» » The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Leaders of All Time
Download The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Leaders of All Time epub book
ISBN:0806524251
Author: Michael L. Lanning
ISBN13: 978-0806524252
Title: The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Leaders of All Time
Format: doc mobi docx txt
ePUB size: 1237 kb
FB2 size: 1499 kb
DJVU size: 1125 kb
Language: English
Category: Military
Publisher: Citadel (October 1, 2002)
Pages: 384

The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Leaders of All Time by Michael L. Lanning



This book is more about the most influential military leaders of all time IN THE WEST. But they are among the greatest and most influential military leaders in world history, far more important than many on Lanning's list. That's what Michael Hart, the originator of the 100 lists, did in his book. Why should Mao be so low ( Wellington be above Marlborough, and Lin Piao and Chiang Kai-shek be even on the list at all? Judging by Lanning's criterion for his rankings, the most influential military leader of all time, in my opinion, is unfortunately Adolf Hitler, whose legacy the whole world will have to live with forever.

The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Military Leaders of All Time. The list below is from the book The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Military Leaders of All Time (Carol Publishing Group/Citadel Press: Secaucus, New Jersey, 1996), written by Michael Lee Lanning. Lanning served as public affairs officer for Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf. He spent more than twenty years on active duty in the .

Plot: Military 100 ranks the top 100 influential military leaders of history. The book contains no plot otherwise. While reading the book there are the few expected genrals, like George Washington and Eisenhower, but ut also views the generals of the "enemies" throughout history like Hitler and Stalin. I found the listing of Joanne The Arc odd, because of the lack of evidence for her very existence. What I did find interesting in this book is the way tactics are described, which is rarely. A look at those leaders from military history who made Michael Lanning's Top 100 list of military commanders; from General Allenby and the WWI campaign in Palestine, to George Washington and the rebellion that established the United States as an independant nation. Nov 12, 2008 Clare rated it it was ok.

Michael Lee Lanning serves as public affairs officer for General H. He has spent more than twenty years on active duty in the United States Army. He has written nine books of military history, including The Military 100 and Senseless Secrets. He lives in Phoenix, Arizona. A rather dismal book on the most influential military commanders of all time. The author is a retired . Army Lt. Colonel of whom I seriously doubt really studied military history much beyond the. Other books by Michael Lee Lanning Title Page Dedication FOREWORD.

The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Leaders of All Time. by Lt. Col. Michale Lanning. Blacks played a significant role in preserving the union in the Civil War and securing their own freedom. From the expanse of the American West to the heights of San Juan Hill, from the trenches of France to the heartlands of Germany and Japan, from the icy mountain ridges of Korea to the thick jungles of Vietnam and the sands of the Persian Gulf, African Americans have performed loyally and bravely. From The African-American Soldier.

a ranking of the most influential military leaders of all time. by Michael Lee Lanning. Published 1996 by Carol Pub. Group in Secaucus, . A Citadel Press book. Military one hundred.

A rather dismal book on the most influential military commanders of all time. Colonel of whom I seriously doubt really studied military history much beyond the book covers. There are several questionable personalities in the rankings. For instance he ranks Baron Jomini at 26 above Marshal Berthier who I consider to have been more influential as he was the founder of the staff system. However the most glaring additions are those of Norman Scharwzkopf and Saddam Hussein at 49 and 81 respectively. The author ranks Scharwzkopf above Konev,Zhukov and Patton

Following list is from a book The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Military Leaders of All Time by Michael Lee Lanning: . eorge Washington . apoleon Bonaparte . lexander the Great . enkhis Khan . ulius Caesar . ustavus Adolphus . rancisco Pizarro . harlemagne . ernando Cortes 1. yrus the Great 1. rederick the Great 1. imon Bolivar 1. illiam the Conqueror 1. dolph Hitler 1. tilla the Hun 1. eorge Catlett Marshall 1. eter the Great 1. wight David Eisenhower 1. liver.

Michael Lee Lanning (. Army, Re. lists the hundred most influential military leaders not by their victories, their combat prowess, or even their legacies, but by the lasting impact that their lives had upon the world, the lives they affected, and the historical significance of their actions in war. Warriors from every corner of the globe and every era are profiled, both glorious and notorious, modern and ancient, good and evil, including: George Washington Attila the Hun Adolf Hitler Napoleon Hannibal Alexander the Great H. Norman Schwarzkopf Ghengis Khan. George S. Patton Sun Tzu Oliver. He is a decorated veteran of the Vietnam War, in which he served as an infantry platoon leader and a company commander.

