Id like to know what puts moshe dayan on the list with zhukov and guderian...i really would...im very patriotic but still...if at at all than general Tal or Sharon,or general Peled....but dayan...kind of out there...
The American General Bradley and his handling of the Battle At The Forest Of Huertgen in 1944. He just fed countless troops into the battle with ever checking the Battlefield and what was happening. It was a case that he was going take it at all costs. 24.000 Americans died fighting in this forest they even had 9.000 men taken seriously ill with trench foot and it was one of bloodiest battles fought by the Americans in Europe in WW2. Some of the American Ranger units had 90% casualties.
While mentioning some of the able Soviet commanders of the 1941-5 war with Germany, nobody has yet mentioned Rokossovsky, the man who single-mindedly changed the original Soviet plans for Operation Bagration in 1944 and enabled the Soviets to destroy Army Group Centre. Rokossovsky deserves to be placed alongside Konev/Koniev and Chuikov for what they achieved. In the end Rokossovsky was one of the 'big three' alongside Konev and Zhukov, leading their forces into Germany.
Incidentally Zhukov later remarked that the Soviet losses in 1945 on the assault across the Seelow Heights and into Berlin were 'unacceptable'. Estimates are of 300,000 Soviet losses. However they could afford those losses.
In my opinion the worst commander has go to be Commander Geoffrey Basil Simpson-Simpson. He is famous for his amazing victory on Lake Tanganyika in WW1, the only British Naval expedition in Africa during the war. Now your probably wondering, how could a person who won a victory be an awful commander? Let me explain.
During the war he was put in control of two cruisers I think it was. He decided to take out an enemy submarine by hanging wire between the two ships and then taking out it's periscope. What he did was take out a submarine......but one of the British ones. He was then put in command of a group of gunboats. He then docked them in harbour and went to make love to his wife making sure they were somewhere he could see them. he did see them, he saw them get struck by a German torpedo and he saw them sink. Even his victory on Lake Tanganyika was down to luck. He took out three heavily armed ships because they didn't know he was there and they were able to knock them out by surprise and use captured ships to fight as well. But he wasn't even commanding the assaults when they happened, the victories were made by his second in commands. He was rude, frankly and idiot and wore a skirt while in Africa. In fact, he was so awful he was given the easiest office work in the navy and he was only chosen for the expedition because all other commanders were busy blockading the Germans and the navy really didn't care about the situation in Africa. To me, he is the worst commander ever in history.
1. Napoleon Bonaparte.
2. Khalid Ibn Al Waleed.
3. Alexander The Great.
4. Khoulous the Great. (Leader of the Persians.)
5. Sun Tzu.
6. Erwin Rommel.
8. Isoroku Yamamoto. (The Japanese guy who led the attack on PEarl Harbour.)
9. Von Manstein.
10. Hannibal Barca.
This list is my opinion about what they achieved and what kind of strategy/tactics they used.