Worst General in History???

[ConHog]

Worst general in US History? I'd have to say General Custer. Why? His arrogance got his entire regiment killed.

Nothing worse than an arrogant officer who thinks they never make mistakes.

Worst general in recent history? General Petraeus. He wanted to sell out the military for the presidency in 2012.

See discussion regarding considering Custer above. He doesn't make the grade.

Petraeus, I didn't see where he sold out the military to fulfil political aspirations. You have something on that?

I'm surprised that Arnold hasn't gotten more votes. I mean any guy who's name is synonymous with traitor had to have been one shitty General.

 

[geauxtohell]

This video is relevant to the OP:

YouTube - SAM KINISON IN BACK TO SCHOOL

I love that scene. "Is she right?..............."

 

[dilloduck]

Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Worst general in US History? I'd have to say General Custer. Why? His arrogance got his entire regiment killed.

Nothing worse than an arrogant officer who thinks they never make mistakes.

Worst general in recent history? General Petraeus. He wanted to sell out the military for the presidency in 2012.

See discussion regarding considering Custer above. He doesn't make the grade.

Petraeus, I didn't see where he sold out the military to fulfil political aspirations. You have something on that?

I'm surprised that Arnold hasn't gotten more votes. I mean any guy who's name is synonymous with traitor had to have been one shitty General.

It sounded to me like there was a general consensus that He's number one and everyone is just talking about who comes next after him.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

He was one of the more brilliant commanders of the war. The reason he had so much trust from Washington was because he was one of the best.

He was instrumental in the victories at Ticonderoga and Saratoga.

 

[geauxtohell]

Not the worst, but I'd have to put Westmoreland up there. Has anyone read the book "We Were Soldiers" when Westmoreland screwed up the 7th Cavalry's Thanksgiving Dinner right after Ia Drang.

He's the poster boy for Hackworth's "Perfumed Prince" perjorative (and I am not a Hackworth fan).

 

[geauxtohell]

Custer

/thread

Custer was a good General.

He was a lousy Frontier Regimental Commander (He was a LTC at Little Bighorn).

 

[Tech_Esq]

He was one of the more brilliant commanders of the war. The reason he had so much trust from Washington was because he was one of the best.

He was instrumental in the victories at Ticonderoga and Saratoga.

In the Army there's a saying that one "Aw shit!" equals ten "Attaboy!!s"

He was a great general until he sold out his country and accepted a commission in the enemy's army. WTF???? Now that is one big "Aw SHIT!!"

 

[del]

He didn't tell Marshall what he was doing until the troops were already ashore.

As a piece of Military art, it was a marvel. But you don't leave your boss in the dark like that.

It was the reason the Jt Cheif's didn't say a word when truman fired him. As far as they were concerned, it was time for him to fade away.

considering the emnity between mac and marshall, it's no surprise he didn't tell him what was going on. he never liked marshall anyway (he wrote that he was unfit to command a regiment when marshall was at CG&S, IIRC), he felt that marshall had betrayed him in the phillipines by bypassing him after he left corregidor.

inchon was a brilliant piece of strategy, but he was also very lucky that the islands in the flyng fish channel had not been reinforced or invested with artillery.

 

[del]

Worst general in US History? I'd have to say General Custer. Why? His arrogance got his entire regiment killed.

Nothing worse than an arrogant officer who thinks they never make mistakes.

Worst general in recent history? General Petraeus. He wanted to sell out the military for the presidency in 2012.

See discussion regarding considering Custer above. He doesn't make the grade.

Petraeus, I didn't see where he sold out the military to fulfil political aspirations. You have something on that?

I'm surprised that Arnold hasn't gotten more votes. I mean any guy who's name is synonymous with traitor had to have been one shitty General.

actually, he was an excellent battlefield commander. we would have lost saratoga if he hadn't been there. many historians feel that it was gates taking the credit for saratoga that pushed arnold in to the arms of the brits.