The Military 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Military Leaders of All Time The African-American Soldier: From Crispus Attucks to Colin Powell. The Battle 100: The Stories Behind History's Most Influential Battles Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks, 2003. Mercenaries: Soldiers of Fortune From Ancient Greece to Today's Private Military Companies. New York; Ballantine, 2005. The Civil War 100: The Stories Behind the Most Influential Battles, People, and Events of the War Between the States. Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks, 2006. The Revolutionary War 100: The Stories Behind the Most Influential Battles, People, and Events of the American Revolution. Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks, 2008. Double T Double Cross.

THEY WERE CONQUERERS. LIBERATORS. HEROES. MADMEN.ALL CHANGED THE WORLD FOREVER ON THE FIELD OF BATTLEThis compelling study by Lt. Col. Michael Lee Lanning (U.S. Army, Ret.) lists the hundred most influential military leaders not by their victories, their combat prowess, or even their legacies, but by the lasting impact that their lives had upon the world, the lives they affected, and the historical significance of their actions in war. Warriors from every corner of the globe and every era are profiled, both glorious and notorious, modern and ancient, good and evil, including:George Washington Attila the Hun Adolf Hitler Napoleon Hannibal Alexander the Great H. Norman Schwarzkopf Ghengis KhanGeorge S. Patton Sun Tzu Oliver CromwellILLUSTRATED WITH PHOTOS AND PORTRAITSLt. Col. Michael Lee Lanning (U.S. Army, Ret.) served as public affairs officer for General H. Norman Schwarzkopf. He has spent more than twenty years on active duty in the U.S. Army. He is a decorated veteran of the Vietnam War, in which he served as an infantry platoon leader and a company commander. The author of twelve books, Lanning lives in Phoenix, Arizona.
Reviews: 7
Manesenci
I've read through all of the comments. Here is my opinion. This author has ranked these great/not so great leaders of the world. Perhaps not the best idea to do that, based on all the comments written about his sequencing of these leaders in whatever order he chose to do so. However, These rankings are "based as much on the influence (I repeat, influence) that each man had on the destiny of the forces and nation he was empowered to lead as on the number and size of his victories". This is clearly written on the inside of the front jacket. I think people are not getting the point. It's a good read and there is as much and more information about each of these leaders on the internet and from other resources. It's fine to make your own judgment of this but have an open mind.
WOGY
"The Military 100" is a list of people in the authors opinion on who the greatest military leaders from history are: akin to Michael Harts book "The 100:A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History". The book is a good idea for spurring discussion of military history.
While I like the idea of his adherence to the idea that war is just politics continued by other means, and thus including a leaders talent for handing political situations... which is why he puts George Washington at the top of the list. But, it seems to me that this is really little more than an excuse to put Washington at the top of the list... for what I would think is really little more than his own patriotic belief in the greatness of America. However, I don't know if Washington really deserves the majority of the credit for the success of the American Revolution. The involvement of the French and the Spanish in the revolution, especially with Naval engagements with the British is at least as important to any of the campaigns in the colonies. Then there is the fact that the British military leadership in the American Revolution war, on the whole, rather lacking.
Yes, later as President, Washington did do much to put the fledging United States on the proper path toward greatness, but Lanning does not apparently consider that when ranking him number one on the list.
Also, I would not even consider folks like Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro for inclusion on a list of Military leaders. It especially seems wrong to rank them above people of most lasting military influence, such as Saladin, Doenitz, Ney or Patton. Hussein was nothing more than a common thug and was not a true military leader in any grand sense, and Castro is interesting, but I don't think him as somebody who is going to have lasting influence.
The inclusion of people like Washington, Hussein, Castro and others such as Hitler and Mao Zedong on the list makes some omissions seem rather glaring as well. Why no Lenin or Stalin or Muhammad? Yes, not true military leaders, but definitely very influential as political and religious leaders and with definite affects on military affairs. I know... the argument would be that Konev and Zhukov made the list and they were more important in the military decisions... but Stalin was at least as involved as Hitler, and more inclined to listen to them, which in the end made Stalin a more formidable long term foe, and Hitler's own Military leaders are also on the list: Guderian, Rommel, Doentiz, etc.
As you can see from my many quibbles, the book does start the discussions it intends too. I would have forseen a rather different list though.
Hono
Most of the reviewers who gave this book a low rating disagree with the rankings. I must say they all have a point. And the point is: we are not going to have a consensus on the rankings.

It's a different matter, however, if there are serious errors. Here's an example. Genghis Khan is claimed by Lanning to have been made universal khan by age 25. That's not what I know: he didn't get this title until he was 40. Lanning says Marlborough was appointed duke by William - but it was Queen Anne who appointed him duke. William only made him earl. Another example: Frederick the Great (#11) was called the most influential one between the time of Marlborough (#31) and the age of Napoleon (#2). Now, Washington falls right into this timeslot and Lanning has already rated him #1! If Frederick WAS the most influential one, then he should precede Washington, which contradicts Lanning's own rankings. Either the author was careless or worse (stupid).

The Eurocentric and American bias is very evident, but I don't blame him for that because this appears in all books of this kind depending on the author's own nationality. This book is more about the most influential military leaders of all time IN THE WEST. Such great military leaders as Muhammad, Qin Shihuang, Thuthmosis III (the Alexander of ancient Egypt), Ramesses II, Ogodai, Kubilai, Zhu Yuangzhang, Toyotomi Hideyoshi - these are not only not ranked, they're not even mentioned. But they are among the greatest and most influential military leaders in world history, far more important than many on Lanning's list.

Lanning's ignorance of the non-Western world is glaring. Certainly I would place Muhammad, who conquered the whole Middle East by the sword, and left a lasting legacy worldwide, way above Saxe (#24), whose name hardly rings a bell. Lanning may not like Muhammad post-9/11, but then he has Hitler on the list. Muhammad's conquests are far more lasting than even Alexander's. Instead, Lanning chooses not to mention his name even once.

Lanning has military experience as an officer in the finest army in the world today. (As a Lt. Col. he is an overkill......even Liddell Hart was a mere Captain.) However, his mistakes can be hair-raising.

My own disagreements with his rankings are numerous:

Why is Stalin not on the list? If Hitler is on the list, then Stalin should be too. The reason for putting Konev above Zhukov is absurd (Zhukov made the Russians triumph over the Nazis, but it was Konev, Lanning argues, who was the head of the Soviet Army after WW2!!). Why is Ernest King not even mentioned, when his influence is as great as Nimitz? Should MacArthur even be on the list? And why so high, at #20? (This spot should go to Omar Bradley.) Where is John Paul Jones? Rundstedt? Mannstein? Constantine the Great? I don't have a serious problem with placing Washington high on the list - but the first place? (Then Cornwallis should be on the list too. His failure was just as influential.) Where is Agrippa, who won the Roman Empire for Augustus? Where is Arminius, who ambushed the invincible Romans and forced them to stay forever west of the Rhine and south of the Danube?

If these great figures in military history are not on the list, then Lanning should explain why, and mention their names. That's what Michael Hart, the originator of the 100 lists, did in his book. Why should Mao be so low (#40), Wellington be above Marlborough, and Lin Piao and Chiang Kai-shek be even on the list at all? Judging by Lanning's criterion for his rankings, the most influential military leader of all time, in my opinion, is unfortunately Adolf Hitler, whose legacy the whole world will have to live with forever.

Missing are sources, bibliography, AND MAPS (a shocking omission for military history).

Also, a separate chapter discussing the sociological and psychological aspects of ranked leaders - to me the most interesting chapter in Michael Hart's original book - would seem absolutely necessary. (Hart even singles out a medical mystery among the great: a high incidence of gout!) Personally I'd be curious to know the relationship between a talent for mathematics and military leadership. There seems to be a correlation. Whether there's a causal relationship is another matter. Certainly Napoleon, Omar Bradley, and U.S. Grant were good at math, as indeed was Washington, who was once a surveyor - a good indication of their high intelligence, at the very least.

I'm unwilling to give this book more than 2.5 stars. If I could rate this book on a 1-10 scale, I'd give it 5. In the spirit of generosity, I'd round it up to 3 stars.