NationStates Jolt Archive

I'd go for Gandi or King. Mandela's in there as well.

Who would you put on your list of greats though?

wow... that's a hard question...
but a good one, probably a bit too thought provoking...

Unfortunately, I don't know any centaurs by name, so I couldn't tell you which one is best.

George Bush

I know its been metiond but gandi for sure the dudes a god! I also like Elizabeth I wending all this killing of catholics and protestants lovely stuff.

Well, I'm gonna have to say Stalin. Like I always say, but I think Kemal Ataturk deserves a good mention.
Or maybe even Adolf Hitler? Why him? Well, he made the VW Bug so damn cute, that's gotta be worth something.

(Yes, it was Hitler's design changes to the original VW Bug that made it cute, Porsche's design was butt ugly.)

Here's my Top 3 List:
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Willy Brandt
Mikhail Gorbachev

Einstein.

Please learn to spell century !!!!


Bobby Moore

Please learn to spell century !!!!

Do you have something against centaurs? Centaurs are people too, you know.

Two centaur jokes on page one. Not bad.

ok who was the greatest centaur of the 20th Century ?

Lenny Bruce or Jack Kerouac.

Two centaur jokes on page one. Not bad.

:) Shame I'm too lazy to find the names of the famous ones.

Einstein. Without his relativity, we would scientificly be stuck in the 40's or 50's. Although, Steve Jobbs is also great, without him, there wouldn't have been apple, and we would be stuck in '95 or '98 :P

I know its been metiond but gandi for sure the dudes a god! I also like Elizabeth I wending all this killing of catholics and protestants lovely stuff.

Funny...last time I looked Eilzabeth I was long gone by the 20th Century.

I'd have to say Sir Winston Churchill - one of the most inspiring people ever. Shortly followed by William Shakespeare(!)

Funny...last time I looked Eilzabeth I was long gone by the 20th Century.
You looked? Do you have a time machine? Maybe Elizabeth I had a time machine. You should learn to not be so dismissive.

ok who was the greatest centaur of the 20th Century ?

Fine, I'll look it up.

tap, tap, tap...

Right. Google suggests, in an incredibly scientific search of "greatest centaur" and 20 (ignoring the random porn links - go figure):

The greatest Centaur chieftain, Gulmana, led the forces of Niea’la in the last battle of the Fourth Age (Some Christian RPG whose link seems to be broken)

Sometimes called the Huntress, Anya is one of the greatest Centaur warriors alive, and leader of the nomadic herds of Paramecia (link works)

And the old classic from Greek myth, Chiron.


Apologies to the original poster for hijacking what is a quite interesting thread. In penance, I'll provide a couple suggestions from other fields besides politics:

Dalai Lama
Pablo Picasso

Fine, I'll look it up.

tap, tap, tap...

Right. Google suggests, in an incredibly scientific search of "greatest centaur" and 20 (ignoring the random porn links - go figure):

The greatest Centaur chieftain, Gulmana, led the forces of Niea’la in the last battle of the Fourth Age (Some Christian RPG whose link seems to be broken)

Sometimes called the Huntress, Anya is one of the greatest Centaur warriors alive, and leader of the nomadic herds of Paramecia (link works)

And the old classic from Greek myth, Chiron.


Apologies to the original poster for hijacking what is a quite interesting thread. In penance, I'll provide a couple suggestions from other fields besides politics:

Dalai Lama
Pablo Picasso
Don't worry, you're about the fourth person with the centaur jokes. You do have the honour, however, of being the first person sad enough to look it up on google. I bow down before you.

Anyone know how to spell centuary? If you can, mods please change the tital.

Uh...and please learn to spell title. :p

Uh...and please learn to spell title. :p
Bastard.

Vaclav Havel, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, George Patton, or the guy who stood in front of the tanks in Tiananmen Square.

Vaclav Havel, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, George Patton, or the guy who stood in front of the tanks in Tiananmen Square. Patton!........ :eek:

Greatest in what way? That their existence totally changed the face of the world?

