|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 12 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-21-06 | | jackmandoo: Sorry about my choppy unedited writing my brothers, for I dont believe in going back and fixing the mistakeies, I stick to what I say, no matters what may come out. |
|
| Jan-21-06 | | SniperOnG7: <Gypsy> Khan was indeed a great military leader but the devastation he caused was so great that not many people want to talk about him. Most leaders conquer but he destroy and that is why most people don't respect him.
As for Napolean, he was DEFINITELY NOT an idiot and if theres a leader who was stupid, it was Hitler. LOL after what happened a century ago, he still charged into Russia. He is either arrogant, stupid or didnt pay attention to history classes back at school. |
|
| Jan-21-06 | | hidude: This guy is smart. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | alicefujimori: <Ron>I understand, but many people do disregard them, which is a pity. I don't blame them for it because many people are brought up like me with Western history that tends to disregard the history of the East. There has been a debate concerning whether Columbus was the first to discover the West recently. Apparently, evidence were found that there was a Chinese person who actually might had "discovered" the West 70 years prior to Columbus. If the evidence are proven to be true, then Columbus will fade away from future history books, which he doesn't deserve to belong in the first place if it is proven to be true. This is one of the good examples of the possible result of disregarding the history of the East. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | notsodeepthought: <If the evidence are proven to be true, then Columbus will fade away from future history books> Sorry, the evidence may very well be true, but Columbus will not fade at all. For that matter, it has been argued that Leif Ericsson reached North America (the Labrador region) around 1000 A.D. - but, for right or wrong, he is little more than a footnote in North American history. Reasonable minds may disagree as to whether Columbus should be called a "discoverer". But history books will continue to discuss him in detail for centuries to come because it was his expedition that triggered the colonization of the "New World". Some of those books will praise him, others will vilify him, and most will do a bit of both - but none of them will ignore him. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | alicefujimori: <notsodeepthought>Maybe I haven't phased myself clearly. I actually meant the part where he "discovered" the West that will be faded away. Anything else that happened as a result of his expedition is not included, of course. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | szunzein: I can't understand why after ruining this country Napoleon Bonaparte is still considered "a genius" (at least here); mistery |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | SniperOnG7: <szunzein> Just curious, as un(e) français(e) (sorry about that) why do you dislike Napolean...Can you provide some insight to how he ruined France? |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | meloncio: <SniperOnG7> Maybe because Napolleone Buonaparte (a full-blood Italian) always spoke French with a strong Corsican accent. :-)) |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | szunzein: Sniper: Napoleon not only ruined this country; he humiliated it. I guess I don't need to give you any lesson in history; I won't tell you how many times the enemy enter Paris in less than two years, and how many it did before Napoleon, and I won't tell you how many people were killed......not only French of course.
You are wrong 100% if you think that being French makes you "automatically" a Napoleon admirer |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | vampiero: Napoleon was an extremely talented (and lucky) General. Just because he ended up losing to Russia after defeating Italy, Austria, Prussia, and Spain, and other German States does not make him any less talented. Would u claim that Hannibal wasn't a great general just because he ended up losing to the Romans??? Even more so, if you WANT a history leason. Napoleon did destroy the majority of the russian army which was forced to retreat. The only reason his army began to die of hunger and cold was due to the fact that the russians evacuated and BURNT Moscow to the ground destroying any possible food and shelter. Now i officially challenge anyone to show me how napoleon wan'st a great general and even more so...embarassed his country.....Did Rommel embarass Germany just because he was outnumbered and didn't have enough fuel for his famous tanks in Africa??? |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | ughaibu: Militarism may not be an embarrassment to countries but it is an embarrassment to the species. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | szunzein: Napoleon was responsable for the death of hundreds of thousand of people; he held that sad "world record" untill you know who broke it in the 1940's; I think is wrong to admire warriors, I couldn't care less whether the guy was a military genius or not. And by the way if he didn't see in advance the counterplay the Russian had in store for him and his invading army, or Rommel his tanks "running out of fuel" that was just their fault; tant pis pour eux. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | norami: That sad "world record" was broken by Stalin and then broken again by Mao, who still holds it. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | szunzein: Beethoven understud who Napoleon was when witnessing the destruction of Vienna by the Napoleon army; he changed his view about the guy. Beethoven however wrote music, a beautifull music that we can still enjoy; that was a genius, a real one! |
|
Jan-22-06
 | | Ron: <vampiero> I am in the main in agreement with your post.