 

[del]

Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.

i thought he was vacationing

i gotta get out more

 

[Modbert]

actually, he was an excellent battlefield commander. we would have lost saratoga if he hadn't been there. many historians feel that it was gates taking the credit for saratoga that pushed arnold in to the arms of the brits.

I've read about that too, and it would answer why he would do so. But there is no denying that he was an excellent battlefield commander as you said.

 

[Againsheila]

Worst general in US History? I'd have to say General Custer. Why? His arrogance got his entire regiment killed.

Nothing worse than an arrogant officer who thinks they never make mistakes.

Worst general in recent history? General Petraeus. He wanted to sell out the military for the presidency in 2012.

Yeah, Custer was bad, but he fired on the Indians, not the American people, oh wait a minute....nevermind.

 

[Toome]

I think it's difficult to carry on a discussion about best or worst without taking into account the context of certain battlefield decisions. A frontal attack on today's battlefield, for instance, is nothing less than suicidal and stupid. But during the Civil War or Revolutionary War, this was a sound tactic.

My nomination goes to General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Talk about fucking up a wet dream. His forces had momentum after the slaughters at the Alamo and Goliad, and he had Sam Houston on the run. At San Jacinto, Santa Anna had every tactical advantage; he outnumbered the Texans 2:1; he had better artillery; he had professionally-trained troops; he had everything in his favor. Santa Anna's problem was his arrogance, and that arrogance led to a fundamentally stupid decision: he never posted pickets at San Jacinto. He had no idea that the Texans were sneaking up on him until it was too late. He lost the Battle of San Jacinto in 18 minutes with catastrophic losses.

While anyone can have a bad day, I consider Santa Anna pretty stupid because he again had superior numbers during the Mexican War when Winfield Scott went to Mexico City. Santa Anna had 16,000 troops under his command compared to Scott's 7,000. Santa Anna lost approximately 3,000 troops after a series of battles.

My argument for Santa Anna being the worst is that his slaughter of the Alamo defenders and what would be considered war crimes by today's standards emboldened the Texans. They began their charge at San Jacinto with "Remember the Alamo!" and "Remember Goliad!" His miscalculation of American military capabilities during the Mexican War cost Mexico all of its land north of the Rio Grande (although Texas had already won its independence) resulting in what is today California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona and most of New Mexico and Colorado being annexed by the United States. So Santa Anna's defeat was costly for the Mexican government.

That's why I pin the tag on him: stupid tactics, dropping the ball when he had the tactical advantage, inciting resistance rather than winning support from the local population, and losing big when the stakes were high.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Okay.......if we're gonna talk foreign generals, how's Napoleon for ya?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Okay.......if we're gonna talk foreign generals, how's Napoleon for ya?

Richard the Lion-Hearted.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Okay.......if we're gonna talk foreign generals, how's Napoleon for ya?

Napoleon won too much to claim the title of "worst"

I would put forward every Italian general in World War II. They couldn't beat anyone. They couldn't beat the Ethiopians for God's sake and they weren't even in the same century. The impotence of their Army was only surpassed by the impotence of their navy.

 

[Oddball]

In modern history, I'd have to go with the grossly overrated Hap Arnold, for continuing to waste valuable bombers and crew after it became more than obvious that B-17s couldn't defend themselves without escort.

 

[ConHog]

Now we're talking world wide? Woo hoo then I present to you

Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig

This thread is OVER

want a quick synopsis of this fool's "achievements"?

Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig: World War I's Worst General HistoryNet

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Okay.......if we're gonna talk foreign generals, how's Napoleon for ya?

Napoleon won too much to claim the title of "worst"

I would put forward every Italian general in World War II. They couldn't beat anyone. They couldn't beat the Ethiopians for God's sake and they weren't even in the same century. The impotence of their Army was only surpassed by the impotence of their navy.

This bothered me for a long time until I realized the thing about us Italians is that we ruled the world once already and had no real interest in reconquering it.