First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Who was the best leader in all of history?
599 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Connecticut
Offline
Posted 5/21/14
Oh gosh I don't even want to start with Lincoln and the complete LIES that has been fed to Americans. It isn't a coincidence that corporations use the 14th amendment to justify that corporations are "people" too. Smh


The 13th Amendment to the Constitution declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Formally abolishing slavery in the United States, the 13th Amendment was passed by the Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the states on December 6, 1865.

Lincoln never ended slavery, he just took slavery off of the cotton fields of the south and institutionalized it into the Prison systems. Which is why Blacks dominate the prison system today.
19605 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Osaka
Offline
Posted 5/22/14 , edited 5/22/14
People saying Hitler are clueless. Just as the myth about him being the most evillest evillest person who ever lived is a myth, so is it that he was "efficient" or actually personally great as a ruler. Hitler knew little about either economics, history and military operations. He also eradicated German freedoms and started the most terrible, most ill-advised and one of the more unnecessary conflicts the world has ever seen, culminating in years of misery, oppression, genocide, bombing, invasion and partition for his own people and the entirety of Europe. How on earth can you legitimately argue that he was the greatest leader the world has ever seen? Charisma, and the ability to get people to vote for you, do not constitute sound leadership. Honestly...


Not a bad choice. While Alexander was an excellent tactician, I agree that he doesn't seem to have had what it takes to actually rule and govern an empire, too mercurial for that. Though he never really gave himself the chance to do so

I can't for the life of me think of a single one, but I'll give an honorable mention to Cyrus, Augustus, Charlemagne, Henry Plantagenet, Mansa Musa, Suleiman the Magnificent, Tokugawa Ieyasu (wish I knew more about him) Gustavus Adolphus, Louis XIV, Toussaint L'Ouverture, Napoleon (despite the negatives), Mahmud II and Bismarck.
Posted 5/22/14
Churchill. Most leaders just used the power of the empire they took over. But England never stood a chance against Germany.
Posted 5/22/14
Mein Führer.

42532 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 5/22/14
Nelson...Mandela?
4016 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 5/22/14
Peter the Great personally traveled the world, gathering information and technology on how to build, create and invent the industry and technology that Russia did not have. He personally learned carpentry, chemistry and tried just about every other industry that he brought home with him. He singlehandedly brought Russia into the Industrial Revolution, moved and rebuilt a new capital city and palace, and refused to let his son take over the Country because he did not think he was good enough to handle it.
Posted 5/22/14 , edited 5/22/14
Darn that Joseph McCarthy.
28029 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
? / ? / ?
Offline
Posted 5/22/14

Blunts- wrote:

Jesus Christ. He even split the ocean into two so he could arrogantly walk through it like a fukin boss.


Please tell me you're joking.
Posted 5/22/14

Mugen417 wrote:


lordnolan wrote:

Alexander The Great. In 13 years he conquered the known world and then some. He crushed the Persian empire and solidified the unity of Greece all without any modern technology. He led his armies from the front instead of ordering them around like most leaders and spread Greek culture across the globe. He never lost a battle and its is said Julius Caesar wept in front of a statue of Alexander the Great, realizing that where Alexander had conquered most of the known world at thirty, he had accomplished comparatively little. There are other great leaders out there, but Alexander is pretty tough to beat.



I have to STRONGLY DISAGREE with everyone who claims Alexander the Great as being one of the greatest leaders, as he didn't live long enough to even LEAD what he took control of. All he could do was fight and win wars, but as soon as his armies could not expand anymore, he lost his life and his so called kingdom quickly collapsed along with him.

Cyrus the Great, the first and TRUE leader to earn the title "THE GREAT" was a role model of leaders. He was first to introduce a humanitarian style of leadership during a time of great Brutality. The Jewish people who were persecuted for many years considered him to be a messiah, and HE WASN'T EVEN JEWISH.

Plus it should be known that without Cyrus creating the Massive Persian Empire, the first TRULY COSMOPOLITAN EMPIRE OF ITS KIND, Alexander the Great would not have been able to conquer as large an area as he did. Once Alexander destroyed Persepolis, the rest of the empire came along with it. As soon as his troops came in contact with disorganized and "uncivilized" tribes near India, his forces REFUSED to continue forward (Some leader he was). Soon after, Alexander died from what I believe were battle wounds (He wasn't that bright either).

History has a way of whitewashing events (300, the movie about Sparta comes to mind) where Western civilization dominates all others when this is not true. In my opinion Alexander the Great really was not that GREAT when compared to Cyrus the Great in terms of leadership. Cyrus created an empire that lasted for GENERATIONS after his death. Alexander's so called empire didn't even stand more than a FEW YEARS after his death. Again I emphasize, Just because he was able to conquer a large geographic area at a young age PROVES NOTHING EXCEPT THAT HE CAN WIN WARS. THAT'S IT. That in NO WAY makes some one a GREAT LEADER. AT ALL.