Come to think of it, it seems that most of the great military leaders have lost at least one battle.
Parallel to chess: Even great players like Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer dropped a game occasionally. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | Cecil Brown: <i officially challenge anyone to show me how napoleon wasn't a great general> Jingoism compells me to post this link:-
http://www.britishbattles.com/water... Although <ughaibu>'s comment <Militarism may not be an embarrassment to countries but it is an embarrassment to the species> has more than a grain of truth to it. It's a funny chap who goes about starting wars without any real need to. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | SniperOnG7: <szunzein> Thanks for that...some interesting information that i didn't know. To tell you the truth, im really interested in history but i don't take history classes - but i do take French :) - so i learn these history stuff from people. BTW this is just a guess but was Paris invaded so many times because most of France's neighbours were invaded by Napolean so they took revenge?!
<You are wrong 100% if you think that being French makes you "automatically" a Napoleon admirer> Im sorry if you thought this was my viewpoint. I was merely curious, learning the perspective of those "from the inside" if you like. <meloncio> Don't think so...if im not mistaken, the French is one of the most tolerating people. LOL at least i hope so anyway cause one of the main reasons why im learning French is to go to France one day. Hope they'll stand my NewZealand/Taiwanese accent ;) |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | WMD: <Militarism may not be an embarrassment to countries but it is an embarrassment to the species.> Pompous pranny. If you don't like this species, join another. |
|
| Jan-22-06 | | ughaibu: There's no implication that I dont like this species. |
|
Jan-23-06
 | | Gypsy: <SniperOnG7: ... Khan was indeed a great military leader but the devastation he caused was so great that not many people want to talk about him.> Khan was also cruel beyond comprehention. As a military leader however, he is one of the most notorious. So I was surprised no one mentioned has him. |
|
| Jan-23-06 | | szunzein: Sniper: thank you; I hope you will come to France soon and that you will like it.
Bonne chance et à bientôt! |
|
| Jan-23-06 | | vampiero: i dont understand who you people are to condemn things that come naturally to humans. Competitions, and as a result, fighting are things that are part of human nature, if not animal nature. The only difference is that this is a large scale country thing instead of a personal combat. Now i would doubt that <szunzein> would claim "tant pis tour toi" for Einstein (means 'too bad for you') just becauase the never was able to solve the unifying theory of the universe, and just because Kasparov lost a game doen'st diminish his genius any less as <Ron> states beatifully. But the fact that Napoleon was a military genius (or just a talented general; whichever way you prefer) doen'st diminish his accomplishments just because they dont meat the moral and ethic standards of a kibitzer! |
|
| Jan-23-06 | | morphyvsfischer: <vampiero> I have nothing against the French, it's just that Napoleon was an idiot. And no, I don't think that Napoleon was the sole idiot and I may have been a bit too harsh. But Napoleon had far too much ambition. Hitler made a BIG, BIG boo-boo when he didn't invade Britian. And, in another post, I'll tell a story about the stupidest possible outcome in war. It is true that there were far dumber generals than Napoleon, but he doesn't deserve as much credit as you give him. He didn't invent canned food; the can has been around for many years, waiting for someone to exploit it in battle. Instead of using what he captured, he destroyed it, which meant that he clearly didn't care about his army's well being. Conquering= free food and a much boosted economy. Destruction=food for an instant, then no more. Simple as that. The only things necessary to destroy are military buildings, military units, and threatening militias. The reason we aren't condeming other generals is because this is the Bonaparte forum. |
|
| Jan-23-06 | | morphyvsfischer: Here's the stupidity of the Americans, arguably the most laughable of all time: The war in Cuba against Spain is an atrocisty. First of all, there weren't enough men or supplies, due to those provocative politicians. Secondly, the general to lead the expedition was inexperienced and and idiot. The port he landed at didn't have enough room for ships and only one railroad track, so ships were backed up for miles. There was no way to off-load horses there, either, so they were thrown overboard, many of which drowned. A small Spanish armada could have ended the war right there. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 12 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
