|
|
Post by Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb on Sept 20, 2017 21:32:07 GMT
WW1 was full of terrible generals and incapable commanders.
Who was the worst in your opinion?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaius Julius Caesar on Sept 20, 2017 21:49:02 GMT
Ludendorff actually succeeded on the Eastern Front (probably because Russia wasn't prepared), and Churchill made a simple mistake. I'd say Douglas Haig out of the list ir maybe Hötzendorf
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesotaball on Sept 20, 2017 21:57:32 GMT
I think Luigi Cadorna. He failed horribly against hotzendorf. That says a lot as Mr. Hotzendorf was not to great either. Cadorna wasted italian resources and lives. Italy would have fared better if they had a better General in charge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb on Sept 20, 2017 21:59:36 GMT
I think Luigi Cadorna. He failed horribly against hotzendorf. That says a lot as Mr. Hotzendorf was not to great either. Cadorna wasted italian resources and lives. Italy would have fared better if they had a better General in charge. Actually, we repeatedly ignored intelligence saying that Hötzendorf was going to attack and he paid for it. |
|
|
|
Post by Minnesotaball on Sept 20, 2017 22:32:50 GMT
I think Luigi Cadorna. He failed horribly against hotzendorf. That says a lot as Mr. Hotzendorf was not to great either. Cadorna wasted italian resources and lives. Italy would have fared better if they had a better General in charge. Actually, we repeatedly ignored intelligence saying that Hötzendorf was going to attack and he paid for it. And cadorna thought he was amazing and overall was a crummy General. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Sept 21, 2017 5:41:09 GMT
Sorry my fellows Italians  Luigi Cadorna Ludendorff is one of the best actually, imo... |
|
|
|
Post by Marshal Ney on Sept 21, 2017 6:06:23 GMT
Sorry my fellows Italians Luigi Cadorna Ludendorff is one of the best actually, imo... Definitely not one of the worst. Anyway, I would say Cadorna (and I'm Italian) |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Sept 21, 2017 6:15:02 GMT
Sorry my fellows Italians Luigi Cadorna Ludendorff is one of the best actually, imo... Definitely not one of the worst. One-eyed man is king in the valley of the blind  |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Sept 21, 2017 7:39:13 GMT
WW1 was full of terrible generals and incapable commanders. Yeah, indeed. Napoleonic wars and ww2 have a bunch of good, even great commanders. WW1 on the other hand was poorly led by many generals. Even big names like Petain or Hindenburg are mediocre generals at best. So we actually choose King of the loosers in this poll |
|
|
|
Post by Hobo Joe on Sept 26, 2017 16:56:54 GMT
WW1 was full of terrible generals and incapable commanders. Yeah, indeed. Napoleonic wars and ww2 have a bunch of good, even great commanders. WW1 on the other hand was poorly led by many generals. Even big names like Petain or Hindenburg are mediocre generals at best. So we actually choose King of the loosers in this poll That is fair until you realize they were all career officers and armchair generals who never faced combat until the war broke out. Minding that, I think they did fairly well. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Sept 27, 2017 5:09:19 GMT
Yeah, indeed. Napoleonic wars and ww2 have a bunch of good, even great commanders. WW1 on the other hand was poorly led by many generals. Even big names like Petain or Hindenburg are mediocre generals at best. So we actually choose King of the loosers in this poll That is fair until you realize they were all career officers and armchair generals who never faced combat until the war broke out. Minding that, I think they did fairly well. That is the difference between good and great generals. Alexandr demonstrated great tactical abilities from his first battles. Battle of the Granicus is a good example of victory after the right assessment of the terrain. Napoleon's actions in Toulon (his first serious battle experience) are famous, he conceived a plan which envisaged the capture of imortant forts and thus the city was taken. He wrote later in life: "I have fought sixty battles and I have learned nothing which I did not know at the beginning. Look at Caesar; he fought the first like the last". ww1 generals were good career officers but nothing more than that. Only Tannenberg had some glimpses of tactical finesse, other great battels (Verdun, Somme, Gallipoli, Kaiserschlacht and many others) were bloodbaths of the worst kind with heavy casualties on both sides (and exactly that should be avoided by any good general). |
|
