Posted on Jan 25, 2014
Which General throughout the United States history has been the best and which has been the worst.
9.66K
35
43
2
2
0
Which General throughout history has been the best and which was the worst and why, I think it is important that when looking for examples of leadership for what to do and what not to do, the past is the most important place to look. Lifetimes of achievements and mistakes are held there waiting for us to learn from them. I am curious to hear the opinions of this vast community.
Posted in these groups: 
History (Major)
History (Major)
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 19
5
5
0
<p>Very hard to pick given the generality of "best" and "worst", especially since a general's political, logistics, and leadership legacy can be as important as his/her battlefield legacy.</p><p><br></p><p>Worst: Tossing aside Benedict Arnold for obvious reasons; 2 generals pop into mind as competitors for the worst: Horatio Gates and Ambrose Burnside. Horatio Gates constantly plotted against George Washington, was surly and insubordinate, took credit for battles he never won, and his loss at Camden left the South open to Cornwallis and nearly cost the war. Ambrose Burnside never met a battle he could win. Starting at First Bull Run, his battlefield performance was without distinction but not without high casualties in each and every unit he commanded. He knew he was incompetent and offered to resign his commission on several occasions, but each time was refused or stayed on for political reasons. General Burnside was at the center of the battlefield of each of the Union's biggest defeats.</p><p><br></p><p>Best: Have to go with George Washington. He did it all. He never won a battle until it mattered and defeated the largest military of the time; hated politicians but mastered them and had them begging him to be in charge; was the worst farmer ever but kept an Army fed and going; two thirds of the country was against independence or didn't care but he took the whole 13 colonies in tow and by sheer will of personality, leadership, and tenacity made it a free country. Even now it seems a miracle. </p>
(5)
(0)
SSgt Tim Meuret
George also convinced men that were ill equipped and starving at Valley Forge to re-enlist. No re-enlistment NCO I ever met had that kind of skill.
(1)
(0)
MAJ Joseph Parker
In fact, General Washington's leadership was brilliant at Valley Forge. It was here that he was joined by Lafayette and Von Steuben. The latter instilled the first real military discipline into the Continental troops. Washington browbeat 5 Congressmen into coming to VF from Philadelphia to see the conditions and convinced them to take over the corrupt supply system and send food and supplies directly to the soldiers. Martha Washington came in February and organized the large number of wives and camp followers to do laundry, prepare food, and administer to the sick. By Spring of 1778 the Continental Army was larger, more disciplined, better trained, and healthier than when it came to VF in 1777, despite almost 3,000 winter deaths and untold desertions early on in winter. All through the winter General Gates and his supporters had been scheming and backbiting General Washington with the public and with Congress to have him relieved. However, By May of 1778 it was clear that General Washington was the leader that would take the country to freedom, and Gates was an egotist. That is LEADERSHIP. Imagine General McAuliffe coming out of Bastogne with more men in the 101st ABN than he went in with!
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
So far the best response that I have seen. What would you think of Custer or Pickett to be on the worst list? or GEN Thomas J Jackson and GEN Theodore Roosevelt III on the best?
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I personally think General Colin Powell. His leadership quotes are still being used by many that don't even know it. Not only did he make history by becoming the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he also assumed several of his leadership positions far ahead of the normal timeline.
(4)
(0)
(3)
(0)
MAJ Joseph Parker
General Powell oozed leadership and charisma, but his battlefield accomplishments as a general were nil...like Marshall, who was also a great general and had 5 stars. This comment isn't meant as a negative. Patton was a brilliant tactical commander but he never could have done what Eisenhower did, and vice versa. So saying a general is "best" and worst" is a subjective rating unless it can be quantified. Powell was exactly the right general to be CJCS and it's doubtful any other flag officer of the time could have come even close to what he accomplished.
(3)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Agreed sir, the choice of best and worst were merely meant to spark the conversation about good and bad leadership qualities and how to best bring them out in yourself and your soldiers.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Too many Generals to pick from as the best. But I'd choose Colin Powell just because of how he maneuvered in the military and then into politics. As for the worst then there too many to go down the list. I would choose a General that got fired [MacArthur, McCrystal] just because that particular General got too big in the position and forgot his duty to follow orders.
(3)
(0)
Cpl Matthew Wall
I would agree that McChrystal was not a good General. He got a lot of men killed in the war due to his ROEs.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google