The US Army has a rich history, peppered with the stories of great commanders. Entire books have been written about these men, but here are five who deserve extra recognition. That’s not to say that others don’t, but we have limited space. Two of these commanders are essential to any such list. Another is regularly recognized, and I’ve included two who, in my view, are too often overlooked by popular media.
To mark the United States Army’s 250th birthday, I started with a list of twenty-one names, ranging in rank from colonel to General of the Armies. From there, I whittled it down to five, chosen for their accomplishments and influence on the modern U.S. Army. Feel free to disagree.
General George Washington
Any list of top American commanders must include George Washington. It’s not even negotiable.
Washington was not a professional soldier, but he had served in and commanded the Virginia Militia, leading Virginia troops in the French & Indian War. He served alongside British Regulars in that war, learning to respect their toughness, discipline, and overall professionalism. At the same time, he saw firsthand that their European doctrine didn’t always translate well to the vast, underdeveloped North American continent. European troops operating too far from their supply bases were soon at a distinct disadvantage against soldiers fighting on their home turf.
Washington also understood that militias alone couldn’t stand up to British Regulars on the battlefield. He advocated for the creation of the Continental Army, which he organized and trained along professional European lines. The Continentals formed the backbone of the force that won the American Revolution.
the Strategist
Washington was the consummate strategist. He knew his own strengths and weaknesses, and those of his enemies, thanks to his previous experience and a well-developed spy network.
He understood that British troops could not survive long in the field, forcing them to operate in coastal enclaves where the Royal Navy could supply them. But the British supply line was over 3,000 miles long, and much of the imported food was spoiled on arrival. So, Washington kept the British bottled up, denying them access to local supply networks and pressuring their logistical system.
The best path to American victory was not to win battles, though that was great when it happened. The best strategy was not to lose the war. That may sound obvious, but it’s easier said than done. Washington accomplished that goal by employing what’s known as a Fabian Strategy, avoiding battle unless the odds were clearly in his favor.
Even so, he lost more battles than he won, largely due to the British Army’s quality and his own relatively undisciplined militia. But preserving his army forced Great Britain to keep funding an expensive war. That created opportunities when the British inevitably overextended themselves trying to end it. That’s how Yorktown happened, with a big assist from the French.
Washington was our first, and possibly greatest, president. He is also the only president to lead troops in the field as Commander-in-Chief, which he did during the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion. Fortunately, his troops weren’t required to fire on their fellow citizens.
General Ulysses S. Grant
Grant is another non-negotiable inclusion on our list. He was a professional soldier, graduating from West Point in 1843. He served ably in the Mexican War and stayed in the Army. But lonely postings in the California wilderness, away from his family, brought on a drinking problem that ultimately forced his resignation in 1854.
When the Civil War broke out in 1861, Grant petitioned the Governor of Illinois for a commission. He was made a colonel and soon rose to brigadier general. In his first major action, at Belmont, Missouri, Confederate troops cut his force off from its river transports. One of his brigade commanders suggested surrender, but Grant calmly replied that they had cut their way in and they would cut their way out. His troops proceeded to do just that.
Grant is sometimes referred to as “Unconditional Surrender” Grant, an obvious play on his initials. Even though he is famous for the phrase, Grant demanded unconditional surrender exactly once: at Fort Donelson, Tennessee in 1862, when he knew the Confederate commander had no other choice. His victories at Forts Henry and Donelson paved the way for the Union capture of Nashville.
Rising to Prominence
A few months later, the Confederates nearly pushed Grant’s army into the Tennessee River on the first day of the Battle of Shiloh. William T. Sherman said to Grant that evening, “We had the Devil’s own day today.” Grant chewed on his cigar for a moment and replied, “Yeah. Lick ‘em tomorrow though.” And he did. Shiloh opened up the Tennessee Valley and forced the Confederates back into Mississippi.
Grant’s true talent was maneuver. His initial efforts against Belmont and Forts Henry and Donelson were campaigns of maneuver, even though Donelson was briefly besieged. His celebrated Vicksburg Campaign featured maneuver on a grand scale before ending in a successful siege. Vicksburg, not Gettysburg, was the Civil War’s turning point, giving the Union full control of the Mississippi River.
Jealousy among the career Washington generals sparked rumors that Grant had been drunk at Shiloh. Those officers pressured Abraham Lincoln to relieve him, seeing him as a rising star and a threat to their positions. But Lincoln refused. “I cannot spare this man,” the president said. “He fights.” Lincoln named Grant General-in-Chief in early 1864, much to those officers’ chagrin.
A New Way of War
Grant’s Overland Campaign of 1864 was based on maneuver, eventually running Robert E. Lee to ground around Petersburg. His policy of army-sized raids into Confederate territory (think Sherman’s march through Georgia and the Carolinas) was the last leap from occupying territory to destroying the South’s ability to wage war. Grant was among the first commanders to develop this strategic approach.
