Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Who, In you're opinion was the best leader ever? In my opinion, Lenin did a good job of making Russia a world power.
At the moment I say Lenin.

GOUGH WHITLAM

I would see Hitler if he wasn't a maniacal, crazy fiend. Had he been less psychotic and of a kinder disposition, I daresay Germany would have had bragging rights...but no, they got screwed instead.

I'll agree with the Lenin statement. He did a lot of good things for Russia- not in the long run, but at the time.

Score:

Lenin: 2
Gough Whitlam:1

Keep it going..

Gough Whitlam euro.

Ech vote counts once, but you can still post, or you may change your vote.

Hm. Otto von Bismarck comes to mind, but I might think of someone else later.

Caesar, of you where a Socialist,
Pompey Magnus if you are a Conservitive
Caligula-Nero-Tiberius if you are a bit into the wacky backy!

Romans have all the answers, honestly though?

Perhaps Bismark, he did alot for his Reich, not that the Prussian Rebels were too pleased!

Hitler is another!

Chairman Mao?

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Caesar, of you where a Socialist,
Pompey Magnus if you are a Conservitive
Caligula-Nero-Tiberius if you are a bit into the wacky backy!

Romans have all the answers, honestly though?

Perhaps Bismark, he did alot for his Reich, not that the Prussian Rebels were too pleased!

Hitler is another!

Chairman Mao?
Mao, are you Kidding?

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Mao, are you Kidding?

Yup! What did he do...diaster!

I'd probably have to say Hitler, he was a very good leader; great public speaker and a pretty decent tactical mind, he pretty much inspired a whole country, shame the bastard was leading the bad guys, good thing he lost the plot near the end of his reign.

Best leader - Hmmm, there were few who could qualify.

Deffinitivly Hitler is one of them. He was one of the greatest leaders.
Alexander the Great would be another.
I would say Stalin too - this guy murdered 40 million people under his rule, yet died of natural causes in his bed - he must have been doing SOMETHING right...

What?

Hitler had one of the greatest tactics ever. The only reason he failed at the end, is because he miscalculated because he became greedy.

Think about the cunning invasion of Czechoslovakia, entering of Austria and later Poland, while allies just sat there watching.
Then consider how he manipulated Mussolini, who for the most part had NO idea what was going on, yet remained Hitler's ally.

As far as tacticians go my personal favourite would have to be Robert E. Lee.

Marcus Aurelius....The last of the great Roman Emperors.

Napolean....Besides the invasion of Russia, he was a great tactician.

Hitler....Brought back Germany as a world power.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What?

Hitler had one of the greatest tactics ever. The only reason he failed at the end, is because he miscalculated because he became greedy.

Think about the cunning invasion of Czechoslovakia, entering of Austria and later Poland, while allies just sat there watching.
Then consider how he manipulated Mussolini, who for the most part had NO idea what was going on, yet remained Hitler's ally.
Austria? He hardly had to ask them to join his effort. They were ok with it from the get-go. Poland? It was a Blitzkrieg, which didn't require any tactics, because it counted on the unbeknownst of the enemy. I don't know if he was good tactically or not in Czech, but from other instances, I doubt it.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What?

Hitler had one of the greatest tactics ever. The only reason he failed at the end, is because he miscalculated because he became greedy.

Think about the cunning invasion of Czechoslovakia, entering of Austria and later Poland, while allies just sat there watching.
Then consider how he manipulated Mussolini, who for the most part had NO idea what was going on, yet remained Hitler's ally.

Someone's been sleeping in history class.

Hitler had no worthwhile tactics to speak of- he relied heavily on the elite cadre of German generals who had learned the brutal lessons of WWI and were in the forefront of reestablishing German military predominance since the dark days of the Weimar republic. People like von Seeckt, Guderan, Student, Beck, and a multitude of other German generals of education did the best laid plans and the overall finetuning of all the wartime efforts. Hitler did little more than point and demand that his generals destroy the opposition. If anything, Hitler repeatedly empeded the better judgment of his elite generals all the time- putting Paulus out in the east, pushing Guderan out of the picture, letting the geniuses behind the Blitzkrieg get dissolved from influence because they did not support his ideals... Hell, if Hitler had listened to Rommel, there would have been armor on Normandy beach!

And Hitler's "cunning" behind Czechoslovakia, the Rhineland, and Austria was a lot more of a gamble than anything else. Poland was more the work of generals Student and Beck, and the clever treaty done by Ribbentrop which divided the country before a shot was even fired.

