Started By
Message

re: Was Alex the Great the greatest conqueror in history?

Posted on 5/5/26 at 2:25 pm to
Posted by CatfishJohn
Member since Jun 2020
20209 posts
Posted on 5/5/26 at 2:25 pm to
quote:

How does this not align with what I said?

Inherited his army=Nepo Baby

The conquering was all him =Took the roster and went on championship run.


Fair enough, but continually improved and enlarged that roster with each conquest. And the military acumen was incredible. So he was a brilliant nepo baby that took a strong, regional family business and built it to #1 on the S&P 500 after his dad died. In a relatively very short timeframe.

Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
65313 posts
Posted on 5/5/26 at 2:27 pm to
quote:

Subutei conquered on his own more territory than Alexander, and Genghis Khan was his boss and the creator and organizer of the nation that produced the army Subutei led, as well as several other armies.
No, I wouldn't call him the 'creator' of them as they all came into being by each other's power, and Subutai kept conquering for two Khans long after Genghis died, so you're defeating your own point about the empire expanding after death. He did not already have a large empire that the generals signed up for, or whatever picture you have in your head. Subutai met him before he was even called GK.
quote:

And its military strategies are also taught in military schools
Not nearly as much as Alexander's.
quote:

greatest conqueror
means defeater of other peoples, imo. There is no time requirement, especially when you die at 32.
quote:

if anyone is jacking off to YouTube
It's definitely you.
quote:

again, Genghis Khan started from zero
Again, so did his generals, They all came up together.

Genghis Khan would have been nothing without his generals. Alexander was the primary general and he's the only one suggested in this thread who can say he led from the front.
quote:

my guy
:whatyearisitgif:
Posted by Globetrotter747
Member since Sep 2017
5681 posts
Posted on 5/6/26 at 4:33 pm to
quote:

West Point, for example, specifically teaches his hammer and anvil tactic

It seems to me that if you able to implement this tactic on the battlefield, you probably have superior resources.
quote:

as his points for adapting to different terrains and how to endure prolonged campaigns.

Yeah, right.
Posted by JohnnyBgood
South Louisiana
Member since May 2010
4457 posts
Posted on 5/6/26 at 5:42 pm to
Cyrus the Great doesn’t get enough credit as a straight-up conqueror because people usually focus on his “good ruler” reputation instead of the fact he built one of the first real mega-empires. The guy rolled through the Medes, Lydia, and Babylon like it was nothing and stitched together a massive chunk of the ancient world in a pretty short span of time.

Compared to names like Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan, he should be in the same conversation for pure expansion and efficiency.
Posted by saintsfan92612
Taiwan
Member since Oct 2008
30440 posts
Posted on 5/6/26 at 5:48 pm to
quote:

no one wrote about Alexander the Great until hundreds of years after his death, so as far as we know he didn't even exist.


This might be the dumbest post I've ever seen on here.

Posted by Hondo Blacksheep
Member since Jul 2022
3132 posts
Posted on 5/6/26 at 7:18 pm to
Julius Caesar
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
55427 posts
Posted on 5/6/26 at 7:55 pm to
quote:

Plus Alexander started off in a much more powerful position than Genghis.

Understatement of the year! Genghis started with nothing! Alexander started with the greatest army the world had ever seen.
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 5Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram