Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Worst ruler of your country?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 12>
Author
JanusRook View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419
  Quote JanusRook Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Worst ruler of your country?
    Posted: 18-Aug-2004 at 15:18

ANd how possibly Janus, could he further your personal agenda? Unless of course you mean make the US government easier to overthrow?

My personal agenda is totally absent of the US gov't.

That said I prefer slash and burn farming techniques.

 

To Tonifranz: I would like to apologize for saying that Andrew Jackson was a horrible president. He was a horrible person, but his leadership skills were some of the best (Nat'l bank thing still ticks me off, but then again I'm a fan of Alexander Hamilton).

 

Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
  Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2004 at 15:20
Originally posted by Lannes

I'll go with Abe Lincoln, for the killing of hundreds of thousands of his own countrymen.

But seriously, I would say Andrew Jackson.  Mainly for hus authorization of one of the most tragic events in US History(the Indian Removal Act), and for his quick temper(going so far as to duel people on a few occassions).

Heh!  I agree.  Abe Lincoln, for his destruction of the constitution.  He revoked the writ of habeas corpus, even!  I think the South was right, constitutionally, and that he forced the war upon them.

And on Andrew Jackson, too, for the reasons you state and for his handling of the nullification crisis of South Carolina

Back to Top
Tobodai View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
  Quote Tobodai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2004 at 19:26
Originally posted by Lannes

I'll go with Abe Lincoln, for the killing of hundreds of thousands of his own countrymen.

But seriously, I would say Andrew Jackson.  Mainly for hus authorization of one of the most tragic events in US History(the Indian Removal Act), and for his quick temper(going so far as to duel people on a few occassions).

 

hey he killed less than Napoelon, and he was successfull in the end

"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Back to Top
Tonifranz View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Tonifranz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2004 at 19:50

Then you should all say Peter the Great was a horrible leader for killing so many of his fellow Russians, not to mention killing a lot of Swedes and Turks.

Or Julius Caesar the worst Roman leader for killing so many Gauls.

Or James Polk the worst U.S. President for killing so many Mexicans.

Or Bismarck the worst German chancellor for killing so many French, Austrians, Danes, not to mention his own soldiers in three wars.

Or Frederick the Great the worst Prussian king for killing so many Russians, Austrians, Frenchmen, and his fellow Germans.

Or Shi Huandi the worst Chinese Emperor for killing so many scholars.

Or Napoleon I the worst French leader for killing so many Europeans and Frenchmen.

Or Louis XIV the worst French king for killing so many Dutch, Spaniards, Austrians, and his own soldiers in four wars.

Or Charlemagne the worst Frankish Emperor for killing so many Saxons.

Or Diocletian the Worst Roman emperor for killing Christians.

Or Andrew Jackson the worst U.S. President for killing many Indians.

Or Richelieu the worst French statesman for killing so many nobles and Spaniards and prolonging the Thiry Years War resulting in many more deaths.

Or Philip II the worst king of Spain for killing so many Dutchmen, English sailors, Turks, and his fellow Spaniards.

Or Hannibal the worst Carthaginian leader for killing so many Romans and Italians.

Really, killing people makes one a horrible person, but it does not mean that you're a horrible or worst leader because of it. Just because you're a saint doesn't mean you're a great leader, or the best leader.

 



Edited by Tonifranz
Back to Top
Lannes View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 439
  Quote Lannes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2004 at 20:52
Originally posted by Tonifranz

Then you should all say Peter the Great was a horrible leader for killing so many of his fellow Russians, not to mention killing a lot of Swedes and Turks.

Or Julius Caesar the worst Roman leader for killing so many Gauls.

Or James Polk the worst U.S. President for killing so many Mexicans.

Or Bismarck the worst German chancellor for killing so many French, Austrians, Danes, not to mention his own soldiers in three wars.

Or Frederick the Great the worst Prussian king for killing so many Russians, Austrians, Frenchmen, and his fellow Germans.

Or Shi Huandi the worst Chinese Emperor for killing so many scholars.

Or Napoleon I the worst French leader for killing so many Europeans and Frenchmen.

Or Louis XIV the worst French king for killing so many Dutch, Spaniards, Austrians, and his own soldiers in four wars.

Or Charlemagne the worst Frankish Emperor for killing so many Saxons.

Or Diocletian the Worst Roman emperor for killing Christians.

Or Andrew Jackson the worst U.S. President for killing many Indians.

Or Richelieu the worst French statesman for killing so many nobles and Spaniards and prolonging the Thiry Years War resulting in many more deaths.

Or Philip II the worst king of Spain for killing so many Dutchmen, English sailors, Turks, and his fellow Spaniards.

Or Hannibal the worst Carthaginian leader for killing so many Romans and Italians.

Really, killing people makes one a horrible person, but it does not mean that you're a horrible or worst leader because of it. Just because you're a saint doesn't mean you're a great leader, or the best leader.

 

The winking smilie I put was supposed to denote that I wasn't being serious...

