Is Khalid bin walid the greatest military leader ever? His victories

File: Subudei.jpg (120KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 600x900px

Tengri is stronger

>>1449824

>Is Khalid bin walid the greatest military leader ever?

He was damn good, but I wouldn't put him quite there. I'd probably rate Subotai and Napoleon clear ahead, and possibly Alexander and guys like Guo Ziyi ahead of him as well, but I honestly don't know enough about all the campaigns involved to make definitive pronouncements there.

Battle of Yarmouk was pretty impressive. He's in my top 5.

>>1449833
Alexander is the only one there that even comes close, and imo even he falls short. Keep in mind that he led the militaries of some backwater peninsula against the two biggest empires around, and at the same time. There is no comparison.

>>1449824
He's in the top 10.

Of course, Christboos, Byzantiboos, and general people who hate Islam, will try to downplay him with the tired old argument that the Byzantines were "exhausted". Which conveniently ignores their newly reformed armies, led by experienced generals who beat the Sassanids, and the fact that they even outnumbered the Arabs considerably.

>>1449841

So, you mean, like Subotai did? And advancing further and faster?

And let's not forget that Nepoleon existed at a time when everything military was far more professional than it was in the eras previous, and he ran rampant over the biggest, strongest states of his day, and came a damn sight close to becoming European hegemon at a time when Europe was the world, for all intents and purposes.

And you should really look up Ziyi. Anyone whose list of successful campaigns is longer than their list of battles is pretty awesome. Anyone who can march into enemy territory, and force their enemy to be cut off from their own internal supply and surrender is godlike.

>>1449833
>Napoleon
>even in the same league as Alexander or Khalid

>>1449852
Kind of, but he didn't have these insane odds stacked against him like khalid had. Also, he wasn't really in command of all the military like khalid was either. Guess he was a poor Khalid you can say.

Khalid took over persia and large parts of byzantium which, for all intents and purposes, was the world. And he managed to keep the land as well.

Guo is a great general, but he didn't have the insane disadvantage Khalid had.

>>1449875

Napoleon was, IMO, considerably better than either of them. Again, enormously greater caliber of opposition, in a time when professional militaries, at both the officer and the enlisted level were the norm, and he still ran roughshod over all of them, mostly with a levied force. The work he did on logistics alone would make him a military legend.

>>1449879

Khalid was hardly running all the military either. And yes, Ziyi's victories are less impressive on every level except the technical. To win without even fighting a battle is the acme of skill.

Also, you're overlooking several major advantages Khalid did have, both in being able to subvert local populaces over to his side (admittedly, only really in the levant), as well as the extreme effectiveness of the arab archer/dragoon thing that they did, which the Byzzies especially had a very tough time countering even when they weren't facing armies led by Khalid.

>>1449824
Probably the hardest nigga of all time. Just look at that actor. If he looks at my girl, it's his girl now I

File: Maneuver of Muslim army (in red) against the Byzantine convoy (in blue) at the Battle of Maraj-al-Debaj.gif (8KB, 797x581px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 797x581px

yeah he's pretty good. but the whole never defeated thing was bullshit, he lost once in his first fight against the byzantines

File: Maneuver of Muslim army (in red) against the Byzantine (in blue) at the Battle of Walaja.gif (37KB, 800x695px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 800x695px

>>1449972
le tricky light cavalry man face

>>1449972
He wasn't in command in that battle, he only commanded the withrawal, which he succesfully achieved.

>>1449974
Arab'd

>>1449974
>byzantines

this should be the sassanids btw

>>1449824
>beating up two empires that were heavily fucked up already
>Persians on top of that coming off a 7 year plague that literally killed off roughly half their population and multiple civil war
What mighty opponents he faced.

>>1449833
He is considered to be among the greatest military leaders and innovators of all time and is one of several commanders in history who never lost a battle (alongside Alexander the Great, Scipio Africanus, Jan Zizka, Subutai, the Duke of Marlborough, Bai Qi, Alexander Suvorov, Fyodor Ushakov, Yi Sun-Shin, and Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck).

>>1451433
But he did lose a battle

>>1449841
Alexander ended four empires get it right

>>1451460
>4
which ones

File: 647_a1c9d8166645d1d98bb94f1a645661b2r.jpg (108KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1000x750px

ahem

>>1451471
literally who

>>1451497
Read my comment,This man in the picture is one of several commanders who've never lost a single battle in their careers.

>>1449824
Another delusional sand monkey nothing new

>>1451717
go back to /pol you faggot

>>1449824
He gets a little overrated because it's written that the Romans threw 100k soldiers at him at Yarmouk when they could only scrounge up maybe half that number to fight their previous campaign against the Sassanids.

It's still an impressive victory, the the odds were not as stacked against him as Arabs pretended they were. That's the issue with oral histories.

>>1451776
>Only /pol/ hates sand people
Go back to redit or tumbler or wherever the fuck you crawled out of. 4chan has and always will be anti-sand people.

File: Belisarius_mosaic.jpg (694KB, 1104x1160px) Image search: [Google]

694KB, 1104x1160px

He is good, but I would also say that Belisarius is also in the top 5.

>>1449824
>Is Khalid bin walid the greatest military leader ever
No. Not even close desu

Some men are just greater than others.

File: julia.jpg (87KB, 390x513px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 390x513px

this guy

He is definitely a worthy foe, and I respect him.

>>1453623
This nigga reconquered the entire italian peninsula and sicilly.

>>1453566
Modern estimates put the Byzantines at 100k. These are estimates made that most agree is the most accurate. Arabs themselves actually put them at 150k.
>>1453599
4chan is whatever its users wants it to be. And right now we all want you to fuck off if you don't have anything of worth to say.

>>1454145
>we

wew lad. You say that as though /his/ is a single collective mind with all of its users sharing the same opinion.

>>1454161
Fuck off retard
t. another anon

>>1449824
Persian here (in before shitposting about dispora peanut gallery), I think he's amazing but he tends to be a bit over wanked.

>>1454145
Modern estimates? How many of them were professional soldiers and how many were forced or conscripted levies?

>>1453794
*teleports behind you and unsheathes katana
But I am a worthier foe indeed but I am worthier

>>1454178
Sure thing samefag.

btw Kahlid Bin Walid is overrated and did nothing but kill poorly trained conscripts of two empires who had already killed each other's good men and suffered from devastating plagues.

>>1449972
>>1449974
>Knows how to flank
>OMG GUIZE ALLAH IS WITH HIM

>>1454187
This was around year 600, no one had much of a professional army. Also, arabs were made up of different tribes while byzantium had existed for hundreds of years. Byzantines probably had a lot more professional soldiers than arabs had.

>>1454195
No, he used poorly trained conscripts to kill battle hardened soldiers of two empires while being outnumbered 5:1.

>>1454227
>Battle hardened soldiers
All of those would've died killing other battle hardened soldiers years earlier

>>1454227
>battle hardened soldiers of two empires while being outnumbered 5:1.
You mean the leftovers of what was essentially a world war at the time.

He took peasants and used them to kill other peasants from a crumbling empire that barely survived the previous wars.

>>1454239
>>1454238
War produces experienced soldier, ie battle hardened. And no matter how you spin it he defeated an enemy that not only had better soldier but also outnumbered him 5 to one.

>>1454271
Then the Arabs would also be considered battle hardened and not just poor conscripts after their first engagement. A lot of the Arab soldiers might've even taken part in raids before the conflicts with the Byzantines and Persians which should be considered war.

>>1454271
>War produces experienced soldier, ie battle hardened.
Catastrophic war produces a generational gap in the male population. Just look at WW2.

All the experienced soldiers die off and children are used as younger and less qualified people are drafted every year.

Yes, beating two unreplenished, worn out Empires that fought each other for decades just prior to meeting him makes him great. Not.
Heraclius, his campaigns again st Persia are near equal to Caesar.

>>1453751
This guy gets the gold, for sure.

Not only did he subjugate a nation, he also won a war against a general who had been the greatest Rome had ever seen with losing odds.

>>1454329
You mean the two biggest empires around who have a longstanding military tradition and had a war almost 10 years ago?

>>1454321
The war was nowhere near as bad as ww2. They had those kinds of war all the time and had more than enough time to recover from that war.

>>1454301
The arabs might have experience in raiding, but not in big battles. In fact the arabs had very little experience of battles involving such big numbers, but byzantium were bascially experts in it.

>>1454370
>The war was nowhere near as bad as ww2.
It was still one of the most brutal wars of all time considering that it lasted for almost 30 years. Not to mention that the Middle East was left devastated and was one of the factors why they didn't put up resistance against the Arabs.

>>1454223
Doubtful.

>>1454370
As someone mentioned before, the Persians also had not only multiple civil wars over the throne after Khosrau II being deposed by his son, who would die a few months after signing a peace treaty with Heraclius from a plague. The plague and flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates destroyed much of the most vital and important crops and farms in the Sassanid Empire's breadbask provinces, which lasted seven years and lead to roughly half the population dying.

Also I don't think the claim of the Persians or Byzantines constantly mounting hundreds of thousands of men is realistic given the aftermath of the last Byzantine-Persian War and said massive impact of plague on the Persian populace or Eastern Roman troop levels.