Hitler's for me.

Gahndi, maybe the Dalai Llama.

Greatest in what way? That their existence totally changed the face of the world?

Hitler's for me.
There's always one.

first off...just changing the world doesn't make you GREAT in any way...Hitler...yea great man for slaughtering millions of people...excuse me while i slap myself in the forehead for whoever thought hitler in any way could be considered great....

As for me - Ronald Reagan or Ayn Rand (forgot to add ayn rand in first draft, how stupid of me)

Then whats the definition for Greatest?

Then whats the definition for Greatest?
Hitler could also be considered a great leader in that he has very good at leading and inspiring people into action. The counter argument, of course, is that it was PR more than leadership. He didn't act in the way that his people would have actually wanted.

My vote goes for Winston Churchill.

Richard Feynman

I guess it of course depends of what you define as "great"

For myself it would have to be "Pierre Elliot Trudeau" he was Canada's best P.M. and I believe held the office longer than any other person in Canadian history.

However that is not why I consider him to be the greatest. I consider him to be the greatest because he brought total sovereignty to Canada from the UK without a single bullet ever being fired.

He also did what is nothing short of amazing during the days of the FLQ. While we live in a state of world wide terrorism today, that could of easily of happened to Canada back in the days of the FLQ as they were terrorists. However, Pierre Elliot Trudeau stomped out terrorism in Canada in about a month. We haven't seen it since.

He gave Canada her identity, he defined us as a people and the type of people we are today. An inclusive country and dreamed of the multiculturalism that we also have today unlike the attitude of the USA. He dreamed that Canada would respect and encourage every one to be free to their beliefs and culture and to celebrate it.

Since that day, Canada has never adopted the American principle of "The melting pot" idea. Which I am really proud of. I could go on, the list is long. Pierre Elliot Trudeau the greatest man to my mind of the 20th century.

This is hard. I think I'll say Gandhi.

Well, I'm gonna have to say Stalin. Like I always say, but I think Kemal Ataturk deserves a good mention.
Or maybe even Adolf Hitler? Why him? Well, he made the VW Bug so damn cute, that's gotta be worth something.

(Yes, it was Hitler's design changes to the original VW Bug that made it cute, Porsche's design was butt ugly.)
Hitler and Stalin? Surely these are the worst men of the century?

first off...just changing the world doesn't make you GREAT in any way...Hitler...yea great man for slaughtering millions of people...excuse me while i slap myself in the forehead for whoever thought hitler in any way could be considered great....

As for me - Ronald Reagan or Ayn Rand (forgot to add ayn rand in first draft, how stupid of me)
Reagan also caused many thousands of people to be killed. Not as bad as Hitler, but no saint.

George Bush
What has Bush done that is on a par with the significance of someone like Gandhi, Churchill or FDR?

If you really wanted to be a partisan Republican, you could do better and just say Reagan. Even though I think that he was a bad man, he has more of a case than Bush.

This is hard. I think I'll say Gandhi.


Hitler and Stalin? Surely these are the worst men of the century?


Reagan also caused many thousands of people to be killed. Not as bad as Hitler, but no saint.


What has Bush done that is on a par with the significance of someone like Gandhi, Churchill or FDR?

If you really wanted to be a partisan Republican, you could do better and just say Reagan. Even though I think that he was a bad man, he has more of a case than Bush.


You see, it all depends on what you define as greatness.
For instance, Hitler brought Germany from the Great Depression and into a world super power after it had been devastated by a world war, humiliated by the French, and basicly thrown into utter chaos.
Let's not forget, he comissioned the VW Bug, designed the final cosmetic look of that car too.
And he was Time Magazine's man of the year in 1936 I think.
And Stalin, well he dragged Russia kicking and scraming from a third world nation to the superpower it became in the Cold war, and because of this he drove the "western nations" like the US, Britian, and Canada, into further devlopment. All of this was done faster then has ever been done before or after.

