• @Not_mikey
      link
      English
      201 year ago

      Washington stayed with his troops but kept behind the lines. Western Leaders mostly stopped leading from the front after Gustavas Adolphus got killed doing so.

      • @lunarul
        link
        English
        61 year ago

        Also, Washington had military training and was elected because of his military victories. He didn’t fight as president, he had already resigned his commission by the time he was elected.

      • Khrux
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m British and not that well read on the American Revolution but I was under the impression that he was knows for riding out ahead of his troops? The general tactical decision other US generals kept making was stay in the safety of their forts, but that’s ineffective against the British who have the resources to win every war of attrition, and one of the things Washington was known for was basically pushing his troops out of forts by riding out himself?

        I’m not super well read on it but that’s my understanding, although the flip side, George III and basically every other world leader wouldn’t have done the same, that was just one of those unique things Washington did.

      • @banneryear1868
        link
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Wallenstein still ran like a baby from that battle and was assassinated by his own side over it (allegedly). To think Adolphus would likely have secured Swedish land in mainland Europe…

    • @AngryCommieKender
      link
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      WWI was the last war that the elite fought in. At least in the US, and even then they sent their kids, not the old people that started it.