By Jeff Danelek
Okay, not really a bad field commander. In fact, a pretty
fair one. The only reason he’s on the list is that, like a British version of
Macarthur, he too may be one of the most overrated commanders of World War II.
While Monty is credited - and rightfully so - for his victory at El Alamein, Egypt
in October of 1942, it must be remembered he was fighting an exhausted and
over-extended German Afrika Korps that lacked significant air support and was
running on fumes. The British and their allies, in contrast, massively
outnumbered Rommel in almost every category, making victory - pending some
remarkable chain of events - eventually inevitable. Unfortunately, unlike his
predecessors, Monty choose not to follow up on his victory by pushing the
Germans out of Africa immediately, waiting until May of 1943 to finally
accomplish what should have been done months earlier. But Egypt wasn’t
Monty’s real problem. That came later, first with the over-planned and
under-executed landings in Sicily (Patton’s
forces beat Monty’s British Army to Messina even
though they had twice as far to go), followed by his dismal attempt to capture Caen, France
on D-Day. (The city was not taken until July 18, 1944, six weeks after the
initial landing.) Then there was Operation
Markey Garden
in September, 1944, the attempt to take three key bridges in Holland
that would make a breakout into the Ruhr
Valley possible. Great
idea; just poorly implemented, the result being the surrender of 6,000 British
paratroopers at Arnhem and a temporary stalemate that was to last until
that next spring. Monty had good intentions; it’s just that he tended to be too
timid when aggressiveness was called for, and too aggressive when caution would
have been more advisable.
10. (Tie) Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, Germany
This is easily my most controversial pick, and I do it with
some reluctance only because of the esteem the “Desert Fox” is looked upon with
today. In my defense, I do not maintain that Rommel was a bad General. In fact,
considering the circumstances he had to deal with - lack of supplies, harsh
conditions, being perpetually outnumbered - he did a remarkable job as arguably
Germany’s most successful - or, at very least, most popular - general. Plus, the
fact that he was implicated in the plot to kill Hitler - though pretty late in
the game - makes him a hero to both sides. However, in terms of actual
accomplishments, the man may not quite live up to his reputation. While an
aggressive and capable commander, he tended to be abrasive, intolerant,
unteachable and rash to the point of foolhardiness, which might be one of the
reasons he was defeated by the British in North Africa not once, but twice (the
first time at the hands of British General Auchinleck, the second time by
Montgomery) and finally pushed off the continent. Afterwards given the task of
securing the French coastline from allied invasion (the Atlantic Wall) he
oversaw the construction of a formidable barrier of bunkers and gun
emplacements that prevented the allies from taking the beaches at Normandy on
June 6, 1944 for about half an hour or so, thereby demonstrating the futility
of depending on fixed defenses to stop invasions (a lesson the Germans should
have remembered from France’s futile efforts to hold the Maginot Line in 1940).
Obviously, not all of this could be laid at Rommel’s doorstep as he did have to
work under the limitations imposed upon him by der fuehrer, but when one
considers his almost legendary reputation, it seems he should have been able to
do more to stop the allied advance in France.
9. Admiral Gunichi Mikawa, Japan
This is a case in which a successful commander enjoyed an
overwhelming victory, only to almost immediately squander the priceless
opportunity it afforded him. Admiral Mikawa was an up-and-coming Japanese
admiral known for his intelligence and sound judgment when he assumed command
of the Japanese 8th fleet at Rabaul in July of 1942. Just a month later, he was
to lead this same fleet to one of Japan’s greatest naval victories of World War
Two when, during the night of August 8-9, 1942, he slipped into the waters off
Guadalcanal and sent four allied cruisers to the bottom in a little under one
hour. In doing so, he left the Marines on Guadalcanal
without sea protection and rendered the transports anchored off shore sitting
ducks. However, just as complete victory - and the routing of the American forces
on Guadalcanal - was all but imminent, the Admiral inexplicably broke off the
attack and headed for home, thereby saving the U.S. Navy from further
humiliation and destruction. Had the man shown a bit more aggressiveness and
sank the hapless transports, very likely the U.S. would have been forced to
evacuate the Solomon Islands and the war would have been extended by months or,
possibly, as long as a year. Rightfully criticized by his superiors for his
timely blunder, he was given increasingly smaller and more isolated commands
throughout the remainder of the war until being forcefully retired by the
Japanese Navy in June of 1945, three months before the war ended. Not a bad
officer, but an officer with bad timing.
