Worst general of WW1

Douglas Haig is underrated.

Oskar Potoriek is probably the worst. He totally bungled both invasions of Serbia, losing over a third of a million men in a failed attempt to subdue a tiny Balkanshit state. He got fired and never commanded in the field again.

I second this, Hotzendorf was in his own league of incompetence.

Cadorna was a fantastic staff officer and organizer; it was because of him that Italy had the fifth largest artillery stock in Europe, and was able to so quickly raise a decently-trained army. He was just a terrible battlefield commander. Same with Enver Pasha actually. He was largely responsible for the modernization of the Ottoman Army following the Balkan Wars and forged into a force that could give the British and Russian armies a hard fight. But on the battlefield, he was a complete inept who threw away his empire's strongest field army by marching it through hundreds of kilometers of snowy mountainous terrain with insufficient supplies in summer uniforms to attack dug-in Russians in the middle of the winter- suffering 90% casualties, mostly due to the weather.

Is Haig generally considered inept? I thought he prosecuted the war quite ably given the subordinate role of the British on the Western front until 1917. Obviously the Somme was something of a fiasco, but the reasoning behind the offensive was solid, and disaster tho it was it wasn't close to war-losing.

I don't believe there was any general, no matter how much a genius, who, placed at the head of the British Army in 1915, could have made any substantial breakthrough in the German lines sooner than 1918.

>Obviously the Somme was something of a fiasco, but the reasoning behind the offensive was solid, and disaster tho it was it wasn't close to war-losing.

Was it a disaster? I mean the first day, sure. But overall? Expending 620,000 casualties, mostly green men, to inflict 500,000 casualties on the Germans, mostly veterans, seems like a perfectly viable result. Especially when not doing so would mean the Germans could reinforce themselves at Verdun which may very well end the war right there.

>Was it a disaster?
That's the public perception of it and it failed to achieve its material objectives, though it succeeded in its primary purpose of reliving stress on the French lines.

Hötzendorf

>"Nah, man. Like, the French won't fight defensively if we attack them all at once, like what are they going to do, dig foxholes? lol"
This. After victory in previous Franco-Prussian war, germanz ware certain it will be another quick victory.
But frogs pulled their shit together since then, and we had a 5 year conflict that took millions of lives.... But also gave independance to numerous oppressed nations.

CADORNA
A
D
O
R
N
A

Ludendorff managed to beat the Russians twice in 1914 with inferior numbers. Without him, Germany may have lost Eastern Prussia.
He directed many of the following campaigns in the Eastern front. Hidden burg was mostly a communicator and figurehead who rarely collaborated.

Falkenhayn really

Seriously? Strategically he didn't do any worse than any of the other Germans, and the Romanian campaign was genius.

Pershing. Worst? Debatable but certainly most overrated.

>Ludendorf
?? Hitler specifically said he was the one man who--with almost superhuman strength-- tried to save Germany in her hour of greatest humiliation. This is actually where AH first hypothesized about the idea of "the Big Lie" technique-- essentially, hitler opined that your enemy will attack the one man who holds an aura of righteousness with such venom and a lie so gigantic, that the average person will believe it's true since they themselves cannot imagine telling a lie so monstrous...

Fuck off. If Maltka had actually not reduced the right wing by 40% of its intended size they would have won in 1914.

Instead Maltka undermined his own plan by moving troops from the right wing to the left and pushing the French out of Lothringen just because Prince Reprekt bullied him into doing so.

The french moving in to Elsass was perfect for the plan and Maltka decided to push them back by weaking his right wing. Fucking retard.

Yean, no. Which soldier will die like that just because an enemey soldier will also die like that.

Dolce et decorum est pro patria mori

>Thinking his 1918 offensive would work
It almost did. They got into artillery range of Paris.

>Without him, Germany may have lost Eastern Prussia
Debatable, the russians were led by particularly inept generals in 1914

The Russians still crushed the Austro-Hungarians and Ottomans in that year though.

Was Sarikamish the most suicidal offensive in all of the First World War? I know it has stiff competition but I remember thinking, "Nigga, what the fuck are you doing?" when reading about the utterly insane conditions Enver sent his army into.

Hotzendorf's Carpathian offensives were basically "what if Enver did it three times instead of one?".

If at first you dont succeed Try try again

cadorna or hotzendorf

haig wasn't anywhere near as awful

>implying banging on a bunker door with your sword and demand their surrender isn't badass, and requires balls of steel

What about the whole Gallipoli staff?

Haig unironically was one of the most effective generals on the western front.

Beating militaries with even shittier generals does not preclude your military and generals from being shit.

That is true, however, their armies were much bigger than Germany's.
As such, there many (including Chancellor Bethman) who argued to abandon Prussia.
Nicholas II also defended yo push into Germany.
It was Ludendorff 's victory what made them change their minds.

Yo.

enver was based
he captured adrianople during the balkan wars but thats it, he should stay behind his more talented officer, also his whole post ottoman story is worth a read

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basmachi_movement