Even if it ultimately failed, the whole return, without a shot fired, after two or three small troops had been sent to get rid of him definitely? The show of charisma (and magnificent bastardy) in that episode is just too awesome to pass up.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Even if it ultimately failed, the whole return, without a shot fired, after two or three small troops had been sent to get rid of him definitely? The show of charisma (and magnificent bastardy) in that episode is just too awesome to pass up.
Julius Ceasar,
All the obvious stuff of course, but especially his handling of capture by Pirates in his 20's. When held hostage till a ransom was paid he befriended his captors, while they ate and drank around the camp fire together he was forever telling them 'you know I will come back and kill you all.' Ransom paid, Julius runs off to the nearest large city, raises a troop of Roman's at his own expense, then storms the pirates base. Putting them to the sword and crucifying the rest. Briliant. His only down side was that he was a bit of a dandy.
All the obvious stuff of course, but especially his handling of capture by Pirates in his 20's. When held hostage till a ransom was paid he befriended his captors, while they ate and drank around the camp fire together he was forever telling them 'you know I will come back and kill you all.' Ransom paid, Julius runs off to the nearest large city, raises a troop of Roman's at his own expense, then storms the pirates base. Putting them to the sword and crucifying the rest. Briliant. His only down side was that he was a bit of a dandy.
Well, John Rabe is quite a hero in my book plus there is a kind of aura as we know it from the Greek tragedies about his whole life that fascinates me.
Henri IV of France is also a person I admire greatly. I mean, the guy forged France together after 8 wars of religion sacrificing his own religious creed in the process. A tolerant and benevolent monarch who had quite the luck with ladies I hear.
Henri IV of France is also a person I admire greatly. I mean, the guy forged France together after 8 wars of religion sacrificing his own religious creed in the process. A tolerant and benevolent monarch who had quite the luck with ladies I hear.
So many to choose from.
US Figure. George Washington hands down. Humble in many ways. He was also capable enough when it came to battle to .. well, not allow the destruction of his army against an enemy that knew how to kick ass.
I think the most important part of him however is the fact that he was also fairly politcally astute, in many respects like Eisenhower, able to hold together a rough coalition of armed force.
European Figure- Being of Swedish Descent I've gotta give it to Gustavus Adolphus. I'm not as well schooled in European history, but I'm not totally ignorant either, so I have to wonder what he could have done had he not been killed at a fairly young age. Would Germany look very different from what it is today? He was capable not only militarily, but also politically, and from what little I know, economically.
Asian- Mao.. by far IMO. He was given so many opportunities to fail and managed to stay in the game and finally emerge on top. That alone gives it to the guy. I'm surprised he stayed alive so long!
African-Hannibal, Strategically Brilliance plus lack of other options gives it to him.
Overall-Gotta be a tad bit nationalist here... Washington. How different would the world be without that man? I think that alone makes the decision for me.
US Figure. George Washington hands down. Humble in many ways. He was also capable enough when it came to battle to .. well, not allow the destruction of his army against an enemy that knew how to kick ass.
I think the most important part of him however is the fact that he was also fairly politcally astute, in many respects like Eisenhower, able to hold together a rough coalition of armed force.
European Figure- Being of Swedish Descent I've gotta give it to Gustavus Adolphus. I'm not as well schooled in European history, but I'm not totally ignorant either, so I have to wonder what he could have done had he not been killed at a fairly young age. Would Germany look very different from what it is today? He was capable not only militarily, but also politically, and from what little I know, economically.
Asian- Mao.. by far IMO. He was given so many opportunities to fail and managed to stay in the game and finally emerge on top. That alone gives it to the guy. I'm surprised he stayed alive so long!
African-Hannibal, Strategically Brilliance plus lack of other options gives it to him.
Overall-Gotta be a tad bit nationalist here... Washington. How different would the world be without that man? I think that alone makes the decision for me.
Edward III- He took his kingdom from a relatively minor nation and turned it into the dominant military nation of christendom through a number of wars, had the kings of both Scotland and France captured and in many ways created the idea of the house of commons. He was elected the Holy Roman Emperor but refused, he was one of the greatest English lawmakers among the laws he created was statute of treasons which is still in place today (with a few alterations). To top that list, he is the last common royal ancestor of the English people, being an ancestor of over 98% of them. Probably the worst thing abbout him was not dying sooner.
Nicolai Machiavelli had a such a great mind he is my number one. Theodore Roosevelt is a close second.
Because his later years weren't quite as stellar as his early ones, I'd wager.
Well because in his old age nearly all his friends and companions of his glory years were dead, he toolk an incredibly unpopular mistress whose cronies made him more unpopular and he was to use the words of a contempory "Like a tattered coat upon a stick".Lachlan Smith said:
I think Raoul Wallenberg saved many more people...To be captured and imprisoned by the Soviets.
My favorite historical people because of their deeds:
Ante Starčević
Stjepan Radić-since him we in Croatia didn't have a single fair politician
John Paul II
Jesus
Mahatma Gandhi
M.L.King Junior
Mother Theresa
Churchill-probably the best politician a country can have
Also a lot of various artists,scientists,philosophers and explorers.
Favorites because they are interesting or fascinating (mostly dictators and war criminals):
Hitler-he actually killed 20 millions,not 40.
Stalin
Mao
Mussolini
Aleister Crowley
Tito
Ante Pavelić
Jure Francetić
Rafael Boban
Draža Mihajlović
Tuđman
Milošević
Lenin...
Favorite Historical personality?
Damn...
Well in the "small" history: Paul Emil Von Lettow
No Assistance Needed. Ever.
In the "Grand" History...
Metternich I'd say, or Richelieu
I love backroom plotters
Damn...
Well in the "small" history: Paul Emil Von Lettow
No Assistance Needed. Ever.
In the "Grand" History...
Metternich I'd say, or Richelieu
I love backroom plotters
It has always been said that it's more difficult to be the one behind the throne than the one on it. Yet, I've always felt it's a bit more.. excuse the word, I just can't think of a better one, spineless. It's a convictionless way of ruling a nation. It says "I want things my way, just.. not enough to put my face on it."
Yet for most of those back room plotters it was not an option to "put their face on it". The king was the king, no two ways about it. It was either governing through the monarch or having some other guy governing through the king. In most of these cases there never was an option for them to become kings themselves. And in most cases everyone and their moms knew who ran the show anyway. Considering the risk involved (as shown by the fate of some of these behind the throne rulers) I really cant see how it can be termed spineless.
I had to tease a bit, it's in my blood. It's not spineless, but it can feel that way, especially if that backroom plotter has the capability to take over the throne. I in no way meant all of them, but I'm sure that at least a couple had to have been
Well, half as bad, techically. It seems we've had him wrong all this time.
I for one feel rather ashamed to have previously slandered his fine name.
o
He was much like the Ottoman version of Hitler, actually. Killed hundreds thousands of civilians just because they were from different religious group than the state.
I will put Kemal Ataturk as one of the most prominent characters in history. Building a complete new nation from the ashes and bringing an end to a venerable empire, gaining independence, kicking the sultans out, building a brand new country, a brand new capital, introducing the Turkish language, boosting music, science and arts, and all the people loving him for whatever he did, is no little thing.
Well,Suleyman was a few hundreds of years ago,and Hitler was 65 years ago,so they cant really be compared,and then,if we were going to say Suleyman was like Hitler,then that would probably be true for a lot of pre-20th century rulers...
Ask the pontians and armenians.
oI will put Perikles. He just saved europe and africa from the persians, bah, small things