Go 
|
New 
|
Find 
|
Notify 
|
|
Reply 
|
|
Admin 
|
New PM! 
|

Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13983
|
funny now rouse we meant ancient conquerors silly madchen you have the brains of fliedermaus somedays you really do.
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|

Registered: September 14, 2005
Posts: 336
|
(0) donald trump
|

Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13983
|
Thing about al in india is they had cavalry too and they used war elephants which could cause a hell of a lot more damage then a bunch of guys on horseback On Ghengis: quick fact: Ghengis Khan is not a name it's a title it means "Great Leader" Ghengis's real name is belived to be Temuchen yes the armored cavalry of europe whould have been a challenge but any tech advantage would have leveled out eventually Ghengis's superior tactics would have won through from him as the Tech advantage was lost.
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|

Registered: September 29, 2004
Posts: 3690
|
I hadn't even thought of that. European calvary would've been quite the challenge for Khan. Alexander on the other hand...if he had just rested, and gone back to Macedon to work out the problems with Olympias and Antipater, things would've gone so much better for him. He could've traveled south, conquered much of Africa that was known, rested, then traveled East toward India. The Indians would've fought like hell..but with enough calvary, Alexander could've taken them.
A lo hecho, pecho.
|

Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13983
|
I think the Khan would not have had as much success as he had else where just because of the way europeans fought with their fortifications and heavly armored cavalry Ghengis's light horsemen would have had serious trouble. Some regions though would have fallen before the Mongols like wheat before a reaper
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|

Registered: September 29, 2004
Posts: 3690
|
True. I agree that Genghis Khan had a much more successful post-mortem rule...but I think Alexander was still the world's greatest conqueror. If Alexander hadn't died, his empire could've easily have out-expanded Genghis Khan's. He would've expanded into Africa, then with that support, tried again to go out East, I'd imagine. If he hadn't died before reaching Europe, do you think Khan would've conquered them, as well? Or as India was Alexander's near kryptonite, Europe would've been Khan's?
A lo hecho, pecho.
|

Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13983
|
Actually The Mongols Ruled Their huge empire for a very long time and ruled the lands well, Alexander dies before even returning to really govern his mighty empire. Ghengis also set up the first "pony express" running from china to his persian gulf holdings maikng rule of his vast empire that much more simple
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|

Registered: June 20, 2005
Posts: 337
|
Alexander... Ghengis just invaded and killed people ALexander invaded and killed people, but suceeded in governing his conquered territories much better than the mongols
|

Registered: February 22, 2004
Posts: 13983
|
Ghengis Khan His Empire was Larger than Alexander The Greats and his empire lasted over a Hundred Years After his death. Military wise the Great Khan was able to use a small force (in comparision) of mostly cavalry to conquer some of the most advanced and powerful nations of the world including China he also experimented with biological warfare using catapulting plague ridden bodys in to cities he was sieging. Tactics wise the Khan was a genius pioneering what in modern tactical doctrine is called "manuver warfare" and is what the Marines are adopting as their main strategy.
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
|

Registered: December 11, 2003
Posts: 9501
|
Catherine the Great and Alexander the Great. I haven't studied much on Khan.
"Regardless, I have always, and will always, succeed."
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|