8. Saddam Hussein,
Iraq
People don’t normally think of the Butcher of Baghdad as a
military leader (though he liked to wear uniforms), but for the twenty-four
years he called the shots in Iraq,
that’s exactly what he was. Like Hitler, every military operation was overseen
by him personally and in great detail, though, again like Hitler, he left the
day-to-day tactical operations to a group of hand-picked incompetents known
more for their loyalty to him than for their battlefield prowess. Consider that
during his reign, Saddam oversaw three major conflicts (the invasion of Iran and Persian Gulf
I & II) all of which he lost soundly (although the Iranian conflict dragged
on for 8 long years before Saddam finally sued for peace.) His inept defense of
Kuwait in 1991 against U.S. and coalition forces almost cost him his
entire army - not to mention his head - while the follow-up war just eleven years
later (the U.S. led invasion
of Iraq
in 2003) cost him both. Perhaps his best idea was convincing the world he had
WMD in an effort to discourage an invasion, thereby encouraging the very
conquest he was trying to avoid. Worst, he forgot to tell his own generals his
WMDs were merely a figment of his imagination, much to their consternation as
they were counting on using them to slow the American march on Baghdad. Truly it could be said that no
American military commander ever had a better ally than the madman from Tikrit.
7. General George McClellan, USA
While there were a host of bad generals serving on both
sides during the American Civil War - mostly on the Union side unfortunately - the
one that usually gets the most credit for dragging out the war as long as he
did is Union General George McClellan. McClellan wasn’t the worst general in
the Union army - that title probably belongs to men like Joe Hooker or Ambrose
Burnside - but he was the most cautious which, in war, can be as dangerous as
being too bold. In command of the Union Army from November, 1861 until he was
dismissed by Lincoln after the bloody and inconclusive Battle of Antietam in
September, 1862, McClellan was famous for his take it slow approach that
resulted in interminable delays and missed opportunities to hit the rebels hard
and potentially shorten the war. To his credit, some of his biographers write
that McClellan was hesitant to commit to battle out of concern for the lives of
his men - which is admirable - but missing opportunities to potentially and soundly
defeat the smaller Confederate Army on several occasions may have inadvertently
extended the war by years, actually resulting in an even greater loss of life
than might have been experienced had he simply been more aggressive. The man’s
personal contempt for Lincoln was also unwise (he once refused to see the
president when he visited his home in Washington, claiming he had gone to bed
and could not be disturbed) while his political ambitions - he ran against
Lincoln in the 1864 presidential election - made him more of a publicity-hound
than the type of quality commander the Union Army needed. Again, not a terrible
general - just the wrong man for the job.
6. General Robert Georges Nivelle, France
What Douglas Haig was for the British Expeditionary Force in
France during the First
World War (see no. 5), Robert Nivelle was for France. A French artillery officer
who took command of the French Army in December of 1916, he immediately set
about doing very little but sit by and watch his men and the Huns slaughter
each other on an unimaginable scale. At the Battle of Verdun (21 February to 18
December, 1916) Nivelle went through French troops like pork through a sausage
factory, racking up an impressive half a million casualties before it was all
over. But it was his ill-fated and poorly planned “Nivelle Offensive” in the
spring of 1917 that was his undoing. Promising a quick and decisive victory
over the Germans, in April of 1917 Nivelle sent over a million French soldiers
against a German army half its size and got his proverbial butt kicked. By the
time the French government finally pulled the plug on the thing three weeks
later, over a quarter million French had been killed or wounded and the army
was on the verge of wholesale mutiny. It was only his quick sacking that
prevented the French soldiers from turning on their own officers and the whole
allied front from collapsing, handing victory to the Germans by default. (On
the other hand, had the Germans won in the summer of 1917, there would have
been no Hitler and no Second World War and history would have taken a much
different track. Oh well…) Unlike his British counterpart, Sir Douglas Haig,
Nivelle did not return home a hero but slinked off to some outpost in
Africa - the French equivalent of being sent to Siberia - to finish out what little
was left of his career. He died in 1924 and was buried with full military
honors…and then promptly forgotten.
5. General Sir Douglas Haig, U.K.
The Commander of British forces in France during the
disastrous Battle of the Somme in 1916, Haig has the distinction of overseeing
the greatest single day loss of British lives in history: on the morning of
July 1, 1916, 60,000 troops - 20% of the entire British fighting force engaged - was
killed or wounded (including all but 68 men of the 801-man strong 1st
Newfoundland Regiment) in an offensive that failed to gain a single one of its
objectives. Haig, ever the optimist however, did not consider the enormity of
the casualties inflicted all that bad and even wrote in his diary the next day “…the
total casualties … cannot be considered severe in view of the numbers engaged,
and the length of front attacked.” Of course, today such incompetency would
result in the immediate sacking of the offending buffoon, but things were
different back then. In fact, Haig would continue to oversee the British forces
for the rest of the war and even was promoted to Field Marshall for his fine
work. Under his auspicious leadership, some 800,000 British soldiers would
ultimately die. Remarkably, Haig came home a hero after the war and is still
considered to have been a competent military commander by many today (mostly by
people who never served under him, one might assume). While no commander on
either side during that war comes off looking good when it came to incurring
casualties, what makes Haig stand out is his seeming indifference to the
carnage and an unwillingness to learn the hard lessons required to fight a
twentieth-century war. He had his moments of brilliance, to be sure, but
by-and-large he was definitely not the right man for the job.
4. George Armstrong Custer, USA
The dashing Custer may have made a fine 1940’s-era Western
hero, but in real life he was the sort of military leader enlisted men desert
for. Brash, intelligent, and personally courageous, his great undoing was his
indifference for the welfare of his men - or their safety for that matter. (As
one of the youngest Generals in the Union Army during the Civil War, his
cavalry unit had the highest casualty rate of any in the Army). He was also
savage when it came to dealing with the Indians, whom he would slaughter
without remorse. His recklessness finally caught up with him, however, when he
led his famous 7th Cavalry to disaster at Little Big Horn in June of 1876,
losing almost his entire command in the course of a few hours when he attacked
an Indian encampment with several thousand Lakota, Northern
Cheyenne, and Arapaho warriors in it. Somehow, he became a legend
as a result of this debacle - largely through the tireless efforts of his widow,
Libbie, who went on speaking tours on his behalf the rest of her
life - demonstrating the old adage that Americans tend to honor their defeats
(Little Big Horn, the Alamo, Pearl Harbor, 9/11) more than their victories.
While adored as a martyr by millions of Americans for generations, Custer has
not fared well with historians of late, who have come to see him as the
publicity-seeking, Indian hating, ambitious huckster he really was, dulling his
sterling reputation considerably. Does he deserve such scorn? Ask any of the
267 men who died alongside of him (not to mention the hundreds of Native Americans
he dutifully slaughtered).
3. Douglas
MacArthur, USA
What? Doug MacArthur has made it onto my top ten losers
list? The hero of the Pacific Theater and the mastermind behind the Inchon
Landings? Impossible! Not if you look at the record. Start with his incoherent
strategy to defend all of the Philippines
that ended in the disastrous surrender at Bataan in April of 1942 (the largest
mass surrender of American troops in U.S. history). Follow that with an
antagonistic ego that made him frequently unable to work with the Australians
defending New Guinea and the
ill-advised decision to invade Peleliu (a Japanese stronghold of no immediate
strategic value that cost 10,000 U.S. casualties and took two months
to secure). Then there is his insistence that Roosevelt invade the
Philippines - despite the fact the archipelago had no real strategic value - so he
could keep his promise to the Filipino people that he “would return” (as though
they cared). The operation at Leyte Gulf took
up so much in terms of military assets that Doug may have single-handedly
extended the war by months.
