Worst military commanders in history

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by Panzerkampfwagen, Nov 28, 2012.

  1. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Having just read "Citizen Soldier" that reminded me of the Battle for Hurtgen Forest- another attack for land with no strategic value- which cost some 24,000 American casualities.
     
  2. Herkdriver

    Herkdriver New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    21,346
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, and the American advantage in numbers was reduced by weather and terrain. These opearations, back then, are planned on flat maps, maybe with topography markings, but they are not 3 dimensional...combine that with weather and these are factors which can influence a battle. In this instance, what many consider a defeat for the Americans given the number of casualties. They were fighting in dense forest and had assumed the German troops were already demoralised. A poorly planned battle plan from the start, and these decisons rest squarely on the shoulders of commanding officers.
     
  3. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    From what I have read this ranks up there for the reasons you mention but let me lay it out again:
    a) An attack on target with no strategic value
    b) Little or no understanding of the forces opposing them
    c) During the attack upper commanders stayed way back and were not aware of the battle situation- and instead of re-evaluating they just poured more troops into the battle.

    Until I had read Citizen Soldiers I had never heard of this battle.
     
  4. Herkdriver

    Herkdriver New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    21,346
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is largely ignored for that exact reason, it's an American defeat.

    The basic tenets of any military leadership position:
    ...Accomplish the mission.
    ...Take care of the welfare of the troops in your charge.

    The battle of Hurtgen was a meat-grinder approach to warfare and an embarrasment to leadership. It's therefore placed on the back-burner of historical analysis. We Americans prefer to think we do not treat the lives of our soldiers as expendable...but more often than not in WW2, they were precisely that.
     
  5. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One of the reasons why reading "Citizen Soldiers" was eye opening for me.
     
  6. Herkdriver

    Herkdriver New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    21,346
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Going full circle and getting back to the topic, it's precisely why I'm hesitant to label Gen. MacArthur as one of the best Generals to emerge from the Pacific. More otten than not he placed ego above the men he led. "Dugout Doug" was hiding in Australia while his men suffered brutally at Bataan...he was downright hated by many of them.

    "I shall return"

    Indeed...the mythos is greater than the man.
     
  7. krunkskimo

    krunkskimo New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Westmoreland
     
  8. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Good points. You can also be a great generaL one day and a goat the next (Lee) or a goat one day and a great general the very next (Meade). You can also be a mediocre general (Schwarzkopf) but have outstanding subordinates (Horner and Boomer). Who knows? Maybe the best generals are the ones with overwhelming firepower who simply don't blow it.
     
  9. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mac spent a great deal of his time leading the war from Australia in Melbourne. He then moved his HQ to Brisbane. I don't how well you know Australia but those are thousands of km from where the fighting was. Even when he went to where the fighting was he didn't actually go to the front lines but he made sure the newspapers reported that he did.
     
  10. aussiefree2ride

    aussiefree2ride New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MacArthur was an egotistical incompetant, Blainey, his Australian consort was a cowardly puppett of MacArthur and the press. MacArthur had no concept of warfare, on arrival in Australia, he branded the battle hardened Australians in New Guinea as cowards, for not running of on shedule 100% of the time. Glory Boy MacArthur, then withdrew Australian troops from the Buna offensive, and sent his own green US in. The result was a complete failure, with extremely high casualties, the Americans were driven back by the Japanese, with the survivors barely escaping capture / slaughter. Australian forces then captured Buna, although MacArthur`s report that his US forces had acheived the objective, is now an undisputed lie.
    http://www.worldwar2database.com/html/newguinea.htm

    MacArthur and Blainey continued through the New Guinea campaign, among others, in the same vein. These two clowns never learnt from their mistakes (mistakes that should never have been made in the first place). They both continued to throw the lives of their troops away with their simple minded, repetitous blundering.
     
  11. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
  12. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think it would be simpler to break it down:
    Worst commander:
    WW2
    WW1
    U.S. Civil War
    Napoleanic War
     
  13. Courtney203

    Courtney203 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Fairly easy answer to this question. Hitler had some of the most well trained and armed soldiers in the world at the time. Also some of the best war strategists and commanders under him. However, as a means of control, most advice was ignored and Hitlers flawed tactics were instituted regaurdless of the great advisers he had who told him in so many words, his plans would be disasterous. Many commanders simply ignored his orders and were very successful on a small scale. However, 2-3 great decisions wont turn a war around when 20-30 bad decisions are made.
     
  14. Jarlaxle

    Jarlaxle Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    8,939
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Nobody is perfect. Lee was a superb commander. His ragtag, underequipped, undersupplied Army of Northern Virginia came closer than most people realize to winning the war for the Confederacy.

    His first action as an army commander...which ended with his overseeing what might be the most amazingly-executed withdrawal in history.

    Custer was an egonamiacal idiot.

    Yes...though he was in anything but a positive state of mind, considering that 24 hours earlier, his flagship (cruiser Atago) had been shot out from under him. He barely survived; none of his staff did.
     
  15. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sorry, but West Point produces some (*)(*)(*)(*) good officers .
     
  16. cooky

    cooky New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Edward Almond is certainly among the worst US officers ever.
     
  17. Taxcutter

    Taxcutter New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    20,847
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scandal hardly disqualifies a good military commander when the lead is flying.

    Consider Alexander the Great.
     
  18. Herkdriver

    Herkdriver New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    21,346
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    0

    You're misquoting me. Never stated the academies don't produce some good officers. I'll say again, there is no substantive evidence that officers commissioned through the academies consistently outperform those commissioned through other means. Combine that with length of service committments, and the ROI (return on investment) of taxpayer dollars into putting a cadet throught the academies should be looked into.

    Federal Government cost
    per graduate (FY98 dollars)

    Service Academy..........ROTC (Scholarship)..........OCS/OTS


    $340,000....................... $86,000.......................$32,000
     
  19. smalltime

    smalltime Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    43
    George B. McClellan at Antietam.

    No General wasted so many lives so quickly.
     
  20. Greataxe

    Greataxe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    9,400
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    President Johnson aka LBJ, would have to rate as one of the worst commanders. Even though he was not a true military officer, he pretended to be one by trying to run the Vietnam War from the White House.

    His disasterous failures in Vietnam can in no way take away from his even more tragic legacy of the Welfare State, instituted by his Great Society Welfare programs in the 60's that now plauge the nation and will eventually destroy it.

    LBJ was obsessed with the welfare of the communists in the Soviet Union and China who supplied the North with their goods and services. He said he "did not want to spite China's face" by being too tough on the North Vietnamese. China, who had just killed off some 40 million of its own people in their Great Leap Forward genocide programs, was too weak to take on the US.
    Any simpleton as a military commander would have blockaded the coast, and sank anything suspicious coming into the North's waters. All supply lines should have been demolished anywhere inside Vietnam and Cambodia. Hanoi could have easily been taken with an amphibious assault following a massive bombing campaign. The war could have been won in two years instead of being lost in 11.
     

Share This Page