Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Military Strategy and Tactics

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures




Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence








Great Commanders in History

This is a discussion on Great Commanders in History within the Military Strategy and Tactics forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Your suspicious speculation makes it complicated. Tell me, which country would like to have 138,448,210 poor people, a land that ...


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 17 votes, 4.76 average.
Old June 14th, 2004   #31
Banned Member
Major General
srirangan's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New Delhi, India
Posts: 2,351
Threads:
Your suspicious speculation makes it complicated. Tell me, which country would like to have 138,448,210 poor people, a land that can't feed the huge population, and which has a few worthless industries. The region floods each year and it has no strategic significance what so ever. Pak should be happy that Bangladesh is no longer their responsibility.
srirangan is offline  
Old June 14th, 2004   #32
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
fieldmarshal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 339
Threads:
Re: Great Commanders

Air Marshal Noor Khan.......he was a great commander and tactician and very chrismatic..........any one who served with him is full of praise fro him.....he organized the Paf in such a way that resulted in their spectacular dispaly of awasome fighting skills during the 65 war....which resulted in the distruction of the indian air force with in three days and paf ruled the skies for the remainder of war.he was a fearless leader as he did some combat missions him self.
not only this his tenure on deputation in pakistan international air line is regarded as the golden age of pia when it was rated as one of the best airlines in the world.
olso his tenure as the head of Pakistan cricket board and Pakistan hockey federation are still remembered as the golden days of these orgs.........which all proves his adminstrative , planning skills....n his personal charisma with out a daubt.
fieldmarshal is offline  
Old June 15th, 2004   #33
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
fieldmarshal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 339
Threads:
Re: Great Commanders

[b]Khalid bin Al-Waleed [/b]was one of the greatest generals in history, and one of the greatest heroes of Islam. Besides him, Genghis Khan was the only other general to remain undefeated in his entire military life. A measure of Khalid's genius is that he was the only person to inflict a (temporary) defeat on the Prophet Muhammad, (may Allah bless him and grant him peace)
The prophet (pbuh) gave khalid the title "the Sword of Islam" or "Sayef Al-Islam". Even though Khlaid didn't participate in the early battles, but of course, the prophet (pbuh) did foresee that Khalid will fight to raise the word of Islam. The prophet's prediction concerning Khalid was right on target and after all, Khalid is the one who conquered both empires, Rome & Persia. Khalid is the one who conquered the defectors "Apostates" headed by "Musailama the liar". Kahlid is the one who opened "Bilad Ashaam" and Iraq. All this happened during the rule of "Abu-Bakr" and "Omar bin Al-Khattab".

Khalid fought next to the prophet (pbuh) in several battles such as: Tabook, Hunain, & the battle of Ta'if which was a continuation for Hunain. In Hunain, the infidels have ambushed the Muslims and many of them fled away. It's said that only 12 "Sahabah" left fighting and protecting the prophet (pbuh). Meanwhile, Khalid was inside enemy lines fighting them like a lion. When Khalid heard "Al-Abbas" calling for the Muslims, Khalid pulled back and headed toward the Prophet (pbuh). Khalid, along with Omar, Ali and Abu-Bakr, fought vigorously around the prophet (pbuh). Khalid was wounded all over his body. But Khalid's ultimate Battle was, of course, the Battle of Mu'tah. The prophet (pbuh) had sent messengers to several Arabian tribes including " the tribe of Al-Talh" inviting them to Islam, all messengers got killed but one who went back to inform the prophet (pbuh). Also, the prophet (pbuh) had sent messengers to Hercules, the Roman Leader in Bilad Ashaam, but in the middle of the road the Tribe of Gassan had captured the messengers and ordered them killed. The Prophet (pbuh) vowed to punish both tribes for such heinous crimes.

The prophet (pbuh) decided to send 3 Thousand men under the leadership of "Zaid bin Harithah", and if he gets killed then "Jafar bin Abi Talib", and if he gets killed then "Abdullah bin Rawaha", and if he gets killed then Muslims ought to elect their new leader. Khalid bin Al-Waleed was among the Muslims in this platoon.

The Muslim army advanced until it reached the city of Ma'aan and stayed there for 2 nights. The Muslims have learned that the Arab tribes have gathered an army of 100,000 men and that Rome has sent an army of 100,000 men to aid the local Arab tribes. Two hundred Thousand men against 3 Thousand Muslims! Of course this is not a fair fight especially when the ratio is 67 to 1. But since when numbers scared Muslims!

