George Washington voted Britain's greatest enemy commander

[Farnan]

No, that is absolutely what I meant, both the stunning tactical defeat and the long-term consquences.

Glad we agree then.

[Erebus Pasha]

It wasn't Camden that made him a traitor but the Newburgh Conspiracy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newburgh_Conspiracy

I do agree that his actions during the war was incompitence not treason and agree on Lee.

Ah...I didn't know how involved he was in that conspiracy.

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

Glad we agree then.

If I may, I think the Historian's case in favor of Washington is badly damaged if it can be quite easily proven that the American Revolution was not the worst defeat for the British Empire, ever.

That was pretty much his thesis in the arguement, if I am not mistaken.

[Imperial]

And that's the point that most people seem to miss. George Washington didn't want to stun the world with tactical brilliance, he wanted to win.

He knew that the ONLY chance his cause had was him keeping the army together until he got the upper hand (a monumental task), and he accomplished that goal.

I really think that people need to learn alot more about the war, particularly how difficult things really were for Washington's army.

The French didn't want to intervene until they knew that victory would be possible. France thought that victory was unobtainable for the colonists, therefore, they wanted no part in it. The American victory at Saratoga showed the French that the Revolution can still be won, even after the string of American defeats leading up to Saratoga.

[Cyclops]

...The American revolution was a world war. ...America made that happened.

Nothing like a little bit of tunnelvision. I s'pose Moses led the chosen people out of Egypt so Billy Graham would have something to preach about?

I can't believe some of the choices here, Michael Collins? Seriously? I'm an Aussie of Irish descent ( bit I try to keep my irish sympathies in check), and studied a bit of this period and the guy was not a military commander, he organised a little terrorism, thats all.

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

Nothing like a little bit of tunnelvision. I s'pose Moses led the chosen people out of Egypt so Billy Graham would have something to preach about?

I can't believe some of the choices here, Michael Collins? Seriously? I'm an Aussie of Irish descent ( bit I try to keep my irish sympathies in check), and studied a bit of this period and the guy was not a military commander, he organised a little terrorism, thats all.

I would not rule Collins out, either.

He operated on a much smaller scale, but it was indeed a guerilla campaign. I'm not expert, but Independent Irish entities had not existed since the early 1600's if I am not mistaken.

Ireland was the first British colony that achieved independence in the modern era, against British wishes. It would not be the last.

[brandbll]

This reminds me of a story that Abraham Lincoln use to tell about an old American Revolutinary, Ethan Allen.

Word has it that during one of Ethan Allen's trips to England to negotiate he was verbally harassed everywhere he went. Well, one day a British soldier was trying to get Mr. Allen's goat by telling him he and his men had put a picture of George Washington in the outhouse. The soldiers all sat there laughing and thinking they had got the best of Ethan Allen; but Allen explained to the young soldier, "There is no better place for such a picture, as nothing makes a British soldier faster than the sight of General Washington."

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

Haha, great yarn.

[Londinium]

This reminds me of a story that Abraham Lincoln use to tell about an old American Revolutinary, Ethan Allen.

Word has it that during one of Ethan Allen's trips to England to negotiate he was verbally harassed everywhere he went. Well, one day a British soldier was trying to get Mr. Allen's goat by telling him he and his men had put a picture of George Washington in the outhouse. The soldiers all sat there laughing and thinking they had got the best of Ethan Allen; but Allen explained to the young soldier, "There is no better place for such a picture, as nothing makes a British soldier faster than the sight of General Washington."

It's a shame that Ethan Allen was a quasi traitor aswell and spent three years negotiating with the British to hand over Vermont to them and very nearly did at various points.

The French didn't want to intervene until they knew that victory would be possible. France thought that victory was unobtainable for the colonists, therefore, they wanted no part in it. The American victory at Saratoga showed the French that the Revolution can still be won, even after the string of American defeats leading up to Saratoga.

The French were supplying the rebels with weapons and funding from the very start. Vergennes was conspiring with the rebels by late 1775 at the very latest. During the New York campaign the rebels used cannon of a calibre that didn't exist in the New York garrison before the Revolution...I wonder where they appeared from? Saratoga just allowed the French to go public with their support, to massively up the financial support and to openly attack Britain on land and sea.

[Cyclops]

I would not rule Collins out, either.

He operated on a much smaller scale, but it was indeed a guerilla campaign. I'm not expert, but Independent Irish entities had not existed since the early 1600's if I am not mistaken.

Ireland was the first British colony that achieved independence in the modern era, against British wishes. It would not be the last.

IIRC Collins was only one of several leaders coming from a variety of backgrounds. War weariness and Griffiths passive civil disobedience campaign was IMHO the deciding factor in the establishment of what would become the Republic: there had been any number of violent attempts at revolt and the English put them down easily.

Colins was a smart leader but hardly acheived a remarkable outcome: Ireland was firmly on the path to some kind of independence before WW1 without the IRB or IRA. Collins failed to include the six counties (2/3 of Ulster) in the new state, which was basically what the fighting was about. That amounts to a failure in my eyes.

[Blarni]

This is certainly a hard to nail down topic.

I agree that Napoleon was the 'greatest commander' - who was an enemy of Britain, but then he only personally mixed it up with Britain once.

And I certainly get the Washington thing in terms of what was lost. However, Washington has become the face and poster boy of the revolution - rightfully so as he provided the backbone that kept it all going, but in terms of military aptitude I think 'greatest enemy commander' is handing him the credit for a number of other very competent individuals. It's a tough one to call.

[Imperial]

The French were supplying the rebels with weapons and funding from the very start.

It's normal for other countries to supply aid to other countries that are hostile to their enemy, and it wasn't just the French doing it. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The French didn't want to get involved at all until the Americans had to do the dirty work of first defeating the British on their own terms.

[money]

1799 was the last independant Irish thing, although the French did intervene the Irish were doing fine before they came.

[Ramashan]

During the New York campaign the rebels used cannon of a calibre that didn't exist in the New York garrison before the Revolution...I wonder where they appeared from?

I'm not calling you wrong, but could these not have been some of the hundred cannon that Knox 'liberated' from Ft. Ticonderoga?

the French did have ulterior motives for supporting the rebels, I mean, they had recently lost the French and Indian war and would have wanted some repayment for that.

As for Washington. I'm rather biased being a Yank and all. But one of Washington's greatest victories in the Revolution wasn't winning any land battles. It was bringing an Army out of the winter at Valley Forge. He brought a dispirited, under supplied, and shambles of soldiers into the Valley and brought a strong competitive army out of it. This after multiple defeats and retreats at the hands of the enemy.

Yes yes Stubben was responsible for shaping the Army, but it was Washington's army and Washington's cache that kept the thing together and kept the rebellion going.

But poor Benedict Arnold, he gave the British perhaps some of their most severe lashings, but his inability to see things through to the end has destroyed his military prowess to history.

[Invictus XII]

As for Washington. I'm rather biased being a Yank and all. But one of Washington's greatest victories in the Revolution wasn't winning any land battles. It was bringing an Army out of the winter at Valley Forge. He brought a dispirited, under supplied, and shambles of soldiers into the Valley and brought a strong competitive army out of it. This after multiple defeats and retreats at the hands of the enemy.

Napoleon brought an un-paid, un-clothed, starving, untrained army in Italy, 1796 as an uncredited "novice" and inspired them, and turned them into a force that brought Austria (a superpower) and many other Italian states to their knees, dictating surrender terms in Vienna. Then did it again in 1798-99.

[Justice and Mercy]

Napoleon brought an un-paid, un-clothed, starving, untrained army in Italy, 1796 as an uncredited "novice" and inspired them, and turned them into a force that brought Austria (a superpower) and many other Italian states to their knees, dictating surrender terms in Vienna. Then did it again in 1798-99.

The state of the Army of Italy was nowhere near as dire as the state of Washington's. It should be noted, for example, that the French armies in the Italian theater actually outnumbered those of the Austrians and their Italian allies. In the majority of the battles in the theatre the French armies outnumbered those of the Allies.

More importantly: Napoleon eventually lost.

[Ramashan]

Napoleon brought an un-paid, un-clothed, starving, untrained army in Italy, 1796 as an uncredited "novice" and inspired them, and turned them into a force that brought Austria (a superpower) and many other Italian states to their knees, dictating surrender terms in Vienna. Then did it again in 1798-99.

I'm not out to have a pissing contest, but I will support Washington as achieving a greater victory is rebuilding his army for three reasons.

A. Most of Washington's men were not soldiers before Valley Forge, but Colonial militia with only the basic of training if any at all beyond firing their guns. They had to learn how to be an Army and succeeded. (The French were already soldiers trained in European style of Warfare)

B. His Army had suffered defeat after defeat before settling in for the winter camp and had to live in miserable conditions until a camp could even be built. (The last major engagement of the Army of Italy was the Battle of Loano which they won)

C. Most of these men could have just walked home. (French were far from home)

Washington used his best talent, getting the right people for the job. Stueben and Greene.

[money]

The French army did not outnumber those of the allies in the theatre, it outnumbered them in battles. Napoleon outmaneuvred the armies in order to attack them where they were weakest. Besides its not like he outnumbered them in every battle. Take Arcole, Rivoli and Tagliamento for examples. At Tagliamento Napoleon defeated Archduke Charles and his crack troops that he brought, because by the end the Austrians saw Napoleon's army as a threat and even went so far as to attempt to assassinate this nobody general.

[strategist.com]

Not Hitler? I know he wasn't a military commander and not even a good one but he was still a commander.

[Justice and Mercy]

The French army did not outnumber those of the allies in the theatre, it outnumbered them in battles.

Taking into account the Army of the Alps alongside the Army of Italy, the French forces outnumbered those of the Austrians/Allies.