And I hardly think he manipulated Mussolini; the guy was already way over the top before Hitler even came to power. And it was a thorn in the Nazi side to be helping out the Italians at ever chance, in North Africa, and so on. I mean, Mussolini's troops lost to Ethiopia. And some of the Ethiopians rode on horses and threw spears at plans. The ineptness of the Italian forces in WWII is only surpassed by the sheer idiocy of repeating Napoleon's mistake and attacking Russia just in time to spend Christmas on the Volga.

Oh, and then there's that whole gamble that the Japanese were gonna help counterattack Russia from behind and provide aid.

Really, the genius of Hitler can be best summed up in the burning rubble of Berlin, and in the cries of the civilians and soldiers as the Red Army streamed into their streets. Hitler was a charismatic, powerful political figure. But when it came to war, he was as inefficient as any dictator before him.

Originally posted by Janus Marius

Oh, and then there's that whole gamble that the Japanese were gonna help counterattack Russia from behind and provide aid.

Well, that wasn't exactly Hitler's fault....Japan jumped the gun on his plans, he had to live/deal with what they did. Adding even more pressure on the German troops.

Hitlers biggest mistake however was breaking the non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union.

No, the plan was before then, the Japanese were supposed to attack Russia from the rear beforehand. This was before Pearl Harbor.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
No, the plan was before then, the Japanese were supposed to attack Russia from the rear beforehand. This was before Pearl Harbor.

Yeah, that's what I meant.....Japan jumped the gun on America, by attacking Pearl Harbor.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Someone's been sleeping in history class.

Hitler had no worthwhile tactics to speak of- he relied heavily on the elite cadre of German generals who had learned the brutal lessons of WWI and were in the forefront of reestablishing German military predominance since the dark days of the Weimar republic. People like von Seeckt, Guderan, Student, Beck, and a multitude of other German generals of education did the best laid plans and the overall finetuning of all the wartime efforts. Hitler did little more than point and demand that his generals destroy the opposition. If anything, Hitler repeatedly empeded the better judgment of his elite generals all the time- putting Paulus out in the east, pushing Guderan out of the picture, letting the geniuses behind the Blitzkrieg get dissolved from influence because they did not support his ideals... Hell, if Hitler had listened to Rommel, there would have been armor on Normandy beach!

And Hitler's "cunning" behind Czechoslovakia, the Rhineland, and Austria was a lot more of a gamble than anything else. Poland was more the work of generals Student and Beck, and the clever treaty done by Ribbentrop which divided the country before a shot was even fired.

And I hardly think he manipulated Mussolini; the guy was already way over the top before Hitler even came to power. And it was a thorn in the Nazi side to be helping out the Italians at ever chance, in North Africa, and so on. I mean, Mussolini's troops lost to Ethiopia. And some of the Ethiopians rode on horses and threw spears at plans. The ineptness of the Italian forces in WWII is only surpassed by the sheer idiocy of repeating Napoleon's mistake and attacking Russia just in time to spend Christmas on the Volga.

Oh, and then there's that whole gamble that the Japanese were gonna help counterattack Russia from behind and provide aid.

Really, the genius of Hitler can be best summed up in the burning rubble of Berlin, and in the cries of the civilians and soldiers as the Red Army streamed into their streets. Hitler was a charismatic, powerful political figure. But when it came to war, he was as inefficient as any dictator before him.

And what is it that I said in my previous post that was historically incorrect?

What you said is debatable - a conclusions you drew. What I said is debatable as well, I do not deny that. I have never said anything that did not happen in History, and thus I must have NOT been sleeping in my history lesson.

You think Hitler didn't have tactics - fine. I think he did. You explained why you don;t think he did. I am challanged by your point of view - but I at the same time do not want it down my throat.

Alexander The Great hands down IMO.. I think he could have taken his army's anywhere in the world and been victorious.

Patton. Only General the German's (rightly) feared.

King Leonidas...."Come get them"

In my opinion, if the stories are true, he was one of the most noble Kings ever.

I might be switching opinions to Gorbechev. He got rid of that damn union.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What?

Hitler had one of the greatest tactics ever. The only reason he failed at the end, is because he miscalculated because he became greedy.

Think about the cunning invasion of Czechoslovakia, entering of Austria and later Poland, while allies just sat there watching.
Then consider how he manipulated Mussolini, who for the most part had NO idea what was going on, yet remained Hitler's ally.

