Komrade

Seeing as how a debate about Montgomery developed in another thread, I'm interested to see everyone's opinions of overrated commanders in history. Somebody who the media held in much higher regard than you ever did, someone who ranks among everyone's "great" list but you can't stand.

I'll start by saying I can't stand glory hounds and prima donnas. And then throw out MacArthur. Can't stand him. For some reason I just can't stand him. Take the Korean War for example, Inchon was brilliant, I will not deny that, but he waged the rest of the war from Tokyo, completely out of touch with the lines and moved his troops northward despite threats from China, ultimately provoking them into war.

As stated in another thread, Halsey's name also belongs on my list. What kind of "great" naval man leads a fleet through TWO freakin' typhoons? And then his actions at Leyte Gulf, leaving the San Bernardino Strait to go chasing after the Japanese carriers seeking the distinction of wiping the last remaining carrier force from the Pacific and seeking the great Naval battle he'd seemingly been denied up to that point. The result? A powerful Japanese surface fleet passes through the strait unmolested, comes bearing down on a force of destroyers and jeep carriers which could offer no meaningful resistance and very nearly screws over the whole of MacArthur's landings if it weren't for the Japanese commander losing his nerve and withdrawing. "TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG FROM CINCPAC ACTION COM THIRD FLEET INFO COMINCH CTF SEVENTY-SEVEN X WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE THIRTY FOUR RR THE WORLD WONDERS"

Belisarius

Really good idea for a thread. My own personal bugbears are most of the German Generals of WW1 and WW2, especially Rommel, who the more I read about him the more convinced I get that he was "manufactured" by propaganda. When I get more time I'll elaborate further.

C.C.Benjamin

I'm not so big on modern military history, I prefer the ancient stuff, so I can't really comment on the WWI and II generals.

I think Alexander was overrated. Don't get me wrong, he must have been very good, but I think the situation was completely poised for the Greeks to utterly dominate the world, and instead the simply squabbled between themselves.

Chookie

For this reason I would include Patton on the list.

Lucius

Well, I think it's not unfair to say that Blücher's reputation didn't suffer any from having Gneisenau for a Chief of Staff. And if Courtney Hodges had just let the Germans sit unmolested in the Hürtgen Forest over the winter, the rest of the campaign would have played out pretty much the same.

Come to think of it, Napoleon's reputation didn't suffer any from having Berthier for a Chief of Staff either.

Pantagruel

Komrade,

I agree that MacArthur was a prima donna, but I still think he ranks as one of the all-time greats. Remember that in the First World War he always led his troops from the front, and I believe was the most decorated American general in that war. He also exposed himself to a fair bit of danger in WWII; often against the wishes of his staff. I'll second your opinion of Halsey as a useless glory hound, but that's because he didn't do anything to offset his narcissistic qualities. MacArthur did.

Belisarius,

I'm interested to hear more of your views on Rommel; I think he is somewhat overrated myself, but he still conducted a great tactical campaign in Africa. His refusal to halt operations to allow resources to be diverted to the capture of Malta was a serious strategic blunder that cost him any chance of ultimate victory, but tactically he was a good general.

Lucius,

Nice observation, I think we're all guilty sometimes of forgetting how important staffs and subordinate commanders are to military operations, especially in the modern period. I have read one author that blames Napoleon's defeat in the Waterloo campaign on the death of Berthier and his replacement by Soult. Soult was apparently incapable of running the army smoothly, and several mis-communications and omissions, including one incident that led to d'Erlon's corps marching for an entire day between the battlefields of Ligny and Quatre Bras, taking part in neither battle, spelled defeat for Napoleon.

gashead

I'm sure that I read somewhere he said to hitler that Malta had to be neutralised in order to achieve security to his supply line

Pantagruel

gashead,

Rommel did indeed want Malta neutralized, but after his capture of Tobruk in 1942 he did not halt his advance as planned to allow resources to be concentrated on taking Malta. The following is taken from Panzer Battles by F.W. Von Mellenthin:

"In the original plan agreed upon between Hitler and Mussolini at the end of April, it was laid down that after Rommel had taken Tobruk, the Panzerarmee would stand on the defensive on the Egyptian frontier, and that all available aircraft and shipping would then be diverted to the attack on Malta. ... Rommel insisted that he must follow up his victory without waiting for an attack on Malta, but Kesserlring [Commander-in-Chief South] pointed out that an advance into Egypt could not succeed without full support from the Luftwaffe."

He goes on to say that Rommel decided to press the attack into Egypt whether or not Kesselring intended to give him air support. Von Mellenthin was one of Rommel's staff officers at the time, so he was in a position to know.

Jonathan4290

I think regardless of Rommel's responsibility in the Malta blunder, he can still be considered one of the best generals of the war. Maaaybe propaganda played him up a bit but he still played a significant part in the fall of France, fought the numerically superior British almost to defeat while dealing with his inept Italian allies, could've prolonged the Tunisian campaign if given free reign and did develop the best way to deal with an Allied invasion of France although it wasn't used as wholeheartedly.

As for overrated generals, everytime i read about Marshal Ney he seems to be doing something dopey that makes Napoleon angry.

What about Miltiades? He won the Battle of Marathon... and what else?

As for MacArthur, his Inchon landing was brilliant and his island hopping campaign saved alot of time and resources. However, thinking he could invade China by using nukes was stupid in so many levels and his role in the decisive New Guinea campaign is overrated.

historian

I got the impression that some considered Montgomery as overrated I have to disagree. At the beginning of the war Montgomery in command of the 3rd Division was deployed to Belgium as part of the BEF. He realised that some of our “Allies” were not shall we say reliable! He was proven right, when Belgium capitulated to the Germans part of the deal was that the British 3rd Division should not be imformed until the last minute. Thus enabling the Germans to surround and capture them. Montgomery had foreseen this and had been training his troops for tactical retreat rather than offensive operations. Thus managed to slip between the German lines and get his whole division safely, minimum casualties, to Dunkirk. The Germans were not happy to say the least, incidentally the German General in command of the force to capture the 3rd Division and whom Montgomery made to look a little silly was a bloke called Rommel.

Montgomery overrated? Give me a general with foresight like Montgomery any time.