Both armies advanced and met face to face in an area called Mu'tah, currently a small city in Jordan. Both sides launched fierce attacks at each other, while in Medianna which is 500 Miles away, the prophet (pbuh) was giving an instance and live battle update to his followers. The 3 Muslim leaders got killed and the Muslims elected Khlaid to lead the army against the Roman/Arab gigantic armies. Khalid maintained the fight until night where he, using his superior war tactics, withdrew his small army and swapped the wings. Plus, he ordered few men to go behind the hills to cause rumble and dust to create illusion that Muslim backups are on the way. The following day, both armies engaged in a fiercer battle, but the Romans thought that the Muslims had received more backup, both Romans and Arabs panicked and began cowardly withdrawing from the battle field while the small and brave Muslim army on their tails. The Muslims won this amazing Battle under the great leadership of the Muslim leader "Khalid bin Al-Waleed".
fieldmarshal is offline  
Old June 15th, 2004   #34
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
fieldmarshal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 339
Threads:
Re: Great Commanders

Khalid bin Waleed must be the greatest........as he conquored persia which was one of the great empires of the time...........he defeat the romanswhich was the greatest empire of the time and numerious others......and never to loose a battle.......he was so brave that once he faced the roman army of more than 50000 with 60 men and faught like a lion and defeated em.............he is the greatest
fieldmarshal is offline  
Old June 15th, 2004   #35
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,942
Threads:
Re: Great Commanders

The largest contiguous empire the world has ever seen and stretched from the east coast of china to current bagdhad.... It was under the mongols and under the generalship of subodai - with an army that started at 20,000 men.

If the Great Khan hadn't died, they would have gone through Poland and in alll likelihood have reached the Channel.

That one general defeated more generals from more countries than any other in the history of the world to date.

Khalid bin Waleed may be a great warrior in history, but by all measurements, depth of field, tactics, new military technology, countries conquered, generals defeated, armies co-ordinated concurrently there has been no other general in history who comes even remotely close.

Subodai was the first general to engage in concurrent theatre war - something not effectively achieved by any other nation until possibly Foch or Eisenhower in WW1 and WW2. The mongols developed more innovative military technology than any other force for a given war except for the American Civil War and WW2, and both of those were not managed under a single generalship.

Khalid bin Waleed may be singularly effective in given battles, but I'd argue that he does not qualify on all the other issues that make up the criteria.

napoleon conquered more countries, travelled further, changed society in more nations etc... and you are suggesting that Khalid bin Waleed is greater than Napoleon, Wellington, Ghengis Khan, Ubodai, Zhukov or Sherman even ?

How does he compare to the impact that all these other individuals had?
gf0012-aust is offline  
Old June 17th, 2004   #36
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
fieldmarshal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 339
Threads:
Re: Great Commanders

Alexander the great.....he is probabily the boldest and shroudest general in the history of war fare. In his short life he was able to conqure most of the know world. Alexander was a Mecodonian and inherited greece from his father Philip when he died.
He is the father of the modern day logistics. he always kept his army close to the sea for supplies that were carried by his naval ships at sea. where there was no seas he followed rivers.
Alexander was brave and always lead from the front , he was wounded 9 times in battles. He died at the young age of 33. From 331-334 bc he had conquered most of the known world at the time.
when julus cesar conqured greece he want to alaxanders grave and wept as he could not match his feats.Nepolian said that no commander can understabd war if he does not understand Alexander.even hitler marvalled at his achivements.
fieldmarshal is offline  
Old September 3rd, 2004   #37
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: india
Posts: 196
Threads:
Re: Great Commanders

Quote:
when julius cesar conqured greece he want to alaxanders grave and wept as he could not match his feats.
julius caesar wept at alexander's grave b'coz he couldn't match the same feats at such a young age and that that was before his gaul campaign and most of his famous battles(including the one where he defeated pompei).there is no doubt that alexander was one of the greatest,but i wonder why no one remembered caesar.and nepolean....they are by far greater than sam manekshaw and zia-ul-haq...
also there are other great generals from ww2 besides romme,monty and patton.von manstein was a great general i heard...he was sent to relieve the trapped german 6th army in stalingrad but was pulled back by hitler.
but the trouble is no one really cares about the eastern front nowadays.people tend to forget the 20 million lives lost on soviet side.compared to battles in the eastern front,western front was nothing(hitler had moved as many as 85 divisions to the east from west-if i am not wrong)and el-alamein involved just a handful of divisions.
________________
"When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say,
For Their Tomorrow, We Gave Our Today"
-the "kohima epitaph"
14th army(forgotten army)
neel24neo is offline  
Old September 4th, 2004   #38
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
highsea's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Location: BFI Seattle
Posts: 1,091
Threads:
Re: Great Commanders

