What General are you like?

[Dan Weaver]

R. E. Lee for me.

[Matt Madison]

I got Ike. I'm surprised I'm the only one. Does this mean I get a girlfriend to drive me around too?

 

Matt

[Scott Cunningham]

I got Teddy Roosevelt

 

Now I will try and answer opposite to every question I answered to find out who is diameterically opposed to my military ideology.

[Scott Cunningham]

William Westmoreland was the one when I tried the 180 approach

[RETAC21]

That must be the bottom of the Pit!!

[Manic Moran]

That's interesting.. My complete 180 is Lord Nelson.

 

Avast, ye!

 

NTM

[Guest Dwight Pruitt]

Originally posted by Jim Martin:

Patton....the best Marine the Army ever had...

 

 

Jim, considerng that the First Army killed and captured as many enemy troops, and took as much ground as Patton's Third, and considering that Patton got the lions share of publicity...I think your Marine analogy is right on

[Guest Sargent]

I got Omar Bradley.

 

I figured:

 

1) These are good troops and they need a good plan more than a handshake and a pep talk.

 

2) These good troops don't need to be told exactly what to do in every circumstance, give them a plan with some flexibility.

 

3) When communications were out, I went to the front. Figured it was about time to meet the boys and let them know I wasn't just static on a squawk box.

 

4) I negotiated. Get the fighting over, take control of the region. Anybody upstairs doesn't like it,they can can me, my men are safe. Oh, and keep a close eye on those religious sites.

[Guest Moriartty]

Originally posted by Sargent:

I got Omar Bradley.

 

I figured:

 

1) These are good troops and they need a good plan more than a handshake and a pep talk.

 

I chose the opposite but had a problem here. I think what would be best would be both. Planning the op but leaving a little time for a good pep talk type radio speach for the troops. Patton could pull this off with one of his well flavored speeches and have the boys happy with just a little effort. The rest goes into planning the op.

 

2) These good troops don't need to be told exactly what to do in every circumstance, give them a plan with some flexibility.

 

Completely agree.

 

3) When communications were out, I went to the front. Figured it was about time to meet the boys and let them know I wasn't just static on a squawk box.

 

Completely agree.

 

4) I negotiated. Get the fighting over, take control of the region. Anybody upstairs doesn't like it,they can can me, my men are safe. Oh, and keep a close eye on those religious sites.

 

I do not think this question can be answered really. Without background you dont know what to say. Does this enemy normally honor their statements? Or do they just use ceasfires as time to dig in and rearm? Any answer given here really is just the persons own reflection. I chose the opposite of you. A soldiers job is to fight. I also agree with Patton on this. You will lose more blood if you give an enemy a chance to dig in then if you keep pressing him. Since you know nothing of the specifics here I think stopping and putting trust in your enemy is a mistake.

[Guest Sargent]

Originally posted by Moriartty:

I do not think this question can be answered really. Without background you dont know what to say. Does this enemy normally honor their statements? Or do they just use ceasfires as time to dig in and rearm? Any answer given here really is just the persons own reflection. I chose the opposite of you. A soldiers job is to fight. I also agree with Patton on this. You will lose more blood if you give an enemy a chance to dig in then if you keep pressing him. Since you know nothing of the specifics here I think stopping and putting trust in your enemy is a mistake.

 

They were all pretty imprecise, but that's what you get in real life.

 

The basic set-up was you are a bn or rgt level CO. The question implied that the enemy was on the run, but still capable of resisting.

 

I figured that accepting the surrender takes pressure off my men and opens the area for exploitation at little risk, so long as we keep an eye on the "prohibited areas." The enemy might try to cheat and reinforce there, but he's not gonna use the guys in my POW camps to do it.

 

IOW, I chose an end to resistance with the possibility of trouble later to continued resistance with the possibility of the enemy recovering his balance, getting reinforcements and building a defense, or some fluke like all my subordinate COs stepping on mines and screwing up my whole operation.

[Guest Moriartty]

Agreed but I think the last question was too much so. You would have some clue of how your enemy would act in this situation.

 

 

Originally posted by Sargent:

They were all pretty imprecise, but that's what you get in real life.

 

[Guest Hans Engström]

I got Teddy, but trying it with the one I waffled on (#3) the other way (ie staying back) I got Clark.

 

BTW, I won a major victory as the Iraqi's.

 

Hans

 

[Edited by Hans Engström (04 July 2001).]

[Brad Sallows]

Patton and Bradley differ only in the answer to #4. Somehow that doesn't sound quite right.

[Guest sunshadow]

Lord Horatio Nelson

 

Prepare to be boarded ye landlubbing swine!

Arrr, set the jib, raise the ring, and bring her along side so they can taste the powder on my cannons!

 

Religious sight or no, either ye give up the timbers or ye sleep with Davey Jones in the Briney deep - Arrrr.

 

Ok enough play acting.

[Douglas]

Originally posted by sunshadow:

Arrr, set the jib, raise the ring, and bring her along side so they can taste the powder on my cannons!

 

Oh! You have a woman's ring! I'll wager that shiny loop o' metal was never wrenched off the dead finger of a pirate captain after ye just killed 'im with his own wooden leg.

[Dan Weaver]

I retook the test and for some reason I came out as Jubilation T. Cornpone. Please help!

[EchoFiveMike]

Sherman. Could have been worse. S/F..Ken M

[Al]

>Jubilation T. Cornpone<

 

Little known, but highly influential general. Known for developing the "southern" approach

[Lev]

I got Grant, personally I think that makes me a little overrated. OTOH I'm well known locally for high loss rates under my command.

 

"Bring on the reserves!"

[RETAC21]

Classic russian approach!

[Lev]

Originally posted by RETAC21:

Classic russian approach!   

 

If I had gone out touring the troops in my jeep I would have gotten the all-american version of the same approach, Patton

 

 

[Edited by Lev (12 July 2001).]

[Guest Moriartty]

Yeah, too bad Patton's casualty figures never hit "Russian" levels.

 

 

Originally posted by Lev:

  If I had gone out touring the troops in my jeep I would have gotten the all-american version of the same approach, Patton   

 

 

<font size=1>[Edited by Lev (12 July 2001).]

[Lev]

Originally posted by Moriartty:

Yeah, too bad Patton's casualty figures never hit "Russian" levels.

 

Sorry for tarnishing the Patton myth, no reussian would ever come close to his superior skills in command and organization. Not to mention that the thought of a russian general having a similar leadership style to Patton is absolute heresy.

[Guest Moriartty]

Let me think.

 

I can either give a shit what Lev thinks about Patton. OR I could look at what Stalin thought of the man.

 

Gee, rough choice there.

 

Originally posted by Lev:

Sorry for tarnishing the Patton myth, no reussian would ever come close to his superior skills in command and organization. Not to mention that the thought of a russian general having a similar leadership style to Patton is absolute heresy.

[Lev]

Originally posted by Moriartty:

Let me think.

 

I can either give a shit what Lev thinks about Patton. OR I could look at what Stalin thought of the man.

 

Gee, rough choice there.

 

 

You can stick it where the sun don't shine for all I care. Do you now Patton's casualties ratios? Do you know shit about any russian general? I guess I shout bow to your superior, whatever you are superior at, and accept that your judgement is better. Although I haven't the faintest idea what it is.