I agree is the greatest leader ever. If you speaking of wars & taking over countries Genghis Khan was. Look him up. His life and who much his people owned is unreal
www.historchannel.com\
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan
www.hyperhistory.net
www.fsmitha.com
www.hyperhistory.com
www.royalalbertamuseum.ca/vexhibit/genghis/intro.htm
www.news.nationalgeographic.com
These are but a few.
I hope I helped or at least gave you someting to think about & som one to learn sbout. Very intresting.
2007-01-20 05:26:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Blues Man 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
No way.
Firstly, you cannot isolate the moral dimension from leadership. Hitler was an evil man, to make a huge understatement. And the incoherence of his wicked ideology prevented his leadership from having a clear direction.
Secondly, Hitler's peacetime and civil leadership was a shambles. The administration of Germany under the Nazis was a mess of competing organisations with overlapping boundaries. If Hitler had not gone to war in 1939, there are indications that Germany would have collapsed economically.
Thirdly, a great leader would appreciate the situation he was taking decisions in, which Hitler did not. For instance Hitler failed to appreciate that the UK would go to war in 1939.
Fourthly, Hitler made devastating strategic mistakes, particularly in Russia which he invaded too late in 1941, and where in 1942 he attacked Stalingrad instead of knocking out Moscow and the centre of the Soviet Union, compounding his error by refusing to withdraw his troops.
Fifthly, Hitler was exceptional in his use of charisma to gain loyalty from ordinary people and troops, but other aspects of his human relations management were absymal. He never really got loyalty from his top subordinates, particularly in the German army (c.f. the 1944 attempted coup). Even more seriously, he failed to motivate experts such as scientists or to use their specialist skills effectively: if he had done this the allies would have had serious difficulties in combating advanced weapons which in the event were not ready by the end of the war.
Sixthly, Hitler's racism and his extermination of the Jews and others is of course utterly morally appalling. But from a leadership point of view it in addition represents a waste of resources that could have been mobilised to support Germany.
I hope you will see from the way I have answered you that I am looking at Hitler's leadership from a management science point of view, and the answer from that point of view is that Hitler was a dreadful leader.
Finally, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I don't agree with you that Hitler almost conquered the world. For a start, he had almost no military effect on the United States or anywhere else in the Americas. He intended the Third Reich to last a thousand years, but failed in this leadership objective so spectacularly that it only lasted thriteen years. And he ended up having to commit suicide. If those are not the results of a failed leader I don't know what are.
P.S. Alexander of Macedon has strong claims to be the greatest leader the world has ever seen. Starting from a small state in Greece he conquered almost all the then known world.
2007-01-20 15:18:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Philosophical Fred 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Hitler no way near conquered the world. Look at a world map, and mark out the areas that were under Hitler's control. Not very much.
A leader who conquered much more in far less time was Genghis Khan. He controlled all of the Northern half of Asia plus a large spear head into Europe all the way to Germany and France.
Had Khan lived a few years longer all of the organized nations of the world would have been under his personal control. He was not killed in battle.
2007-01-20 13:30:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
No. He was a criminally insane iron fisted dictator that just happened to have the 'gift' of gab. He used that gift to hypnotize the masses by saying what they wanted to hear. His SS murder squads made sure nobody said anything bad about him. Those that did raise their voices disappeared and were never seen again. He murdered dissidents, gypsies, Christians, Protestants, all of the retarded and disabled, Mayors, police chiefs, Jewish people, etc. And that was in Germany! When he invaded other countries, he did the same there! Does that sound like a great leader?
2007-01-20 13:31:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
I don't know about that. My vote would go to Pope John Paul II. Unlike Hitler, the Holy Father had no way to insure compliance with his wishes. Everyone who ever listened to him and furthered the causes for which he stood did so 100% voluntarily. His words emboldened Solidarity in Poland, which in turn became the first crack to show through the black wall of Communism. When he said, "Be not afraid" with that humble smile of his, people knew he was right and were willing to risk their lives to further the cause of dignity and respect for all men.
I very much credit Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher for winning the Cold War, but if it hadn't been for the Holy Father, they wouldn't have been in a position to do so.
2007-01-20 13:25:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Rick N 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
not quite he didn't conquer much of anything, he was just a dictator over many people, as for the greatest leader in the world Alexander the Great conquered more land than anyone and accomplished so much during his short reign
2007-01-20 13:18:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by *Jenny from the block* 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
You are right, youdunnomuch!
Bush's grandfathers buddy, who he helped finance and had his assets seized, is a really great leader!
He is responsible for:
It is estimated that about 55 million people died in the European theater during World War II. Globally a total of over 60 million people died in WWII and of those 60 million, more were civilian than soldiers. The Soviet Union lost the most with 25 million deaths, but only about a third were combat related. China's death toll is incomplete but estimates are between 15 and 22 million, Poland had 6 million deaths including 3 million Jews, roughly 20% of its prewar population, Germany lost 4 million soldiers and 2 million civilians, many of them women, Japan had 1.2 million battle deaths and another 1.4 million soldiers listed as missing, almost 1 million civilians were killed in the bombing raids between 1944 and 1945, over 1.7 million Yugoslavs and 500,000 Greeks died in the war, France lost 200,000 soldiers and 400,000 civilians, Italy lost 330,000 people, Hungary lost 147,000 men in combat, Bulgaria lost 19,000 in combat, Romania lost 73,000 in combat, Great Britain lost 264,000 soldiers and 60,000 civilians in bombing raids, the United States lost 292,000 soldiers, the Dutch lost 10,000 soldiers and 190,000 civilians, Australia lost 23,000 men in combat, Canada 37,000 soldiers, India lost 24,000 men in battle, New Zealand 10,000 and South Africa 6,000. These totals do not include the 6 million Jews who perished in the Final Solution of Nazi Germany or the 17 million dead as a result of Japan's policies in Asia from 1931 to 1945.
See a shrink!
2007-01-20 13:21:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by cantcu 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
He certianly has had a greater impact on World history than any other leader. Everthing he did good and bad still effects the world today.
2007-01-20 13:20:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would not say so, he vastly underestimated his enemies and destroyed his nation in a few short years. he took a nation of strong people and powerful industry and destroyed it in an insane attemt to rule Europe....as far using the term "greatest", to me it would have to include a certain amount of morality and there was no morality in killing millions in concentration camps.
If you want to idolize a leader, look into Napoleon, Wellington, Ghandi, Jefferson, Washington....they had many "great" characterists.
2007-01-20 13:19:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ford Prefect 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
What did Hitler accomplish to make him "great"? He started a war which killed nearly 60 million people and caused his own country to be split into two. He lost the war, and failed in his mission of racial purity. By all measures, he was an utter failure.
And that doesn't even take into account his absolute evil. You're right, you "donnomuch."
cantcu: In addition to being "Bush's granddaddy's buddy," Hitler was also Ted Kennedy's father's buddy. So let's stop with the partisan bullshit, okay?
2007-01-20 13:30:03
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