What's new

List your most favorite Ancient Chinese Generals!

孙子 said that a good general wins first and then fights, and a bad general fights first and then seeks to win. 诸葛亮 was a fool by this standard. He had no regard for people's lives, just his personal glory. He did not know how to manage generals, so 魏延had to rebel. He did not know how to manage supplies. So besides foolish bravery and misguided ambition, what else was he good for? Throughout the Chinese history there had been so many good generals. He is not even close to be in the top 100. If anyone is a good general, it would be 刘备.
According to Sun Tzu, the Shu Kingdom should simply surrender to Wei, since there was no way Shu would have the resources to win. Zhu Geliang was given the mandate to ensuring Shu's survival. His expeditions may have failed, but they were also proactive approaches. If Shu was on the defensive, it could be much more painful as Wei would dictate the pace of the war. Like Rumsfield said, you go to war with the army you have, not the one you want.

No offence, but Sun Tzu's word is not holy text to me. You adapt and you improvise with what you got. Zhu Geliang did exactly that, and shouldn't be consider a failure by any stretch.
 
.
That is right, we only see Zhu not winning hs battles, but have we seen the fact that all his battles were fought dictated by him, and what about all the battles that is never fought through his intervention.

Sun Tzu also said that a good general is not well known for bravery or cleverness, since he did all the background work already prior to facing his enemies, a tough battle is avoided and he did not get the glory than if the struggle was harder.

A good general also do not fight for mere glory.
 
. .
Many? I would have thought Sun Tzu would be required reading for every military academy. The only book that can make you look inteligent just to be seen reading in ;)

sun_tzu_04_paris_hilton.jpg

Paris Hilton can read?:woot:
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom