Who is the most overrated general ever?

[Africanvs]

Hannibal didn't have siege equipment to attack Rome itself and Rome was one of the largest city in the mediterranean. So I think he was right not laying siege to it.

The mere mention of Hannibal at the gates, even when he wasn't, scared the hell out of the entire city. We'll never know what kind of success he could have had, because he never tried. You don't necessarily have to take a city by assault to have a successful siege.

I just mean that Petraeus gets loads of hype and publicity, as if he was the 'savior of iraq'. in reality he is just an adequately intelligent and well-read man who remembers previous counter-insurgencies conducted by the brits and others.

Isn't a bit difficult to examine the career of a General who is A) not finished with his career, and B) never really fought any actual battles? Sure he's commanded in operations but we're talking about insurgency type stuff, not serious campaigning. Maybe if the U.S. were to face another major world power and he had to go up against an actual adversary, we might see what he's capable of. Let us hope that doesn't happen but is he really over-rated? All I have heard is that he is a charismatic leader, and one of the top 100 intellectuals around, and he left Iraq in better shape than he found it. I don't hear anyone running around saying, "that Petaeus, he's greater than Napoleon!"