Genghis Khan

[KingBeasley08]

Is he the GOAT alpha male in human history?

-Started from the bottom
-Ended up taking over a huge part of Eurasia
-Banged so many women that he makes Wilt look like a virgin

Only con was that the dude was nuts and destroying the House of Wisdom and thus Arab science

Is there anyone who can stake a claim?

[JohnFreeman]

Caesar maybe?

[Nick Young]

he tops the GOAT human list IMO.
1/16th of Asians today are directly related to him. Sometimes I've heard that statistic as high as 1/8.

He's the best IMO because he started out in a ruthless backwater horse shaman culture where everyone backstabbed and killed eachother. He united all the Mongol tribes who had been warring and infighting for thousands of years, and from there he used them to take over the world. Truly a story of a man coming from nothing and taking everything.

My favorite story is how he wiped out an entire civilization and had them written out of history just because they killed one of his messengers. That's where the phrase "Don't shoot the messenger" comes from. That's like some Darth Vader destroying Alderaan level shit, only it happened in real life.

GOAT HUMAN.

[KingBeasley08]

he tops the GOAT human list IMO.
1/16th of Asians today are directly related to him. Sometimes I've heard that statistic as high as 1/8.
:eek: :applause:

[MrC1991]

If I could meet anyone from human history he'd easily be one of them.

[russwest0]

Nah, dude was a 5'8 manlet

[Nick Young]

Nah, dude was a 5'8 manlet
5'8 was like 7'2 in the 1100s:rockon:

[KingBeasley08]

He's probably the reason that the Middle East is so fcked. If anyone is interested in learning about him listen to the podcast "hardcore history" by dan carlin.
Now back to the question. He sure makes a strong case for it. Dude was ****ing up empires and had real military strategies that are still used today. Alexander the Great makes a case too but I am pretty sure he was a homo. So yeah khan is the GOAT manly man. He spread his seed so much that a considerably large amount of people in the Mandarin speaking areas still carry his DNA. Dude was a beast.
Yep, pretty crazy if you think about it.

Before Genghis Khan: Middle East was a place full of intellectuals and some of the brightest, secular thinkers in the World

After Genghis Khan: Absolute shithole, all their research and notes destroyed, hasn't recovered since

[JohnFreeman]

Hitler was pretty alpha

[KingBeasley08]

Hitler was pretty alpha
Nah, he was pretty charismatic but a really shitty military mind and pretty much made a series of massive mistakes that lead to his "thousand year empire" ending in a few :oldlol:

Stalin, on the other hand, was pretty damn alpha. Can't lie

[JohnFreeman]

Nah, he was pretty charismatic but a really shitty military mind and pretty much made a series of massive mistakes that lead to his "thousand year empire" ending in a few :oldlol:

Stalin, on the other hand, was pretty damn alpha. Can't lie
Hitler was a great leader though, and taking on the whole of Europe?

[DonDadda59]

Stalin, on the other hand, was pretty damn alpha. Can't lie

And handsome as phuck.

http://caliperwake.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Young-Stalin-2.jpg

Dude looks like he just got back from a one direction audition http://vz.iminent.com/vz/6ebff618-071f-4f30-bb49-9aef1d1cf46c/2/2d-yellow-smiley-heart-eyes.gif

[kNIOKAS]

Didn't know this thread was sociopaths getting called GOAT human beings.

[LJJ]

Only con was that the dude was nuts and destroying the House of Wisdom and thus Arab science

Is there anyone who can stake a claim?

This entire Genghis Khan destroyed the Arab world and science is such nonsense.

First of all, the sacking of Baghdad happened 30 years after Genghis Khan's death. That was Hellegu Khan, not Genghis.

More importantly science in the Islamic world experienced a revolution during the mid 700s and peaked during the 800s. By the time the Mongols reared their heads it's 300-400 years later. The Abbasid caliphate was on it's last legs, largely usurped by feuding tribes that didn't give a shit about science and the Abbasids had mostly stopped giving a shit too. Sure there was a nice library, but Baghdad certainly was not a thriving scientific place full of intellectuals during it's sacking.

[Sarcastic]

His stats are just a product of his era. A modern Seal Team 6 could easily wipe out the entire Mongolian Army.

[East_Stone_Ya]

him and Alexander the Great are the most alpha commanders in history

[JohnFreeman]

His stats are just a product of his era. A modern Seal Team 6 could easily wipe out the entire Mongolian Army.
They couldn't carry enough ammo, that mongol army was massive

[Sarcastic]

They couldn't carry enough ammo, that mongol army was massive

Pfft. The Conquistadors decimated the Native Tribes of America with guns that took a minute to load.

[Nick Young]

Didn't know this thread was sociopaths getting called GOAT human beings.
Most great CEOs are political leaders today are sociopaths or otherwise lack empathy.

Ghengis Khan was not a sociopath. He just didnt give a single phuck about anything or anyone.

[Nick Young]

Pfft. The Conquistadors decimated the Native Tribes of America with guns that took a minute to load.
These mongols had a technique that they were able to shoot 3 arrows in 1.5 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zGnxeSbb3g

Only unlike this guy they could do it accurately from moving horseback.

When they did the rain of arrows technique they could launch them 300 yards pretty accurately.

Add to this intense street hunger, born from growing up in the harshest climate on earth in the most cut-throat society on Earth.

They grew up learning how to ride horses since before they could walk.

Back in those days, horses were the equivelant of tanks on the battle field.

Each soldier had atleast three horses so he could keep rotating them so they were always fresh for battle.

Imagine thousands of these guys, united unquestioningly under one leader.

That leader was one of the greatest military minds of all time.

These guys were not shit Aztecs who just used stone bludgeons and wore jaguar skin as armour.

[JohnFreeman]

Pfft. The Conquistadors decimated the Native Tribes of America with guns that took a minute to load.
You are underestimating how good the Mongols were, they were born to fight.

[Denitron]

Is he the GOAT alpha male in human history?

Is there anyone who can stake a claim?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vBiEgTy2Xqc/T1976SeSKFI/AAAAAAAAA2A/ZJ1TE-LrI7Y/s1600/IpKat%2B23%2B-%2Bmichael%2Bjordan%2Bbulls.jpg

http://oi46.tinypic.com/1499fy8.jpg

[JohnFreeman]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vBiEgTy2Xqc/T1976SeSKFI/AAAAAAAAA2A/ZJ1TE-LrI7Y/s1600/IpKat%2B23%2B-%2Bmichael%2Bjordan%2Bbulls.jpg

http://oi46.tinypic.com/1499fy8.jpg
Jordan never killed anyone apart from his father

[CelticBaller]

Jordan never killed anyone apart from his father
thats so messed up it aint even funny

[mr.big35]

There are minority of eastern european people that look asian becuase of him. there is one girl from eastern europe she has the asian features even though none of her parents are asian

[nathanjizzle]

in the later stages of his rule, he tried to invade vietnam and failed. Good thing im not related to that scum bag.

also one little anecdote. It seems like war mongering back then is the equivalent to billionaire CEO's in present day. Ghengis was the Bill Gates of his time.

[mr.big35]

you will find odd families in eastern europe that has mongol features

[Nick Young]

in the later stages of his rule, he tried to invade vietnam and failed. Good thing im not related to that scum bag.

also one little anecdote. It seems like war mongering back then is the equivalent to billionaire CEO's in present day. Ghengis was the Bill Gates of his time.
Ghengis Khan is humanity's GOAT reformer, conquerer and empire unifier.

If I was you, I'd wish he had invaded Vietnam successfully because it would mean I would have a good shot at having his blessed DNA.


Why do you think China kicks so much ass these days? Many of them have Khan blood flowing through them.

Ghengis legacy of domination will continue on when China takes over as the next global super power.

[MightyWhitey]

Is he the GOAT alpha male in human history?

-Started from the bottom
-Ended up taking over a huge part of Eurasia
-Banged so many women that he makes Wilt look like a virgin

Only con was that the dude was nuts and destroying the House of Wisdom and thus Arab science

Is there anyone who can stake a claim?
Alexander the Great fought real opposition though. He had to battle the Greek city-states who were lead by the Athenians. He had to continuously push back against neighboring Thracians and Illyrians while mobilizing to fight against the Persians. And finally, Darius and his Perisans, the most powerful kingdom of the time. Alexander had less men but was still able to beat Darius and become the new King of Kings.

Caesar would be a close 2nd. Constantine the Great would be a 3rd. Genghis would maybe be top 10.

[MightyWhitey]

Ghengis legacy of domination will continue on when China takes over as the next global super power.
http://i1167.photobucket.com/albums/q633/RhapidKid/bocca-meme-generator-yeah-right-030038.jpg (http://media.photobucket.com/user/RhapidKid/media/bocca-meme-generator-yeah-right-030038.jpg.html)

[MightyWhitey]

Yep, pretty crazy if you think about it.

Before Genghis Khan: Middle East was a place full of intellectuals and some of the brightest, secular thinkers in the World

After Genghis Khan: Absolute shithole, all their research and notes destroyed, hasn't recovered since
That's where Alexander has Genghis Khan. His kingdom stretched into 3 continents.

[East_Stone_Ya]

you will find odd families in eastern europe that has mongol features

this is not because of that. It's due to the fact that Soviet Union purposely populated some territories with different nationalities

[Dresta]

This entire Genghis Khan destroyed the Arab world and science is such nonsense.

First of all, the sacking of Baghdad happened 30 years after Genghis Khan's death. That was Hellegu Khan, not Genghis.

More importantly science in the Islamic world experienced a revolution during the mid 700s and peaked during the 800s. By the time the Mongols reared their heads it's 300-400 years later. The Abbasid caliphate was on it's last legs, largely usurped by feuding tribes that didn't give a shit about science and the Abbasids had mostly stopped giving a shit too. Sure there was a nice library, but Baghdad certainly was not a thriving scientific place full of intellectuals during it's sacking.
This is very true. According to Gibbon, Hellegu built a pyramid of 100,000 heads on the ruins of Baghdad; don't even think Genghis was that dramatically vicious.

And then it's not like Muhammed hadn't earlier gone around conquering everyone offering only 'the sword/the koran/or the tribute' to his opponents, and before him the groundwork was laid by other earlier conquests (forget by whom though). In fact, Muhammed could be termed the 'GOAT Alpha male' - was an illiterate goat-herder, who managed to conquer vast areas in short spaces of time, and who laid down his own principles as eternal, so much so that they still have a huge army of followers today. All this while managing to keep 11 wives and innumerable concubines. Guy was a boss.
That's where Alexander has Genghis Khan. His kingdom stretched into 3 continents.
Alexander does have the benefit of his conquests being generally helpful to humankind, in allowing the spread and proliferation of hellenistic principles and culture that might otherwise have been lost.

[KingBeasley08]

This entire Genghis Khan destroyed the Arab world and science is such nonsense.

First of all, the sacking of Baghdad happened 30 years after Genghis Khan's death. That was Hellegu Khan, not Genghis.

More importantly science in the Islamic world experienced a revolution during the mid 700s and peaked during the 800s. By the time the Mongols reared their heads it's 300-400 years later. The Abbasid caliphate was on it's last legs, largely usurped by feuding tribes that didn't give a shit about science and the Abbasids had mostly stopped giving a shit too. Sure there was a nice library, but Baghdad certainly was not a thriving scientific place full of intellectuals during it's sacking.
Very interesting, didn't know that. Thank you

[KingBeasley08]

Alexander the Great fought real opposition though. He had to battle the Greek city-states who were lead by the Athenians. He had to continuously push back against neighboring Thracians and Illyrians while mobilizing to fight against the Persians. And finally, Darius and his Perisans, the most powerful kingdom of the time. Alexander had less men but was still able to beat Darius and become the new King of Kings.

Caesar would be a close 2nd. Constantine the Great would be a 3rd. Genghis would maybe be top 10.
Alexander the Great was gifted a nice army by his pops doe. Philip II pretty much gave him all the Greek city-states to fight with. Alexander the Great def had a bigger influence on the world but he's nowhere near Genghis in terms of being an alpha male

Dresta: Muhammad is a pretty good pick too and could easily have the title as well. Was basically Jesus except instead of the religion becoming big hundreds of years after his death, it became big in his lifetime :applause:

[Nick Young]

Alexander the Great fought real opposition though. He had to battle the Greek city-states who were lead by the Athenians. He had to continuously push back against neighboring Thracians and Illyrians while mobilizing to fight against the Persians. And finally, Darius and his Perisans, the most powerful kingdom of the time. Alexander had less men but was still able to beat Darius and become the new King of Kings.

Caesar would be a close 2nd. Constantine the Great would be a 3rd. Genghis would maybe be top 10.
Brah-Ghengis fought against the Chinese, the most technologically advanced military in the world AND the goddamn great wall of China.

[Nick Young]

This is very true. According to Gibbon, Hellegu built a pyramid of 100,000 heads on the ruins of Baghdad; don't even think Genghis was that dramatically vicious.

And then it's not like Muhammed hadn't earlier gone around conquering everyone offering only 'the sword/the koran/or the tribute' to his opponents, and before him the groundwork was laid by other earlier conquests (forget by whom though). In fact, Muhammed could be termed the 'GOAT Alpha male' - was an illiterate goat-herder, who managed to conquer vast areas in short spaces of time, and who laid down his own principles as eternal, so much so that they still have a huge army of followers today. All this while managing to keep 11 wives and innumerable concubines. Guy was a boss.
Alexander does have the benefit of his conquests being generally helpful to humankind, in allowing the spread and proliferation of hellenistic principles and culture that might otherwise have been lost.
Bruh-Ghengis spread every countries ideas from one side of Asia to the East of Europe. Every culture he went to, he took all the good ideas and spread them throughout his empire, and eliminated the shit parts. He is the greatest reformer in the world, and best of all his empire was run through pure meritocracy. Anyone could rise through the ranks if they were qualified enough at what they did. Ghengis Khan was also incredibly progressive in the field of RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE. Every religion was accepted equally.

He wasn't a dumb stinky horsemonger. He was an all around genius leader, in terms of both conquering an empire and keeping it moving forward and united. He was a combination of all the greatest leaders before him mixed with the perfect amount of ruthless Machiavellianism that all great leaders require. We will never see another on his level.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Mongol_Empire_map.gif

[TheMan]

And handsome as phuck.

http://caliperwake.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Young-Stalin-2.jpg

Dude looks like he just got back from a one direction audition http://vz.iminent.com/vz/6ebff618-071f-4f30-bb49-9aef1d1cf46c/2/2d-yellow-smiley-heart-eyes.gif
80's porn 'stache FTW:applause:

[TheMan]

Pfft. The Conquistadors decimated the Native Tribes of America with guns that took a minute to load.
Actually, diseases brought from the Old World to the New World is what brought down the Aztec Empire. Read a history book.

[OhNoTimNoSho]

He killed his older brother when he was 9 years old for stealing a fish from him. Thats boss.

[Trollsmasher]

in the later stages of his rule, he tried to invade vietnam and failed. Good thing im not related to that scum bag.

also one little anecdote. It seems like war mongering back then is the equivalent to billionaire CEO's in present day. Ghengis was the Bill Gates of his time.
Mongols generally stopped where the steppes stopped.

That's why they never tried to get past Hungary in Europe, got obliterated in India and Vietnam, had to buy the Koreans and completly embarassed themselves trying to invade Japan.

The conquest of China is impressive though.

[MightyWhitey]

Alexander the Great was gifted a nice army by his pops doe. Philip II pretty much gave him all the Greek city-states to fight with. Alexander the Great def had a bigger influence on the world but he's nowhere near Genghis in terms of being an alpha male
He was considered the greatest General and Conqueror of all time by rulers from all times and continents like Julius Caesar and the Sultan Mehmet II. He gets the adulation and praise from these great rulers which is Alpha. I have never read any great leader use similar language when it came to Genghis or any Khan after him.
He built cities and named them after him (Alexandria in Egypt for example)
He was a heavy drinker and drank from a large cup humorously called "the cup of Hercules". Alpha at its finest right there.
On his deathbed he was asked whom he would give his Kingdom to and he said "To the strongest'. That right there is the most Alpha Male you can get. The man was admired, considered the greatest (hence the Great in his name) was a drinker and stayed strong and true till the end. Genghis who?

[MightyWhitey]

Brah-Ghengis fought against the Chinese, the most technologically advanced military in the world AND the goddamn great wall of China.
:lol Show me where he defeated the All time greatest like Alexander did with Darius and then we'll talk. Alexander beat Darius' Persians, who outnumbered his army greatly btw, and took the mantle as "King of Kings"! Bruh this is the greatest conqueror of ALL TIME. I have read many books about Alexander and all historians are pretty much in agreement. There is a reason why there are 10 new history books written on Alexander the Great every year. He is still admired to this day as the greatest of all time.

[rezznor]

inspired by Genghis

http://media.giphy.com/media/rjsZfIrX0BG4E/giphy.gif

[kNIOKAS]

There are minority of eastern european people that look asian becuase of him. there is one girl from eastern europe she has the asian features even though none of her parents are asian
Hm maybe because she has asian ancestry? :lol

No seriously Easter European people are so impressed with that guy they start looking like him.


Anyhow, again, why would you recognise some of those mass murderers as greatest human beings?


Alexander does have the benefit of his conquests being generally helpful to humankind, in allowing the spread and proliferation of hellenistic principles and culture that might otherwise have been lost.
Following this rotten type of thinking, guys from WWII accomplished great in allowing the West culture to spread. Which I don't know how could be beneficial, but still. Gulags and Holocaust, very helpful for humankind?

[rezznor]

btw, Genghis' cavalry would destroy Alexander's cavalry and phalanx

[TheMan]

He was considered the greatest General and Conqueror of all time by rulers from all times and continents like Julius Caesar and the Sultan Mehmet II. He gets the adulation and praise from these great rulers which is Alpha. I have never read any great leader use similar language when it came to Genghis or any Khan after him.
He built cities and named them after him (Alexandria in Egypt for example)
He was a heavy drinker and drank from a large cup humorously called "the cup of Hercules". Alpha at its finest right there.
On his deathbed he was asked whom he would give his Kingdom to and he said "To the strongest'. That right there is the most Alpha Male you can get. The man was admired, considered the greatest (hence the Great in his name) was a drinker and stayed strong and true till the end. Genghis who?
That's all cool and shit but he took it up the ass:confusedshrug:
Explain to me how having a gay **** buddy is more alpha than having thousands of chicks bearing your seed.

Sorry, just don't see it.

[glidedrxlr22]

The real historical guy in my avy was was alpha all the way.

[rezznor]

one tribe of ewoks would destroy them both

[mr.big35]

atilla hun was another alpha

[Dresta]

Following this rotten type of thinking, guys from WWII accomplished great in allowing the West culture to spread. Which I don't know how could be beneficial, but still. Gulags and Holocaust, very helpful for humankind?
Rotten type of thinking? I'd take it you'd prefer to live in the kind of era of medieval thinking and scientific backwardness that being ruled by a barbaric culture would bring?

I don't see what the Gulag and the Holocaust have to do with anything you dumb shit. WW2 did not 'spread Western culture' - it hastened its retreat, and brought the end of colonialism, which if it had endured would have embedded western culture deeper than it did. Kind of retarded comparison.

Humans have been slaughtering people forever and this guy thinks it's unimportant who wins because that's somehow 'rotten thinking' :facepalm

[Nick Young]

Mongols generally stopped where the steppes stopped.

That's why they never tried to get past Hungary in Europe, got obliterated in India and Vietnam, had to buy the Koreans and completly embarassed themselves trying to invade Japan.

The conquest of China is impressive though.
One of their other huge advantages was that they had tiny horses and the entire army lived off the land. They never had to organize massive supply lines which is why when they did, ie the failed trip to Japan, they usually screwed it up.

ANYWAYS those failures were not on Ghengis, that was on Subotai, and Subotai is in all other ways definately one of the GOAT leaders only a few rungs below Ghengis. Subotai is also the only general in human history who has ever conquered Russia.

[Nick Young]

This is why Ghengis is the GOAT human:[QUOTE]
Originally known as Tem

[Nick Young]

That's all cool and shit but he took it up the ass:confusedshrug:
Explain to me how having a gay **** buddy is more alpha than having thousands of chicks bearing your seed.

Sorry, just don't see it.
Every time Ghengis captured a new place, his army would round up all the hottest looking women and put them in a line for Ghengis to choose from. He would often take 10 at a time into his yurt at night. Basically he went on a continental tour of Asia boning the hottest women of every town he conquered. ALPHA.

[Trollsmasher]

inspired by Genghis

http://media.giphy.com/media/rjsZfIrX0BG4E/giphy.gif
Yep, Dothraki are basically Mongols without brains or basically anything that made the Mongols so great:lol

[rezznor]

One of their other huge advantages was that they had tiny horses and the entire army lived off the land. They never had to organize massive supply lines which is why when they did, ie the failed trip to Japan, they usually screwed it up.

ANYWAYS those failures were not on Ghengis, that was on Subotai, and Subotai is in all other ways definately one of the GOAT leaders only a few rungs below Ghengis. Subotai is also the only general in human history who has ever conquered Russia.
it didn't help that massive storms sank much of their invading army both times. The Mongols were actually winning the battles before the storms hit. The Japanese called those nation-saving storms "divine wind" aka kamikaze.


also, those invasions were headed by Kublai, not Genghis.


The first Mongol invasion of Japan occurred in 1274. In November, an armada of nearly 900 vessels containing more than 40,000 troops was dispatched from Korea. The armada demolished Tsushima and Iki islands and arrived at Hakata Bay on November 18th. On the following day, the troops landed on the bay and fought the Japanese defense on land. The Japanese were no match for the Mongol's cavalry tactics and weaponry including their small explosive bombs, which the Japanese had never encountered before. The Japanese defense had no choice but to retreat to a fortress near Dazaifu. That night, when the Mongols retired to their ships, a severe storm hit the island, sinking 200 ships and killing over 13,000 Mongol soldiers. As a result, the remaining armada retreated back to Korea, ending in an unsuccessful invasion.

The Japanese referred to this miraculous wind as the Kamikaze (divine wind), and believe that their island was protected by the gods. Although the country was saved by the storm, the invasion proved that the Japanese were no match against the Mongol on land or sea. As a result, the Japanese strengthened their army in fear of another invasion, and constructed a stone wall, 20km long, along the coast of Hakata Bay. Kublai Khan, on the other hand, never gave up on Japan and renewed his demands of Japan in 1275 through envoys sent to Japan.


On August 12, the Mongols' main fleet landed to the west of Hakata Bay. Now faced with a force more than three times as large as their own, the samurai were in serious danger of being overrun and slaughtered. With little hope of survival, and little thought of reward if they triumphed, the Japanese samurai fought on with desperate bravery.

Japan's Miracle:

They say that truth is stranger than fiction, and in this case, it's certainly true. Just when it appeared that the samurai would be exterminated and Japan crushed under the Mongol yoke, an incredible, even miraculous event took place.

On August 15, 1281, a second typhoon roared ashore at Kyushu. Of the khan's 4,400 ships, only a few hundred rode out the towering waves and vicious winds.

Nearly all of the invaders drowned in the storm; those few thousand who made it to shore were hunted and killed without mercy by the samurai. Very few ever returned to tell the tale at Dadu.

[Nick Young]

Yep, Dothraki are basically Mongols without brains or basically anything that made the Mongols so great:lol
Dothraki are mongols mixed with huns mixed with gauls and Khal Drogo is like Tamerlane mixed with Attila.

