Day 13 out of work. Still in pain, but the doc adjusted my meds so I'm not going all hallucinogenic anymore. Twice a week PT and a scheduled visit with a Specialist which leaves hours of sitting around in pain. Not being at work is, as expected, mostly nice. I get to be with my wife and child spending the days quite frivolously. However, boredom has set in. That and uncertainty due to being on comp meaning no 2nd job and no OT which means less income which means tighter budget. That being said, I'll try to keep my complaining to a minimum.
"Real Life" has taught me a few things. Surprising right? But one of the things I've learned best is that everything happens at once. Every time something big happens, whether it be financial, social, spiritual, work-related or family-related, a bunch of other big things happen in several of the other facets of life. We can go months at a time without changing even the slightest aspect of our routine, then BAM all the dominoes start crashing around. That is happening now.
I kicked around devoting this post to the dominoes that are crashing around us but instead wanted to think about something else for a little bit. So here's one of the few topics of conversation I can carry for hours: Military History.
The 5 Greatest Generals in the History of the World.
1. Napoleon Bonaparte
This is not a slam dunk, nobody else is close, type of choice. The next 4 guys have solid arguments in their favor. However, Napoleon conquered the majority of Europe in a time when armies were both large and developed. Trains made bringing a sizable amount of troops from miles away a tactical possibility. Gunpowder made numbers mean less and tactics mean more. The warfare of the Napoleonic Wars (gotta mean something when you name the era after him) was the perfect type of warfare to display a general's abilities. Bonaparte wasn't just a brilliant tactician, he also was an accomplished artillery engineer and possibly the greatest motivator of all time. The men who lead his armies were every bit as tactically brilliant as Napoleon, but many of them not only blindly followed his orders but also accepted exile along side their Emperor. Napoleon was at the same time the best and worst thing to come out of the French Revolution. He embodied the end result of unbridled ambition coupled with endless genius. His weakness? He trusted Spain too much and couldn't muster a decent Navy. In my humble opinion, had he fielded a decent Navy he would have conquered the British Iles. Even if everything else goes precisely as it did, with the Russian counterattack and Spanish rebellion squeezing the French into submission, the world would have been profoundly altered. Then, after defeat and exile, he managed to scare the world within an inch of its life and in a very short time united all of Europe against him. What a legacy.
Tactics: 10 (Movements during battle)
Strategy: 10 (The Plan of Battle)
Personal Prowess: 8 (Individual combat)
Leadership: 10 (Who he led and how they followed)
Contemporaries: 7 (Who he defeated and how badly)
Legacy: 10 (How he will be remembered)
2. Alexander III the Great
Hard to be better than this guy. He has the distinction of being the first great conqueror. There were conquerors before him but none of them did it like he did. None of them were great. Not only are his tactical skills virtually unmatched, he managed to forge an Empire which he personally ruled for only a few years. You might suggest that is a weakness, however Alexander was such a brilliant manager, he unified as he conquered, something no one else has ever accomplished (save perhaps the Mongols who might appear in this list). Who he defeated is not an impressive list, how badly he defeated them is astounding. Alexander would go into battle with 10-1, 8-1 and 5-1 odds and the end results would be ridiculous. There are recorded casualty numbers from battles, when hand-to-hand combat was the common method, where Alexander would lose 100 or so men while he opponent lost thousands. This is hardly believable. Is it because the Macedonians were somehow better soldiers? I doubt it, Alexander always supplemented his armies with Mercenaries and conquered subjects. It was because Alexander's genius and according to records personal bravery was incredible. Is it possible Alexander's incredible feats are merely a product of "he who wins writes the History books" or however that goes? Yeah, most likely. But he won. A lot. Every major civilization which means anything to the development of Eurasian History that existed prior to Alexander swore fealty to him by the end of his life. Greece, Persia and Egypt, a venerable group, were, in no uncertain terms, crushed by Macedon. While Napoleon had a more impressive military career, Alexander had more impact on Europe and the World than perhaps any single man.
