[February 28, 2026] Victor Davis Hanson, in his analysis of the Second World War (most notably in his book The Second World Wars), argues that the United States military was uniquely successful because it balanced two distinct, often clashing, archetypes of leadership. I found his thoughts intriguing, and I’ll lay out his thoughts here.
Do these two archetypes of leadership still exist? Are they needed in today’s modern military? Most leaders would answer with a firm YES.
Hanson posits that the U.S. didn’t just need brilliant tacticians; it needed a mix of volatile “warriors” and methodical “managers.”
- The “Prancing” Warriors (Tactical Geniuses)
These were the aggressive, charismatic, and often ego-driven leaders. They were the men on the front lines who understood the “visceral” nature of combat. They were essential for breaking enemy morale and achieving rapid breakthroughs, but they were often difficult to manage and politically “incorrect” for the era.
- Characteristics: High-risk, impatient, publicity-seeking, and master tacticians.
- The Archetype: George S. Patton.
- Others in this category: Douglas MacArthur, William “Bull” Halsey, and Curtis LeMay.
- The Role: They provided the “shock and awe” needed to decisively win battles.
- The “Gray” Managers (Logistical Giants)
Hanson notes that the U.S. was the only nation that treated war as a massive corporate and industrial enterprise. These leaders were often soft-spoken, politically savvy, and obsessed with the “boring” details: supply lines, troop rotations, and coalition building.
- Characteristics: Stoic, organizational, diplomatic, and focused on the long-term “math” of the war.
- The Archetype: George C. Marshall.
- Others in this category: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Omar Bradley, and Chester Nimitz.
- The Role: They ensured the warriors had the bullets, fuel, and political cover to do their jobs.
Hanson’s core argument on why this dual system worked is that the Axis powers (Germany and Japan) had plenty of “warriors” but almost no “managers” at the highest levels.
The American system was unique because it allowed the “Gray Managers” to rein in the “Prancing Warriors.” For example, Dwight Eisenhower (the manager) spent significant time managing the explosive personality of George Patton (the warrior). Without the managers, the warriors would have burned out or overextended; without the warriors, the managers would have been too cautious to end the war quickly.
The Hanson Take: The “Gray” officers created the overwhelming material advantage, while the “Prancing” officers applied that advantage with lethal speed.
I believe senior military officers today will recognize Hanson’s arguments and see them as convincing. So, we should ask, “Is it possible for a single officer to be both a ‘Prancing’ Warrior and a ‘Gray’ Manager” at the same time?”
Those who have little understand of what senior leaders look like would do well to read Hanson’s book The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict was Fought and Won (2017).
————
Please read my books:
Now, Gen. Satterfield, this is indeed an interesting breakdown of the major two types of leaders. And in my experience, Prof. Victor Davis Hanson is very perceptive in his look and his thinking on the matter. But, can a leader be both? I wonder. I hope VDH has recovered from his illness, as I pray for his speedy recovery. Some hear say that Trump is the “prancing” warrior (a very fitting term) and I agree. Others say yes but he gets to hire anyone so he hires those who are “gray” managers. Yep, I think this is the description of a great and practical leader. If anyone would like to read about the “gray” managers, then read about what Gen. Satterfield wrote in his first book, “Our Longest Year in Iraq.” Read it, you won’t regret that decision: https://www.amazon.com/Our-Longest-Year-Iraq-Construction/dp/1737915510/
Great book, very much worth getting your own copy, I bought several and give them away to clients as gifts.
President Trump is the George Patton of the political arena. 🇺🇸
I’m pulling for the Iranian people today. And, they have my prayers. 🙏
I’m sure Gen. Satterfield will soon make a comment but I’ll be the first. America’s attack this morning on Iran means we did not choose this moment lightly, but no nation can sit idle while a hostile regime builds weapons and threatens our people and our allies. The strike was not against the Iranian people, but against those in power who have ruled through fear, violence, and intimidation for decades. President Donald Trump made it clear that America stands for strength, not apology, and that peace sometimes requires decisive action. He also spoke directly to the Iranian people, reminding them that their future belongs to them, not to tyrants who hide behind missiles and secret police. America showed the world that freedom still has a defender, and that courage, not hesitation, is what preserves peace.
I wonder what type of leader President Donald Trump is?
BOTH ….. should be obvious.
Donald Trump is a WARRIOR and that’s exactly what we need. He has folks working for him that are great managers. He does the strategy, very bold, and ensures the troops have everything they need to get the job done, including getting rid of stupid DEI flag officers.