Again, Churchill can be argued against, as his commissioning of the tank durring the first world war caused the deaths of more people, both civillians and soldiers, then chemical warfare has in the past 100 or so years.
Ghandi, while a great man, no question of that, I don;t consider him the greatest. All he did was use tactics against an enemy that was not prepared for them, and brought independance to his nation (Only to watch it split into two warring nations).
If you wish to include Ghandi, then I say we also include the wonderful Ho Chi Minh, who did the very same thing, twice. Using unconventional tactics against two "great empires" over a period of some 25 years to secure the independance of his nation.
The only difference between why Ho Chi Minh chose voilence to peace, unlike Ghandi, is because both the French and Americans were prepared for the same stuff Ghandi did. Non-viloence does not work against everyone, it only workes against those who expect viloence. The unthinking bully if you will.

If Ghandi is to be nominated, then I say so should Ho Chi Minh.
If Churchill is to be nominated, then I say so should Hitler.
Stalin did something no other man in history did, and he deserves recognition for that too.
Just because someone does something we do not agree with, does not mean that's all they do, and does not mean that is all they should be juged on.

You see, it all depends on what you define as greatness.
For instance, Hitler brought Germany from the Great Depression and into a world super power after it had been devastated by a world war, humiliated by the French, and basicly thrown into utter chaos.
Let's not forget, he comissioned the VW Bug, designed the final cosmetic look of that car too.
And he was Time Magazine's man of the year in 1936 I think.
And Stalin, well he dragged Russia kicking and scraming from a third world nation to the superpower it became in the Cold war, and because of this he drove the "western nations" like the US, Britian, and Canada, into further devlopment. All of this was done faster then has ever been done before or after.

Again, Churchill can be argued against, as his commissioning of the tank durring the first world war caused the deaths of more people, both civillians and soldiers, then chemical warfare has in the past 100 or so years.
Ghandi, while a great man, no question of that, I don;t consider him the greatest. All he did was use tactics against an enemy that was not prepared for them, and brought independance to his nation (Only to watch it split into two warring nations).
If you wish to include Ghandi, then I say we also include the wonderful Ho Chi Minh, who did the very same thing, twice. Using unconventional tactics against two "great empires" over a period of some 25 years to secure the independance of his nation.
The only difference between why Ho Chi Minh chose voilence to peace, unlike Ghandi, is because both the French and Americans were prepared for the same stuff Ghandi did. Non-viloence does not work against everyone, it only workes against those who expect viloence. The unthinking bully if you will.

If Ghandi is to be nominated, then I say so should Ho Chi Minh.
If Churchill is to be nominated, then I say so should Hitler.
Stalin did something no other man in history did, and he deserves recognition for that too.
Just because someone does something we do not agree with, does not mean that's all they do, and does not mean that is all they should be juged on.
If you say so. However I don't balive Churchill can be compaired to Hitler.

Probably Martin Luther King, although there is a long list of runner-ups

Ghandi
Churchill
Einstein
Reagan

And others, of course, but I figured a top-five list would look better

Pablo Picasso

After him, all the plastic arts became derivative, he was the apex of Modern Art and in my opinion the Apex of Art, after him there is no one you can consider a master.

Pablo Picasso

After him, all the plastic arts became derivative, he was the apex of Modern Art and in my opinion the Apex of Art, after him there is no one you can consider a master.
Good point I hadn't thought of him, but did he really change the world like King, or Einstein

Good point I hadn't thought of him, but did he really change the world like King, or Einstein

Picasso did better..He EXPRESSED the world, he gave us a new vision of the world, a new way of seeing the woordl...he changed the means by which we view just about everything...

Picasso did better..He EXPRESSED the world, he gave us a new vision of the world, a new way of seeing the woordl...he changed the means by which we view just about everything...
I don't think he canged how I see things. How did he do so?

Nikola Tesla AKA All electronics in your house besides portable DC battery powered stuff. Hail alternating current!

