Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Attila2
Pretorian
Joined: 03-Oct-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 154
|
Quote Reply
Topic: The most successful leader Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 07:30 |
After choosing the cruelest,its time to elect the most successful one!
waiting for your opinions...
|
|
the Bulgarian
Colonel
Joined: 25-Jul-2005
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 618
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 07:33 |
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 07:41 |
William Wallace and Boudica, now didn't they both lose.
I'd say Alexander, he had the good sense to die, before it all went pear shaped.
|
|
|
giani_82
Shogun
Joined: 28-Apr-2005
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 231
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 07:42 |
The most successful in what - reforming, conquering, establishing a long lived empire? Wallace didn't live long enough to see the results of his campaign, Boadicea failed. IMO Ghengis Khan should be included, and I'll most galdly vote for him - besides expanding the most he managed to secure to some extent the future of his empire.
|
"Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising everytime we fall."
Confucius
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 08:25 |
I would also vote for Chinghiz... this poll lacks about 90% of the most succesful leader ever, while including some who have nothing to do with the word "success"
Of those listed, certainly Alexander is the greatest (and not because he had the sense to die, as Paul said, but because he was the stuff magnanimous leaders are made of)
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 08:40 |
The choice is pretty limited and most were actually not very succesful, so I had to vote for old good Alex.
You could have looked in more succesful leaders such as the first
Caliphs, Octavius, Charlemagne, Washington, Ferdinand of Aragon, Gengis
Khan, Asoka, Stalin, Mao and surely many others. Of your choice, Attila
compares to Alexander but his legacy was even more feeble, Hannibal was
glorious but ultimately failed in achieving his goals, not sure about
the British ones, and, well, Ataturk achieved something but not enough
probably.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 08:53 |
well none of the above is the most succesfull leader in whole history.
alexander didnt actully lead a country he was a great general and a conquerer and didnt live enough to show how his rule would be.
|
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 09:10 |
William the Conqueror.
The dynasty he founded went on to establish the largest empire in history, and still exists, even though the empire has been transformed into a community of equals.
None of the others can claim that. In fact nobody anyone else has mentioned can claim that.
Edited by gcle2003
|
|
Attila2
Pretorian
Joined: 03-Oct-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 154
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 09:37 |
well I just had only 10 slots and I just thought of 8...
and a stupid mistake not to add Cengiz Han too..
sorry for that
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 12:09 |
I think we should count all the leaders starting from acient Egypt and Babylon with monarchs to modern leaders such as Prezident Clinton of United States of America. Different times different leaders. "Managing small same as managing big" Tzun zi
|
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 12:37 |
If leaders then Atatrk. Atleast from that list.
|
|
dirtnap
Colonel
Joined: 28-Mar-2005
Location: Virgin Islands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 605
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 20:16 |
Some of these opinions astonish me as perhaps mine does to others.
Khan was the most successful leader the world has ever seen IMO followed by Alexander.
Edited by dirtnap
|
|
ramin
General
Joined: 16-Feb-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 921
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 01:19 |
Originally posted by Attila2
well I just had only 10 slots and I just thought of 8...
and a stupid mistake not to add Cengiz Han too..
|
but you put Chengis already under the cruelest leaders?!
|
"I won't laugh if a philosophy halves the moon"
|
|
Ahmed The Fighter
Chieftain
Lion of Babylon
Joined: 17-Apr-2005
Location: Iraq
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 05:20 |
Mustafa pasha Ataturk.
|
"May the eyes of cowards never sleep"
Khalid Bin Walid
|
|
Behi
Sultan
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 27-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2268
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 06:03 |
Where is Cyrus the Great's name???
|
|
Chingis
Immortal Guard
Joined: 13-Oct-2005
Location: Mongolia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 06:36 |
All from European empires?
|
The 800th Anniversary of the Great Mongolian State
Great Mongolian State (1206-2006 >>>>>
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 07:25 |
and two turkish and one north african.
|
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 10:24 |
Originally posted by dirtnap
Some of these opinions astonish me as perhaps mine does to others.
Khan was the most successful leader the world has ever seen IMO followed by Alexander. |
No: the two like Atilla and others failed in one thing: to give
continuity to their Empires. They got divided and succumbed after their
death, so they failed in the aftermath.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 10:47 |
That's just innacurate. Chinghiz was succeeded by five Khaghans, I can't see how that is "failing to give continuity to his empire". And, by all means, you can't say his administrative work wasn't superb - even if he was the greatest butcher in history too.
Also, Alexander's empire may have been divided but a)he died before he finished his conquest (not to mention his administrative work) and b)most certainly three centuries of Greek rule from the Tyrrenean sea to Hindu river and from Danube to Nubia, should be accounted for, wouldn't you agree?
Besides, all this is irelevant: the success of a ruler is not measured by the success of his heirs, but of his own. Another prime examples of extraordinary rulers with crappy heirs: Basil Bulgaroktonos has brought Byzantium in its most powerful state... and the two emperors succeeding him lost half the empire because of their incompetence.
Does this mean Basil is not THE most succesful leader of Byzantium?
|
|
dirtnap
Colonel
Joined: 28-Mar-2005
Location: Virgin Islands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 605
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 21:38 |
What Alkiviades perfectly pointed out...
Edited by dirtnap
|
|