Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Genghis and Hitler Posted: 19-Nov-2005 at 19:22 |
Originally posted by Murph
i find it interesting that many people somewhat admire genghis khan, but saying the same of hitler would be horrble (i am in no way a hitler sympathizer, i'm just trying to make a point here)
they were both ruthless conquerors who killed millions in the course of their wars.
so what makes it ok to think genghis is cool but hitler is the devil incarnate
is it just that the memory of hitler is too recent... hitler did commit the holocaust, one of the most horrific things ever commited by human beings...but genghis khan slaughtered entire civilizations because he felt like it is it better to kill indiscriminately than to kill for a (very very disturbed) personal belief?
|
The answer of your question maybe this : Ghenghis lived in a barbarian world and with its rules and if we think these medieval rules,these slaugtherings were more naturel but Hitler did everything in a civilizated world and after second world war balance of the world was spoiled.
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Nov-2005 at 08:49 |
Originally posted by Alkiviades
Hitler will gain some popularity in a couple of centuries, rest assured. Distance in time makes us forget the atrocity part and focus on the legend. He'll never get the following Chinghiz has because contrary to the great Khan, Hitler was eventually defeated. Had he succeeded and depopulated eastern Europe to bring in his ubermenschen, I can bet a fair amount of money that in 2-3 centuries he'd be viewed as "the greatest leader of the Germans", just as the genocidal maniac Chinghiz is viewed by our dear MongolHero as "the greatest leader of the Mongols".
History is like that, you know...
|
I agree absolutely, distance in time makes the bad memories fade and leaves us only with drama, excitement, revolutionary change and the world poised for re-alignment. Both men achieved these things, which is why inspite of their atrocious human rights record they will both be remembered with awe once their atrocities are not too close for comfort. You will find the opinion of Hitler somewhat altered once no one is around any longer to tell their grandparents' war stories. He will always be an evil monster, but this characteristic will fade over time.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Nov-2005 at 09:56 |
Originally posted by burkicapraz
The answer of your question maybe this : Ghenghis
lived in a barbarian world and with its rules and if we think these
medieval rules,these slaugtherings were more naturel but Hitler did
everything in a civilizated world and after second world war balance of
the world was spoiled. |
I don't think Genghis' victims considered his behaviour 'natural'.
|
|
yan.
Consul
Joined: 15-Apr-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 352
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Nov-2005 at 14:10 |
Well, sacking cities and massacring the population certainly wasn't that unusual during Chinggis' time. During Hitler's time, it was. I think civilizatory progress really can make a difference here. I don't think it's useful to, say, call Alexander evil for sacking Tyrus either. At his time, he maybe just couldn't know better.
|
|
Imperator Invictus
Caliph
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3151
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Nov-2005 at 15:14 |
..and in fact, Caesar slaughtered a greater percentage of the population in Gaul than Genghis did in his conquests.
I don't think Genghis was especially cruel. Compare him to Tamerlane.
Genghis gets bad press because the Mongols simply conquered more, not
because they were more cruel. If Alexander had conquered the world like
the Mongols did, then all the cities he conquered would've been up in
flames just as well.
Edited by Imperator Invictus
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2005 at 03:03 |
Imperator, I think you are way off here. Alexander HAD conquered the world. He didn't set anything to flames except Persepolis and Tyre - both for good reasons. Plus, he didnt' depopulate the middle east (Chinghiz, no matter how you view him, did depopulate Asia) and he didn't do any large scale massacre. Compare Alexander's victims with Chinghiz's and you'll see that the latter slaughterd 20fold more.
Why such anxiety to defend that monster?
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2005 at 14:18 |
yeah, how come you dare comparing Alexander the civilized greek to that slanted-eye subhuman barbarian called Chingis...
|
|
Imperator Invictus
Caliph
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3151
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2005 at 23:58 |
Ok, I'll stop talking about Alexander. Now let's move on to Chinggiz:
Chinggiz did not depopulate Asia. Do you have evidence to quantify the actual population decrease?
