The Official Best Leaders Ever Thread

Started by Fatal Smoke4 pages

The Official Best Leaders Ever Thread

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...

Originally posted by §P0oONY
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.

While I will say he had good speech skills, he was a horrid tactitian, leaving men scattered towards the end of the war and letting them die in Russia. Maybe he inspired them, But it's not too hard when you're the Fruer and you can manipulate every part of there lives. He did good for the economy, by getting them out of a horrible debt, but that was at the cost of many lives. He did this by creating Total war, and making concentration camps, which creating jobs. Also he sort of took power by sneeking in. The Nazi party never really said they were anti-jew UNTIL they had full control, and had the president on his backside asking mercy of his life. I'd also like to say, it's a shame the germans where being led by him. He was the bad guy, and if you can't see that, I feal sorry for you.

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.