Can it be let known that Hitler was not a great tactician. He was foolish,half-witted and NOT general.

Hitler really can attribute his great success to people like Goebbels, Speer, Himmler, Rommel etc etc.

Hitler was an Orator yes, but not a "great tactician"

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Well, that wasn't exactly Hitler's fault....Japan jumped the gun on his plans, he had to live/deal with what they did. Adding even more pressure on the German troops.

Hitlers biggest mistake however was breaking the non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union.
IMO the biggest Mistake he made was trying to fight a two-front war. History shows it just doesn't work.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Can it be let known that Hitler was not a great tactician. He was foolish,half-witted and NOT general.

Hitler really can attribute his great success to people like Goebbels, Speer, Himmler, Rommel etc etc.

Hitler was an Orator yes, but not a "great tactician" I do concur with the idea that his henchmen did a lot of work, and his success depended on it.

Trotsky for example was a great military man, but he had 0 feel for politics - he didn't show up for Lenin's funeral because Stalin told him the wrong date...what an idiot.

I think Mein Kampf did demonstrate that Hitler was not stupid at any rate, and had a set and clear ideology.
I do believe he had tactic - if he was not a good tactician at any rate, he wouldn't have got to where he has...

But sure, war tactics of him are debatable - i will concur.

.................

NO NO NO!

Hitler's hand was forced!

Stalin knew that the Nazi's hated Communism! Everyone did! Stalin knew that Hitler would invade Russia at some point.

BUT

Stalin KNEW that Hitler did not want a war on two fronts like in the FWW and so Stalin expected Hitler not to attack Russia until he had won the war with Britain. However Stalin did not think that Hitler would attack Russia while it had yet to conquer Britain. BUT Hitler knew that Russia was preparing itself for a war with Germany and so Hitler believed, justly, that he had to attack and destroy Russia before Russia was in a position to defend itself, also why the alliance with Japan was so important.
So even though Hitler didn't win the Battle of Britain he HAD to attack Russia!

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
.................

NO NO NO!

Hitler's hand was forced!

Stalin knew that the Nazi's hated Communism! Everyone did! Stalin knew that Hitler would invade Russia at some point.

BUT

Stalin KNEW that Hitler did not want a war on two fronts like in the FWW and so Stalin expected Hitler not to attack Russia until he had won the war with Britain. However Stalin did not think that Hitler would attack Russia while it had yet to conquer Britain. BUT Hitler knew that Russia was preparing itself for a war with Germany and so Hitler believed, justly, that he had to attack and destroy Russia before Russia was in a position to defend itself, also why the alliance with Japan was so important.
So even though Hitler didn't win the Battle of Britain he HAD to attack Russia!
Hitler still had a choice. He could have gone after Russia first with no opposition besides russia, and then continued his war on Democracy. Poor planning on his part, and He let his hate controll his Actions.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I do concur with the idea that his henchmen did a lot of work, and his success depended on it.

Trotsky for example was a great military man, but he had 0 feel for politics - he didn't show up for Lenin's funeral because Stalin told him the wrong date...what an idiot.

I think Mein Kampf did demonstrate that Hitler was not stupid at any rate, and had a set and clear ideology.
I do believe he had tactic - if he was not a good tactician at any rate, he wouldn't have got to where he has...

But sure, war tactics of him are debatable - i will concur.

Mein Kapmf is so boring, lot of thought in it however so I concur with you!

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Hitler still had a choice. He could have gone after Russia first with no opposition besides russia, and then continued his war on Democracy. Poor planning on his part, and He let his hate controll his Actions.
And how was he to get a war with Russia? Would Poland agree to be used as a battleground? I think not.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Mein Kapmf is so boring, lot of thought in it however so I concur with you!


And how was he to get a war with Russia? Would Poland agree to be used as a battleground? I think not.
Ermm..He woul sign an armistice with them until he had defeated Russia.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
And what is it that I said in my previous post that was historically incorrect?

What you said is debatable - a conclusions you drew. What I said is debatable as well, I do not deny that. I have never said anything that did not happen in History, and thus I must have NOT been sleeping in my history lesson.

You think Hitler didn't have tactics - fine. I think he did. You explained why you don;t think he did. I am challanged by your point of view - but I at the same time do not want it down my throat.

