Shen Ai wrote:Caesar for me. I think too many see Cao Cao as a military genius who can't be bested by most other political leaders/military generals. Caesar was one of the greats, much better than his peers Crassus and Pompey, especially Pompey.
Politically Cao Cao created a kingdom after the collapse of a major dynasty with rivals everywhere. He did very well, but I wouldn't discount Caesar. The political situation was difficult to say in the least and thus his assassination could be attributed to his greed rather than poor governing.
As for Napoleon. Now he's very good, and charismatic as well. He was prone to making foolish decisions however, and picked fights with the wrong people at the wrong time. Rommel is a great general, not sure about greatest modern, but certainly great. Since the war he fought was rather difficult I don't know how to compare so easily, but i would give it to Rommel, whose advice might have changed the world we live in forever, while Napoleon lost because he acted on impulse.
Shen Ai wrote:I am not at all a fan of Akbar at all. You could say I despise him, but credit is due to him, I would probably say he was just a tad bit better than Emperor Wu for me.
TooMuchBaijiu wrote:and was one of the finest tacticians who ever lived. He just wasn't a great strategist.
Striga wrote:What's the difference in your view?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved