Soviet_Guy said:My Analysis
Robert E. Lee No
Julius Caesar Strong Candidate but died too soon
Tadeusz Kosciuszko What were you thinking?
Adolf Hitler Perhaps, but he failed, do you understand that?
Hannibal Excuse me, the Roman Empire slaughtered his army in 100 B.C.
Joan of Arc No, she simply gave her army spirit and fought off the British occupants, that's all
Genghis Khan Don't even try
Atilla the Hun Yes, a very good candidate, but I chose Alexander
Alexander the Great Bingo
Napoleon Bonaparte Also a very good candidate, I just prefer Alexander
My suggestion would have been to have added Augustus, Marcus Arelues and Peter The Great of Russia
Soviet_Guy said:No, his only weakness was impatience.
Just as well, because most were, at the end of the day losersRoundhouse! said:I didn't ask who the most successful was
Soviet Guy said:lol, you wouldn't have a problem with that if you weren't a capitalist
Probably since the beginning of mans ability to record history in one fashion or another.Aleem said:Since when have slaughtering people and occupying nations been considered as an accomplishment or an indicator of greatness ?
GPS_Flex said:No, it’s all about your forum being based upon a childish “same to you but more of it” atmosphere. If you're going to edit what people post in that forum, why would any intelligent person bother with it?
Good luck attracting anyone with an IQ above 100 though.