[Nick Young]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzmI3vAIhbE

:dancin :dancin :dancin :dancin :dancin
:facepalm

[DonDadda59]

Alexander the Great would be denied service at business establishments in Arizona today. Based Khan f*cked everybody's bitches. True story.

[MightyWhitey]

That's all cool and shit but he took it up the ass:confusedshrug:
Explain to me how having a gay **** buddy is more alpha than having thousands of chicks bearing your seed.

Sorry, just don't see it.
Alexander had female concubines and was married to Roxanne as well.

[MightyWhitey]

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1308014/Ten-greatest-Historical-conquerors.html#ixzz2uXQ0MGAf
Big deal. How many loose tribes were these? Besides, alexander Conquered the biggest Kingdom of the time. Who did Genghis conquer? And how much of that land he conquered was under administrative control? Alexander not only conquered but he also set up government.

[MightyWhitey]

Alexander the Great's impact to human history still reverberates today. That in itself is Alpha.

[Nick Young]

Alexander the Great's impact to human history still reverberates today. That in itself is Alpha.
Ghengis Khan's impact to human history still reverberates today to a much much greater level.

I repeat-Alexander was born into everything. He had Aristotle as a personal tutor and had his fathers army given to him for nothing.

Ghengis Khan came from absolutely nothing to become the greatest conqueror in history and accomplished 4 times as much as Alexander. He was a greater reformer then Alexander and his empire lasted much much longer then Alexanders.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Nerds celebrating a psychotic nutjob. :oldlol:

[Nick Young]

Nerds celebrating a psychotic nutjob. :oldlol:
Do you think politicians today like Obama aren't psychotic nutjobs too?

[MightyWhitey]

Ghengis Khan's impact to human history still reverberates today to a much much greater level.

I repeat-Alexander was born into everything. He had Aristotle as a personal tutor and had his fathers army given to him for nothing.

Ghengis Khan came from nothing to accomplish 4 times as much as Alexander. He was a greater reformer then Alexander and his empire lasted much much longer then Alexanders.
Alexander's Empire split into the greatest known dynasties in history. The Ptolemies, Seleucid, Antigonid, and the Lysimachus dynasties continued administrative control of Alexander's former kingdom. European ideas and ideals spread during his lifetime and after his death. The Egyptians even considered him a God. Dude, Alexander was no mongrel who took over some villages. He conquered the greatest reigning empire off all time.

[Nick Young]

Alexander's Empire split into the greatest known dynasties in history. The Ptolemies, Seleucid, Antigonid, and the Lysimachus dynasties continued administrative control of Alexander's former kingdom. European ideas and ideals spread during his lifetime and after his death. The Egyptians even considered him a God. Dude, Alexander was no mongrel who took over some villages. He conquered the greatest reigning empire off all time.
:roll:
Taking over China and holding it and installing a Mongol Dynasty there>Alexander's combined lifetime accomplishments.

[Akrazotile]

Hitler was pretty alpha


Hitler was a good speaker/actor but a total emo ***** on the inside. The Johnny Depp of anti-semitism. Definitely not alpha.

[Akrazotile]

Alexander the Great would be denied service at business establishments in Arizona today. Based Khan f*cked everybody's bitches. True story.


Would be hilarious balls to see the ruler of 2/3 the known world get turned away at a deli and walk away with his head slunk and muttering bitterly to himself. :oldlol:

[kentatm]

That's all cool and shit but he took it up the ass:confusedshrug:
Explain to me how having a gay **** buddy is more alpha than having thousands of chicks bearing your seed.

Sorry, just don't see it.

Because back then Greeks were so bad ass they didn't give one **** what you thought about their **** buddies.

you be like 'Whoa bro you banging a dude! You ain't alpha!"

and they be like "Come here so I can gut you for giving a shit about who I screw."

[KingBeasley08]

That point about a young Khan killed his own selfish brother as a kid because he didn't share a massive feast he found with his family was badass too. This mfcker did whatever he had to survive. Molded him into the conqueror he became

[OhNoTimNoSho]

Nerds celebrating a psychotic nutjob. :oldlol:
A nutjob is a dude who sits around sniffing glue, picking his asshole in his parents basement and talking about conspiracy theories. Genghis Khan brought together over 30 tribes... coordinated and mobilized over a 100 thousand troops...motivated all of them.. developed and pioneered revolutionary battlefield strategies which were still used as recently as world war II. Had amazing foresight, enough to give the mongols plans a 100 years after his death. Dude knew exactly what he was doing.

[DonDadda59]

Because back then Greeks were so bad ass they didn't give one **** what you thought about their **** buddies.

you be like 'Whoa bro you banging a dude! You ain't alpha!"

and they be like "Come here so I can gut you for giving a shit about who I screw."

In tradition, Alexander the Great's ancestor was the legendary demigod warrior Achilles. He (Achilles) was not only batting for the other team... he was a bottom.


Would be hilarious balls to see the ruler of 2/3 the known world get turned away at a deli and walk away with his head slunk and muttering bitterly to himself. :oldlol:

Would serve him right for blaspheming against the LORD... who he predates by some 3 centuries. But f*ck a technicality.

[Akrazotile]

In tradition, Alexander the Great's ancestor was the legendary demigod warrior Achilles. He (Achilles) was not only batting for the other team... he was a bottom.



Would serve him right for blaspheming against the LORD... who he predates by some 3 centuries. But f*ck a technicality.


Actually if this were the case I think he would legally be grandfathered in to permissible buttsecks. But he only predates Jesus by three centuries, not the original Big Poppa. Moses received Leviticus and the other 4 books about 200 years prior to Alexander. And that is where the Notorious G.O.D. famously said "ju cannot lie with another mayne, mayne."

The books may not have been translated into Greek by the time of Alexander so he may not have been aware of the prohibition. But still... ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse.

[DonDadda59]

Actually if this were the case I think he would legally be grandfathered in to permissible buttsecks. But he only predates Jesus by three centuries, not the original Big Poppa. Moses received Leviticus and the other 4 books about 200 years prior to Alexander. And that is where the Notorious G.O.D. famously said "ju cannot lie with another mayne, mayne."

The books may not have been translated into Greek by the time of Alexander so he may not have been aware of the prohibition. But still... ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse.

Zeus was the head honcho then, Jehovah was still just a lowly intern learning the ethereal ropes, fetching the Big Z his morning coffee n shit. I think his homosex ban was more of a rough draft than a manifesto at that point. Achilles, Alexander, etc were legally and spiritually free to live their heathen lifestyles. Still got into Paradise too, that's what you call beating the system :applause:

[MavsSuperFan]

Is he the GOAT alpha male in human history?

-Started from the bottom
-Ended up taking over a huge part of Eurasia
-Banged so many women that he makes Wilt look like a virgin

Only con was that the dude was nuts and destroying the House of Wisdom and thus Arab science

Is there anyone who can stake a claim?
His dad was the chief of their tribe.

After his dad died he hit bottom, but one of the reasons he was able to get people to follow him was his blood relations/lineage.

[DonDadda59]

His dad was the chief of their tribe.

After his dad died he hit bottom, but one of the reasons he was able to get people to follow him was his blood relations/lineage.

Interesting. Sounds a lot like Caesar- came from a noble family that was pretty much dead broke by the time he was born. Used his name, borrowed money until he was bankrupt, allied himself with filthy rich noblemen and schemed his way to the top as the most powerful man in the world. Bawse.

[Akrazotile]

Zeus was the head honcho then, Jehovah was still just a lowly intern learning the ethereal ropes, fetching the Big Z his morning coffee n shit. I think his homosex ban was more of a rough draft than a manifesto at that point. Achilles, Alexander, etc were legally and spiritually free to live their heathen lifestyles. Still got into Paradise too, that's what you call beating the system :applause:


Well Polytheism really never had any cred, even in those days. Conquered peoples never converted to worship the greek deity model, because they knew it was jokes. The monotheistic religions are the one true religion.

Or at least one of them is, presumably.

Hova was simply laying in the cut during the earliest of times of Mesopotamia and Egypt etc, but it is historically documented that he decided to clear his throat at some point during the time the Greek empire was extant. Archeological evidence of surviving phone records show this to be the approximate time when a call to a friend from a party would say "Damn, it's a total sausage fest, don't come here," a reversal from previous centuries wherein the call would have said "Dude this is a total sausage fest, you have to get over here." This was a direct result of the Lord's decree.

Alexander either did not watch the news with adequate regularity, or he chose to, in the words of St. Christopher (Broussard) "Walk in open rebellion to God." In either case, it was at this time he forfeited his right to order the glazed salmon at a number of Arizona dining establishments.

[MavsSuperFan]

Interesting. Sounds a lot like Caesar- came from a noble family that was pretty much dead broke by the time he was born. Used his name, borrowed money until he was bankrupt, allied himself with filthy rich noblemen and schemed his way to the top as the most powerful man in the world. Bawse.
People from cultures that value names/lineages and have those noble ties, never really are at the bottom.

[BasedTom]

Some lesser appreciated guys in history:
Simo H

[KingBeasley08]

[QUOTE=BasedTom]Some lesser appreciated guys in history:
Simo H

[DonDadda59]

Well Polytheism really never had any cred, even in those days. Conquered peoples never converted to worship the greek deity model, because they knew it was jokes. The monotheistic religions are the one true religion.

Or at least one of them is, presumably.

The Greeks didn't seem too concerned with forced conversions for the most part but to say their religious practices never had any cred is a bit misguided. They seemed to focus on fusion as opposed to conversion at the end of a sword/gun as became the practice. Alexander's general Ptolemy merged Greek polytheism with the beliefs of the Egypt he inherited. The Romans copied their worship system and just slapped new name tags on the familiar Gods. This was a practice that ironically enough the Pauline Christians used to convert 'gentiles' (read: Pagans). That's why so much of modern Christianity is heavily steeped in Pagan ritual and beliefs.

And monotheism was nothing new or revolutionary in the general region. Zoroastrianism was clearly the template used by the Abrahamic religions when they crafted their mythos.

[East_Stone_Ya]

i know we are discussing all time alphas here but damn this is impressive by Seagal :applause:


http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/amXV0zV_700b_v3.jpg

[Akrazotile]

The Greeks didn't seem too concerned with forced conversions for the most part

Hence, no cred.

Polytheism = Kobe
Monotheism = Shaq

Polytheistic cultures were just based on inefficient volume, they covered a lot of the map but they really didn't have much impact.

Islam and Catholicism each had runs in world history equivalent to Shaq's '00-'03 span with the Lakers. Just goin HAM on nikkas. Alexander blatantly going against the will of Yahweh with his bath house sword fighting would be like Todd MacCulloch taunting Shaq before the 02 finals. It's just begging for the smackdown from an alpha.

It's pretty much an open and shut case of classical greek "hubris." Alexander thought he could openly defy the new sheriff in town and continue to receive load after hot load to the face in bukkake fashion. "I'm the one in charge here," he thought. "I'm invincible." And now look at him. Has to ask permission to get a bite to eat when passing through Scottsdale.

Truly a tragic shakespearian tale.

[BoutPractice]

You know civilization is done when Genghis Khan has become a model for humanity. Da Vinci is probably too gay for the "alpha male" crowd.

How about Thales? Or Isaac Newton? Conquerors had the power to kill. Newton had the power to write the laws of nature - an almost God-like power. Certainly the closest a man can get, since we can't really bend the laws of physics.

[Nick Young]

You know civilization is done when Genghis Khan has become a model for humanity. Da Vinci is probably too gay for the "alpha male" crowd.

How about Thales? Or Isaac Newton? Conquerors had the power to kill. Newton had the power to write the laws of nature - an almost God-like power. Certainly the closest a man can get, since we can't really bend the laws of physics.
You mean Isaac Newton the same guy who plagiarized the theory of gravity from Robert Hooke and stole the first two laws of motion from Galileo?:confusedshrug: That's the guy who should be the model of humanity?