τρέφεται δέ, ὤ Σώκρατης, ψυχὴ τίνι;
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2004 at 23:27

"killing people makes one a horrible person"

Not necessarily if it's in a war and must be done, or if you need to kill them to prevent a war.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
Tonifranz View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Tonifranz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 02:04

Originally posted by Lannes

The winking smilie I put was supposed to denote that I wasn't being serious...

Sorry about that, he he. I misread it.


Back to Top
Tobodai View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
  Quote Tobodai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 14:25

No I agree killing people isnt all that bad in the right circumstances, hell alot of my heroes are mass murderes, there just needs to be a good reason, and when there isnt one, its an argument that doesnt work very well.

"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Back to Top
Colchis View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Vatican City State
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 164
  Quote Colchis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 23:13
Originally posted by TheDiplomat

<>

Because your post indicates you have ''hear-say history''knowladge on Ittihat ve Terakki.


And I think yours is pretty much on the "official" side, Diplomat.

I'll only reply to your post very briefly. Before the previous AE went down you had sent me a message on the same topic and I had replied, and rather lengthily at that, so I assume you already know where I stand.

3-When it comes to the ideology of Ittihat ve Terakki,one think should never be forgetten...Ittihat ve Terakki was born to save the empire from collapse with the Identity Ottoman...If you look at Ittihat ve Terakki postcards,you see that they bring together Arabs,Armenians,Kurds,Greeks,Slavs and Turks together under the umbrella of the Ottoman.The allegations of pan-turkish fallacy towards the Ittihat ve Terakki is answered by Cemal Pasha:

''Greeks can open their own schools,found their own national foundation,as well as the Circassian...So are the Bulgarians,Armenians and Macedons..but why is being critisized when the Turks open their own school?''


Ah, but that was only in the beginning, for a brief period of time. Ittihat ve Terakki, or the CUP, cannot be studied in only one period for their official policy changed drastically form their beginning towards the end. As you should be aware, Mustafa Kemal was once a member of the CUP himself and it was him who afterwards criticised them bitterly for their deeds himself mentioning the deportations in the east:

"These left-overs from the former Young Turk Party, who should have been made to account for the millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse, from their homes and massacred, have been restive under the Republican rule." -The Los Angeles Examiner, August 1926.

note: this one is quoted on many resources even though I haven't seen the original copy of the LAE myself. However, I'm almost certain that I can access the archives from NYPL.


5-The Armenian Issue is being generalized..Therefore it cant being understood...but even in 1914,when the kurds of Bitlis rebelled toward the Armenian because of land dispute of a long time,local governor of Ittihat ve Terakki didnt hesitate to distribute weapons to the Armenians of Bitlis in order to defend themselves ..Ofcourse,this cant not tell the whole issue..But it once agains indicates that Ittihat ve Terakki never developed a racist policy...



Enver's quote from 1916: "The Ottoman Empire should be cleaned up of the Armenians and the Lebanese. We have destroyed the former by the sword, we shall destroy the latter through starvation." followed by "I am entirely willing to accept the responsibility myself for everything that has taken place."

CUP tried to deny the massacres before, during the period roughly in 1909 blaming the Sultan and then deposing of him; which they thought would make everything work out fine.


Anyway, to answer the question stated in the topic I agree with Beylerbeyi on this one. I also think that the CUP government, which means the three Pashas as a three-unit dictatorship was possibly the most corrupt government the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic combined has seen. The Menderes government with the 6-7 September incidents and the "Varlik Vergisi", the so-called "wealth tax", which was almost exclusively enforced on minorities, and the Kenan Evren dictatorship during and after the coup in 1980 follows closely.


Edited by Colchis
Back to Top
TheDiplomat View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1988
  Quote TheDiplomat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Aug-2004 at 08:21
Colchis wrote:

''And I think yours is pretty much on the "official" side, Diplomat. ''

A-haa.thats the tactic critic of those who have a bias towards The Turkish History,when they see a person with high-level information and detailed info about the Turkish history!

Sorry to diopponting you Colchis.Now i am gonna prove my resources while you cant rpove anything once again.
My resources:

*Feroz Ahmad(the indian author)-İttihat ve Terakki

*Cemal Paşa'nın Anılari-Turkiye İs Bankasi Yayinlari

*İbrahim Termo'nun Anilari

*Sina Aksin(neednt to say who he is,should i? )

 

Colchis wrote:

''I'll only reply to your post very briefly. Before the previous AE went down you had sent me a message on the same topic and I had replied, and rather lengthily at that, so I assume you already know where I stand.''

no i never got a PM from you??


