied down multitudes of Yankee troops with only a few hundred men. Otherwise, these troops could have been brought to bear upon Lee and the other Generals in the eastern theatre and the war ended much sooner.

Sherman was overrated by those who confuse sheer brutality with courage and tactical brillance.

Winston Churchill said RE Lee was the single greatest general that ever spoke the English language.

General Welfare and General Disaster.

Best-worst?

At pure generalship in the field, you've got to rank Lee at or near the top of the best. Even though the early high command in the North were idiots. But that is far from the whole story.

At grand strategy, he was a miserable failure as he knew the odds were overwhelmingly against his cause. The man was a trained engineer and had a fine appreciation of the resources of the two sides in manpower, materiel, and technology. More to the point, he understood the South and knew how fracticous, disorgzanized, and nonviable it was a state. Remeber the line about South Carolina -- "too small for a state, to large for a lunatic asylum"?

Yet he led and enabled his beloved region -- and the larger nation for which he obviously had no appreciation or loyalty after it lifted him from obscuranty, educated, and gave him a career -- into a suicidal endeavor.

The south took a 100 years to recover becaue the best went into the ground at a comparative rate -- given the thin base it began with -- that left it bereft of talent, and hope. The occupation -- they did lose after all -- was not pleasant but in the great sweep of such activity was far from the worst. The damage was already done. The waste of blood & brains, treasure, ssutainable myths, and morale was worse that our more recent national experience in Vietnam. For the south though there was almost no indigeneous capacity for self-healing other than the thin gruel of "the cause".

It astounds me that he and his compatriots are revered.

Most overrated---Gen. MacArthur
He should have turned the Pacific over to the Navy and Marines.