Greatest as in the person that I admire the most:
Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill, Ayn Rand, Hiroshi Yamauchi (founder of Nintendo :fluffle: ), Greg (me), Pink Floyd, Urbanus, Ghandi

Greatest as in the person that had the most influence on history:
Stalin, Hitler, Reagan, Churchill, Roosevelt, Greg (me)

Greatest Person : Hitler, he turned Germany around in the space of 20 years, an amazing leader, also changed the face of the world, even if he was an evil git. Stalin is the same.

Gahndi, maybe the Dalai Llama.
both very good choices since both were quite pro nazi back in the day.

I'm slightly puzzled as to why Ronald Reagan keeps popping up. What makes him so great?

And people admiring Stalin - I find that sick. And Stalin and Hitler were on the complete opposite sides of the political spectrum yet a few people have said they really admire both of them. With totally different policies and beliefs, and the only thing in common is their mutual killing of innocent people, one wonders if this is what turns you sick people on.

Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher politically speaking.
Sir Edward Elgar culturally speaking.

I'm slightly puzzled as to why Ronald Reagan keeps popping up. What makes him so great?

And people admiring Stalin - I find that sick. And Stalin and Hitler were on the complete opposite sides of the political spectrum yet a few people have said they really admire both of them.
They didn't say they admire them. They said they could be defined as great, depending on your definition of great.

jackie wilson. he wrote (or at least did best ever version of) 'I get the sweetest feeling' they should play that on repeat in Iraq and maybe the war would stop. who knows.

jackie wilson. he wrote (or at least did best ever version of) 'I get the sweetest feeling' they should play that on repeat in Iraq and maybe the war would stop. who knows.
You mean because everyone will stop shooting each other and shoot themselves instead?

You mean because everyone will stop shooting each other and shoot themselves instead?

you know damn well that the song could only ever inspire love and joy.

heathen. i suggest torching you.

DEATH TO UNBELIEVERS. DEATH TO INFIDEL. JACKIE WILSON RULES

you know damn well that the song could only ever inspire love and joy.

heathen. i suggest torching you.

DEATH TO UNBELIEVERS. DEATH TO INFIDEL. JACKIE WILSON RULES
Um, I do like the song. But any song played on repeat, no matter how good, will only ultimately inspire suicidal thoughts.

Dear people, the question was about the best 20 centaury.

The etymology of centaury is from the Middle English centaure, from Middle French centaurée, from Medieval Latin centaurea, from Latin centaureum, from Greek kentaureion, and from from Kentauros.
According to an online dictionary it is:
1 : any of a genus (Centaurium) of low herbs of the gentian family; especially : an Old World herb (C. umbellatum) formerly used as a tonic
2 : an herb (Sabatia angularis) of the eastern U.S. closely related to centaury

Therefore, of the top 20 herbs of the eastern U.S., not so closely related to centaury, my vote is for marijuana. Forget about playing a song over and over. Let's get the terrorists stoned, and then sit down and have a nice meal with them while listening to happy music. Bingo! It's a recipe for peace.

Dear people the question was about the best 20 centaury.

The etymology of centaury is from the Middle English centaure, from Middle French centaurée, from Medieval Latin centaurea, from Latin centaureum, from Greek kentaureion, and from from Kentauros.
According to an online dictionary it is:
1 : any of a genus (Centaurium) of low herbs of the gentian family; especially : an Old World herb (C. umbellatum) formerly used as a tonic
2 : an herb (Sabatia angularis) of the eastern U.S. closely related to centaury

Therefore, of the top 20 herbs of the eastern U.S., not so closely related to centaury, my vote is for marijuana. Forget about playing a song over and over. Let's get the terrorists stoned, and then sit down and have a nice meal with them while listening to happy music. Bingo! It's a recipe for peace.
Surely you mean a nice cup of tea and a sit down (http://www.nicecupofteaandasitdown.com)?

Surely you mean a nice cup of tea and a sit down (http://www.nicecupofteaandasitdown.com)?


BEST.

WEBSITE.

EVER.