Actually, the conclusions I've demonstrated aren't solely my own- they've been shown in numerous works by military historians of the German military of that age. Now, tactics is not just an idea of what you want to do- it's a military science. And Hitler was a lance corporal- he didn't even receive basic officer training. And like I'd said, a lot of times he worked against the better judgment of the OKH and his generals which cost him and later, Germany.

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Ermm..He woul sign an armistice with them until he had defeated Russia.

..............please turn your computer off, really look at what your typing.

Well I just read my replies and I seem like a bit of a foreceful Hitler supporter.

For the record, Im not, but I do still believe he was an intelligent man to have gotten where he has. I do not deny that his success was largely due to his henchmen.

I did think he had tactics (war or otherwise) - but I guess my view was put in a different perspective. I never had the chance (interest) to read further into his war efforts, apart from my A-level history class.

Hitler was a good state leader, meaning he oversaw some of the best infrastructure overhauls in German history, among other things. He also revitalized a dying country after a bitter war. But after Poland, his military strategy started to go down the drain, and he started to argue against the better thoughts of his generals. Hitler may have had his own view of tactics, but as we can see that didn't pan out too well.

Yup!

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Mao, are you Kidding?
For someone who claims Lenin was the world's best leader because thanks to him Russia became one of the world's superpowers, that is indeed a very surprising response.

Originally posted by Eis
For someone who claims Lenin was the world's best leader because thanks to him Russia became one of the world's superpowers, that is indeed a very surprising response.



However, lets be fair, Many of Mao's "plans" were disastrous.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav


However, lets be fair, Many of Mao's "plans" were disastrous.
Doesn't change the fact.

Originally posted by Eis
Doesn't change the fact.

No your right, but well does he qualify as a great leader?

Osceola was a great leader, as he led Native Americans to victory over the United States Army.

Julius Ceaser by far.

Originally posted by Eis
Doesn't change the fact.
The fatc that....What fact? That he was a fascist in control of a oppressive regime? He had good intentions, but was corruspted by power.

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
The fatc that....What fact? That he was a fascist in control of a oppressive regime? He had good intentions, but was corruspted by power.
Doesn't change the fact that your reponse was surprising, painfully obvious, really.

You said Lenin did a good job making Russia a world power. Guess what thanks to Mao, China is now a world superpower as well.

Originally posted by Eis
Doesn't change the fact that your reponse was surprising, painfully obvious, really.

You said Lenin did a good job making Russia a world power. Guess what thanks to Mao, China is now a world superpower as well.
And China was not a superpower before, right? Get you facts straight.

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
And China was not a superpower before, right? Get you facts straight.
What the? You claimed Lenin was the best leader ever because thanks to him Russia became a world superpower. Thanks to Mao, China became a world superpower.
Plus the U.S.S.R. became a major industrial power only after Stalin's 5 year Plan. This was after Lenin's death.

'Lenin emphasized the importance of bringing electricity to all corners of Russia and to modernize industry and agriculture. He was very concerned about creating a free universal health care system for all, the emancipation of women, and teaching the illiterate Russian people to read and write. But first and foremost, the new Bolshevik government needed to take Russia out of the World War.' All Stalin did was build on Lenins foundations and add some extreme marxism in the mix. Mao also essentially followed in Lenin's foot steps since Lenin was the first communist leader. He got Russia to prosper after one of the most brutal deppressions ever created without using war to base his economy.


'After the revolution, Lenin worked hard to combat Anti-Semitism, which was still alive in Russia as a heritage of the tsarist days. In a radio speech in 1919, Lenin said: "The tsarist police, in alliance with the landowners and the capitalists, organized pogroms against the Jews. The landowners and capitalists tried to divert the hatred of the workers and peasants who were tortured by want against the Jews. ... Only the most ignorant and downtrodden people can believe the lies and slander that are spread about the Jews. ... It is not the Jews who are the enemies of the working people. The enemies of the workers are the capitalists of all countries. Among the Jews there are working people, and they form the majority. They are our brothers, who, like us, are oppressed by capital; they are our comrades in the struggle for socialism. ... Shame on accursed tsarism which tortured and persecuted the Jews. Shame on those who foment hatred towards the Jews, who foment hatred towards other nations." '


In my eyes, this sound s like and ideal leader to me.

Guess I was too quick to assume the only reason why you thought Lenin was a great leader was because thanks to him Russia became a world superpower.

Anyway, try not to pull a deano and copy-paste next time. It gives you much more credibility if you type it yourself.