>Frederick The Great

>>1454643
They had almost 10 years to recover, which is more than enough time. People use that war as an excuse towards Khalid's success, not wanting to admit that someone can actually be that good.

>>1454694
There was no plague at that time. Searched for it and find no mention of it at all. If you provide source then that's good, else you are a liar about that.

Also, your second claim that they couldn't mount hundreds of thousands of men is opposed by almost every modern scholar in the field. I think I'll take their opinion over yours.

>>1455544

>no mention of plague
Here you go you pleb:

https://books.google.com/books?id=XNmgDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA255&lpg=PA255&dq=heraclius+plague&source=bl&ots=KJhMbGqiyU&sig=TA8xEGfDwz0uTCpB0lgQluuEuT4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi09Lr5qYzOAhUM2SYKHQjbCtUQ6AEINzAF#v=onepage&q=heraclius%20plague&f=false

This bait is terrible

>>1449824
>His victories against the Romans and Persians almost makes me believe he actually had allah behind him.
He also defeated Muhammad at the Battle of Uhud, thus proving that he was better than Allah himself.

>>1454344
>he also won a war against a general who had been the greatest Rome had ever seen with losing odds
What the fuck, Pompey was no better than the likes of Lucullus and Metellus Pius.

>>1456037
Haha, did you just source a book on rome and then hope for the best? There was no plague at that time, you just made that up.

>>1456064
Senpai Mohammed is not the same as Allah. just because Mohammed was as fallible as any man doesn't mean that the god whom he represented was fallible

>>1456064
They lost because of undiciplined archers not staying in their position as commanded by the prophet

File: Screenshot_20160724-120449.png (962KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

962KB, 1440x2560px

>>1456120
Read a book, bigger.
>pic related

>>1449831

is this stance related to any martial arts technique?

>>1456495
It cites a plague that happened 100 year before and then says it was making itself still felt based on nothing. The whole thing seems very biased and trying to give excuses to why the byzantines lost. Also, there was no plague at that time, even this book of yours says that, so you were wrong from the beginning.

>>1456530
I always thought he was in the middle of some smooth dance moves.

>>1456588
Under Umar's rule there was a plague in Syria

Several high ranking governors, commanders and leaders and also companions died (like Abu Ubaydah ibn al Jarrah) it was one of the reasons Muawiyah became the governor of Syria and lead one of the most successful and prosperous times in that area.

File: Screenshot_20160724-125610.png (1MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x2560px

>>1456588
Yes, because recurrent breakouts of diseases never happen. You must be Swede, loving Arab cock this much.

>>1451136
This to be honest, and not even trying to say he doesn't deserve more fame than he has. Khalid ibn Walid is indeed an underrated general but arguing he was the best is contrarian rant.

File: citationneeded.jpg (39KB, 300x190px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 300x190px

>>1455535
> which is more than enough time.

>>1456620
You must be obese and overweight living in your mom's basement with this baseless hate for him. This is discussing history, not politics. I'm discussing his military ability. This is why Khalid is so underrated even though he is one of the few generals that is undefeated. People like you have so much hate for muslims that they can't fathom someone like him so they try to make excuses.

>>1456798
And you refuse to acknowledge all the variables that went into his martial success.

>>1457046
Are you refusing to acknowledge that most of those variables was his skill and prowess in battle?

>>1456798
Well said

>>1454370
Listen, retard.

When you lose almost ever fighting man you have over a 30 year war, you don't recover in ten. Not unless you want to field literal children.


When you lose EVERY Field army, all of your heartlands, and are melting down church ornaments for coinage, and can barely raise 50,000 men to save THE ENTIRE EMPIRE.


You don't just shit out 100,000 fighting men for ONE FUCKING BORDER when you've got several frontiers to defend, all months apart, and all of them with existential threats to your civilization on them.

The manpower isn't there. The frontier zones you get men from were devastated.

The money isn't there. Your richest cites were sacked and raided multiple times, and you've go infrastructure to rebuild.


The fielded 25-50 k to counterattack Persia, and couldn't raise men to lift the siege of Constantinople at all. The army had been absolutely devestated, and would need decades to rebuild.

>>1456120
Are you fucking retarded? Al-tabari's account of a plague hitting the Sassanids has been proven as well as his records matching evidence of inundation and flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. These have been attested and proven so the Sassanids alone here was massively crippled with a huge plague killing roughly half their population.

File: lateantiquelittleiceage_graph.jpg (171KB, 1024x720px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1024x720px

>>1455544
>There was no plague at the time.
Keep telling yourself that.

>>1456798
>muh muslim persecution
Fucking pathetic.
>>1457109
>those variables was his skill and prowess in battle
So you literally don't know what a variable is? Or are you saying his skill was varying and inconsistent?

>>1451497
Suvorov you uncultured swine