0
The difference between a general and commander is more simple than you think, they are in two different ranks but the name commander can be used as a general too.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoYes. A commander in the Navy is equivalent to Lt Colonel in the Army. The lowest rank of general is 2 ranks higher than the commander.
Wiki User
∙ 10y agoA naval commander is lower rank than a naval captain, but higher than an army captain
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoCommander is not an Army rank.
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoipe
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoYes
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Is a Lt higher than a Lt commander?
no a lt general is higher
Who has the most human authority in the world?
Authority tends to be local in nature, however, the Secretary General of the United Nations has global authority. In any given country, there will be someone who is in charge of that country and whose authority locally is greater than that of the Secretary General.
What is the definition of higher authority?
A person or some people that has more authority than you or has authority over you.
Does a game warden have more authority then the president?
A game warden does not have more authority than the president. The president is the highest authority in a country.
Who led the Roman army?
The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.The Romans did not have a commander in chief as we know it, although at the time of the principate you could say that the emperor was the commander in chief. Their system worked differently than ours. For example, when there was trouble, the senate would appoint a general and give him a number of legions or give him the authority to raise new legions. The fellow appointed general was the commander in chief of the legions under his command, but of no others. Pompey and Caesar are examples. each man had his legions and was commander in chief of them and no others.
Who has more authority FBI or a Sgt in the army?
Their authorities are completely different. In general however, the FBI agent can have much more negative impact on the average person's life than a sergeant in the army.
Who was the first Confederate General to die in battle?
Robert S. Garrett holds that distinction. The most important Southern General killed was Albert Sidney Johnson at Shiloh. At the time of his death, he was considered the best commander in the South, possibly the most talented commander in either army. Davis thought more highly of him than he did of Lee.
Was abraham lincoln a general during the civil war?
No, he was the president through most of the war, thus he was the commander and chief of military services -- higher than a general.
How did Truman use his constitutional authority during the Korean war?
As the "Commander-in-Chief" of all U.S. military, he overruled General Douglas MacArthur on aggresive campaign plans to capture and occuply North Korea rather than just stop North Korean incursion into South Korea.
Does the inferior courts have more authority than the supreme court?
No
Is horatio nelson the best naval commander?
sure, if you think so, in general yes, but my view is yi sun sin, his battle of myeongyang in my opinion has much more tatical depth than the battle of tranfaglar
What US Civil War general was the most offensive minded commander?
The most aggressive and offensive minded general in the US Civil War was General US Grant. He was even more offensive minded than General Lee. The one notable exception was the first day of fighting at the Battle of Shiloh. On day two of that battle he resumed the offensive.