Originally posted by Eis
Guess I was too quick to assume the only reason why you thought Lenin was a great leader was because thanks to him Russia became a world superpower.

Anyway, try not to pull a deano and copy-paste next time. It gives you much more credibility if you type it yourself.

Caeser put foward many reforms in his "republic" generally making life better for the plebs...hence assassination.... so he was as good as lenin in many ways!

Originally posted by Eis
Guess I was too quick to assume the only reason why you thought Lenin was a great leader was because thanks to him Russia became a world superpower.

Anyway, try not to pull a deano and copy-paste next time. It gives you much more credibility if you type it yourself.
I see no need to type something when I can quote.

^My God, those were the EXACT words I was thinking.

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
I see no need to type something when I can quote.

........................ Communist scum!

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
........................ Communist scum! Gotta' love them Commies!

Originally posted by Captain REX
I'll agree with the Lenin statement. He did a lot of good things for Russia- not in the long run, but at the time.

yea he did a lot of good things, altho the shit that happened after his death was something he should forseen and could have planned better.

Originally posted by Fire
yea he did a lot of good things, altho the shit that happened after his death was something he should forseen and could have planned better.
He wrote many political notes before his death warning the other powerful figures to beware of Stalin, but they covered it up.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
........................ Communist scum!

And proud of it!

2 parts democracy:1 part communism:1 part fascism...shake well and...

chugbeer

While many people feel that Julius Caesar was the best leader of Ancient Rome, I would have to argue that it was Augustus (Octavian). He was a better leader because he was able to live long enough to actually lead the Empire. And as for Lenin, his first act was to surrender to Germany in World War I (treaty of brest letovsk) He did not make Russia great, the people of Russia made Russia great. And by the way they were a world power before Lenin (Peter the Great, Catherine the Great)

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
I see no need to type something when I can quote.
Frankly it makes it seem like you found the first pro-Lenin website and quoted things you had never heard of before. Honestly I have to admit, I'm not completely sure that's not the case...

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
He wrote many political notes before his death warning the other powerful figures to beware of Stalin, but they covered it up.

True, but if it was up to me I would have assasinated Stalin, or send him in exile, Tho assasination is better.

Now it really doesn't change the fact that Lening was one of the greatest leaders of all times. All who followed his foodsteps failed (for different reasons tho).

Now about Hitler, I partly agree with Lil stating that Hitler probably did have a specific tactic in his non violent anexations of Austria and Tsjechoslovakia + the neatly orchestrated trick in Poland.

But to me this shows a great political mind, which Hitler was (ofcourse his crew played an important role).

Now his military skills were very very poor, in that area I agree with Bardock. If Hitler had listened to his generals a little more and if he wouldn't have been blinded by hatred so much he would have had some good chances.

I won't debate the military mistakes of the third reich in this thread since it's not the topic.

In final both Lenin and Hitler had the same political flaw, Hitler more than Lenin. Altho with Hitler it had become irrelevant.

The problem is succession. It's a big problem which has haunted almost any great sole ruler.

Is the voting still on? My vote goes for Lenin too, though I wonder what would Salvador Allende have done if Chile weren't taken over like it was...

Frederick The Great of Prussia should definately get an honorable mention.

Originally posted by Tshern
Is the voting still on? My vote goes for Lenin too, though I wonder what would Salvador Allende have done if Chile weren't taken over like it was...
What do you mean? Allende was in office for 3 years, we know what he wanted the country to be like I doubt much would've changed if it weren't for Pinochet and his Junta.

I say Lenin is the better leader but Stalin is the better politician. Stalin was able wiggle his way out of whatever safeguards Lenin put in place to stop him from getting too powerful.

The best leader for me would be . . . . Bill Clinton

Speaking of Russia, dont forget Peter The Great. What a dynamic leader he was.

And also Cathrine The Great, one of the most interesting, industrious and powerful personages to grace the pages of history during the eighteenth century.

I heard rumours that Catherine the Great had sex with horses . . . . izzat true?

Originally posted by Templares
I heard rumours that Catherine the Great had sex with horses . . . . izzat true?

Originally posted by Templares
I heard rumours that Catherine the Great had sex with horses . . . . izzat true?

www.snopes.com

No, it's a myth. Check it out yourself.

Originally posted by Philip_ll
And also Cathrine The Great, one of the most interesting, industrious and powerful personages to grace the pages of history during the eighteenth century.

Wow! I agree bro, Catherine The Great is Definately an angel who deserves representation in some form on here.