View Full Version : Great Idiots From History
Hey Guys,
Don't you love it when you're playing the English (come on, I know you've done it, there's nothing to be ashamed about) and you get to be Richard the Lionheart, or Henry V?
Personally, I was dreading the corronation of King John I, the real reason France is not part of the United Kingdom today.
King John I had a dispute with the Duke of Normandy. So bad, the Pope himself had to intervene.
However, John I couldn't be bothered to appear at the "hearing" before the Pope, who therefore, in King John's absence, dissolved England's claim to their lands in France, awarding it all to the Duke of Normandy instead.
What an eedjut I was having serious misgiving about King John I appearing with a negative accumen rating, however, while the game takes Great Rulers into consideration, it has no memory of the deeds of the dumb ones. King John I is one of the best Rulers the game ever produces for England.
How about Phillipe II of France? (I'm sure it was one of the Phillipe's, fairly sure of the "II").
Apparantly Phil had a bit of a mental condition that caused him to beleive he was made of glass, and wouldn't let anyone near him for fear he would break.
Any other Great Morons the Game's missed out on?
Let me know.
Azrael
There was this Caligula guy in rome, but he was mad, not stupid, and that was before M:TW happens.
Hmmm... There is this guy Caliph Omar who burned the library in Alexandria in the 1300's... makes you ashmed of being Egyptian...(I'm not sure if he actually was Egyptian or not, but IIRC he was) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif
fastspawn
11-16-2002, 03:35
for all the stupid things that King John I did, he was one of the most influential guy in history.
He did sign the magna carta, albeit in duress. And with that he shaped how our world is today. and he was a pretty good king too, though he was a bit of a tyrant. Just imagine taking over a country bankrupted by Your brother, in his quest for Jerusalem. He had to raise the treasury but the lords and barons took it harshly and forced him to sign the charter.
At least a lot of good came off it.
ShadeFlanders
11-16-2002, 11:14
The French army commanders Ferdinand Foch and Joseph Joffre in WW1 that devised plan XVII and were dumb enough to execute it.
el_slapper
11-16-2002, 12:17
Yeah. French generals in WWI were especially stupid. Only the courage & endurance of senegalese troops saved our butts... Nivelle did sacrifice 400,000 for gaining less than 5 km of useless fields
Concerning France no part of U.K., well, I won't complain. HAppy to be french
Catiline
11-16-2002, 18:24
THroughout most of history the rulers of the regions around Turkey and Egypt have been fairly adept at extinguishing their own dynasties, be they Ptolemaic Byzantine or Ottoman. Most come fairly high in the dumb stakes.
fastspawn
11-16-2002, 21:42
in ww1 interesting enuf the german commanders were as stupid as the french one, And the british attache in france was an idiot too.
The german invasion of france was devised by Schlieffen, and it called for german forces to overwhelm the right flank. But schlieffen died before ww1, so he told his succesor Moltke(not the bismarck moltke, i think his grandnephew)too make the right strong. But did Moltke listen... noooo. I forgot the extra details, but instead of taking up the whole of france in a single sweep he chose to reinforce a hill that the left was besieging with the troops on the right. this created a demarcation line that was so long, invariably halting the german advance.
Also the english attache in france, sir john french took the first boat home at once at the first sign of invasion. Bloody coward that.
Eeeeeeh, all generals are stupid http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Kongamato
11-17-2002, 04:03
What about Xerxes? Considering his defeats, he is a great candidate for a great idiot.
if any one is french, then i pre-appoligize
why do they line the streets with trees in paris?
so nazi's can march in the shade.
Hakonarson
11-18-2002, 05:11
Quote[/b] (Kongamato @ Nov. 16 2002,21:03)]What about Xerxes? Considering his defeats, he is a great candidate for a great idiot.
Ypu mean Xerxes - the guy who conquered the whole of the known world, defeated the Greeks at Thermopylae and the Naval battle offf-shore there the name of which I've forgotten, got half of Greece to side with him but failed in 1 battle at Salamis so went home to rule the rest of his HUGE empire and left another bloke to take Greece?
And that makes him an idiot??????
deejayvee
11-18-2002, 05:33
Quote[/b] ]Kongamato posted:
What about Xerxes? Considering his defeats, he is a great candidate for a great idiot.
Quote[/b] ]Hakonarson posted:
Ypu mean Xerxes - the guy who conquered the whole of the known world, defeated the Greeks at Thermopylae and the Naval battle offf-shore there the name of which I've forgotten, got half of Greece to side with him but failed in 1 battle at Salamis so went home to rule the rest of his HUGE empire and left another bloke to take Greece?