I also cast my vote for Alexander. Not just that he conquered most of the known world, but the way he held it also.

Before he began his march, he unified Greece so he would have no enemies at his back.
Without a navy of his own, he defeated the Persian navy by taking all the seaports.
He continuously garrisoned behind him with older and wounded soldiers, picking up fresh troops from the conquered cities. As a result, in his 10 year campaign, his supply lines were never cut.
He adopted Persian customs and dress, which helped him to gain their acceptance.
He adapted quickly to previously unknown situations, such as meeting elephants in battle in India.
He had the complete devotion of his army, and led from the front. In one instance he went over a city wall, and when his soldiers discovered that he was trapped inside they went berserk and crashed down the gates to protect him.

Julius Caesar was a great general, and so was Hanibal, but neither came close to matching the accomplishments of Alexander. And Alexander was only 20 years old when he began his march!

-CM
highsea is offline  
Old September 4th, 2004   #39
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14
Threads:
Cyrus the Great was the founder of the Persian Empire, the first ethical empire throughout human history. He overthrew three great empires (Medes, Lydians, and Babylonians), and united most of the ancient Middle East into a single state stretching from India to the Mediterranean Sea. Cyrus (Kurush in the original Persian) was born about 590 BC, in the province of Persis (now Fars), in southwest Iran. Cyrus was the grandson of Astyages, king of the Medes. Before Cyrus's birth, Astyages had a dream that his grandson would someday overthrow him. The king ordered that the infant be killed promptly after his birth. However, the official entrusted with the job of killing the infant had no heart for such a bloody deed, and instead handed him over to a shepherd and his wife with instructions that they put the child to death. But they, too, were unwilling to kill the boy, and instead reared him as their own. Ultimately, when the child grew up, he indeed caused the king's downfall.

Cyrus was clearly a leader of immense military ability. But that was only one facet of the man. More distinctive, perhaps, was the benign character of his rule. He was exceptionally tolerant of local religions and local customs, and he was disinclined to the extreme brutality and cruelty, which characterized so many other conquerors. The Babylonians, for instance, and even more notably the Assyrians, had massacred many thousands and had exiled whole peoples whose rebellion they feared. For example, when the Babylonians had conquered Judea in 586 BC, they had deported much of the population to Babylon. But fifty years later, after Cyrus had conquered Babylonia, he gave the Jews permission to return to their homeland. Were it not for Cyrus, therefore, it seems at least possible that the Jewish people would have died out as a separate group in the fifth century BC On the contrary, Constantine the Great emperor of Rome (c. 280-337) did not have religious toleration and can be said to mark the beginning of the official persecution of the Jews that was to persist in Europe for so many centuries.

To understand the greatness of Cyrus relative to his time (2500 years ago) we should compare him with Alexander The Great whom he came to power 250 years after Cyrus. Alexander had been brought up to believe that Greek culture represented the only true civilization, and that all of the non-Greek peoples were barbarians. Such, of course, was the prevailing view throughout the Greek world, and even Aristotle had shared it. When Alexander conquered the Persian capital Persepolis; he destroyed Persepolis (the ruin exists today). You can see the difference of these two leaders -- one conquers and allows freedom, the other conquers and destroys.

By the way he was 22 when he started his conquring of the world
Sep is offline  
Old September 4th, 2004   #40
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
highsea's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Location: BFI Seattle
Posts: 1,091
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sep
By the way he was 22 when he started his conquring of the world
Ah, your right. He was 20 when he became King. At 21 he ended the revolt at Thebes and established his northern frontiers, It wasn't until he was 22 that he crossed the Hellespont and began his march into Persia.

Cyrus was truly a great ruler, certainly more tolerant than Alexander, and definitely had great military ability, but I still go with Alexander as the better General.