Tactics: 10
Strategy: 7
Personal Prowess: 10
Leadership: 10
Contemporaries: 4
Legacy: 10
3. Genghis Khan
Theme here. All three of these guys were Emperors in the truest sense of the word. All three controlled an expansive territory on which several different distinct cultures coexisted with one ruler. If the list were ranked by Empire size, this guy would be at the top (below a King George perhaps). Also, if we were ranking by Empire unity, the length it lasted or the uniqueness of its construction nobody could stack up to Genghis' Mongols. The Khan's success was due in part to a group of fantastic generals and a form of combat the world had never seen. Cavalry Archers would be a fearsome thing to encounter today, let alone when Genghis ruled. The Mongols are the only group to successfully conquer China, they rolled across what is today Russia and Kazakhstan, smashed Persia and invaded Europe. Hungary and what would eventually be Poland slowed their advance just enough for Genghis to die and the expansion to stall. The Khan's genius seamlessly transitioned from a tribal leader unifying the Mongols to an Emperor dominating an Empire of which it was said "a virgin with two pouches of money could walk from one end to the other without fearing for anything" or whatever, not very good at those. In any case the guy forged the largest Empire in the History of the World.
Tactics: 7
Strategy: 9
Personal Prowess: 8
Leadership: 10
Contemporaries: 8
Legacy: 10
4. Hannibal
This guy gets the most points for who he was beating. Absolutely dominated the Roman Empire. Read that again but stress the last 2 words. Roman Empire. As far as military empires go, nothing has ever existed comparable to the Roman Empire. Something which only a Military History nerd could ever imagine but would be one of the coolest things to possibly simulate would be the Caesars vs the Khans. Hannibal shows us what no other enemy of Rome could show, the Romans were beatable. Not just beatable, 3 of the 5 worst losses in Roman history were to this guy. The term "textbook" perfectly describes the utter genius Hannibal put on display against, again, the greatest army yet assembled. Crossing the Alps is probably the greatest single feat a general has ever attempted. It is similar to a group of Generals thinking its a good idea to assault a beachhead with thousands of soldiers during WWII. The only difference is Normandy had some statistical legitimacy. Hannibal took a group of soldiers and animals and fought his way through an extremely dangerous mountainous region and arrived in enemy territory with enough army to not once but twice embarrass the Romans and even threaten the capital of the greatest Empire in the World at the time. Easier said than done. He belongs on this list despite only being a general and having a very short time in the spotlight of history.
Tactics: 9
Strategy: 7
Personal Prowess: 8
Leadership: 9
Contemporaries: 9
Legacy: 8
5. Douglas MacArthur
With all due respect to Julius Caesar, this guy rounds off my list. The Western theatre in WWII has several impressive generals, Von Runstadt, Kesselring, Rommel, Patton, Model, Manstein, Bradley, Eisenhower, Montgomery etc. The Eastern theatre has MacArthur. Not only did he coordinate the army side of the brilliant island-hopping strategy he also governed in Japan during the post-war period and conquered North Korea. Had MacArthur been given full reign in Korea, WWIII could've broken out, but also, MacArthur would've crushed the DPRK. The stubbornness that made him a great commander ended his career when he went behind the President's back. Not a good move. But something I'm positive every other member of this list would've done. In the age of communications, troop supply, air forces and international coalition combat, MacArthur stands alone. I also did a project on him in 8th grade so I might be biased.
Tactics: 8
Strategy: 10
Personal Prowess: 4
Leadership: 10
Contemporaries: 8
Legacy: 9
There you have it. Now back to "real life" I guess.
Braves cooling off, but not crashing...return of Maholm, Laird and Schafer tempered by the loss of Heyward and struggles for Walden and the rest of the back end of the bullpen. I hope that if we kick it into cruise control we can relight the fire come October.
No comments:
Post a Comment