But what about Korea, you ask? Wasn’t he the
mastermind behind the Inchon
landing that broke the back of the North Korean Army and (almost) secured
victory on the peninsula? Yes he was, but considering that Inchon was defended
by only a small garrison of Korean troops - the rest being locked in battle with
U.N. forces around Pusan - meant that only the most incompetent commander would
have failed to take it. It’s what happened later, however, where Doug shows his
true nature; ignoring intelligence reports that a million Chinese troops were
massing along the Korean border ready to invade, he suddenly found himself
overrun by Mao’s best and brightest and was forced to retreat well past that
pesky 38th parallel. Only his timely firing by Truman (probably Truman’s best
decision as President) and General Ridgeway’s (his replacement) tactical sense
saved Korea
from becoming another Soviet satellite state. Okay, he was a decent military
governor in Japan after
their surrender and kept the Russians out of Japan, but beyond that, there’s not
much that can be said for him, either as a general or a person. Unfair
appraisal, you say? Consider that this is the man who had to pull in favors and
lobby Congress to get them to award him the Congressional Medal of Honor for
his inept defense of the Philippines
in 1942. Talk about gall.
2. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, Mexico
This colorful character should never have donned the uniform
of a Mexican General (or any uniform for that matter). Whenever he did, bad things
always followed for his hapless army. Yes, he took the Alamo in 1836 (losing
twice as many men as the Texans), but he lost his entire army and was captured
at San Jacinto just a few weeks later in a Battle that lasted all of fifteen
minutes. Still popular in Mexico (Santa Anna liked to refer to himself as the
“Napoleon of the West”), after a brief exile he returned home to once more be
given command of the Mexican Army and the task of pushing a small French force
out of Veracruz. He lost the battle, along with a leg, which resulted in the
Mexicans being forced to capitulate to the French, but he returned home - with
his prosthetic cork leg in tow - more popular than ever. After a short stint as
dictator (he was to serve in this capacity several times during the course of
his illustrious career) he found himself again at the head of the Mexican Army
as it was repeatedly trounced by American troops during the Mexican-American
War of 1846. (It was during this war his cork leg was captured by American
forces and put on display.) Returning home to Mexico
after yet another ill-fated foray as a military strategist, Santa Anna once
again took over the government and spent the next few years lining his pockets
before the people finally got tired of him and sent him fleeing into exile to Cuba in 1855.
Clearly in Santa Anna the Mexican people had a man that was both a military and
political catastrophe, yet who managed to remain popular with millions of
Mexicans for years, just as he does to some degree today, demonstrating that
competency is not a prerequisite for fame in some countries.
1. Adolf Hitler,
Germany
Many may be surprised to see der fuehrer on a list of failed
military leaders, largely because he was not a military officer. However, this
is a list about failed leaders - not necessarily officers - which, given his role
in ensuring Germany’s long awaited defeat in World War Two - makes him top on the
list. While it is true that Hitler never commanded soldiers on the field, in
the last three years of the war he increasingly took over day-to-day control of
his armies, telling his generals where and when to attack and then refusing to
allow them to retreat when defeat was inevitable. While he was content to leave
the tactical details of running the armies to his generals, he set the
strategic objectives, oversaw the allocation of resources, and all but drove
the first tank into each battle after 1943, ensuring that no matter how well
the Germans fought, they were doomed to failure. With the former World War One
Corporal at the helm, allied success was practically assured. Of course, all of
this was a good thing in hindsight, for it’s scary to think what the Germans
might have accomplished had Hitler kept a hands-off policy and left it to his
generals to figure out how best to vanquish his enemies (as he did in the first
three years of the war). Additionally, this was the single biggest difference
between Hitler and his nemesis, Joseph Stalin; Stalin knew he wasn’t a military
strategist and let his Generals run the show. Hitler, assuming his time spent
in the trenches of France in the First World War made him an expert, never
figured that out, much to his - and an entire generation of Germans - detriment.
Source : http://www.toptenz.net
No comments:
Post a Comment