-CM
highsea is offline  
Old September 4th, 2004   #41
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: india
Posts: 196
Threads:
how about leonidas,the spartan.who fended off 250000 persians with his 4000 greeks for 4 days at thermopylae???later when he was outflanked(courtesy a greek traitor)he sent back most of other greeks leaving just the 300 spartans.they repulsed attack upon attack from 10000 persians(their best troops-"the immortals")before sheer superiority of opponents numbers caught up with them.persians won that engagement with 4000 dead.but it was a decisive stand made by leonidas,as it pumped up greek morale and resulted in subsequent persian defeat at plateae.he showed to the world what a small disciplined battle hardened force could do against a much larger force.that may have been inspiration to alexander who defeated darius-3 with 30000 men against 120000.
________________
"When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say,
For Their Tomorrow, We Gave Our Today"
-the "kohima epitaph"
14th army(forgotten army)
neel24neo is offline  
Old September 4th, 2004   #42
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,942
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by neel24neo
how about leonidas,the spartan.who fended off 250000 persians with his 4000 greeks for 4 days at thermopylae???later when he was outflanked(courtesy a greek traitor)he sent back most of other greeks leaving just the 300 spartans.they repulsed attack upon attack from 10000 persians(their best troops-"the immortals")before sheer superiority of opponents numbers caught up with them.persians won that engagement with 4000 dead.but it was a decisive stand made by leonidas,as it pumped up greek morale and resulted in subsequent persian defeat at plateae.he showed to the world what a small disciplined battle hardened force could do against a much larger force.that may have been inspiration to alexander who defeated darius-3 with 30000 men against 120000.
Not to detract from Leonidas' effort. But it has been a popular urban myth to continue to extol the virtues of the spartans. Yes, there were 300 of them, but there were also 700-900 Greek retainers etc who refused to leave them as well. The Greeks (who were not soldiers, but just ordinary impressed villagers) also had the opportunity to flee before contact - and they didn't.
gf0012-aust is offline  
Old September 4th, 2004   #43
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by neel24neo
how about leonidas,the spartan.who fended off 250000 persians with his 4000 greeks for 4 days at thermopylae???later when he was outflanked(courtesy a greek traitor)he sent back most of other greeks leaving just the 300 spartans.they repulsed attack upon attack from 10000 persians(their best troops-"the immortals")before sheer superiority of opponents numbers caught up with them.persians won that engagement with 4000 dead.but it was a decisive stand made by leonidas,as it pumped up greek morale and resulted in subsequent persian defeat at plateae.he showed to the world what a small disciplined battle hardened force could do against a much larger force.that may have been inspiration to alexander who defeated darius-3 with 30000 men against 120000.
I would agree with most of that but the 4000 "persians" that died were really slave troops (arabs) who really didn want to be there. The only real army trained troops were the immortals and as you mentioned once they got involved the battle was over. An dont forget theuniforms of the two armys, the "persian" troops had no armour whatsoever while the greeks were covered with metal. Also the conditions were all great for the greeks because no matter how large the persian army the were at a bottle neck and at most twenty-thirty could have passed.
Sep is offline  
Old September 4th, 2004   #44
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14
Threads:
By the way i am a persian so i am probebly really biased here
Sep is offline  
Old November 22nd, 2004   #45
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: sweden
Posts: 7
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sep
By the way i am a persian so i am probebly really biased here
I would like to inform you that when Xerxes saw the small amount of people there were closing his road, ordered then his immortals to arrest them and bring them in front of him. But immortals couldn't stand against the long hellenic spears and the short swords of spartans which in their hands were extremely lethal, so they finally went off. three times the persians attacked with the same way but they couldn't beat them. So finally one trator saw to the Persians a small path around the mount. Until the morning the 300 spartans and the rest of the army were almost surrounded, so leonidas ordered the army which was consisted of almost 8000 people to leave for their citys in order to fight the persians there, but he hold his 300 spartans 400 thebians and almost 700 thespians. When they were surrounded at all, the hellenic troops went to the top of a hill in order to give the final battle.Then they made a cyrcle in order to face as many persians was possible. But the persians couldn't kill them with their swords so they send them a cloud of arrows, the result? all dead. And something else, Leonidas took an order from Sparta, to come back alive and winner or not to come back alive and loser so he chosed to die with all his Spartans.
alexandros_gre_2004 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:55 AM.