Sayf-ul-llah. Greatest General ever lived?

[1nemansquad]

Khalid Ibn al-Walid. The greatest general ever lived?

[Luq_Ganane]

Hands down.

[1nemansquad]

I had an argument with some gaalo friends of mine who said these were the greatest general ever.

Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Alexander, Hannibal, and Caesar.

So how does he measure up against these men?

[WACAYSA IS GALE]

HE NEVER LOST A BATTLE IN HIS LIFE HE BROUGHT DOWN GREAT ARMIES AND EMPIRES HE EVEN DEFEATED THE MUSLIMS @ UXUUD.

I HEARD HE TOOK PART IN OVER 900 BATTLES HE WON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM AND SOME OF THE ASXAABA SAID HE MADE US VICTORIES DURING OMAR KHALIFAT OMAR REMOVED HIM TO SHOW THEM GOD MADE THE MUSLIMS VICTORIES NOT KHALID..

HE WAS THE CAMMANDER OF THE MUSLIM ARMIES FROM THE PROPHET AFTER XAMZA DIED THROUGH ALL THE FIRST 4 CALIPHS.

HE TRULY EXPANDED ISLAM WITH THE HELP OF GOD AND THE SAXAAABA.

KHALID IBNU WALID RADI YALAHU CANHU.

[Gedo_Boy]

1nemansquad,

go to www.swordofallah.com..........good biography.

[Cilmiile]

Greatest Military Commander ever? Easy

Field Marshall Erwin Eugen Johaness Rommel

"The Desert Fox"

I read two biographies on him. Superb General

[paidmonk]

No doubt Al-Walid was a great general, but he was conquering moderately large cities and tribal nations. At the time of his rise, the Eastern Roman Empire [Byzantium] was just beginning to walk on its own, there were no other middle eastern powers besides the Byzantines, and it was fairly easy to convert and ally with the nearby Arab tribes against the Byzantines. I don't want to discredit him, but it was a time when the Roman Empire had just collapsed and a major power vacuum was active.

Ghenghis Khan conquered the Khwarezmids (Persians), the Crimeans, the entire Chinese confederation among many other nations. He took a small Mongolian clan, the Borjigin, and had conquered over a quarter of the known world. To this day, the Mongol Empire is the largest contiguous empire in world history. With large parts of modern day China, Mongolia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Moldova, North Korea, South Korea, and Kuwait under their belt for both brief and long terms.

The dictionary term 'Conquer' has only been used by contemporary and historic writers to describe only the Mongols and no other empire.

[gurey25]

Paidmonk Ghenghis was not responsible for the victories, he was more of a statesman and unifier than general.
most of the earliest victories were as a result of gheniis giving his 2 trusted generals who were geniuses complete power to do as they pleased.

the best one was Chepe Noyon, a has commanding tumans before the age of 18 and was about 20 during the battle of the Indus , when Khwarazem was foked.

and you underestimate the impact of Saifullah Khalid al waleed.
he was the one that formulated the tactics and strategies used in all the wars involving muslims for centuries to come.
all the other generals , amr ibn al cas, sacad in waqqas were playing by the khalids playbook.
You can talk all you want about the decay of both the Persian empire and the Byzantines, but you forget that in every single battle khalid was outnumbered at least 3 to one and sometimes 5 to one and he still came out without a single defeat.

The funny thing is that most historians agree that they do not understand exactly how the battles like Qaddsiya, and Yarmouk were won.
The best that they have come up with is that muslims skirmished them to death, by denying movement to the enemy and outlasting them with better stamina.

Now that should be impossible becuase muslim forces contrary to popular conceptions had a shortage in cavalary,
and whatever cavalary they had was light and unarmoured,

While byzantine and Persian armies evolved to resemble each other becuase of borrowed ideas through centuries of conflict.
they both had light and heavy cavalary as well as infantry to supplement them.
They were also trained to fight in combined arms and in formation, while also having good chain of command.

Looking at this it should have been dead easy to outflank the muslims, while having them suppressed through the use of showers of arrows, and then have the heavy cataphracts smash them to pieces.

This didnt happened ,infact the opposite did, how and why is a mystery i would love to see solved in my lifetime.
This is why i find this period to be the most facinating.

[DEMOLITION MAN]

[quote="Cilmiile"]Greatest Military Commander ever? Easy

Field Marshall Erwin Eugen Johaness Rommel

"The Desert Fox"

I read two biographies on him. Superb General[/quote]


Indeed Erwin Rommel was a bad ass i remember studying him in history class,
Whole towns used to be evacuated before his arrival, The afrika Korps only lost at the end cause they could not get enough supplies.

Why the fuhrer ordered his killing ? imtimidated perhaps ? !!

[Gedo_Boy]

To put things in perspective, it's important to remember what was at stake. With great military generals, what was their lasting legacy and what were their odds? Khalid bin Waleed was perpetually overmatched in terms of strength but managed to win EVERY time. His military victories were absolutely vital to the spread of Islam, yes the very Islam that's in the news every other day in every newspaper in the world. Rommel fought for the 3rd Reich, but now even Germany's neighbors don't even speak German.

Some people say that when the Prophet (pbuh) called Khalid ibn Walid (ru) "Sword of Allah" it was a sort of omen or promise Allah took upon Himself to firmly plant Islam on this Earth with his astounding military victories. On his deathbed he was mourning "dying as a camel dies" because he wasn't killed in battle, and his servant said that the sword of Allah was not to break in battle

I think Khalid ibn Waleed is so unique because there was no precedence of military leadership among the Arabs before him. To take desert dwelling, tribe-raiding nomads and challenge the might of the Persian/Byzantine empires is absolutely awe-inspiring. He led his army in Iraq across the desert to avoid Roman garrisons and showed up in Al-Sham and ultimately ended up liberating Al-Sham.

I don't think the Mongols faced empires either, and the Macedonians/Greeks did have a history of fighting Persia.

Rommel and others had the benefit of superior technology at least on par with the enemies and I don't know that they ever faced the sort of odds Khalid ibn Waleed did.

[paidmonk]

Gurey,

I did not underestimate Al-Walid's skill, he was the leader of the Muslim armies during one of the greatest periods of expansion in recent history. However, the ratio of men in battle with him isn't a good way of calculating his still. The Mongols were outnumbered 4 to 1 in most battles and never, not even once did they go to battle with more than 4,000 men, heck they only had one tribe behind them during the earlier days. And those earlier days were those of Ghenghis Khan.

I think an even better, and even more underestimated general was Charlemagne of the Frankish Empire. The thing with Al-Walid is that the majority of his conquests were with either new and not-very-powerful factions or tribal factions. Charlemagne ended the Lombard Kingdom, the Bavarian Kingdom, the Saxon Kingdom, the Avar Kindom, all the while keeping the Frankish people safe from outsider attacks, especially from Viking invaders.

To be a great general, you have to have a very high and prestigious head-count. I even consider Timur the Lame to be a better general.


Gedo Boy,

The Mongols destroyed the Kwarezmid Persians, a great empire. They created and unified modern China, and they changed the politics of Eurasia, Russia, and China to this day.

[AbdiWahab252]

My vote would be for General Vo Nguyen Giap of North Vietnam:

1. Defeated the Japanese, French and subsequent American occupation.

2. Used effective techniques to outfox more powerful adversaries and sustain the defeat of World's Greatest Nations at the time in Vietnam.

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