Simviation Forums

George Washington named Britain's greatest ever foe

Hitler was disqualified on a technicality (never led an army in the field against Britain), leaving:

George Washington
Michael Collins
Napoleon Bonaparte
Erwin Rommel
Mustafa Kemal Atat

Rommel and his armies being a threat to Britain is laughable.

I think that if Rommel had captured the Suez Canal* it would have been a major blow to the British war effort.

*Which he almost did.

I'd vote for Hitler and Napoleon.  They threatened Britain's existence.

Hitler could have threated Britain's existence if he was more intelligent. He knew nothing about the battlefield, in the Great War he was a Corporal.

Hitler could have threated Britain's existence if he was more intelligent. He knew nothing about the battlefield, in the Great War he was a Corporal.

Only a Cpl? In that case he was far more qualified than most contemporary polititians and potential warmongers. Most wouldn't know a military uniform if it jumped out of a bush and tickled them with a stick of wet celery.

Hitler could have threated Britain's existence if he was more intelligent. He knew nothing about the battlefield, in the Great War he was a Corporal.

Only a Cpl? In that case he was far more qualified than most contemporary polititians and potential warmongers. Most wouldn't know a military uniform if it jumped out of a bush and tickled them with a stick of wet celery.

Hitler may have been a Corporal & he even won the Iron Cross Twice in the Great War, but he still didn't know very much about the battlefield.

In 1944 Hitler sacked one of his best Commanders, Erich von Manstein because Hitler thought von Manstein "Gave up ground to easily".

Von Manstein pioneered elastic mobile defence. It is still used today in many militaries.

If Hitler hadn

1) George Washington?! Seriously?! Even though I am an American and very proud of that fact, I cannot agree with him being Britain's greatest foe. Heck the US after the Rev War posed no threat to Britain what so ever, the War of 1812 proved that. We got our butts kicked badly.

2) That said, Britain's greatest foe has got to be a tie between Napoleon and Rommel. Rommel because he scared the $hit out of so many Brits in North Africa, the man was a genius of modern warfare with huge brass balls between his legs and an iron devotion to his troopers. That is why he beat the snot out of the Brits time after time eventhough the Brits had on average at least 5x the tanks (including more powerful M3s), over 2x the aircraft, and depending how you count it over 5x the men...yet Rommel STILL beat them and beat them bad...no offense by the way  my friends across the pond...he beat the Americans bad too, and the French. Heck he terrified us all...

Now Napoleon, well that goes with out saying. The man wanted to conquer the British Isles for crying out loud! AND he was a military genius AND a darn good field commander with the resources to take advantage of it..Rommel lacked resources throughout the entire North Africa campaign and lacked them badly...So I would have to say Napoleon.

Washington was yet another rebel leader. As a military commander his greatness is marginal compared to other greats like Rommel, Manstein, Guderian (father of the Panzer corps), Patton, and Napoleon....HOWEVER, Washington as a LEADER of a blooming nation, he is unbeatable...just not so much militarily..

2) That said, Britain's greatest foe has got to be a tie between Napoleon and Rommel. Rommel because he scared the $hit out of so many Brits in North Africa, the man was a genius of modern warfare with huge brass balls between his legs and an iron devotion to his troopers. That is why he beat the snot out of the Brits time after time eventhough the Brits had on average at least 5x the tanks (including more powerful M3s), over 2x the aircraft, and depending how you count it over 5x the men...yet Rommel STILL beat them and beat them bad...no offense by the way  my friends across the pond...he beat the Americans bad too, and the French. Heck he terrified us all...

It's not the number of tanks or troops or planes it's the quality.

British Tanks were either Well Armoured & Slow or Fast & Badly Armoured. The only thing the two types of tanks had in common were they were badly armed with weak guns. That is until the Churchill Arrived.

Also another reason that the Brits didn

I tend to agree that while, militarily, Washington was little more than a rabble rouser to the Empire the same comparison could be made to Ho Chi Minh and the US.

The North Vietnamese never had a chance of defeating the US militarily in Vietnam, let alone launching an assault on American soil.

[quote][quote]2) That said, Britain's greatest foe has got to be a tie between Napoleon and Rommel. Rommel because he scared the $hit out of so many Brits in North Africa, the man was a genius of modern warfare with huge brass balls between his legs and an iron devotion to his troopers. That is why he beat the snot out of the Brits time after time eventhough the Brits had on average at least 5x the tanks (including more powerful M3s), over 2x the aircraft, and depending how you count it over 5x the men...yet Rommel STILL beat them and beat them bad...no offense by the way

[quote]George Washington named Britain's greatest ever foe

In my readings Atat

If you don't know who Michael Collins is then might I suggest a little Irish history? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Co ... _leader%29

Hitler could have threated Britain's existence if he was more intelligent. He knew nothing about the battlefield, in the Great War he was a Corporal.

Only a Cpl? In that case he was far more qualified than most contemporary polititians and potential warmongers. Most wouldn't know a military uniform if it jumped out of a bush and tickled them with a stick of wet celery.

Hitler may have been a Corporal & he even won the Iron Cross Twice in the Great War, but he still didn't know very much about the battlefield.

I know. My post was tongue in cheek!

If you don't know who Michael Collins is then might I suggest a little Irish history? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Co ... _leader%29

The only thing I knew about English-Irish relations was that they don't seem to like each other much.

I've never heard of Michael Collins (except the astronaut) but he sounds like little more than a terrorist.

Is that what you call people fighting for the freedom of their own country? Terrorists?

So basically you

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

If you don't know who Michael Collins is then might I suggest a little Irish history? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Co ... _leader%29

The only thing I knew about English-Irish relations was that they don't seem to like each other much.