Genghis Khan worse than Hitler

Europe - hedonistic hell and demographic extinction? Come on...is that why emigrant from all kinds of Arabic nations try in any possible way to get themselves there? This is beside the point of the OP however

I don't see any conqueror saving anyone from anything - people always fought over resources, not to save the other from some imaginary himself. Nature - maybe, since in nature life is based on death...however, people should have higher aspirations than just animalisticaly following nature.

some actions may seem degenerative but later the history shows those actions were progressive,

some process might seem like chaos but later the history shows it was order of nature, so was for

nomads, their massacre of moslem civilization was an order of nature, as prophet (s.a.v) warned his

descendants to avoid any kinds of stagnations as extreme richness and luxury but khalifs and turks

immersed deeply into richness and failed to lead nations along the way of prophet (s.a.v), for

moslems Chenguizhan was bearer of chaos but actually he was saviour of moslems in the sense of

withdrawing them from absolute degradation, he didn't allow moslems and turks to fall to level of

what is nowdays europe to sink into hedonistic hell and demographic extinction. I think better to

undergo Chinguizhan's invasion rather than to degenerate like western world is degenerating,

better the war than slow death. The same is for Adolf Hitler he waged war against communists, i

like Hitler for that he was the first in the world who created conservation area for wolves, the

population of wolves disappeared in whole europe but Hitler tried to save them. I will always

keep the side of nature, even if there would be no Chenguizhan or Adolf Hitler, any other thing or

anyone else would have occupied their niches, Hitler  challenged Devil to fight as there always will

be someone who will protect the common sense and common sense erupted in form of second world war.

BTW, Welcome to our community Undra.

Chinggis Khan was a nomadic leader who wanted to make Mongolia a glorious country. He had a nomadic life where killing was a kind of a normal way of conquering. But Hitler - he had a modern life where a life was valued - but he killed the innocent people. Hitler is infinitely vicious than Chinggis Khan. C.Khan killed the people who only wanted to fight against him. If they obeyed the simple task, they would have lived normally but with Mongolians owning the land.

Edited by Undra - 15-Nov-2013 at 18:53

Okay um from being a Mongolian and maybe having a biased thought yes chinggis khan was barbaric and yes he did kill a lot of people but he used many different great tactics he was a war chief commander and just saying that he is as brutal as hitler is a little to upfront don't you think I'm not saying either if them were good yes they did have some bad sides and good maybe do a little bit more research before being that upfront

Indirectly, he helped advanced Turkification of previously Indo-European (esp. Persian speaking regions).  Places like Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, northern parts of Afghanistan and Iran.  His armies often killed off a big portion of the Persian speakers in those lands and later his Turkic nomad allies would be rewarded to resettle those lands.

Originally posted by Alcebiades In terms of absolute deaths, the rank is: 1-) Chairman Mao - 60 million people 2-) Josef Stalin - 55 million people 3-) Adolf Hitler- 52 million people Of course that Mao had a bigger base to work with, in terms of kill/total population Stalin wins(I think)

How many people is Genghis believed to have killed? Is it really as much as 10000000?

In terms of absolute deaths, the rank is:

Originally posted by Ruslan let me tell you: if you kill 1 person you are an offender if you kill 100 people you are a hero! if you kill 10000 people you are a king! if you kill 10000000 people you are Genghis Khan!

Originally posted by heyamigos History cannot judge the 2 in the same manner.  Jenghis Khan came from the steppe nomad culture where warfare and killing is the mode of life, whereas Hitler came from a high culture where life should have been valued.  Jenghis Khan would not consciously know what he did was crime to humanity whereas Hitler should know

Germany was also an aggressive and warlike nation in the years leading up to WWII. They missed out when the older powers gobbled up Africa and Asia, so they sought to expand their living space at the expense of the Slavs