[BoutPractice]

Yes. All artists and scientists "steal". But they also "add" and "change". That's how we progress. Standing on the shoulders of giants, etc. And Newton's legacy, what he stands for, matters. Homer probably didn't exist, but I'd rather people modeled themselves after the myth of Homer than the reality of Genghis Khan.

(For the record, I prefer Thales, who probably stole even more and whose life is almost entirely shrouded in myth in legend. But he's a more intriguing figure because he also had political responsibilities and if you believe the story, invented financial futures and options on the side)

[Akrazotile]

Homer probably didn't exist, but I'd rather people modeled themselves after the myth of Homer than the reality of Genghis Khan.



We can't all work at the nuclear plant my dude.

[eliteballer]

The Mongols were defeated in battles plenty of times, but the other side was usually disorganized or had poor leadership and the Mongols recovered better. Also, most of the large mongol armies were mostly constituted by combinations of OTHER people. Either people they had recruited through alliances or conquered. IE the chinese engineers they used.

The later Mongol ikhantes that did most of the damage in the West were mostly tatar if I recall.

[KingBeasley08]

You know civilization is done when Genghis Khan has become a model for humanity. Da Vinci is probably too gay for the "alpha male" crowd.

How about Thales? Or Isaac Newton? Conquerors had the power to kill. Newton had the power to write the laws of nature - an almost God-like power. Certainly the closest a man can get, since we can't really bend the laws of physics.
If I wanted to make a thread about GOAT scientist or GOAT contributor to humanity, I would have made it.

However, this thread is about GOAT alpha male.

[zoom17]

Genghis Khand probably had a small wiener that alone should cancel him being the GOAT Alpha male.

[Dresta]

Yes. All artists and scientists "steal". But they also "add" and "change". That's how we progress. Standing on the shoulders of giants, etc. And Newton's legacy, what he stands for, matters. Homer probably didn't exist, but I'd rather people modeled themselves after the myth of Homer than the reality of Genghis Khan.

(For the record, I prefer Thales, who probably stole even more and whose life is almost entirely shrouded in myth in legend. But he's a more intriguing figure because he also had political responsibilities and if you believe the story, invented financial futures and options on the side)
Nah, but Newton actually just stole those things.

And the myths of Homer? Have you read the Iliad? The Greeks were just are brutal at that time.

[Dresta]

The Greeks didn't seem too concerned with forced conversions for the most part but to say their religious practices never had any cred is a bit misguided. They seemed to focus on fusion as opposed to conversion at the end of a sword/gun as became the practice. Alexander's general Ptolemy merged Greek polytheism with the beliefs of the Egypt he inherited. The Romans copied their worship system and just slapped new name tags on the familiar Gods. This was a practice that ironically enough the Pauline Christians used to convert 'gentiles' (read: Pagans). That's why so much of modern Christianity is heavily steeped in Pagan ritual and beliefs.

And monotheism was nothing new or revolutionary in the general region. Zoroastrianism was clearly the template used by the Abrahamic religions when they crafted their mythos.
Yeah, paganism was far more resistant than that guy seems to think. The early Christians were the fanatics, the impoverished, the filthy, the lowly, the servile etc. (it was effectively a morality for the weak and downtrodden, one that would allow them to feel superior through their weakness, and to feed the human ego that needs to be fed). It took a long time for it to overcome paganism, and this had more to do with the power Christianity held once Constantine made it the state religion and the intolerance of Christians in general more than anything else. After Constantine, paganism only had a brief revival under Julian, who was a remarkable philosopher/general/warrior/emperor worthy of being the subject of this thread.

Funnily enough, contrary to popular wisdom, the Christians weren't persecuted all that much by the Romans; most of the Emperors tolerated them and their practices, though the Romans generally found them to be a repulsive and fanatical bunch. A few Emperors (like Nero) persecuted them, but this was largely because of their refusal to obey and pay a tithe to the Emperor (considering it idolatrous), and were willing to be tortured to death rather than do so :facepalm.

Once Christianity gained state power however, the persecution went to a whole different level, with ***** like Justinian cracking down, and regular Christians being very enthusiastic in torturing and destroying those of other religious persuasions, in their typical over-zealous and mindlessly fanatical ways.

[knickballer]

Genghis Khan was fo sure Alpha but he did dominate in a weal era.

Europe and the former Roman empire was all but gone and only weak states with no proper defenses emerged(atleast in the european part he dominated). The ottoman empire didn't even exist during his time(I think they were the Seljuks) and they were very small at the time as well. But he rape the Chinese a new one which is impressive considering they are arch rivals.

Genghis Khan was like Mike D'Antoni's fast break offense which took the league by storm with some lesser known players at the time.



For me Mussolini was the GOAT
lulz jk

[Nick Young]

Genghis Khan was fo sure Alpha but he did dominate in a weal era.

Europe and the former Roman empire was all but gone and only weak states with no proper defenses emerged(atleast in the european part he dominated). The ottoman empire didn't even exist during his time(I think they were the Seljuks) and they were very small at the time as well. But he rape the Chinese a new one which is impressive considering they are arch rivals.

Genghis Khan was like Mike D'Antoni's fast break offense which took the league by storm with some lesser known players at the time.



For me Mussolini was the GOAT
lulz jk
Bad comparison.

Ghengis Khan is like Phil Jackson and Subotai is like young Kobe.

Ghengis Jackson came in and created a dynasty.:rockon:

[highwhey]

Didn't know this thread was sociopaths getting called GOAT human beings.
:oldlol:

[MightyWhitey]

It took a long time for it to overcome paganism, and this had more to do with the power Christianity held once Constantine made it the state religion and the intolerance of Christians in general more than anything else. After Constantine, paganism only had a brief revival under Julian, who was a remarkable philosopher/general/warrior/emperor worthy of being the subject of this thread.
Constantine did not make Christianity the "state religion". Theodosius did. And Julian's reign was only 2 years long. Not enough to include him into this topic imo. His biggest claim to fame was being the last pagan Roman Emperor.


Once Christianity gained state power however, the persecution went to a whole different level, with ***** like Justinian cracking down, and regular Christians being very enthusiastic in torturing and destroying those of other religious persuasions, in their typical over-zealous and mindlessly fanatical ways.
Politics of the time. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[Nick Young]

****ing Christians were more fanatical and bloodthirsty and murderous then the Muslims for about the first 1800 years of their history.

I just hate how history turned out, and these brainwashed zealots wound up winning and wiping out all the badass religions like druidism or norse paganism.

Also hate how Christians now all seem to believe Christianity is a religion of peace and love and they were poor harmless martyrs in the beginning and not murderous brainwashed zealots. Damn it I hate how history was rewritten.

[MightyWhitey]

****ing Christians were more fanatical and bloodthirsty and murderous then the Muslims for about the first 1800 years of their history.

I just hate how history turned out, and these brainwashed zealots wound up winning and wiping out all the badass religions like druidism or norse paganism.

Also hate how Christians now all seem to believe Christianity is a religion of peace and love and they were poor harmless martyrs in the beginning and not murderous brainwashed zealots. Damn it I hate how history was rewritten.
That's not true. History has recorded evidence that modern historians have used to write about the absolute brutality of Christianity.

But you also must remember that the only way for this religion to get the foothold it got was through brute force. Without Constantine the Great's conversion Christianity would have taken longer to rise up through the ranks, if you will. Todays Christian, not many but most, do acknowledge Christianity's brutal rise to power. Not much different than any pagan religions rise either.

[nightprowler10]

****ing Christians were more fanatical and bloodthirsty and murderous then the Muslims for about the first 1800 years of their history.

I just hate how history turned out, and these brainwashed zealots wound up winning and wiping out all the badass religions like druidism or norse paganism.

Also hate how Christians now all seem to believe Christianity is a religion of peace and love and they were poor harmless martyrs in the beginning and not murderous brainwashed zealots. Damn it I hate how history was rewritten.
:applause:

No one empire becomes dominant without being murderous and bloodthirsty first.

[nightprowler10]

That's not true. History has recorded evidence that modern historians have used to write about the absolute brutality of Christianity.

But you also must remember that the only way for this religion to get the foothold it got was through brute force. Without Constantine the Great's conversion Christianity would have taken longer to rise up through the ranks, if you will. Todays Christian, not many but most, do acknowledge Christianity's brutal rise to power. Not much different than any pagan religions rise either.
I'm not sure if that's true. I think it's "not most but many".

[Dresta]

Constantine did not make Christianity the "state religion". Theodosius did. And Julian's reign was only 2 years long. Not enough to include him into this topic imo. His biggest claim to fame was being the last pagan Roman Emperor.


Politics of the time. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Politics of the time? Is was a maniacal fanaticism and intolerance inherent in Christianity; these were the actions of people and peoples with little connection to politics, and who in their religious fervors frequently contravened the state policy of tolerance.

Julian's actual reign was very short, but he did a remarkable amount in that time, and he did a lot on the battlefield prior to his taking over as Emperor, while he held the title of Augustus, i think.

And that depends what you mean by 'made' - Constantine was the one who tied the throne to Christianity, Constantine was the one who made declarations of divine intervention due to his conversion, and most importantly, Constantine was the one who presided over the formation of the Nicene Creed that would become the central doctrine of Roman Christianity. He managed the theological disputes, the outcome of the convention was of his choosing, and made the later formalisation of Theodosius inevitable. Who did more of the making really? Whose decision was really more pivotal from a historical standpoint?

[MightyWhitey]

:applause:

No one empire becomes dominant without being murderous and bloodthirsty first.
There certainly is a good book written on the subject - http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Wars-Patriarchs-Emperors-Christians/dp/0061768936

[rezznor]

That's not true. History has recorded evidence that modern historians have used to write about the absolute brutality of Christianity.

But you also must remember that the only way for this religion to get the foothold it got was through brute force. Without Constantine the Great's conversion Christianity would have taken longer to rise up through the ranks, if you will. Todays Christian, not many but most, do acknowledge Christianity's brutal rise to power. Not much different than any pagan religions rise either.
Like Buddhists?

[MightyWhitey]

Politics of the time? Is was a maniacal fanaticism and intolerance inherent in Christianity; these were the actions of people and peoples with little connection to politics, and who in their religious fervors frequently contravened the state policy of tolerance.
Sacrificing virgins and babies at the altar wasn't maniacal? Paganism shares the exact same traits. Just a mathematical difference in deities worshipped. You can hate what has happened in history. Doesn't matter what you and your modern way of thinking feels about it. It was nothing more than politics of the time. Brutal,,, absolutely. But still politics of the time.


Julian's actual reign was very short, but he did a remarkable amount in that time, and he did a lot on the battlefield prior to his taking over as Emperor, while he held the title of Augustus, i think.

He certainly doesn't crack top ten on the list of Roman Emperors. Maybe not even top 20.


And that depends what you mean by 'made' - Constantine was the one who tied the throne to Christianity, Constantine was the one who made declarations of divine intervention due to his conversion, and most importantly, Constantine was the one who presided over the formation of the Nicene Creed that would become the central doctrine of Roman Christianity. He managed the theological disputes, the outcome of the convention was of his choosing, and made the later formalisation of Theodosius inevitable. Who did more of the making really? Whose decision was really more pivotal from a historical standpoint?
Theodosius banned paganism and made Christianity the State religion. Constantine did not ban paganism. Nor did he force conversions. Theodosius forced conversions.

[Done_And_Done]

Hitler was pretty alpha

Can an alpha have cowardice qualities though?

[MightyWhitey]

Like Buddhists?Hey blame Paul for not introducing that religion to the most powerful kingdom on Earth.

