 |
|
Most Overrated generals in history - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Parade Ground (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=2) +--- Forum: Historical Discussion (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=17) +--- Thread: Most Overrated generals in history (/showthread.php?tid=46234) Pages:
1
2
|
RE: Most Overrated generals in history - Stryker - 07-04-2008 Hi, Scotland and Ireland (and Wales) have and always will be part of the British Isles (In spite of some politicians trying to redraw the geological map  ) - so they are British, and Ireland was, at the time, under the rule of a British King.But you are correct, it wasn't the British who won Waterloo, it was Britain and her Allies who won the battle, and Bluchers arrival WAS decisive... but as to who what why where and when things may have been different, better men than I have debated it and still not agreed. Point is Wellington was the commander, and he won it. RE: Most Overrated generals in history - FM WarB - 07-04-2008 Did Blucher help or seal the deal? Let me answer that question with a question: How would Wellington have fared if VI Corps with associated cavalry and the Young Guard were thrown into the attack against him? As you might guess, my answer is not well at all. RE: Most Overrated generals in history - Steel God - 07-05-2008 FM WarB Wrote:Did Blucher help or seal the deal? Let me answer that question with a question: Valid point. I accept that. RE: Most Overrated generals in history - Stryker - 07-05-2008 I agree, from what I have read, Wellington's Army was close to defeat and wavering with the centre close to collapse when the Prussians arrived, just in time to attack plancenoit (sp?) and draw the attention of the young guard... even so - it was still "a bloody close run thing" as Wellington himself reportedly said :) |
){kind=link}