His philosophy of war was to “Get at the enemy as quick as you can; hit him as hard as you can and keep moving on.” Grant did that better than any general of the Civil War. What set him apart was his determination to carry on. When the Confederates, especially Lee, bloodied other Union commanders’ noses, they withdrew. Grant just kept coming, never letting his opponents regroup. He understood that a Civil War battle was almost as bad for the winners as the losers. He used his superior numbers and better logistics to keep the pressure on Lee.
Grant is considered one of the first “modern” commanders because he understood and embraced the fact that he was making war on Confederate society, not just its army. More than any other Civil War commander, he targeted his enemy’s ability to wage war on every level. Grant was the rare commander who understood and mastered war on all three levels: tactical, operational, and strategic. He went on to serve as President of the United States, and his memoir is one of the finest military records in American history.
General John J. Pershing
John J. Pershing is often overlooked among America’s great commanders. Yet, he was the foremost soldier of his day. His abilities and performance merited a promotion from captain to brigadier general in 1906, skipping the other ranks and jumping 862 senior officers.
After graduating from West Point in 1886, Pershing literally won his spurs in the Indian Wars. He served in the 6th Cavalry Regiment and later the famous 10th Cavalry, more commonly known as the Buffalo Soldiers. His success with the 10th Cavalry earned him the nickname “Black Jack,” which stayed with him the rest of his life, and is now one of American military history’s most revered nicknames.
A Meteoric Rise
Pershing returned to the 10th Cavalry for the Spanish-American War, leading his troops up San Juan Hill alongside Theodore Roosevelt’s Rough Riders. Pershing earned the Silver Star during that action.
He was later sent to the Philippines, where he demonstrated superior leadership and diplomatic skills in dealing with the Muslim Moro tribesmen during the Philippine Insurrection. Pershing stood out because he worked to understand his adversaries by learning their language and reading the Koran. He eventually developed personal relationships with Moro leaders, helping to quell the uprising. His Philippine service brought personal notice from President Roosevelt.
Captain Pershing became Brigadier General Pershing in 1906. 1916 saw Pershing leading the expedition against Mexican bandit Pancho Villa.
World War I and Beyond
When the United States entered World War I the next year, Pershing commanded the American Expeditionary Force in France. The British and French expected the newly arrived Americans to serve under their commands, but Pershing refused. He demanded separate encampments, American training officers and NCOs, and an independent command. Despite Allied grumbling, Pershing got his way. American troops performed well, winning tough engagements at Belleau Wood, Chateau-Thierry, and the Saint-Mihiel Salient. Finally, American forces were instrumental in the successful Meuse-Argonne offensive, which closed out the war.
At war’s end, Congress elevated Pershing to the new rank of General of the Armies, where he oversaw the transition to merit-based promotion and emphasized physical fitness. He also established professional schools for officers, creating the professional Army we know today.
General George C. Marshall
George C. Marshall is perhaps the most important, yet unheralded, American commander of the 20th century. Educated at the Virginia Military Institute, Marshall served as a planner with the American Expeditionary Force in France during World War I. His contribution to the Meuse-Argonne offense led one superior to recommend that “he should be made a brigadier general…and every day this is postponed is a loss to the Army and the nation. He is a military genius.” Despite the recommendation, Marshall did not make brigadier general until 1936.
Marshall clashed with Pershing during the war, defending his division commander against what he thought was unfair criticism by the Commanding General. Pershing admired Marshall’s courage and integrity so much that he had the younger man transferred to his own staff. The two men had a close professional relationship until Pershing’s death in 1948.
He was instrumental in carrying out Pershing’s advocacy of professional training and combat readiness between the World Wars. During his time at the Fort Benning Infantry School, Marshall trained 150 men who became generals in World War II, giving him a unique insight into the men who served under him in that war.
Shaping World War II Strategy
Marshall became the military’s prime policy advocate as the world moved toward war in the 1930s. He convinced President Franklin Roosevelt to ask Congress to expand the defense budget in 1938, allowing the US to be well on the way to full mobilization when the Japanese struck at Pearl Harbor in 1941.
Marshall’s shrewd policies and strict integrity caused Roosevelt to name him Army Chief of Staff, a position he took on the very day that Germany attacked Poland, starting World War II. It was Marshall, along with Admiral Harold Stark, who made US policymakers see World War II and American security through a global lens, as opposed to the narrow isolationism of the interwar years.
We cannot overstate Marshall’s influence on America’s World War II strategy. He had direct access to Roosevelt and often clashed with the President over policy matters. Like Pershing, Roosevelt appreciated Marshall’s blunt honesty. No one ever manipulated Franklin Roosevelt, but Marshall had his ear and exercised considerable influence, often bypassing Secretary of War Henry Stimson.
Roosevelt so depended on Marshall that the president denied him command of Operation Overlord, the 1944 invasion of Normandy. Explaining his decision, Roosevelt said, “Oh George, I didn’t feel I could sleep at ease with you out of Washington.” Despite his bitter disappointment, Marshall continued on, appointing Dwight D. Eisenhower as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe. Marshall became the Army’s first five-star general later that year.