[nightprowler10]

Sacrificing virgins and babies at the altar wasn't maniacal? Paganism shares the exact same traits. Just a mathematical difference in deities worshipped.
For every pagan religion that was that crazy, there were another hundred that were "normal" and peaceful. You can't make such a blanket statement ffs.

[Nick Young]

That's not true. History has recorded evidence that modern historians have used to write about the absolute brutality of Christianity.

But you also must remember that the only way for this religion to get the foothold it got was through brute force. Without Constantine the Great's conversion Christianity would have taken longer to rise up through the ranks, if you will. Todays Christian, not many but most, do acknowledge Christianity's brutal rise to power. Not much different than any pagan religions rise either.
Most Christians I talk to agree the Crusades were awful but when I try to talk about the zealous fanatical beginning they tell me it's not true and deny and block out when I explain facts to them.

But also that's only when I talk to the brainwashed Church-every-Sunday ones.

[Nick Young]

Like Buddhists?
A lot of blood has been shed in the name of Buddhism. Buddhism is the religion I love the most, and think is most beneficial to mankind, but even that has been corrupted at many points in its history-just not the beginning. In the beginning of Buddhism, things were great.

[MightyWhitey]

For every pagan religion that was that crazy, there were another hundred that were "normal" and peaceful. You can't make such a blanket statement ffs.
But there were so many that you could make such a statement.

[rezznor]

A lot of blood has been shed in the name of Buddhism. Buddhism is the religion I love the most, and think is most beneficial to mankind, but even that has been corrupted at many points in its history-just not the beginning. In the beginning of Buddhism, things were great.
no religion has been without bloodshed, but Buddhism and Taoism are probably the least offending of any major religion.

[MightyWhitey]

no religion has been without bloodshed, but Buddhism and Taoism are probably the least offending of any major religion.
I respect Buddhism as a religion like all religions out there.

[mehyaM24]

cyrus the great,william the conqueror >>> ghengis 'weak era' khan

[Dresta]

For every pagan religion that was that crazy, there were another hundred that were "normal" and peaceful. You can't make such a blanket statement ffs.
Exactly. And most pagans in the Roman empire were not brutally intolerant of Christians and their practices, unlike the Christians were once they got a sniff of power (with Constantine btw 'Mighty' - even with Constantine promoting tolerance of paganism, the Christians still used their new found power to endlessly butcher pagans).

[rezznor]

I respect Buddhism as a religion like all religions out there.
most religions have good messages and intentions, it's just when they get twisted by zealots or for personal gain or agendas that it becomes a problem. some religions have been twisted more often then others and that's a huge problem.

[MightyWhitey]

Exactly. And most pagans in the Roman empire were not brutally intolerant of Christians and their practices, unlike the Christians were once they got a sniff of power (with Constantine btw 'Mighty' - even with Constantine promoting tolerance of paganism, the Christians still used their new found power to endlessly butcher pagans).
Yes I already agreed that it was brutal. But still politics of the time. You cannot deny that. http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Wars-Patriarchs-Emperors-Christians/dp/0061768936

The above link is to a great book on the subject.

[MightyWhitey]

most religions have good messages and intentions, it's just when they get twisted by zealots or for personal gain or agendas that it becomes a problem. some religions have been twisted more often then others and that's a huge problem.
I completely agree with you. I think that ONLY looking for the bad in religion is accepting ignorance. I also believe that Muslims, Jews, and Christians who ignore history (or in some cases accept it and move forward with it today) are not honest to themselves or their faith.

[Nick Young]

I completely agree with you. I think that ONLY looking for the bad in religion is accepting ignorance. I also believe that Muslims, Jews, and Christians who ignore history (or in some cases accept it and move forward with it today) are not honest to themselves or their faith.
I am biased, but also when I try to look at history objectively, Jews are the most exempt and never did shit to anyone and were beaten down by everyone .

I know now that everyone will bring up Modern Israel blahblahblah but I'm talking about all of Jewish history BEFORE modern Israel.

The Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Medieval Europeans, the Muslims, the Christians, the Russians, the Axis powers...SHeeeeit everyone has always had it in for the Jews and the Jews have rarely if ever had the power to do anything back.

[rezznor]

I completely agree with you. I think that ONLY looking for the bad in religion is accepting ignorance. I also believe that Muslims, Jews, and Christians who ignore history (or in some cases accept it and move forward with it today) are not honest to themselves or their faith.the whole christian/jew/muslim thing dumbfounds me. these are 3 religions that are very similar and basically have the same beginnings and yet they have spent centuries killing each other because their beliefs took divergent paths. then we have the sunni/shiite hatred which is even more ridiculous. :facepalm

[Akrazotile]

the whole christian/jew/muslim thing dumbfounds me. these are 3 religions that are very similar and basically have the same beginnings and yet they have spent centuries killing each other because their beliefs


All part of God's plan, hes got his three sons squarin off in a cage match battle royale to see who the toughest, most loyal and worthy one is to gain entrance into the Heavenz. May the best religion win.

[riseagainst]

Jordan never killed anyone apart from his father

:roll: :roll:

[Akrazotile]

:roll: :roll:


^ F*cking ice cold :lol

[Dresta]

Yes I already agreed that it was brutal. But still politics of the time. You cannot deny that. http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Wars-Patriarchs-Emperors-Christians/dp/0061768936

The above link is to a great book on the subject.
The politics of the time was brutal but it was also somewhat understandable and reasonable. With Christianity that need for reason, for compromise etc. went out the window. They went around slaughtering pagans in spite of state opposition, they have always been a law unto themselves.

Christianity has just been a continual negative for human civilisation from the off, because it seeks to weaken the strong and bring them down to the level of the 'meek and mild' who really only want revenge and dominance themselves, but mask their lust with virtuous language. From the off it weakened the resistance of Rome, and hastened its fall to the barbarians; then the Barbarians converted to Christianity, and the Western world was plunged into darkness for almost 1000 years.

[Nick Young]

the whole christian/jew/muslim thing dumbfounds me. these are 3 religions that are very similar and basically have the same beginnings and yet they have spent centuries killing each other because their beliefs took divergent paths. then we have the sunni/shiite hatred which is even more ridiculous. :facepalm
Yep, Christianity and Islam are both corrupted offshoots of Judaism. All three religions have the same basic beliefs, but for some reason the two corrupted offshoots decided to turn against the Jews, the religion that their own religions are based off of.

[DonDadda59]

Yep, Christianity and Islam are both corrupted offshoots of Judaism. All three religions have the same basic beliefs, but for some reason the two corrupted offshoots decided to turn against the Jews, the religion that their own religions are based off of.

You can make the same claim about Judaism in relation to Zoroastrianism. No religion was born in a vacuum. They all take ideas from one or various sources and expand on them to form their own school of thought. A lot of the beliefs in Judaism were probably borrowed from Zoroastrians during the Babylonian captivity (Ie: the messiah = the saoshyant). The Jews even admired a Zoroastrian king, the above mentioned Cyrus the Great, so much that he is even named a messiah in their religious texts.

Then these ideas were later appropriated by an offshoot cult of Judaism, which grew and once the Paulines became the dominant faction, they merged these same ideas with pagan conventions. Islam did the same basic thing. People falsely believe that Judaism was the first monotheistic religion. Zarathustra himself most likely borrowed ideas from earlier traditions. So to call Christianity and Islam 'corrupted offshoots' doesn't take into account that Judaism can be classified as such too.

[Nick Young]

You can make the same claim about Judaism in relation to Zoroastrianism. No religion was born in a vacuum. They all take ideas from one or various sources and expand on them to form their own school of thought. A lot of the beliefs in Judaism were probably borrowed from Zoroastrians during the Babylonian captivity (Ie: the messiah = the saoshyant). The Jews even admired a Zoroastrian king, the above mentioned Cyrus the Great, so much that he is even named a messiah in their religious texts.

Then these ideas were later appropriated by an offshoot cult of Judaism, which grew and once the Paulines became the dominant faction, they merged these same ideas with pagan conventions. Islam did the same basic thing. People falsely believe that Judaism was the first monotheistic religion. Zarathustra himself most likely borrowed ideas from earlier traditions. So to call Christianity and Islam 'corrupted offshoots' doesn't take into account that Judaism can be classified as such too.
Not really. It's pretty much nonsensical to make that claim.

Cyrus the Great is not considered the messiah, he only fulfilled an old prophecy about the Jews being kicked out of Babylon and allowed to return again. Admiring a king who was nice to us does not mean that judaism is a corrupted offshoot of Zoroastrianism. The two religions have zero in common.

Zoroastrianism is not even a monotheistic religion. It is all about the two divine opposing forces. The first true monotheistic religion we know of is Akhenaten's Sun god religion in Egypt, but that died out after Akhenaten died.

Christianity and Islam are corrupted offshoots of Judaism doe. Deal with it.

[DonDadda59]

Not really. It's pretty much nonsensical to make that claim.

How do you figure? You really think Judaism was born in a complete vacuum? Didn't take ideas/traditions from other sources? Why are their ideas and beliefs (as well as those 'corrupted offshoots') so similar to those that Zarathustra wrote about? Pure coincidence?

[Nick Young]

How do you figure? You really think Judaism was born in a complete vacuum? Didn't take ideas/traditions from other sources? Why are their ideas and beliefs (as well as those 'corrupted offshoots') so similar to those that Zarathustra wrote about? Pure coincidence?
Judaism already existed for centuries before the Jews ever even ran in to and knew about the Zoroastrians in Babylon. Some Persian words, like Pharisee were borrowed and used by the Jewish people when they moved to Persia, but Zoroastrian ideas were not incorperated into the religion. Persian terms were adapted for use by Jewish government but the only Persian word used religiously was a Persian name for a demon.

So if you want to say that the jews borrowing a Persian word for demon means that Judaism is a corrupt offshoot of Zoroastrianism, your point stands. otherwise, it holds no water.


The only idea that Judaism and Zoroastrianism really share is the idea of the Messiah, and the messiah was part of Judaism from nearly the beginning, again, before Jews ever came into contact with Zoroastrians.

[Dresta]

How do you figure? You really think Judaism was born in a complete vacuum? Didn't take ideas/traditions from other sources? Why are their ideas and beliefs (as well as those 'corrupted offshoots') so similar to those that Zarathustra wrote about? Pure coincidence?
There is a difference between borrowing from aspects of previous religious traditions and completely stealing the template of a religion and moulding it to your own fancy.

[Akrazotile]

Christianity and Islam are corrupted offshoots of Judaism doe. Deal with it.

Don't forget Rastafarian. Copied the whole babylon/zion paradigm.


It doesn't really matter though. We're all God's children. As long as nobody be foolin around with other men.

[DonDadda59]

Judaism already existed for centuries before the Jews ever even ran in to and knew about the Zoroastrians in Babylon. Some Persian words, like Pharisee were borrowed and used by the Jewish people when they moved to Persia, but Zoroastrian ideas were not incorperated into the religion. Persian terms were adapted for use by Jewish government but the only Persian word used religiously was a Persian name for a demon.

So if you want to say that the jews borrowing a Persian word for demon means that Judaism is a corrupt offshoot of Zoroastrianism, your point stands. otherwise, it holds no water.

That was your term, not mine. Just because Judaism borrowed ideas from earlier traditions as Christianity and Islam would later, doesn't make it 'corrupt' or any less valid.


The only idea that Judaism and Zoroastrianism really share is the idea of the Messiah, and the messiah was part of Judaism from nearly the beginning, again, before Jews ever came into contact with Zoroastrians.

A lot of scholars believe Judaism got its monotheistic bent from Zoroastrians. It's clear the Jews were polytheistic for some time hence why a decree like this became necessary: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me"(Exodus 20:3). That indicates that Yahweh was not the only God recognized or even worshipped. The ancient Semitic religions (ie: Canaanites) were most definitely polytheistic. In fact, strict monotheism did not come until after the captivity ended.

