Started By
Message

re: OT history and military gurus: George Washington v. Oliver Cromwell

Posted on 7/4/17 at 10:56 pm to
Posted by AbuTheMonkey
Chicago, IL
Member since May 2014
8099 posts
Posted on 7/4/17 at 10:56 pm to
Washington was a mediocre general and a great leader.

Cromwell was a great general and a (being generous here, considering some of what he did) mediocre leader.

Cromwell was, strategically, right there with Suvarov and Frederick the Great as far as greatest modern European generals until Napoleon came along.
Posted by Methuselah
On da Riva
Member since Jan 2005
23350 posts
Posted on 7/5/17 at 7:09 am to
quote:

Cromwell was a great general and a (being generous here, considering some of what he did) mediocre leader.

I'd say he was a very good leader of soldiers in a military setting. And he was a passable politician in parliament. But, yeah, he was way out of step with the moods and desires of vast majority of the people of the country he came to rule.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
90923 posts
Posted on 7/5/17 at 7:35 am to
quote:

Cromwell was, strategically, right there with Suvarov and Frederick the Great as far as greatest modern European generals until Napoleon came along.


To a degree, we're comparing apples and oranges here. A better analogue to Cromwell is Nathan Bedford Forrest. A brilliant, yet instinctive leader who excelled with cavalry.

However, I do not see the flashes of outright genius in Cromwell as I do with Frederick and Napoleon (or even Gustavus Adolphus), particularly at the operational and strategic level.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram