if Lee and Jackson aren’t Americans, then, yes, I’d certainly include them. An alternative perspective might be:
Grant, Sherman, Yamamoto, Ho Chi Minh and #5.
Cornwallis - commanded the lead division in General Howe pasting of Washington in the Battle of Long Island; but, embarrassed by Washington in New Jersey a few months later.
He again, in command of lead elements, bested Washington at Brandywine and Germantown, and then Washington held him to a standstill at Monmouth.
In the Southern campaign, where he was the overall commander, he achieved two major victories over American forces, but also suffered defeats at Kings Mountain and Cowpens. He then marched north, through the Carolinas and into Virginia, sweeping aside state militias, only to get trapped at Yorktown.
For a commander of British regulars, this mixed record is not very commendable. Add to this his ignominious defeat at Yorktown, on a campaign of dubious strategic importance. So, didn’t include him in the list.
In contrast, the Brits give Washington credit for surviving his many defeats on the battlefield, as well as some draws, because he was able to keep the revolution going.
Ditto, in both our lists, for Ho Chi Minh.
It was a lot easier to keep Santa Ana off the list, since he wasn’t a very good general at all. In contrast, the soldiers of his army, and many of his subordinate commanders fought with distinction. I will mention only the Battle of Churubusco, where the Mexicans held off the Americans until they ran out of ammunition. When the American commander demanded the unexpended ammunition of the Mexicans, their commander replied, “if I had any ammunition, you would not be here.”
“...the Brits give Washington credit for surviving his many defeats on the battlefield, as well as some draws, because he was able to keep the revolution going.”
This is a major point when discussing General Washington. It’s not that he won battle after battle against the British. It is that he survived to fight again and again; by force of will it almost seems. He won because he could not be defeated and won when it most counted - a lot like Ho Chi Minh.
I agree about Santa Ana. Not a great general.
The other great indian foe that I considered was Geronimo, except that he didn’t command large numbers of troops. Tecumseh is a great choice!
How about the British in the War of 1812 as great foes? I don’t know any great British generals to come out of that war, but these were veterans of the Napoleonic Wars and gave the Americans quite a drubbing both in Canada and at home.