Also, there is a clear difference between pre-exile and post-exile Judaism, the latter having being clearly influenced by the ideas they encountered while in Babylonia. The ideas of universalism, dualism, apocalyptic cults, and ultimately- what would later become Christianity. They all came from the ideas the Jews picked up from the Zoroastrians.

[D-FENS]

Stop arguing you damn nerds, and just appreciate Khan

[Nick Young]

That was your term, not mine. Just because Judaism borrowed ideas from earlier traditions as Christianity and Islam would later, doesn't make it 'corrupt' or any less valid.



A lot of scholars believe Judaism got its monotheistic bent from Zoroastrians. It's clear the Jews were polytheistic for some time hence why a decree like this became necessary: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me"(Exodus 20:3). That indicates that Yahweh was not the only God recognized or even worshipped. The ancient Semitic religions (ie: Canaanites) were most definitely polytheistic. In fact, strict monotheism did not come until after the captivity ended.

Also, there is a clear difference between pre-exile and post-exile Judaism, the latter having being clearly influenced by the ideas they encountered while in Babylonia. The ideas of universalism, dualism, apocalyptic cults, and ultimately- what would later become Christianity. They all came from the ideas the Jews picked up from the Zoroastrians.
These ideas all existed before Jews got to Babylon. The Jews were monotheistic before they got to Babylon.

I am Jewish. I know my own religion much better then you do. The only ideas Jews and Zoroastrians share is the idea of a Messiah. Other then that, the religions are entirely different.

Judaism as a monotheistic religion existed for hundreds of years before the Jews even came into contact with Zoroastrians. It is impossible to dispute this as fact.

The whole idea "Jews stole from Zoroastrians" is a rewrite of history Christian scholars invented to justify their own religion being a corrupted version of Judaism.

[DonDadda59]

Judaism as a monotheistic religion existed for hundreds of years before the Jews even came into contact with Zoroastrians. It is impossible to dispute this as fact.

Uh... what? What makes it impossible? If Judaism was strictly monotheistic, why would 'Yahweh' feel the need to make a decree telling the Hebrews to get rid of all other Gods? :confusedshrug:

The truth is- Judaism was a polytheistic religion, with Yahweh being one of the major deities but not the only one, until the post captivity/exile, second temple era when a move to strict monotheism (with them borrowing heavily from the Zoroastrians and their 'messiah' King Cyrus) and other conventions occurred.


The whole idea "Jews stole from Zoroastrians" is a rewrite of history Christian scholars invented to justify their own religion being a corrupted version of Judaism.

What would Christian scholars gain by doing that exactly? Everyone knows Christianity started as a cult offshoot of Judaism, just as Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, which was influenced heavily by earlier Iranian religions. As I said before- no religion was born in a vacuum. Judaism didn't just pop up fully formed out of thin air.

[Nick Young]

Uh... what? What makes it impossible? If Judaism was strictly monotheistic, why would 'Yahweh' feel the need to make a decree telling the Hebrews to get rid of all other Gods? :confusedshrug:

Did you forget about the part in Exodus, when after the Jews escaped from Egypt and Moses went up to the mountain to get the 10 commandments and he was up there so long loads of the people got scared and created a golden cow statue and started worshiping it? And then how Moses found out and got pissed and broke the 10 commandment tablet?:confusedshrug:

Even though Judaism was all about only one god, Jews still screwed that up loads of times and started jumping on other religions gods bandwagons from time to time. They weren't perfect. That's why it was one of the commandments, durrr.:hammerhead:

ALSO there is no god called "Yahweh". It's not like Allah. Yahweh is merely two letters that are an abbreviation for the true name of God, which cannot be spoken or written down, incase the book they are written in gets ruined. The name of God itself is unpronounceable. It is uninformed and wrong to refer to God as Yahweh the same way that Muslims refer to God as Allah.

I have no idea where you're getting your info from but most of it is wrong.

[Akrazotile]

Did you forget about the part in Exodus, when after the Jews escaped from Egypt and Moses went up to the mountain to get the 10 commandments and he was up there so long loads of the people got scared and created a golden cow statue and started worshiping it? And then how Moses found out and got pissed and broke the 10 commandment tablet?:confusedshrug:

Even though Judaism was all about only one god, Jews still screwed that up loads of times and started jumping on other religions gods bandwagons from time to time. They weren't perfect. That's why it was one of the commandments, durrr.:hammerhead:

ALSO there is no god called "Yahweh". It's not like Allah. Yahweh is merely two letters that are an abbreviation for the true name of God, which cannot be spoken or written down, incase the book they are written in gets ruined. The name of God itself is unpronounceable. It is uninformed and wrong to refer to God as Yahweh the same way that Muslims refer to God as Allah.

I have no idea where you're getting your info from but most of it is wrong.


You are beginning to intertwine legend and history, which I'm afraid is going to damage your credibility in a secular discussion.

[KingBeasley08]

You are beginning to intertwine legend and history, which I'm afraid is going to damage your credibility in a secular discussion.
Yup I got no side just following the discussion but I've never been convinced of the existence of Moses

[Akrazotile]

Yup I got no side just following the discussion but I've never been convinced of the existence of Moses


Well I think historians generally agree that most religious figures did exist as real people, the debate is whether the metaphysical stories surrounding them are rooted in fact (unlikely for the most part) or are apocryphal parables.

[MightyWhitey]

A lot of scholars believe Judaism got its monotheistic bent from Zoroastrians.
Can you name these scholars and which books?

[Nick Young]

You are beginning to intertwine legend and history, which I'm afraid is going to damage your credibility in a secular discussion.
Im not saying Moses actually existed or not or the whole 10 commandments thing actually happened. im just pointing out that even in Jewish holy texts and stories, Jews have been shown to worship other gods on more then one occassion and this has nothing to do with Zoroastrianism making the religion monotheistic, especially when Zoroastrianism is dualistic.

For my own personal beliefs, I think the torah and bible are a book of tall tales and parables meant to be read as instructive, not a true historical document recording things that actually happened.

[Nick Young]

Can you name these scholars and which books?
He's just pulling stuff out his ass.

It's quoted in many places online "Judaism got many ideas from Zoroastrianism" but if you actually look at the two religions, and the history of the two religions, they have basically nothing in common.

[DonDadda59]

Even though Judaism was all about only one god, Jews still screwed that up loads of times and started jumping on other religions gods bandwagons from time to time. They weren't perfect. That's why it was one of the commandments, durrr.:hammerhead:


And you just proved my point :lol

Even if they just 'screwed up' by worshiping other Gods... that's still the definition of polytheism. The fact that you even gave a specific example (The Golden calf, which coincidentally has heavy ties to the Canaanite pagan worship of Moloch) makes it even more hilarious. Obviously whoever wrote Exodus was trying to get the Hebrews to stop worshiping multiple Gods and focus on just one, his personal deity of choice. But the Jews didn't really go along with this for the most part and continued on worshiping various Gods.

And then catastrophe struck- they were cast out of their promised land and sent into exile/captivity. This was a massive shock to the collective psyche of the Jews and many people who came to be known as prophets were convinced that this happened because they had offended their God(s) somehow. They were convinced that their prayers could not be heard outside of their land because their deities' powers were confined to its borders. Then they encountered a different school of thought. The Babylonians told them that there was only one God- one supreme, all powerful, all knowing being who was not confined to any man made borders. They told them that this being was not the God of a few chosen people, but a God of all people who would bring salvation to anyone who believed in him. That he would send a messiah to save them.

Then Cyrus the Great comes along and fulfills these promises, he frees the Hebrews from captivity and allows them to return to their homeland for the first time in 5-6 decades. The second book of Isaiah which deals heavily with the prophesy of the messiah (and even names Cyrus as a Messiah), the coming judgment (ideas taken from the Zoroastrian Avesta) was composed during and immediately after the captivity. The Jews who returned weren't the same as the ones who left. They took the influence from the Zoroastrians and remade their belief system- there was a whole scale move towards strict monotheism, the idea of the messiah became so fervent in certain sects minds that they broke away from mainstream Judaism and formed separate apocalyptic cults (some of which would later be slapped with the label 'Christianity').

[oarabbus]

Genghis Khan > Any Jewish or Zoroastrian people

[SilkkTheShocker]

Jordan never killed anyone apart from his father



:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:


OMG, that was pure gold


:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[AlphaWolf24]

Kahn took over countries, raped and pillaged, drank every night and banged millions of virgins..

doesn't get much more Alpha then that.

he has my vote.

[riseagainst]

Jordan never killed anyone apart from his father

:roll:

so wrong.

[kNIOKAS]

Rotten type of thinking? I'd take it you'd prefer to live in the kind of era of medieval thinking and scientific backwardness that being ruled by a barbaric culture would bring?

I don't see what the Gulag and the Holocaust have to do with anything you dumb shit. WW2 did not 'spread Western culture' - it hastened its retreat, and brought the end of colonialism, which if it had endured would have embedded western culture deeper than it did. Kind of retarded comparison.

Humans have been slaughtering people forever and this guy thinks it's unimportant who wins because that's somehow 'rotten thinking' :facepalm
Which alternative scenario would result in medieval thinking and scientific backwardness? Didn't exactly the scenario that had Alexander conquering the most of the known world resulted in medieval thinking and scientific backwardness, as you call it? Or what?

The Second World War translated into the Cold War which ended in the global dominance of USA and influence of their culture. Without it US would not had have a chance to become what it is today.

Rotten thinking is saying that
Alexander does have the benefit of his conquests being generally helpful to humankind, in allowing the spread and proliferation of hellenistic principles and culture that might otherwise have been lost. This is absolutely a no-point. Yeah it is generally helpful to mankind to kill a lot of people. Helps mankind. Spreads a certain culture of the slaughterer which otherwise wouldn't be spread. Yeah.

[Dresta]

Which alternative scenario would result in medieval thinking and scientific backwardness? Didn't exactly the scenario that had Alexander conquering the most of the known world resulted in medieval thinking and scientific backwardness, as you call it? Or what?

The Second World War translated into the Cold War which ended in the global dominance of USA and influence of their culture. Without it US would not had have a chance to become what it is today.

Rotten thinking is saying that This is absolutely a no-point. Yeah it is generally helpful to mankind to kill a lot of people. Helps mankind. Spreads a certain culture of the slaughterer which otherwise wouldn't be spread. Yeah.
:facepalm

You're such a naive and ahistorical fool. The preservation of Greek learning and culture was salient in the revival of thinking that came after the Middle Ages, that allowed, Europe to develop into the dominant powers in the world, and the development of our civilisation. If Greece hadn't been dominated by the Macedon Empire, which took their culture and spread it through conquest, and the Romans who did the same; if instead of this happening, they had been conquered by a tribe like Genghis Khan's, or the Hun's, the Visigoths etc.and hard their entire history and culture effectively erased off the face of the earth, then who knows how long it would have taken to emerge from the Dark Ages? My surmise would be a lot longer and even with very different values than the ones we currently have.

There was no make peace and all shake hands back then; it was a completely different time, it was far more vicious and brutal, and you seem to share no understanding of this. Rather, you seem incapable of understanding just about anything.

[kNIOKAS]

:facepalm

You're such a naive and ahistorical fool. The preservation of Greek learning and culture was salient in the revival of thinking that came after the Middle Ages, that allowed, Europe to develop into the dominant powers in the world, and the development of our civilisation. If Greece hadn't been dominated by the Macedon Empire, which took their culture and spread it through conquest, and the Romans who did the same; if instead of this happening, they had been conquered by a tribe like Genghis Khan's, or the Hun's, the Visigoths etc.and hard their entire history and culture effectively erased off the face of the earth, then who knows how long it would have taken to emerge from the Dark Ages? My surmise would be a lot longer and even with very different values than the ones we currently have.

There was no make peace and all shake hands back then; it was a completely different time, it was far more vicious and brutal, and you seem to share no understanding of this. Rather, you seem incapable of understanding just about anything.
You don't know what could have happened. Nobody knows. To say that "if it wasn't somebody killing somebody, we wouldn't have values we have today" is meaningless. Yes, we would have different values. You would be starting your ridiculous argument from there.

What you are saying that if a lot of people hadn't been killed and conquered, "we" would be worse off. How about not? How about killing people is bad? How about civilisations getting massacred is bad for humanity?

[Dresta]

You don't know what could have happened. Nobody knows. To say that "if it wasn't somebody killing somebody, we wouldn't have values we have today" is meaningless. Yes, we would have different values. You would be starting your ridiculous argument from there.

What you are saying that if a lot of people hadn't been killed and conquered, "we" would be worse off. How about not? How about killing people is bad? How about civilisations getting massacred is bad for humanity?
These are historical facts i am giving you: the answers are obvious, you are either not comprehending or not reading what i have been saying, because your post is not at all a reply to it.

I do KNOW that what survived of Greek culture and science was instrumental in lifting Europe out of the Dark Ages. I can be pretty certain we've benefitted far more from having it to learn from than needing to develop from scratch due to some hoard of Barbarians wiping out Greek civilisation.

Culture and ideas have always been spread by force. What is so difficult about this for you to comprehend? If you were running an Empire during that time you would have been trampled and slaughtered in months, spouting absolutist nonsense like 'killing people is bad.'

You need to realise that some people were always going to be killed and conquered, what matters in respect to where we are now is who conquered who, not whether it adheres to whatever dogmatic ethical standards you think should apply.

[kNIOKAS]

These are historical facts i am giving you: the answers are obvious, you are either not comprehending or not reading what i have been saying, because your post is not at all a reply to it.

I do KNOW that what survived of Greek culture and science was instrumental in lifting Europe out of the Dark Ages. I can be pretty certain we've benefitted far more from having it to learn from than needing to develop from scratch due to some hoard of Barbarians wiping out Greek civilisation.

Culture and ideas have always been spread by force. What is so difficult about this for you to comprehend? If you were running an Empire during that time you would have been trampled and slaughtered in months, spouting absolutist nonsense like 'killing people is bad.'

You need to realise that some people were always going to be killed and conquered, what matters in respect to where we are now is who conquered who, not whether it adheres to whatever dogmatic ethical standards you think should apply.
Let me know how do you judge guys like Mao, Stalin and Hitler. They killed a lot of people, and let certain culture and ideas prevail, either of their own or of their adversaries. You would be having different values today, if not them.


Then again who knows what would have happened if the Alexander hadn't anihilated the most of the known world. Maybe we would be commuting between galaxies right know.

[Dresta]

Let me know how do you judge guys like Mao, Stalin and Hitler. They killed a lot of people, and let certain culture and ideas prevail, either of their own or of their adversaries. You would be having different values today, if not them.


Then again who knows what would have happened if the Alexander hadn't anihilated the most of the known world. Maybe we would be commuting between galaxies right know.
Don't see what they have to do anything. The world would most likely have been a far better place without them ever having existed; they also destroyed culture and only allowed their own totalitarian ideas to prevail; they didn't promote the culture of scientific inquiry, they destroyed it. The comparison you are making is ludicrous. You haven't answered me at all, just spewed irrelevant and incoherent naivety AGAIN.

Alexander didn't 'annihilate most of the known world' either :lol - he simply conquered a large part of it.

[kNIOKAS]

Don't see what they have to do anything. The world would most likely have been a far better place without them ever having existed; they also destroyed culture and only allowed their own totalitarian ideas to prevail; they didn't promote the culture of scientific inquiry, they destroyed it. The comparison you are making is ludicrous. You haven't answered me at all, just spewed irrelevant and incoherent naivety AGAIN.

Alexander didn't 'annihilate most of the known world' either :lol - he simply conquered a large part of it.
The world most likely have been a far better place without Alexander ever having existed. A lot of people would have saved their lives, and a lot of cultures would have been preserved.

Also, I think Nazi Germany and Soviet union was pretty advanced in science, don't you think so? First rockets, first man in the space... I wouldn't call it destroying the scientific inquiry.:confusedshrug:

[Kiddlovesnets]

What? This man was 10x worse than Adolf Hitler, look how many people he killed, directly or indirectly. The number is at least 200 million, back in the middle-age era 200 million was a huge number. He is not a hero, but a murderer and the world's worst culprit of genocides.

[Dresta]

The world most likely have been a far better place without Alexander ever having existed. A lot of people would have saved their lives, and a lot of cultures would have been preserved.

Also, I think Nazi Germany and Soviet union was pretty advanced in science, don't you think so? First rockets, first man in the space... I wouldn't call it destroying the scientific inquiry.:confusedshrug:
You have missed the point AGAIN. It was a constant state of war and turmoil then, and all states lived under the constant threat of invasion. No 'people' would have been saved, they'd all still be dead right now, and the only ****ing point that was being made was that Alexander carried out the beneficial (to our time) task of protecting Greek culture. Only to get your pathetic moralising thrown at me 'oh, how can you say such rotten things' 'killing is bad derp' 'people should be nice to each other, be happy and play' bla bla bla - get lost you utter child.

The Soviets and Nazi's may have been capable in some areas of science (the two you name: weapon making and propagandising) but they were still massively hostile to scientific inquiry. Ever heard of Lysenko? Of course not, because you don't have the faintest clue about the things you are debating

[kNIOKAS]

You have missed the point AGAIN. It was a constant state of war and turmoil then, and all states lived under the constant threat of invasion.
Invading other territories and killing their inhabitants is ok under the condition that they are in constant state of war and turmoil?

Hey, it just like that now. Europe has been under constant state of war and turmoil until the end of the Second World War. So I guess Hitler and Stalin were ok.


No 'people' would have been saved, they'd all still be dead right now
Ok. I guess all the people from 2000+ years ago would be dead by now, one way or another. I agree with the point you're making.


and the only ****ing point that was being made was that Alexander carried out the beneficial (to our time) task of protecting Greek culture.
No, he killed a number of Greeks, occupied the most of the known territories and peoples by that time and enforced the modified Greek culture on them, and did it through violence.

The Soviets and Nazi's may have been capable in some areas of science (the two you name: weapon making and propagandising) but they were still massively hostile to scientific inquiry. Ever heard of Lysenko? Of course not, because you don't have the faintest clue about the things you are debating
I never knew of fields of science such as "weapon making" and "propagandising". I thought it was like mathmatics, physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, etc.

Sadly, I really often have a clue about what are you saying... What is this concept of "being hostile to scientific inquiry"?

[dr.hee]

I never knew of fields of science such as "weapon making" and "propagandising". I thought it was like mathmatics, physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, etc.

Research motivated by military reasons was a huge factor in making human spaceflight technologically possible.

[Dresta]

Invading other territories and killing their inhabitants is ok under the condition that they are in constant state of war and turmoil?

Hey, it just like that now. Europe has been under constant state of war and turmoil until the end of the Second World War. So I guess Hitler and Stalin were ok.

Ok. I guess all the people from 2000+ years ago would be dead by now, one way or another. I agree with the point you're making.


No, he killed a number of Greeks, occupied the most of the known territories and peoples by that time and enforced the modified Greek culture on them, and did it through violence.

I never knew of fields of science such as "weapon making" and "propagandising". I thought it was like mathmatics, physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, etc.

Sadly, I really often have a clue about what are you saying... What is this concept of "being hostile to scientific inquiry"?
This is your problem: it has nothing to do with whether it is 'ok' or not, my view on the benefits of the spread of Greek culture has nothing to do with your idiotic moralising. Whether i think Alexander was morally repugnant or not is completely irrelevant.

'being hostile to scientific inquiry' is suppressing, by force, the publication of scientific conclusions that were contrary to the desires of the Soviet Union. Why can't you understand such simple things? (why don't you look up Lysenko, for example?).

[Nick Young]

You guys are fools.

Ghengis Khan spread more culture across a bigger distance then Alexander ever did.


Every civ that Ghengis conquered, he let all the artisans and scientists live, so that he could learn their best ideas from them, and then spread them across his empire.

Ghengis was responsible for expanding trade between Europe and Asia. He also invented the postal service, so that messages can be spread over his empire in a small amount of time. Ghengis took chinese gunpowder and spread that around the world too.

Ghengis allowed all religions and cultures to exist, and none of them had to pay a tax for worshiping the god they wanted to worship.

Mongols ALSO invented hamburger meat. They put spiced meat under their horse saddle and road 1000 miles to tenderize it. This became tar tar which evolved into hamburger meat when people cooked it.

[kNIOKAS]

This is your problem: it has nothing to do with whether it is 'ok' or not, my view on the benefits of the spread of Greek culture has nothing to do with your idiotic moralising. Whether i think Alexander was morally repugnant or not is completely irrelevant.

'being hostile to scientific inquiry' is suppressing, by force, the publication of scientific conclusions that were contrary to the desires of the Soviet Union. Why can't you understand such simple things? (why don't you look up Lysenko, for example?).
So you say it had a benefit of spreading the Greek culture. How about it was killing, occupying and opressing other peoples and cultures?

It's pretty much what British Empire did in Africa and all over the world. It is pretty much what Spaniards did to Mexico. It is pretty much what Soviets did to the most of the countries that they've occupied. Oh wait, this one is not ok - Soviets "were hostile towards scientific inquiry"! That doesn't fly!


On the other hand, Japan was spreading the benefits of their culture in Nanking - since they were "pro-scientific inquiry". Or were they? Maybe they also had a pseudoscientist in their history... Eugenics expert... Somebody.

I really feel that mentioning Lysenko could help you argument to not be ridiculous.

[kNIOKAS]

You guys are fools.

Ghengis Khan spread more culture across a bigger distance then Alexander ever did.


Every civ that Ghengis conquered, he let all the artisans and scientists live, so that he could learn their best ideas from them, and then spread them across his empire.

Ghengis was responsible for expanding trade between Europe and Asia. He also invented the postal service, so that messages can be spread over his empire in a small amount of time. Ghengis took chinese gunpowder and spread that around the world too.

Ghengis allowed all religions and cultures to exist, and none of them had to pay a tax for worshiping the god they wanted to worship.

Mongols ALSO invented hamburger meat. They put spiced meat under their horse saddle and road 1000 miles to tenderize it. This became tar tar which evolved into hamburger meat when people cooked it.
Ghengis Khan might be responsible for around 60 million deaths. He spread that culture alright! Allowed all religions and cultures to exist. Without humans in them.

[Dresta]

So you say it had a benefit of spreading the Greek culture. How about it was killing, occupying and opressing other peoples and cultures?

It's pretty much what British Empire did in Africa and all over the world. It is pretty much what Spaniards did to Mexico. It is pretty much what Soviets did to the most of the countries that they've occupied. Oh wait, this one is not ok - Soviets "were hostile towards scientific inquiry"! That doesn't fly!


On the other hand, Japan was spreading the benefits of their culture in Nanking - since they were "pro-scientific inquiry". Or were they? Maybe they also had a pseudoscientist in their history... Eugenics expert... Somebody.

I really feel that mentioning Lysenko could help you argument to not be ridiculous.
:lol

Man, you are so ****ing stupid. None of this idiotic post of yours even makes any sense

If you can't realise that the preservation of Greek culture was important for the development of W. Europe, then you should really just kill yourself. Europe was a cultural wasteland (with the exception of the Greeks) back then, and having the patronage of Rome and Macedon was important to its survival when you had so many tribal, warrior races around, who would have happily extinguished anything Greek. I don't know what these 'oppressed peoples and cultures' you are whining about are, because that sort of language is completely nonsensical for that period of human history. You just keep jumping from one irrelevancy to another; it's depressing.

Your moral judgments (incredibly childish ones btw) are completely irrelevant when it comes to historical impact. So stop being such a clueless fool.