 

colchis wrote:

''note: this one is quoted on many resources even though I haven't seen the original copy of the LAE myself. However, I'm almost certain that I can access the archives from NYPL. ''

such statement is a product of propaganda without doubt/das ist keine frage/kan'esh'na.Ataturk never made an interview with a person called emile hildebrand.Now i am gonna prove:

The document stating the fact that as simple workers not enough to go out of Zurich,grandfa and father of Emile hildebrand,born in 1941 never set foot on Turkiye in 1926

The document of Switzerland National Library stating the fact no any journalist under the name of Emile hildebrand found.

the article written by James Tashcian and published by the Armenian Weekly in 1982 stating the fact that Ataturk never made such a statement .The author James Tasican,after exposing the armenian propaganda of 1926,was sacked from the Armenian Weekly.

Not suprising isnt it?

 

Dear colchis,

now will you  still believe that Emile hildebrand,born in 1941,could make an interview with Ataturk in 1926?Now will you still believe that a newspaper is a document of truth history?

The choice depends on you!!!


As for your comments on Enver Pasa:

Do you really think that enver pasa was a moron as a politician to make that statement?ıttihat ve terakki wanted toweaken russia.therefore they felt they had to join the war.after the war,they knew that whole world would not be theirs.but they just hıoed to survive by beating english-french and russian imperialistic alliance



Edited by TheDiplomat
ARDA:The best Turkish diplomat ever!

Back to Top
Jagatai Khan View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Jeune Turc

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1270
  Quote Jagatai Khan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Aug-2004 at 09:21

I mean I will not write our worst rulers.I used a shprt sentence.

The only good thing he did was to prevent Turkey from entering WWII. Apart from that, what good did he do really?

(Though I'm not interested in Recent Turkish History...)

He collected tons of gold in Turkish Treasure.It was a bout 150 tons.But Adnan Menderes and his government spent all the gold.Our peopl don't know this,and they say Adnan Menderes fed them.

Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3148
  Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Aug-2004 at 15:53
Originally posted by Ptolemy

 I myself only like Trudeau's non-economic policies.

Well many of his policies did good things for Canada well others not so much. IIRC he was resonsible for Bi-Lingual labels which costs this country a fortune every year. Many of his policies that deal with Quebec are good for Quebec but not so good for the rest of us.

Back to Top
boody4 View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
  Quote boody4 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Aug-2004 at 22:33
For worst Polish ruler, I'd probably say the Comunists?
Back to Top
mauk4678 View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote mauk4678 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2004 at 00:52

I have to say.....George III. YOu know, that whole revolution thing. There is someone who trumps even him though: John Kerry. Althugh I hate to say it, hes probably the next worst ruler.

One a bipolar madman, One an opportunistic gold digger. These guys are in a class all their own.

Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2004 at 05:41

I've read enough sources on Ittihat ve Terakki, both Turkish and independent. It is true that they were formed to save the Empire but they failed miserably at that task, and caused vast human suffering. After their experiment at free elections and pan-ottoman ideology in 1908 failed they quickly seized power and resorted  to tyranny. 

Their pan-Turkish streak or Turkish nationalism developed in time. They tried to force Turkish-language education on Arabs and other muslims, which is hardly 'Turks opening their own schools'. They suppressed Arab protests with violent means. In the end these policies supplied the likes of Lawrence the leverage they needed to pit the Arabs against the Turks. Also, after the war Enver was raising an Army in Turkestan dreaming of Turan- a pan-Turkic empire!

Also, the Armenians were ethnically cleansed from Ottoman Armenia, under direct orders from the Ittihat ve Terakki. No amount of spin can hide this obvious fact. They were primarily responsible for that disaster.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Aug-2004 at 04:16
worst ruler of Australia: George W Bush
Back to Top
Roughneck View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 192
  Quote Roughneck Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Aug-2004 at 16:45
Originally posted by mauk4678

I have to say.....George III. You know, that whole revolution thing. There is someone who trumps even him though: John Kerry. Although I hate to say it, hes probably the next worst ruler.

One a bipolar madman, One an opportunistic gold digger. These guys are in a class all their own.

Ummm, technically, Kerry can't be included, because he's not a ruler yet.  And even then, how the heck can you judge him before he did anything at all?  I even admitted it's too soon to truly judge Bush (although I think I know where he'll be).  Bush CAN'T be worse than Kerry!

[IMG]http://img160.exs.cx/img160/7417/14678932fstore0pc.jpg">
Back to Top
boody4 View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
  Quote boody4 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Aug-2004 at 19:32
How is Bush the worst ruler of Australia............makes no sense.
Back to Top
Gallipoli View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 318
  Quote Gallipoli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2004 at 06:19

USA Lyndon Bailes Johnson: For getting involved in Kennedy's assasination and for continuing the Vietnam War

United Kingdom Tony Blair: For destroying the respect and reputation of a nation which was the empire the sun never faded.

Turkey: The list would go a looong way but here is one person I will never forget Necmettin Erbakan

Italy: Silvio Berlusconi; Forza Italia? 

Germany: No need: Adolf Hitler

Soviet Union: Leonid Brejhnev

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2004 at 09:14

boody4 i was making a satirical comment on the influence he as on the current Australian government  (nudge nudge wink wink)

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.100 seconds.