Thank you for so calmly stating that.
Posted 5/22/14


Madoka became god for your SINS!
28029 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
? / ? / ?
Offline
Posted 5/22/14 , edited 5/22/14
You seem sarcastic, but I'm pretty sure he/she/it actually was calm stating that. Those underlines and bold typefaces are simply for emphasis, those are the key points of their argument, not just them randomly bolding and underling words.
28029 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
? / ? / ?
Offline
Posted 5/22/14
Ill explain this right now, no leader, so far, stated in this thread even compares to my favorite leader.
Not only are they a great, but they turned one of the most impoverished, smallest territories into a country of fear and respect.

At the start of their career, they defeated the most strategical genius in the world in an all out war.

Then after becoming a bit more known, they defeated a great enemy who had a upper hand, due to the fact that they were leeching off of a supreme power just bordering off their own land.

As a result of that victory, they brought fame to their name, and were named king. When they became king, they created an agricultural system to provide greater nourishment to their people, as well as a budgeting system to stimulate the countries broken down economy. With the economy, and nourishment of their people increasing steadily, they also raised the moral of the entire country.

Next, the ended up challenging another superior enemy, an enemy so powerful they were known as "God Slayers". After letting their battle go on for a while, they stalled the battle to make the enemy let down their guard, and finally tricked the "God Slayers" into creating their own demise.

As of now, they are currently on the verge of another great battle, and of course they will emerge the victorious underdog once again.


Of course, Im talking about the one, the only, the greatest leader of them all [ ]
17562 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F / Los Angeles
Offline
Posted 5/22/14 , edited 5/22/14
I couldn't really argue who the best is because there were so many different great leaders in different ways. My favorite by far is Theodore Roosevelt.
1103 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Some place that m...
Offline
Posted 5/22/14

KarasuEL wrote:

Ill explain this right now, no leader, so far, stated in this thread even compares to my favorite leader.
Not only are they a great, but they turned one of the most impoverished, smallest territories into a country of fear and respect.

At the start of their career, they defeated the most strategical genius in the world in an all out war.

Then after becoming a bit more known, they defeated a great enemy who had a upper hand, due to the fact that they were leeching off of a supreme power just bordering off their own land.

As a result of that victory, they brought fame to their name, and were named king. When they became king, they created an agricultural system to provide greater nourishment to their people, as well as a budgeting system to stimulate the countries broken down economy. With the economy, and nourishment of their people increasing steadily, they also raised the moral of the entire country.

Next, the ended up challenging another superior enemy, an enemy so powerful they were known as "God Slayers". After letting their battle go on for a while, they stalled the battle to make the enemy let down their guard, and finally tricked the "God Slayers" into creating their own demise.

As of now, they are currently on the verge of another great battle, and of course they will emerge the victorious underdog once again.


Of course, Im talking about the one, the only, the greatest leader of them all [ ]



This... is the truth of the world...
26434 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Future Gadget Lab...
Offline
Posted 5/22/14 , edited 5/22/14
Hitler definitely had some merit for leadership in the sense that he knew how to manage a government, restore an economy, and persuade the people towards his beliefs and his ideal sense of nationalism, and for that, I must concede that he did a good job despite how horrific a man he was. Hitler turned himself around, from a mere prisoner writing a book about his idea of a perfect world to a man who could hold the very fate of Germany and even the world in his hands. He was influential, charismatic, and managed to perfect Fascism in a form unmatched by other, similar dictators. To Germany, he was a savior; to the world, he would be one of humankind's biggest threats.

However, I cannot agree that Hitler was a good military leader, and so I cannot agree that he is one of the greatest leaders to have existed because being a good military leader was crucial for the position he was in as a Fascist ruler.

He should have maintained the non-aggression pact as long as he could with Russia and shouldn't have been so eager to invade Russia until he had finally conquered Britain or at least has broken the stalemate between Germany and Britain. The fact that he also thought he could take Russia quickly was undermining Russia's military size and Stalin's ruthlessness towards his own people's welfare, and furthermore shows arrogance to German capacity at the time (now, it is true that Germany had an excellent military, but they were under prepared for Russian winters, and Napoleon's campaign as well as the German campaign during World War I are both amazing examples of undermining Russian winters). Hitler also ignored one of the most basic rules of warfare that costed him too many of his troops, that being the besieging of cities, notably Stalingrad (the turning-point of the war, no less).

I would argue that Hitler sending ill-prepared troops invading Russia prematurely is what costed him the war, and the only real reason Hitler had for invading Russia so pre-maturely would be because of his twisted ideologies. Yes, the very thing that made Hitler a fantastic leader in the sense of politics and of persuasion is the very thing that guaranteed his own downfall: his absolute hatred of Communists and his eagerness to exterminate them.

DISCLAIMER: I am not endorsing him in any way, shape, or form. He was a horrible man and deserved his fate; I am merely discussing him objectively and for intellectual purposes solely.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.