'cept i hate tea. but i'll substitute a coffee. safe as

Tea is nice. I have coffee in the morning, Coke in the afternoon and tea in the evening.

I would feed the people, though, because one side effect of being stoned, according to what I have read about the subject, is what is known as having the "munchies" or a desire to eat. I think it has to do with a change in blood sugar as a result of the THC, etc.

Another herb I like is garlic. It helps lower blood pressure. Surely, it makes one's breath a tad offensive; but, if a garlic eater uses mints, then that issue is resolved. It reportedly keeps vampires at bay, too.

Pim Fortuyn. Conrad Adenauer. Jurij Gagarin.

1) Ronald Reagan

2) Augusto Pinochet

3) Benito Mussolini

It's a tie between Jimmy Carter and Posh Spice

Ronald Wilson Reagan

He stood up to the Soviet Barbarians, setting in motion the events that freed millions from communist tyranny.

the jewish giant was pretty big. http://www.temple.edu/photo/photographers/arbus/arbus_jewish_giant.jpg

Bill Clinton, purely for starting the trend of giving no-bid contracts to Haliburton

If you wish to include Ghandi, then I say we also include the wonderful Ho Chi Minh, who did the very same thing, twice. Using unconventional tactics against two "great empires" over a period of some 25 years to secure the independance of his nation.
The only difference between why Ho Chi Minh chose violence to peace, unlike Ghandi, is because both the French and Americans were prepared for the same stuff Ghandi did. Non-viloence does not work against everyone, it only workes against those who expect viloence. The unthinking bully if you will.

If Ghandi is to be nominated, then I say so should Ho Chi Minh.
YEs, but that's the point isn't it? Ghandi chose PEACE. That's what makes him so GREAT. To compare him to someone who used violence is asinine, to the extreme.
Ghandi could have taken the path of violence but chose not to.
What a Great man.

I think Picasso deserves a mention, definitely. But not the guy that signed the urinal and exhibited it in 1905 (or something like that). Cause all that did was make talentless artists (Tracey Emin for example) put any crap out (literally for one 'artist' who canned his own excrement and diisplayed it as 'art') under the guise of modern art - and of course anyone who doesn't like it, just isn't clever or sophisticated enough to 'get it'.
Whoops. Bit of a rant there. Sorry.

I definitely think we need to agree on the definition of 'Great'. I think it's someone who set out to positively change the world.
That's the difference between 'Greatest' and 'Greatest Impact'
So that leaves out Hitler and Stalin and Mao. Also arguably Einstein, as he never had any intention when coming up with the Theory of Relativity of it changing the World. That it did was just incidental.

I thought the Times magazine a few years back who claimed that Hitler didn't have the greatest impact on the 20th Century - that he was just 'evil' - was just Times being wimpy, as usual. Hitler had more effect on last century than anyone else. He caused millions of deaths, his actions led to the formation of Israel, the independence of India, the final death of the British Empire, the Vietnam war, the rise of Communism in China, the nuclear age, the Cold War, huge advances in technology, etc etc etc.
He shaped the latter half of last century.

If you want to talk about real and lasting impact to the way the course of human events in the twentieth century developed economically, socially and technologically, all these "feel good" world leader answers simply miss the mark. The answer needs to consider the persons who set the ball in motion and whose ideas changed the way people live and the very face of this earth, and without a doubt, in my not so humble opinion, there are two men who have tied for the title.... Thomas Edison and Henry Ford.

James Brown definately, Although if the S Club Juniors had been born in the 20th century then it would be a close one.

If you want to talk about real and lasting impact to the way the course of human events in the twentieth century developed economically, socially and technologically, all these "feel good" world leader answers simply miss the mark. The answer needs to consider the persons who set the ball in motion and whose ideas changed the way people live and the very face of this earth, and without a doubt, in my not so humble opinion, there are two men who have tied for the title.... Thomas Edison and Henry Ford.
Using your definition, what about the Wright brothers, then?