[Dresta]

You guys are fools.

Ghengis Khan spread more culture across a bigger distance then Alexander ever did.


Every civ that Ghengis conquered, he let all the artisans and scientists live, so that he could learn their best ideas from them, and then spread them across his empire.

Ghengis was responsible for expanding trade between Europe and Asia. He also invented the postal service, so that messages can be spread over his empire in a small amount of time. Ghengis took chinese gunpowder and spread that around the world too.

Ghengis allowed all religions and cultures to exist, and none of them had to pay a tax for worshiping the god they wanted to worship.

Mongols ALSO invented hamburger meat. They put spiced meat under their horse saddle and road 1000 miles to tenderize it. This became tar tar which evolved into hamburger meat when people cooked it.
But don't you know that killing people is wrong? And that nothing beneficial to humanity could be done by somebody that kills people, even if it was over 2000 years ago!?!?!?!?!

[kNIOKAS]

:lol

Man, you are so ****ing stupid. None of this idiotic post of yours even makes any sense

If you can't realise that the preservation of Greek culture was important for the development of W. Europe, then you should really just kill yourself. Europe was a cultural wasteland (with the exception of the Greeks) back then, and having the patronage of Rome and Macedon was important to its survival when you had so many tribal, warrior races around, who would have happily extinguished anything Greek. I don't know what these 'oppressed peoples and cultures' you are whining about are, because that sort of language is completely nonsensical for that period of human history. You just keep jumping from one irrelevancy to another; it's depressing.

Your moral judgments (incredibly childish ones btw) are completely irrelevant when it comes to historical impact. So stop being such a clueless fool.
How likes of you going to judge Hitler and Stalin in two thousand years from now? Maybe this period of history is going to be considered turmoil-ish, so... Yeah, all good. Beneficial to humanity.

[Dresta]

How likes of you going to judge Hitler and Stalin in two thousand years from now? Maybe this period of history is going to be considered turmoil-ish, so... Yeah, all good. Beneficial to humanity.
Why do you keep repeating the names of two of the worst tyrants in human history, who mass executed or starved their own citizenry, and did it in a time when modern standards of morality had already evolved far beyond kill/conquer/fight for your own tribe/nation/whatever - why do you keep bringing this up as if it somehow justifies your idiotic point? Because it doesn't: it is ****ing irrelevant, like just about every point you have attempted to make, incoherently, and hysterically.

[kNIOKAS]

Why do you keep repeating the names of two of the worst tyrants in human history, who mass executed or starved their own citizenry, and did it in a time when modern standards of morality had already evolved far beyond kill/conquer/fight for your own tribe/nation/whatever - why do you keep bringing this up as if it somehow justifies your idiotic point? Because it doesn't: it is ****ing irrelevant, like just about every point you have attempted to make, incoherently, and hysterically.
Are you suggesting that morality has not been there in 300 B.C.? People were ok with getting killed and occupied back then, right? The morality wasn't evolved enough to recognise the killing and oppressing as bad?

Did they even feel pain before Christ?

[Dresta]

Are you suggesting that morality has not been there in 300 B.C.? People were ok with getting killed and occupied back then, right? The morality wasn't evolved enough to recognise the killing and oppressing as bad?

Did they even feel pain before Christ?
I'm not suggesting anything. I'm saying it is a fact that conventional morality was very different back then, and that the world was largely a place where you fought and won and dominated, or you were dominated by somebody else, you were sold into slavery etc. It was standard practice then that as a victorious conquering force it was your right to keep the populace of the place you have conquered as your slaves. So yeah, who rules over you in this case is extremely important.

lol @ this fool: so certain about his morality, yet completely unaware of where his sense of morality has come from (i can tell you, it's not intuitive). Morality evolves in a process of spontaneous order that progresses alongside the development of civilisation, which is why it constantly changes, and why you can't make moral judgements over time periods without taking historical context into account.

[kNIOKAS]

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm saying it is a fact that conventional morality was very different back then, and that the world was largely a place where you fought and won and dominated, or you were dominated by somebody else, you were sold into slavery etc. It was standard practice then that as a victorious conquering force it was your right to keep the populace of the place you have conquered as your slaves. So yeah, who rules over you in this case is extremely important.

lol @ this fool: so certain about his morality, yet completely unaware of where his sense of morality has come from (i can tell you, it's not intuitive). Morality evolves in a process of spontaneous order that progresses alongside the development of civilisation, which is why it constantly changes, and why you can't make moral judgements over time periods without taking historical context into account.
Hasn't the world always been like this?

So what you'd say about Hitler and Staling if you lived 2000 years later? That they carried on on the Alexander's task to spread the Greek culture which otherwise would have been lost?

[Dresta]

Why do you keep comparing the incomparable you jackass?

[kNIOKAS]

Why do you keep comparing the incomparable you jackass?
The biggest tyrants in the world are incomparable? Since when?

[Dresta]

The biggest tyrants in the world are incomparable? Since when?
Since they lived over 2000 years apart, were absolutely nothing alike, and whose circumstances and actions were completely different, that's 'since when'

If you want a 'tyrant' in antiquity closer Hitler and Stalin, i would instead look to Nero or Caligula, not Alexander you big steaming pile of brazen ignorance.

[kNIOKAS]

Since they lived over 2000 years apart, were absolutely nothing alike, and whose circumstances and actions were completely different, that's 'since when'

If you want a 'tyrant' in antiquity closer Hitler and Stalin, i would instead look to Nero or Caligula, not Alexander you big steaming pile of brazen ignorance.
So only now you openly admit your lack of historical knowlegde. Better late than never, I guess :confusedshrug:

He sacked entire cities, for example, he razed Thebes to the ground. He was seen as a tyrant and despized by the Greeks. I mean he conquered the most of the known world - how do you think it was done, by voting?

[Dresta]

So only now you openly admit your lack of historical knowlegde. Better late than never, I guess :confusedshrug:

He sacked entire cities, for example, he razed Thebes to the ground. He was seen as a tyrant and despized by the Greeks. I mean he conquered the most of the known world - how do you think it was done, by voting?
As has been standard practice in the world for thousands of years. If you want a modern comparison Napoleon and perhaps Lincoln with Grant and Sherman would be more apt, but they are still very different. Of course the Greeks despised their oppressors, but that is once again irrelevant to whether Alexander patronage of Greek culture wasn't of any benefit. They had revered the just as, if not more brutal heroes of the Iliad for centuries, and it was actually out of this period of oppression that a number philosophies flourished like Stoicism and Cynicism (because they provided a philosophy that made it easier to endure hard times) that run counter to what had then been the current consensus that conquest, domination and power were the aims in life.

You have continuously displayed a gross lack of historical knowledge throughout this whole of this discussion so don't give me that shit.

[kNIOKAS]

As has been standard practice in the world for thousands of years. If you want a modern comparison Napoleon and perhaps Lincoln with Grant and Sherman would be more apt, but they are still very different. Of course the Greeks despised their oppressors, but that is once again irrelevant to whether Alexander patronage of Greek culture wasn't of any benefit. They had revered the just as, if not more brutal heroes of the Iliad for centuries, and it was actually out of this period of oppression that a number philosophies flourished like Stoicism and Cynicism (because they provided a philosophy that made it easier to endure hard times) that run counter to what had then been the current consensus that conquest, domination and power were the aims in life.

You have continuously displayed a gross lack of historical knowledge throughout this whole of this discussion so don't give me that shit.
How is this relevant to your argument? Does what you've written here support the notion that Alexander wasn't a tyrant?

:hammerhead:

[Trollsmasher]

Dresta with so much sonning in every post:lebronamazed: :applause:

[kNIOKAS]

Dresta with so much sonning in every post:lebronamazed: :applause:
Whatever you call spewing nonsense... Oh wow.

[KingBeasley08]

How is this relevant to your argument? Does what you've written here support the notion that Alexander wasn't a tyrant?

:hammerhead:
My fcking God. Alexander being a tyrant doesn't mean that he didn't have a very positive impact on the history of the world. Fcking hippie

And Genghis Khan is still the GOAT alpha male.

[Dresta]

How is this relevant to your argument? Does what you've written here support the notion that Alexander wasn't a tyrant?

:hammerhead:
Once again: whether Alexander was a tyrant or not is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.
My fcking God. Alexander being a tyrant doesn't mean that he didn't have a very positive impact on the history of the world. Fcking hippie

And Genghis Khan is still the GOAT alpha male.
Oh no, what rotten thinking! But HOW CAN YOU EXPLAIN HITLER AND STALIN DOE? DEY DO MUCH GOOD AS WELL BY YOUR LOGIC YES YES!?!?!?!

[Ratnik]

Uncle Adolf takes my vote :cheers:

[KingBeasley08]

Uncle Adolf takes my vote :cheers:
Uncle got bitch slapped by Stalin. Can't be the GOAT alpha male if you lost to your biggest rival. Like sayin' Drexler was greater than Jordan

[kNIOKAS]

My fcking God. Alexander being a tyrant doesn't mean that he didn't have a very positive impact on the history of the world. Fcking hippie

And Genghis Khan is still the GOAT alpha male.
If killing a lot of people is a very positive impact on the history, then yes.

Actually, you have Genghis Khan for the GOAT alpha male I see. You are consistent, I see.

[Lebron23]

One of his descendants.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/03_04/khanG2503_468x687.jpg

[triangleoffense]

he didn't really start from the bottom tho since his dad was a king or something

source: wiki

Also the alpha goat can't be genghis khan since it's clearly OP

[Nowitness]

Reading this thread has made me realize that history class has failed most of you.

[MadeFromDust]

Ummmm, Abraham, duhhhhh

Father of many nations, hello??

[MadeFromDust]

But Genghis Grill is pretty good and for that, he can get a ranking

[Legends66NBA7]

Man, missed out on a crazy read last year.

[KyrieTheFuture]

I disagree with Dresta politically usually, but he is ****ing crushing everyone in this thread

[CasterL]

William the Conqurer and the Normans had a Monster impact. Strong Per rating. Charlemagne is another good one. A tier below a couple that have been discussed already but still pretty boss.

[Timmy D for MVP]

Genghis is my favorite conqueror of all time. What he and the Mongols were able to accomplish is astonishing.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

yeah they fun to play with in age of empries

[TheMan]

Bothe Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great have songs written about them by Iron Maiden :rockon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGL_L0fok10&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZvqZhskVPE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Both were badass but my vote still goes to Khan because he banged thousands of chicks and Alexander had cockbreath.

[pauk]

Ottomans Sultan doe.... and did it in not such a weak era...

[Graviton]

Yea Genkhis Khan is definitely my favorite rapist/murderer. Funny how over the years people look differently at historical figures. Wonder how Hitler will be remembered in a few centuries. I can just picture the thread.

"Hitler was responsible for the genocide of millions man, Peak Hitler is the most underrated in world history". :lol

[tpols]

Yea Genkhis Khan is definitely my favorite rapist/murderer. Funny how over the years people look differently at historical figures. Wonder how Hitler will be remembered in a few centuries. I can just picture the thread.

"Hitler was responsible for the genocide of millions man, Peak Hitler is the most underrated in world history". :lol

Reported.

Lol

[KNOW1EDGE]

I really don't know too much about Genghis Khan but I am enjoying watching posters get all bent out of shape over another posters opinion on him. :cheers:

[Graviton]

Reported.

Lol
Can you imagine some futuristic stans similar to Pauk/Jlauber arguing Stalin vs Hitler. :lol

Some new statistics will be made up...

"PER"=People Extermination Rating
"RPM"=Real pu$$y+Manslaughter ratio

BTW why the **** is pu$$y censored, cmon Jeff just because you don't get any doesn't mean you can erase it from existence.

[RoseCity07]

Makes Wilt look like a virgin:oldlol:

Seriously though this guy must have been f*cking like 8 times a day. Truly the GOAT life. True alpha.