Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Alegandron, post: 2160808, member: 51347&quot;]I agree with many of Brass&#039; observations, some I do not agree with.&nbsp; </p><p>Regarding Tactical Skills, I am more in the camp of the &quot;Illegitimi One&quot;.&nbsp; </p><p>LEADERSHIP is what makes successful Generals.</p><p>I do believe that Hannibal had observed Roman military strategy and tactics after several encounters with the Romans from Spain and several years in Italy.&nbsp; He also understood Roman leadership, and their need to win and impress for glory.&nbsp; I believe at Cannae was a culmination of his brilliant leadership, and seasoned experience fighting the Romans.&nbsp; He specifically placed less seasoned troops into the center and orchestrated the double envelopment, KNOWING that the Romans would chase the routed.&nbsp; </p><p>Regarding Alexandros at Chaeronea, he had just turned 19 and was a bit inexperienced and eager to make his mark.&nbsp; Although he had campaigned in Thrace as &quot;training&quot;, this was one of his first encounters with a capable Greek Army.&nbsp; I believe that, indeed he had madness, and luck was with him.&nbsp; However, Granicus, Issus, Tyre, Gaugemela, Hydaspes, and various other battles proved his combination of genius and madness.&nbsp; His genius was his ability to SEIZE the opportunity during the madness of the battle and MAKE his luck!</p><p>In all cases of all the successful generals:&nbsp; I believe they know luck plays a part in any battle or campaign.&nbsp; However, how they SEIZE the opportunities as luck reveals them, is what makes a brilliant Leader.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in