A General Wins the Nobel Peace Prize
General Marshall went on to serve as President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State, where he developed and implemented the European Recovery Program to rebuild the shattered continent. By mid-1952, every Allied nation’s economy had exceeded its pre-war levels. Marshall was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1953 for what is now known as the Marshall Plan.
General Dwight D. Eisenhower
When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, bringing the US into World War II, Brigadier General Dwight D. Eisenhower, despairing of his chances for advancement, wrote a letter to his old friend General George S. Patton. “I suppose it’s too much to hope that I could have a regiment in your division,” he wrote, “but I think I could do a damn good job of commanding a regiment.”
Before he could mail the letter, Ike was summoned to Washington to report to General George C. Marshall. He cursed his luck. He’d been stuck in a staff job during World War I and seen no combat. Eisenhower believed Marshall was about to give him a similar assignment.
But Marshall had identified Eisenhower as an able strategist. Moreover, Marshall believed Ike could lead a multinational alliance while smoothing the inevitable differences between the allies themselves. Ike didn’t know it, but he was on the short list for the top American command in Europe. Marshall asked Eisenhower to broadly outline how he thought they should fight the war. Ike accomplished that in only a couple of hours, and Marshall agreed with the assessment. From then on, Eisenhower took on more and more responsibility, until he was second only to Marshall himself.
For all his accomplishments, Eisenhower never experienced combat up close and never commanded troops in battle at the tactical or operational levels. That didn’t hamper his ability as a strategic-level commander.
Well-Prepared
The British thought Ike a strategic amateur, but he had prepared himself diligently for his task in World War II. During the war, his public relations people depicted him as liking to relax with a cheap Western novel. He probably encouraged that image. In reality, he was a well-traveled and well-read military intellectual.
Ike was once asked in the 1930s why he read so many books on Belgium, Holland, and Luxembourg. He responded that he was learning all he could about where the next big war would be fought. He also read military theorist Carl von Clausewitz’ On War three times, no mean feat in itself. Eisenhower was a thinker, but he got things done where other Allied leaders had failed. He knew what he wanted to do, and he knew how to get it done. Marshall had identified these traits in Eisenhower early on, thanks to his time at Fort Benning.
A Shrewd Commander
Ike shared Marshall’s ability to size up commanders and put them to best use. George Patton is probably the best example. Marshall came under enormous pressure to relieve Patton after several embarrassing, but well-documented incidents. But Eisenhower knew that he would need Patton for the upcoming invasion of Europe. And he knew it more than a year before the Normandy landings took place.
Eisenhower wrote to Marshall that Patton was “admittedly unbalanced but nevertheless aggressive.” In his memoirs, Ike wrote that Patton was “a master of fast and overwhelming pursuit,” and that he was “the finest leader in military pursuit that the United States Army has known.” Patton was a thorn in Eisenhower’s side, but Ike knew he needed Patton to win the war. History shows it was the right decision.
Eisenhower penned two press releases before Operation Overlord. One talked about the operation’s success and extolled the efforts and valor of the troops. The other reported the failure of the landings and placed all the responsibility on himself. There is little doubt that Ike would have been relieved had the landings failed. Failure at that level was not tolerated and since Eisenhower was the commander, he would have shouldered the blame. Marshall would have had to pick up the pieces, whether Roosevelt liked it or not. Happily, the Normandy landings succeeded, and Germany surrendered less than a year later.
The Right Man for the Job
Despite Marshall wanting the Overlord command for himself, Eisenhower was more than capable. Marshall knew that and had known it for some time. Ike was smart but not arrogant; diplomatic but not pliable; loyal but not blindly so. He always had his eyes on the endgame and positioned himself and his command to achieve it.
Eisenhower went on to succeed Harry Truman as President of the United States. His 1961 farewell address is another testament to Ike’s integrity. Do yourself a favor and find it on YouTube. It isn’t long.
Final Thoughts
Each of these men was a superlative commander. Washington, Grant, and Pershing ably led men on the battlefield. Marshall and Eisenhower had different roles but were just as effective and influential. As noted, I considered other names, such as Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, Philip Sheridan, James Gavin, Terry Allen, Norman Schwarzkopf, and many others. George S. Patton, Jr. is probably the most glaring omission. But I don’t feel bad about it because he gets so much attention anyway.
Washington and Grant were always going to be here. I consider them the top two commanders in American history. It’s hard to say which one I think was better. I think I’d choose Washington if I planned to play defense and Grant if I wanted to attack.
My original list included several Confederate officers. But since their most prominent accomplishments were not in service of the US Army, I scratched their names, even though I consider Stonewall Jackson one of American history’s most effective operational-level commanders. He probably wouldn’t have made the cut, however, since his tactical decisions were often subpar.
My final five are all worthy, but they are only representative of the many capable and accomplished commanders throughout US Army history. That proud tradition is now 250 years old. Here’s to another 250. This We’ll Defend.
