Genghis Khan>Alexander the Great>Adolf Hitler
PROVE ME WRONG. PRO TIP: YOU FUCKING NIGGERS CANT
ALL HAIL EMPEROR KHAN!
you forgot napoleon, moron.
was so based they took him back off the island, then put him back.
then put his son or someshit into power like 3 times.
He was a mentally unstable idiot. Very overrated. It's like saying Bush was a great leader because America was #1 during his reign. Shit runs itself. France had a colossal demographic power, rigidly trained officers, was an innovating center, had a very high productivity, and the best artillery in Europe.
Anyone capable of getting it out of the instability bullshit would inherit a steamroller. Anyone being, the army, which is essentially what happened. The general doing the coup could have been anyone else.
The revolution brought up meritocracy, which on top of what I said, gave France a colossal edge. If you look at all the battles won in this time, Napoleon was not involved in most of them, and even if greatest victories have the moral and speed of his troops, the competence of his generals, to credit.
>It was the reason he was even popular.
And a certain dark skinned president is popular because he's competent? Or maybe proles and masses aren't good arbitrary measurement of someone's competence.
>He invented a lot of the strategies.
If you read his memories, he stated himself, and insisted that he did not invent anything. He was applying what he would learn and read at the academies, he simply did so consistently and competently for a while, as far as battle strategy was involved. Something most generals had the time in aristocratic Europe were unqualified for.
He was completely clueless when it came to global strategy and diplomacy. His colossal fuck ups with the German princes, Russia, the Ottomans and especially Spain are proof of it.
I fully agree, Genghis Khan and his line conquered the largest area out of any invader. However I think Alexander the great and Hitler should be replaced with, maybe, Julius Caeser and Stalin. My reason being that Alexander the Great died too young to ever fully realize hos potential, and Hitlers attempts at conquest resulted in utter failure.
Also I'm glad that this board might be more than some WWII stormfagging. Cheers anon.
Yeah, but Napoleon ultimately lost, he was successful at times, but ultimately a failure.
I'd agree with Hitler, but at least Alexander the Great left a cultural legacy of Hellenisation behind him.
Literally the only contributions the Mongols made were
>muh freedom of religion
>muh untrammeled Silk Road
And let's be honest, I think most Asians would've much rather paid higher tolls and dealt with dhimmitude than have a fucking Mongol horde rampage through your state
>empire literally collapses unto itself the moment the leader dies
Genghis is the best not because of his empire, but because of his personal achivements.
Who would've believed that an orphan slave boy who got exiled from his own tribe will be one of the topdogs in the list of "the greatest conquerors"?
If this was posted here by some random anon as alt-history, he would be laughed at and get showered with /tg/ links.
>I think most Asians would've much rather paid higher tolls and dealt with dhimmitude than have a fucking Mongol horde rampage through your state
The fuckers almost halved the population of china, how the fuck did they managed to do that?
If i was to say yes would my opinion be discarded?
No he would have won because of his ways of tinking and planning of the battle.
He was at least better then Napoleon in terms of war not diplomacy or intrigue.
MUH HORSE ARCHERS
It was inevitable. Rome in its heyday got smashed at Carrhae by them. The Mongols were just the best at using them a the time because that's the way they lived their entire life. And Genghis was also a good leader that knew how to inspire loyalty in his friends and absolute fear in his enemies.
Hannibal is I think in a good spot, he was able to yes beat the Romans, but unlike Alexander and Scipio he wasn't able to hold of destroy an opposing empire. If anything was to be questioned I think it would be Scipio vs Alexander.
>Rome in its heyday got smashed at Carrhae by them.
Everyone brings this up in the inevitable "Roman legions vs Mongol hordes" althistory wank, but the Persians pretty much got raped in return when they tried to push further into Roman Syria