We all know who sad the best general in history, but what are best known examples of the retards leading all their soldiers to certain death?
everyone who invaded russia except the mongols
>>1203756
Shitposting hour is over, John
WW1 generals get a terrible reputation which is 99% of the time absolutely undeserved and only an indictment of the ignorance of the people shittalking them.
Except for this guy, he's not as bad as people make him out to be... he's worse.
>>1203696
General Custer is pretty famous for his decisive defeat against a coalition of Native Americans at the battle of Little Bighorn. Apparently he also got two of his brothers killed.
>>1203696
Well famously brutus. Indirectly
>>1203809
>absolutely undeserved and only an indictment of the ignorance of the people shittalking them.
They all knew what machine guns were and still took time to adapt.
>>1203952
I was taught in either middle school or AP US History that the problem with WWI is that everyone kept using Napoleonic tactics despite much advanced technology (machine guns, poison gas, longer range artillery, airplanes). Is that a good summary of the problem or is there something missing?
Obviously I'm an Amerifat so we didn't go in-depth.
>>1206184
Maybe in the first months. They figured that out pretty quickly.
The problem was that the state of technology didn't allow for anything but slogging and wholesale slaughter. If you don't have tanks, mechanized units, modern aviation, etc., it's really hard to break through those kinds o trench lines no matter what tactics you use.
Bomb things to bits and then send soldiers? You'll get stuck in a wasteland, can't supply people further out. Don't bomb/bomb less, and you lose so much more people when you advance. Lose-lose.
>>1203696
Hitler and stalingrad, precisly the order to not fall back once it was obvious they hade 0 chance of winning
>>1206287
So what if all sides boiled down to a cold war with DMZs seperating nations instead of active fronts? Would war have become more about economic embargos, production, etc? Would the old orders still have been a thing?
>>1206184
Every one had already used all that technology against tribals and the chinese, western front just turned into a parking lot after the failed push to paris and the march to the sea
>>1206305
Well no, they didn't have the hindsight we do. They had to try new things while the war was still on , and in trying the new things experience that nothing worked, until tanks and shock-troops were introduced. But at many times the front did more or less freeze up, at least in the west.
But even so, the old empires would still collapse: Russia was beaten in a dynamic war, same as Austria and Turkey. Germany, meanwhile collapsed because of the blockade. So the one place that could have had such a DMZ (west front), is the place where the war was actually won through a blockade.
Probably not Britain's finest Field Marshal of WW 1
>>1206333
Should have been hanged
>>1203809
Luigi Cadorna ignored advice and dismissed people who didn't agree with him. He was a horrible leader.
>>1206341
mad working class scum detected
>>1206384
I'm not even British
Young churchill
Gallipoli was a pretty shit idea
I'm not saying he's a retard, but he got defeated so bad at Carrhae he's on a level of his own.
>>1203819
Custer is underrated as fuck
People always go on about "Muh Little Bighorn" but he had a distinguished and good track record in the Civil War and even the Indian Wars.
>>1206184
>that everyone kept using Napoleonic tactics
NNNNNOOOOO
RRRRREEEEEEEEE
literally no one used napoleonic tactics in ww1
no one had used them for like fifty years prior already
>>1206333
Haig has no place in a thread like this. Championed the widespread use of the machine gun, very keen on deploying the tank, navigated the waters of military matters coupled with politics as well as one could, the Somme sobriquet is literally retarded seeing as he was not the one commanding that particular offensive.
>>1206518
He was in direct command of the British Expeditionary Forces and instead of using the Tanks that were readily available to him he decided to have a meat grinder showdown. That is a huge sign of not evaluating your assets and it cost him tens of thousands of lives.
The first Roman general to lead the counter-attack against the Batavians in their 1st century AD revolt against the empire.
>guys don't worry the Ethiopian forces are short on supplies and ammunition
>I will capture Menelik and put him in a cage, parading him around the streets of Rome like the monkey he is
>now let's march through these narrow mountain passes without maps
>>1208171
The Somme operation literally saw the first use of the tank you dip. Furthermore by your """logic""" every single decision ought to be tracked upwards to the highest point of command. "Hurr durr our lieutenant made us walk into a trap, it's Haig's fault."
Bragg managed his subordinates so poorly and made so many poor decisions that every single brigadier general and above in the Army of Tennessee signed a petition for his removal. Jefferson Davis visited the army in person, and all of Bragg's subordinates proceeded to air their grievances to Davis while Bragg was still in their presence. They were so mad at him that his subordinates basically claimed the army would refuse to fight further under his command.
The best part is, the same subordinates continually turned down command of the army when offered, and Davis was forced to let Bragg continue for some time until giving in and replacing Bragg with Joe Johnston, whom Davis perceived as an enemy.
Johnston's eventual replacement, John Bell Hood, would probably be placed as the SECOND worst general in the Confederate high command.
The army of Tennessee was truly cursed.
>>1208208
>leftenants are in charge of companies, battalions, regiments
>July 1st
~20,000 dead
~40,000 wounded
after words residing himself to 100 yard gains at the cost of 1000 lives.
Tanks were not utilized enough you dolt if you were trying to read between the lines. Yes command failure ultimately falls upon the Commander in Chief of the Operation. For 5 miles of negligible gains it cost a grand total of ~480,000 troops and wasted resources. Logistically speaking that is a nightmare and even more wasted man power that could have been used elsewhere.
Join a military branch before you criticize, the terrible rebuttal you made is extremely embarrassing. If in charge of a squad, fire team, platoon, company, battalion, regiment, ect. the highest ranking brass is ultimately responsible for its both success and failures.
CinC is in charge of constructing, planning, enforcing, delegating, and effectively giving the order to attack on a theater of war. A section Sergeant is in charge of his troops, a leftenant is ultimately (but more likely the flag sergeant) in charge of the well being of his platoon. And up and up it goes. It is the same as General McArthur was responsible for the failure to hold the line against Korea ad China when the US forces had pushed them out of Korea in 1951. The same how Field Marshal Montgomery is responsible for Market Garden.
Haigs ultimately failed to utilize his forces to the best they could be had at the cost of 1000 unlucky sods every 100 yards. Not only does that ways man power, but bullets, wood, metal, leather, cotton, petrol, and other minor resources that it takes to transport new and fresh troops to the front as well.
You're a fucking moron. Haig is responsible for turning Somme into a meat grinder by resorting to a war of attrition.
Learn some fucking military command structure outside of wikipedia. Ask some of your mates who are in or former family. There is this magical thing all a "Chain of Command."
