Frank_East Posted 10 September , 2012 Share Posted 10 September , 2012 The German peoples thought that Hitler was a military genius for his lightening victories of the summer of 1940. Paul Reynaud was mesmerised with Hitler's early success in France and declared at a cabinet meeting on 12 June 1940 "You think that Hitler is another Wilhelm1,the old gentleman who took Alsace Lorraine and that was all.But Hitler is Genghis Khan".Despite a flying visit to Reynaud at Tours the next day by WSC,Reynaud succumbed to those who demanded an armistice. By the spring of 1943,there were some in the Third Reich who thought that Hitler's game was up.It certainly was in the aftermath of Kursk offensive. Sometimes there is not much between success and failure and luck plays its part in the outcome.So military geniuses can be regarded in Success and Failure dimensions....both are seldom final. Regarding Hugh Dowding,he earned his spurs with his leadership in the defeat of the Luftwaffe over British skies.He opposed the transfer of RAF fighters to France when he saw little return, stressing his requirement for a fighter force adequate to deal with the Luftwaffe and for good measure, demanded that he had adequate aircraft in reserve.He was his own man and that made him enemies. When it came to the Air Ministry recording their official account of the Battle of Britain,any reference to Dowding was omitted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geraint Posted 10 September , 2012 Share Posted 10 September , 2012 shaped human thought and sent it in a different direction, no military man has come close to that. Jim Hitler did exactly that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank_East Posted 10 September , 2012 Share Posted 10 September , 2012 Additionally, the instructions on their Warsaw Pact kit caused problems. It was in Russian and they had problems transating it. When translated the instructions read "Retreat several thousand miles and wait for winter". Dayan took advantage of that. Apparently,the main point regarding Russian armour supplied to their satellite friends in the Middle East was the specification of the gunnery.The Russian tanks were designed for the North European plain and had gun elevation angles to match.These tanks were of little use in a tank engagement firing from the top of a desert sand dune. The Russian procured tank could not lower the gun low enough to engage an Israelite tank below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 10 September , 2012 Share Posted 10 September , 2012 On a serious note (an d I tend to agree with Frank, above), is there any general who has been a genius all the time? For example, someone mentioned Rommel, but as I'm currently reading Bryn Hammond's new book on Alamein, it is pretty apparent that Rommel was far from a genius all the time, and I would wonder, therefore, wheher there is a formula of time as genius, divided by time as non-genius = degree of genius. From my limited knowledge, I'd be hard-pressed to think of any general who was a genius all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John-B-Rooks Posted 10 September , 2012 Share Posted 10 September , 2012 From my limited knowledge, I'd be hard-pressed to think of any general who was a genius all the time. My choice of Shaka and Alexander, both of whom were murdered before they could fail in the field might meet your criterion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beau Geste Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Chief Sitting Bull ? Harry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Was it not Custer who described the Sioux as the finest light cavalry in the world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Armstrong Custer Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Was it not Custer who described the Sioux as the finest light cavalry in the world? No, but Custer's 2ic, Major Marcus Reno, who survived the Little Big Horn, was reported by the New York Herald some six weeks after the battle as saying "The Indians are the best light cavalry in the world. I have seen pretty nearly all of them, and I do not except even the Cossacks." And Captain Anson Mills, who served under General George Crooke, whose forces had been defeated by the Sioux at the Battle of the Rosebud just eight days before Custer's defeat, stated forty years later that "the Indians proved then and there that they were the best cavalry soldiers on earth." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest exuser1 Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 If being a military genius can be based on useing what you have ,then Chief Joseph gets my vote , plus a big soft spot for the much misunderstood Vlad Tepes ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMarsdin Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 No, but Custer's 2ic, Major Marcus Reno, I thought it was John Wayne in one of the John Ford cavalry trilogy........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 I thought, when he said "Indians" he meant these chaps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoppage Drill Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 The comments made by Reno and Mills about those Sioux are what they HAD to say after the 7th Cav had had their asses whupped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Armstrong Custer Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 The comments made by Reno and Mills about those Sioux are what they HAD to say after the 7th Cav had had their asses whupped. I wouldn't argue with you there. When you've suffered a humiliating defeat the only thing left is to put as good a gloss on it as possible by claiming you were beaten by the best troops in the world (and it wasn't just Custer's 7th Cavalry column who were shown up at the Little Big Horn in the 1876 campaign, but Crooke's mixed force of the 2nd and 3rd Cavalry and the mule-mounted 4th and 9th Infantry on the Rosebud). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beau Geste Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Another name that comes to mind is Sun Tzu. Harry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watkins Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Doesn't The Duke of Wellington deserve a vote? Even though his most famous victory was a very close run thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil andrade Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 How about " git thar firstest with the mostest" Nathan Bedford Forrest ? Consider the guy who comes from nowhere, who hasn't received a formal military education, and excels despite - or, maybe, because of - this. Phil (PJA) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMarsdin Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 As war is invariably a means to an end, surely a true genius is someone who achieves that end without war ? I nominate Gandhi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watkins Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 As war is invariably a means to an end, surely a true genius is someone who achieves that end without war ? I nominate Gandhi. I'll second that as he defeated the British Empire without firing a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoppage Drill Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 As war is invariably a means to an end, surely a true genius is someone who achieves that end without war ? I nominate Gandhi. You are kidding aren't you ? In pictures: India's partition There was a war, but damned if you knew where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil andrade Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Alexander the Great is frequently cited. Didn't he benefit from a kind of phalanx deployment that was invented by his dad, Philip of Macedon ? There is, I suppose, the inventive genius of a warrior who develops weapons ; and then there's the soldier who knows how to turn the technique to best account. Shaka did both, didn't he ? The asegai was his inspiration, as was the horns and loins of the buffalo concept....or have I been watching too much ZULU ? Phil (PJA) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tn.drummond Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 As war is invariably a means to an end, surely a true genius is someone who achieves that end without war ? I nominate Gandhi. To describe Ghandi as a 'military' genius is not appropriate. He was engaged in non-violent civil disobedience and believed in peaceful means to a nationalistic cause. His scope is vast and personally I don't think he enters the debate. If you chose to pursue the 'end without war argument' it does, I am afraid, not account for the tradegy of partition and its aftermath. Regards Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John-B-Rooks Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Alexander the Great is frequently cited. Didn't he benefit from a kind of phalanx deployment that was invented by his dad, Philip of Macedon ? There is, I suppose, the inventive genius of a warrior who develops weapons ; and then there's the soldier who knows how to turn the technique to best account. Shaka did both, didn't he ? The asegai was his inspiration, as was the horns and loins of the buffalo concept....or have I been watching too much ZULU ? Phil (PJA) Alexander developed his father's deployment I believe, so that when he met the Athenians(?) in battle, they expected one thing but received another. Shaka's loins and horns deployment was similar to Alexander's but new to southern Africa. His 'iKlwa', the short stabbing assegai was a new weapon not designed to be thrown like its predecessor. It also involved the use of steel blades for (I think) the first time in the area (excepting its use by westerners of course). John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 Has anyone mentioned Wolfe at Quebec, who managed to fulfill the additional criterion of dying at the point of victory thus ensuring we never see him mess it up somewhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMarsdin Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 To describe Ghandi as a 'military' genius is not appropriate. Regards Tim Hi Tim, I know Robert was specifically looking at the military genius, I deliberately admitted the "military" tag as I was trying to expand the debate as I do maintain that it is difficult to fully assess a military genius or their success without looking at the wider context in which they operate. In WW1 I don't see any who would consistently be called "genius" with the possible exception of von Lettow-Vorbeck but would he have transferred his "genius" if he'd been posted to the western front ? Edit 20.56 11/09/2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil andrade Posted 11 September , 2012 Share Posted 11 September , 2012 How about Bruchmuller ? If you seek military genius in 1914-18, albeit confined to a technical role, would he fit the bill ? Then you could consider the maverick who knew how to wield a more cultural influence. T.E. Lawrence. Phil (PJA) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now