And people admiring Stalin - I find that sick. And Stalin and Hitler were on the complete opposite sides of the political spectrum yet a few people have said they really admire both of them. With totally different policies and beliefs, and the only thing in common is their mutual killing of innocent people, one wonders if this is what turns you sick people on.

Stalin and Hitler were both fascists, the difference being that in Stalin had a Communist economy, where the government owned all the businesses, and Hitler allowed 'free' enterprise. I put 'free' in quotes because it wasn't really free; you had to mirror fascist society in your business, if you ran one. They both turned failing countries into world superpowers. Although Stalin brought his country from a completely undeveloped country into an industrial powerhouse, which is the greater change, Hitler brought his nation around whilst restricted by a harsh post-WWI treaty that limited his ability to build an army.
It is what they did for their nation, and how they changed the world, that makes people vote them as great people, not for their slaughter and fascism.

Lisefale, Tasima, and Liasain Siasita
Siam Shia Qayle and Mith Annot Qayle
Ayah La Via
Terry and Nina Sacci
Mina Abid
Carina and Cassandra Adriel Riveen
Miriam Iacona
Larit
Sakichi Kunimura, Hassan Mohammed Hassid, Cathrine Quilling, Alfred Collins, and Jarrah Bay Willington
Park Ling and Flare Neja
Tamil Flarra

Calvin n' Hobbes :D

Lisefale, Tasima, and Liasain Siasita
Siam Shia Qayle and Mith Annot Qayle
Ayah La Via
Terry and Nina Sacci
Mina Abid
Carina and Cassandra Adriel Riveen
Miriam Iacona
Larit
Sakichi Kunimura, Hassan Mohammed Hassid, Cathrine Quilling, Alfred Collins, and Jarrah Bay Willington
Park Ling and Flare Neja
Tamil Flarra
I have heard of none of those people.

I have heard of none of those people.
echoed

YEs, but that's the point isn't it? Ghandi chose PEACE. That's what makes him so GREAT. To compare him to someone who used violence is asinine, to the extreme.
Ghandi could have taken the path of violence but chose not to.
What a Great man.

I think Picasso deserves a mention, definitely. But not the guy that signed the urinal and exhibited it in 1905 (or something like that). Cause all that did was make talentless artists (Tracey Emin for example) put any crap out (literally for one 'artist' who canned his own excrement and diisplayed it as 'art') under the guise of modern art - and of course anyone who doesn't like it, just isn't clever or sophisticated enough to 'get it'.
Whoops. Bit of a rant there. Sorry.

I definitely think we need to agree on the definition of 'Great'. I think it's someone who set out to positively change the world.
That's the difference between 'Greatest' and 'Greatest Impact'
So that leaves out Hitler and Stalin and Mao. Also arguably Einstein, as he never had any intention when coming up with the Theory of Relativity of it changing the World. That it did was just incidental.

I thought the Times magazine a few years back who claimed that Hitler didn't have the greatest impact on the 20th Century - that he was just 'evil' - was just Times being wimpy, as usual. Hitler had more effect on last century than anyone else. He caused millions of deaths, his actions led to the formation of Israel, the independence of India, the final death of the British Empire, the Vietnam war, the rise of Communism in China, the nuclear age, the Cold War, huge advances in technology, etc etc etc.
He shaped the latter half of last century.


Firstly, non-viloence worked for Ghandi, it didn;t work for the Communists in Vietnam. I don't know how much you know of history, but they tried that approach with the French at first, and then with the first American troops in the country, it didn't work.
The use of non-viloence is a tactic, nothing more, and is not "great", it doesn't work for everybody, and it doesn't work against everybody. And Ghandi was not the first person to use it.

And as for Hitler being the most impact on the last century? Hahaha, that's funny. The men who had the most impact on the last century are Emperor Franz Josef, Kaiser Wilhelm II, Tzar Nicholas II, Sultan Mehmed V, Gavrilo Princip, and Raymond Poincare. What these men did set the ball in motion for everything else that happened, they caused Germany's colapse and then need for Hitler, Hitler came to power solely on the actions of these men.
Nearly everything that has happened in the 20th century, and still happening today, was in some way caused by these men. They had the most influence on the world in the 20th century.

