>Over 200 battles
>Major/minor/duels/outnumbered
>VSing all different of enemies (Roman Byzantine Arabs etc)
>Different terrain (hills mountain deserts snow)
>Never defeated once in his life
>Greatest commander of human history
>Cunning, Ruthless, very intelligent, charismatic
Change my mind
Other urls found in this thread:
towardsdatascience.com
twitter.com
BASED. He is my actual grandfather. My tribe ancestor tracks back to him
He btfo every army in the world at the time
Well duh. Your people have been fucking cousins almost exclusively since time immemorial. You're probably directly related to muhammad, too.
You mad cucknada?
I invaded this niggas base in age of empires 2 with a bunch of siege onagers
I heard the saudi air force is so inbred that they can't see in the dark at all, and you have to fly in foreign contractors to fly your jets because of it.
Iranian propaganda that only cucks would believe
Lebo detected
Where his book? Surely he took the time to record his ideas
Will look into that guy, but it will really hard to change your mind about the greatest general
Based AoE2 user
Checked and redpilled
based and white
At least he didn't let himself get cucked by his own country.
You obese imbeciles can't even deal with Yemen. BTW, Gulf Arab shitholes are more obese than the USA, lol.
No such things as "your own country" back in Roman times, it was very disunified both as a republic and the empire. Julius was killed because he got old, trusting and sloppy
I've read about him and that he also defeated Muhammad, that's why he wanted him to become a muslim so bad
he was decent
>tribe ancestor
Their own people then. Caesar was a decent guy, he wanted to make peace and basically rule Rome without looking like a tyrant, the senators assassinating Caesar were a bunch of overconfident retards who all died, most of them with their family as well, as a result of the assassination. Caesar was immortalized and his family became emperors so even in death he won.
Napoleon is the greatest, I'll hand 2nd to khalid.
Napoleon wouldnt even make top 10
stop sniffing abo
*TELEPORTS BEHIND YOU*
>greatest commander of all time
ahem
"highest WAR (16.679) by a large margin. In fact, the next highest performer, Julius Caesar (7.445 WAR), had less than half the WAR accumulated by Napoleon across his battles. Napoleon benefited from the large number of battles in which he led forces. Among his 43 listed battles, he won 38 and lost only 5. Napoleon overcame difficult odds in 17 of his victories, and commanded at a disadvantage in all 5 of his losses"
Ahuh...
Nah
The Vietnamese general was far more brilliant than this sand nogger
Greatest leader coming through
This, alexander and khalid are close 2nd
you could say khalid is better as he dominated the byzantines who were close to their peak.
I actually wrote a paper on how the Muslims defeated the Byzantium and Sasanid empire. To be honest, he's a decent pick for best commander I would put him in my top 5. If I were to make an argument against him I would point out how much his campaign benefited from external factors beyond his control. The two empires had just exited a very costly war with each other several limiting the forces they could field, there was a huge amount of political fracturing within the empire and the nations was still damage from the black plague that had not affected the Bedouin tribes because of their isolation on the other side of the desert. These factors made it very difficult for the empires to fight the Muslims who they had shown up completely by surprise. These factors made overarching grand strategy planning difficult, as well as presenting problems on the battlefield stemming from conflicts between the commanders (This was a prevalent feature at the Battle of Yarmoouk). It also limited the troops they could field, figuring out troop count is actual super tricky and the most annoying part of researching this topic. The Battle of Yarmouk which was basically the battle that won the war, is a good example of this problem. We have no idea how many people there actually were, some estimates give the Rashidun forces a numerical advantage. The only accounts we have of the battle are the Muslim ones which are likely embellished. In all likelihood the troop count of Yarmouk was probably similar between the two armies with the Caliphate having a slight disadvantage. Similar reporting problems occur throughout the war making specifics difficult to determine.
In addition while the two nations had more soldiers than the caliphate, the Muslim soldiers where better at duelling. Before the actual battle both sides would send out commanders to duel one another, the Muslim soldiers sent forward dominated these duels killing of a huge portion of the commander class of their opponents armies, leaving them with ineffective leadership for the actual battle.
Based Arab bro. A shame he was working for a cult that would ensure the degradation of his genetic people. Irony, and sad.
there is no "best commander" or "best general", the calculations for that depends on infinite causes and can never be measured. instead, there is "one of the best".
>"Submit to Islam and be safe. Or agree to the payment of the Jizya (tax), and you and your people will be under our protection, else you will have only yourself to blame for the consequences, for I bring the men who desire death as ardently as you desire life."
based
>muhammad
>perfect human
>11 wives
>never had a son who could become his successor
>was forced to make his son in law his successor
sorry mussies but your prophet got cucked, he couldn't even have a single son