Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy-8  successful does not always mean the best. I would for example say that Robert E Lee was a much better commander than US Grant. However Grant was more successful due largely to the fact he had men and equipment crawling out of his ears and ass. Rommel was also a better commander than Monty however Monty beat him because of his overwhelming advantage in almost every area.
success does not equal skill. |
Its an interesting theory as there are many that think Robert E Lee and Rommel are among the most over rated of commanders and to a large degree their continued fame is based largely around the "romanticised post war images of these men rather than their performance on the field of battle.
As for myself I am undecided I have no doubt he was an honourable man and an excellent defensive commander but I have yet to be convinced he was all that good on attack (Gettysburg would be a prime example of a very flawed battle plan).