Recently having read Gore Vidal's book 'Burr', Washington come out as a poor military leader, whose terrible military decisions prolonged the American Revolutionary War by years. In fact none of Washington, Jefferson or Hamilton come out as people of virtue and character as per the book.
Not having read that book, I would say you have to consider the source and why they might have come to those conclusions. Now, it's possible Gore is correct, but then again, why are others incorrect in their assertion, if Gore is right?
I disagree, he wasn't a Napolean, but he was a very good general, and after all Napolean didnt fare well in the end.
He was keen and only attached when necessary. Playing the long game against the British that "prolonged the American Revolutionary War by years" was a winning strategy. Better to take a long time to win than to loose quickly.
> Political scientist Bruce Bueno de Mesquita of NYU and co-author of The Spoils of War talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about how presidents go to war. Bueno de Mesquita argues that the decision of how and when to go to war is made in self-interested ways rather than in consideration of what is best for the nation. The discussion includes a revisionist perspective on the presidencies of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and others as Bueno de Mesquita tries to make the case that the reputations of these men are over-inflated.
