Alexander the Great vs Napoleon vs Julius Caesar vs Genghis Khan vs Hannibal

[sulla1982ad]

Well from what I know, this is not enough. I might think that someone like Scipio Africanus is beyond any of the three mentioned here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamerlane

Tamerlane is a very good candidate for the greatest general of all time.

Perhaps his greatest triumph of all is kicking this generals rear!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayezid_I

[Centurion1]

i cant believe this guy isnt trolling.............. scipio africanus was a great general but better than alexander, genghis, and hannibal!

plus it doesnt matter if their empires latest its damned generals all that matters is how they fought in battle.

and genghis did have a plan he pass on his empire in traditional mongolian manner to everyone in his family. its a damned good inheritance policy to to prevent succession crises. the franks did it as well.

[Ricdog]

i cant believe this guy isnt trolling.............. scipio africanus was a great general but better than alexander, genghis, and hannibal!

plus it doesnt matter if their empires latest its damned generals all that matters is how they fought in battle.

and genghis did have a plan he pass on his empire in traditional mongolian manner to everyone in his family. its a damned good inheritance policy to to prevent succession crises. the franks did it as well.

Well was Scipio any weaker than those? If im correct he always knew to maintain a decent amount of supplies for his army, used grand strategy to win the war, got more in detail with strategy by taking support away from his enemy from the local tribes, and ofcourse had extremely great tactics to win decisive victories. I believe some of Scipio Africanus' battles could rival and even surpass those of Khan, Alexander, and Hannibal in pure genius.

[Ricdog]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamerlane

Tamerlane is a very good candidate for the greatest general of all time.

Perhaps his greatest triumph of all is kicking this generals rear!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayezid_I

Tamerlane is a notable mention. So would Fredrick the Great.

[sulla1982ad]

Frederick the great was very lucky. He would of lost the war if Russia hadn't pulled out. Also he lost a few battles as well.

Tamerlane has countless more victorys than him. In fact as far as I know he never suffered any majoy defeat. He died a old man, still a undefeated completely victorious general.

Frederick was great at the attack, but knowing when not to attack is an inportant part of being a general. He was also fixated on certain battle techniques, and over used the oblique order of battle. This lead to the formation getting countered, and losing badly in one battle.

Frederick is B rank + Tamerlane is A+++

[Ricdog]

Frederick the great was very lucky. He would of lost the war if Russia hadn't pulled out. Also he lost a few battles as well.

Tamerlane has countless more victorys than him. In fact as far as I know he never suffered any majoy defeat. He died a old man, still a undefeated completely victorious general.

Frederick was great at the attack, but knowing when not to attack is an inportant part of being a general. He was also fixated on certain battle techniques, and over used the oblique order of battle. This lead to the formation getting countered, and losing badly in one battle.

Frederick is B rank + Tamerlane is A+++

Im aware of Tamerlane's undefeatedness but I wouldn't put him too much above someone like Fredrick, who I believe got some of his talents from Churchhill (who in turn I think could match Tamerlane) and definitely not in Caesarian/Napoleon level. I always put him as a sort of lower version of Khalid ibn-alwalid. But I would say I hear good things from his tactics in India.

[Noncommunist]

In the next few weeks, I think Spike TV's Deadliest Warrior is doing a matchup of Genghis Khan vs Hannibal. So I suppose we could then use that to further fuel the debate.

And what about Attaturk or Paul Emil von Lettow Vorbeck? Attaturk managed to defeat the allies at Gallipoli and eventually went on to form the nucleus of the movement which defeated the foreign invaders of Turkey and enabled Turkey to negotiate a new peace treaty with the allies.

And Paul Emil von Lettow Vorbeck was the German commander in Tanganyika in WW1 who managed with inferior numbers to fight off various British and Belgian armies and by the end of the war, was wandering into British territory.

[sulla1982ad]

Nocommunist I wikied Paul Emil Von lettow. Very interesting character, and fine general. Theres always something new to learn about!

[Leon the Batavian]

Besides this being a pointless discussion. My opinion vs Your opinion. Based on nationalistic pride, not knowing about other regions and their history. Or worst of all not even knowing your own history.

For e.g. the many Alexander the Great vs Romans topics. Many Greeks or Pro Greeks say Romans never conquered Persia and faced weaker enemies and the Romans were all about larger numbers of men. Well there is some truth in it but it does not tell the whole story.

Is it not that by the time the Romans encountered the Persians those Persians were also better at war. (Learned from their mistakes against Alexander, making them tougher). And how is Hannibal a weaker enemy or the Greeks themselves ?

Anyways its really about opinions and nothing more.