Some comparisons.
1. Barbarian conquest depopulated the Western Roman Empire far more
than Mongol conquest did to China. Civilization "collapsed" in western
europe. Civlization did not collapse in China due to Mongols.
2. When the Han Empire collapsed, heavy warfare ensued and population
declined 40-50%. This amount was greater than the amount of population
decline due to Mongol Conquest.
3. Julius Caesar slaughtered 1/3 of Gaul's population and enslaved
another 1/3. According to Paul Rat..(long russian name), the Jin Empire
lost about 20 million of its 70 million inhabitants during mongol
conquest, a percentage smaller than 1/3.
yeah, how come you dare comparing Alexander the civilized greek to that slanted-eye subhuman barbarian called Chingis... |
Lol I like how you used "Chingis" and not "Iron"-mujin
Edited by Imperator Invictus
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Nov-2005 at 13:56 |
i don't talk of myself in third person
|
|
SaikhaNBayar
Janissary
Joined: 11-Nov-2005
Location: Mongolia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Nov-2005 at 08:46 |
Originally posted by white dragon
sadly enough, i believe there are. fortunatly none on this forum(that i know of) and not many where i live, but they do exist |
I can`t think of the reason why they love Hitler, but i would say They are crazy
|
The 800th Anniversary of the Great Mongolian State. 2006
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2006 at 11:08 |
excuse me but i think this is all bull. the only reason why people
admire genghis khan & not hittler is because hittler lost the war
,had hittler won the war he would be a heroe. Sad as it is history only
loves winners.
Edited by ahiskali
|
|
cg rommel
Shogun
Joined: 12-Dec-2005
Location: Yugoslavia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 244
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2006 at 11:13 |
Nice first post there gisele.....
Anyway about khan.... the fact is he was a military genius, and thats
why i respect him, and well hitler was.... lets say crazy.....
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2006 at 11:49 |
the line between genius and well lets say being a total psychopath is very thin.
I agree with you all the way. genghis khan is a legend. but he was cruel
its good to cruel I think when it comes to to these things. I've got no
respect voor Hittler & i've got nothing BUT respect for the great
KHAN.
but what a wanted to point out was that in history there is no wrong or right only victory or defeat.
Edited by ahiskali
|
|
DayI
Sultan
Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2006 at 11:54 |
Ontopic; I think there where more cruelity outside Chingiz and Hitler, remember the Inca's, Timurlenk, alexander the Gay (sorry a jk), julius Ceasar, etc etc
Edited by Komnenos
|
|
|
GiseleBundchen
Immortal Guard
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2006 at 12:28 |
Jeez, Brian, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!
At least one person on the group has a sense of humour. I was getting worried. I've only been back five minutes (having finally managed to conquer the deadly CompuServe in hand-to-hand combat) and I'm starting to feel like a leper already. Maybe I should start plastering "DANGER!! IRONY ALERT!!" over all my messages.
believe it was the Mongolian Genghis Khan who conquered China and Russia and installed Chinese as bureaucrats to help the Mongols govern Russia for a time...
I believe the German-governed BRITISH (not the people of Great Britain but the rich guys who by-passed so many worthies to find their first King George over in Hanover) governed/explored Russia via the Germans...
I believe further that it was the British/German/Russian Royal Family that sold the once German-governed-British-governed newly "independent" Americans some major real estate...
Edited by GiseleBundchen
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jan-2006 at 06:28 |
Originally posted by Alkiviades
Alexander HAD conquered the world. |
Really?
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jan-2006 at 18:49 |
Originally posted by Detective
Originally posted by Alkiviades
Alexander HAD conquered the world. |
Really?
|
What the Greeks considered the "known" or "civilised" world. By modern standards it would be like conquering everything except Greenland, Siberia, Canada and Antarctica.
|
|
flyingzone
Caliph
Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jan-2006 at 18:54 |
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jan-2006 at 19:18 |
|
|
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jan-2006 at 20:07 |
|
Member of IAEA
|
|