And, your definition of great, is flawed. Everyone has done something horrible in their lives.
And everything has done something to better our lives. Hitler had the VW Bug designed, which is among the most popular cars around.. although I hate it). He had the first car accessable to the masses built, he was the first western nation to move into the current monetary standard we use now (Not based on gold). His actions inspired the equality movements in the 60's and 70's, "Black people could fight Hitlers armies, and die for their country as equils, but they wern't equils in their own country". His actions brought about the end of the Great Depression (The war got US industry going again, as well as many other countries).
Stalin brought into the world a Super Power to oppose the US, which sparked a technology race that resulted in more diseases being cured then ever before, humans going to space and the moon, modern computers, and tons of other stuff.

It's been said before, it's ignorant to look at the specific actions of one person and call them bad, even if they did some good with other specific actions or even as a result of their being bad, and then turn around and look at only the results of other people and call them good.

I have heard of none of those people.
Most of them killed a lot of people. The rest... helped?

Mina Abid is responsible for a few pseudo-terror bombings and assassinations.
The rest is a collection of somewhat unknown heroes, strategists, and murderers.

Without a doubt - Refused Party Program.

there are two men who have tied for the title.... Thomas Edison and Henry Ford.
Using your definition, what about the Wright brothers, then?

Hello, Nikola Tesla?? Don't make me death-ray this thread!

Favorite person? Me
Favorite politically? Charles De Gualle
Biggest impact? Stalin

Since there is no real criteria for greatest...

Favorite Politically : 1. The Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was the greatest man to rule Iran since Yazdegird III, The last Shah of Ancient Iran (Last Zoroastrian ruler of Persia as well) was killed outside Merv in 652.

2. Augosto Pinochet: Saved Chile from communism and probably the ultimate free marketeer.

3. Ronald Reagan: Great President of the US and responsible for ending the Cold War.

Biggest Impact: Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany: Brought on WW1, causing Germany's defeat and the rise of the Nazi Party which brought on WW2 which brought on the Cold War.

Favorite Politically : 1. The Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was the greatest man to rule Iran since Yazdegird III, The last Shah of Ancient Iran (Last Zoroastrian ruler of Persia as well) was killed outside Merv in 652.

2. Augosto Pinochet: Saved Chile from communism and probably the ultimate free marketeer.

3. Ronald Reagan: Great President of the US and responsible for ending the Cold War.

Biggest Impact: Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany: Brought on WW1, causing Germany's defeat and the rise of the Nazi Party which brought on WW2 which brought on the Cold War.


I just dont see how you could like the Shah. Other than his being pro-american, he was a horrid leader. I could see liking him because he was pro-american, but not in any moral, etc way.

Favorite Politically : 1. The Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was the greatest man to rule Iran since Yazdegird III, The last Shah of Ancient Iran (Last Zoroastrian ruler of Persia as well) was killed outside Merv in 652.

2. Augosto Pinochet: Saved Chile from communism and probably the ultimate free marketeer.

3. Ronald Reagan: Great President of the US and responsible for ending the Cold War.

Biggest Impact: Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany: Brought on WW1, causing Germany's defeat and the rise of the Nazi Party which brought on WW2 which brought on the Cold War.
come on, pinochet and the shah were two of the americans crappiest lackeys. you want your lackeys quiet and unobtrusive, not so vile the entire nation they are ruling for you dispises them and then gets to blame of its problems for the next 30 years on the us for installing the bums.

reagan had a pretty strong run his first term, but in his second term his mental health was in such decline he wasn't really in command of the country, and when the cats away the mice will play. alot of stupid shady crap went on in the second term, including giving terrorists weapons to get hostages released.

I just dont see how you could like the Shah. Other than his being pro-american, he was a horrid leader. I could see liking him because he was pro-american, but not in any moral, etc way.

The economy was much better with him than with the current Mullah Dictatorship, people could travel into Iran and see one of the most beautiful nations on earth, the nation was modern, even by western standards and he allowed many more freedoms than the Mullahs do. Sure, he may have "dissapeared" a few people, but they were mostly crazy people against his modern vision for the future of Iran.

Jimmy Page.

The economy was much better with him than with the current Mullah Dictatorship, people could travel into Iran and see one of the most beautiful nations on earth, the nation was modern, even by western standards and he allowed many more freedoms than the Mullahs do. Sure, he may have "dissapeared" a few people, but they were mostly crazy people against his modern vision for the future of Iran.

The same could be said of the De Gualle government of france(post-algeria), and without the horrible human rights abuses. What made the Shah better than that, or any of the other many examples of modern, free nations?

I just dont see how you could like the Shah. Other than his being pro-american, he was a horrid leader. I could see liking him because he was pro-american, but not in any moral, etc way.
alot of irans continuing hostility toward the us dates back to the american installation of the shah. they still believe everything the us does in the middle east is part of a broad plan against them, and every political twist and turn internally is caused by subtle us manipulation.

The economy was much better with him than with the current Mullah Dictatorship, people could travel into Iran and see one of the most beautiful nations on earth, the nation was modern, even by western standards and he allowed many more freedoms than the Mullahs do. Sure, he may have "dissapeared" a few people, but they were mostly crazy people against his modern vision for the future of Iran.
i think iran is presently more modern that alot of people in the west understand. heck, they have a strong film industry, any nation that puts out as much quality cinema as iran has to be reasonably economically and socially strong.

alot of irans continuing hostility toward the us dates back to the american installation of the shah. they still believe everything the us does in the middle east is part of a broad plan against them, and every political twist and turn internally is caused by subtle us manipulation.

Not really, Mossadeigh was a Commie and I'm glad the US deposed him and put the Shah in his place. The Shah was a wise ruler and a great modernizer. If anything, it would be nice for the US to topple the Islamic government and put the Shah's son back in power, though, I feel that many Iranians will be offended by such.

How is this even a debate?

Jimmy Page!

i think iran is presently more modern that alot of people in the west understand. heck, they have a strong film industry, any nation that puts out as much quality cinema as iran has to be reasonably economically and socially strong.

It's not a dirt poor backward nation, like Iraq was or Syria is. However, many of the Shah's reforms have been undone. Tehran, however, still is a modern looking city, though the buildings are often from the 1970's when the Shah was in power.

Most Impact: Franz Ferdinand. His death sparked WW1 which caused WW2 which caused the Cold War.

Favorite Leader: Churchill. Kept the Brits morale up and kept them in the war and kept the Western Front alive. Has lots of great quotes.

well, there are many answers to such a question:

Republican Flag-waiver answer: "Jesus Bush! they are the same person!"
Democratic answer: "That fat bastard michael moore!"
Centrist answer: "I dunno, im an 80 year old floridan"
Satan worshiper answer: "Uuuum, that one dude that killed all those other dudes andHEY MOM STOP EATING MY BURRITO! DAMNIT!"


my answer: Jello Biafra :p :D :gundge: :cool: :) :eek:

Not really, Mossadeigh was a Commie and I'm glad the US deposed him and put the Shah in his place. The Shah was a wise ruler and a great modernizer. If anything, it would be nice for the US to topple the Islamic government and put the Shah's son back in power, though, I feel that many Iranians will be offended by such.
ooh and they could occupy syria too. that would be fun trying to control a swath of land from the mediterranean to the indian subcontinent with over 100 million people who hate them and are in a constant state of bloody revolt.

ooh and they could occupy syria too. that would be fun trying to control a swath of land from the mediterranean to the indian subcontinent with over 100 million people who hate them and are in a constant state of bloody revolt.

The US controlling Iran? NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Iran must rule itself, and the first thing Iran needs to do is get rid of the Islamic government.