And that makes him an idiot??????
Xerxes wasn't an idiot, but Hakonarson is not right either.
1. Thermopylae - yes he won but with possibly up to 2 million troops and suffered 20,000 casualties against a force of 7,000. That doesn't make him great. And considering who he was facing, it doesn't make him an idiot either.
2. Xerxes didn't conquer the whole of the known world. His father Darius conquered most of it for him.
Hakonarson
11-18-2002, 22:36
I didn't say Thermopylae made Xerxes great - I was arguing against him being an idiot.
I rate him, like Darius (defeated by Alex) as ordinary generals, or no great note for greatness or stupidity.
And OK - so he didn't quiet conquer the whole world - but he did take his fathers conquests and expand them, especially in Europe (Thrace, Macedonia, Nthn Greece), and his bridge of ships across the Hellespont was a great feat of engineering for the time.
deejayvee
11-19-2002, 01:28
Quote[/b] ]I didn't say Thermopylae made Xerxes great - I was arguing against him being an idiot.
Still, I don't think Thermopylae is a good example either way. But we agree that he was neither an idiot nor great.
And BTW, the Darius defeated by Alexander was Darius III.
Red Peasant
11-19-2002, 20:26
Quote[/b] (deejayvee @ Nov. 17 2002,22:33)]2. Xerxes didn't conquer the whole of the known world. His father Darius conquered most of it for him.
S'funny, cos I thought that Cyrus did the vast majority of the conquering to establish the Persian Empire. The only significant addition being the conquest of Egypt by his son, Cambyses.
Darius, though, was a great organiser and established the empire on firmer footings. He certainly was no idiot.
The Black Ship
11-21-2002, 03:25
Montezuma of Cortez fame would certainly fill the bill. While it could be argued that European diseases would have inevitably done the job for the Spanish through plagues (estimated pre-Columbian population of the Mexican basin at 7,000,000, then 30 years post Cortez' conquest at 700,000), the fact remains he had a force during Cortez' first march to Tenochtilan outnumbering the Conquistadors of 1,000 to one (conservative est.)
Atahualpa of the Incas doesn't fair much better.
deejayvee
11-21-2002, 08:41
Quote[/b] (The Black Ship @ Nov. 20 2002,20:25)]Montezuma of Cortez fame would certainly fill the bill.
More naive than an idiot, I would have thought.
Rosacrux
11-21-2002, 08:59
Great idiots in history? What about Shrubya the Dumm? A guy holding such a highly esteemed position, while saying in public things like this
Quote[/b] ]"A surplus means there'll be money left over. Otherwise, it wouldn't be called a surplus."
And this
Quote[/b] ]"Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take
dream."
Or this
Quote[/b] ]"This is what I'm good at. I like meeting people, my fellow citizens, I like interfacing with them."—
...and also this
Quote[/b] ]"...I don't need to be subliminabable.."
...and about half a million others you can find here (http://www.bushisms.com/index1a.html#List) and also here (http://www.bushnews.com/english.htm) and additionally here. (http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm)
Now tell me, is he, or is he not the greatest idiot of all times?
fastspawn
11-22-2002, 10:48
not to forgot his poppy's vic-prez, DAN QUAYLE. really that man is unique
ICantSpellDawg
11-29-2002, 04:22
hitler later in his career went really crazy, what with declaring 3 wars at one (maybe even more). his heavy reliance on german pride cost him the war - really stupid if you ask me - the reason the allies didnt assasinate him was cuz he was an asset to our cause, without him towards the end, the germans had a real shot a winning
Interesting post about Bush,
Is he really that dumb? I mean, he is President and you're not. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
However, nobody alive can dispute that he's seemingly dropped some "clangers". i.e. Said some pretty dumb sounding things.
But is he really that dumb. Robert Graves speculates in "I Claudius" that the Emperor Claudius of Rome, though considered a Nitwit of the First Class by his family and friends, was potentially a mastermind working behind a false cloak of idiocy.
Reagan seemed to be a bit spaced, yet their are scholars who beleive he won the Cold War.
Is Bush as "dumb" as some people say he comes accross? That would make it easy to underestimate him. After all, he is the President of the United states. Who's the dummy here? Bush or us?
Azrael
Rosacrux
11-29-2002, 09:11
Depends on how much you value the position - not the man, but the office.
In a fine tradition set by Ronny "fake-cowboy" Reagan, the presidents of the United States are just a show-off, a face. Let's call it "the human face of government".
Reagan was glamorous (ex star end all) and pretty much summed up the average American, when he talked about them reds needing a butt kick and all the stuff he was so famous about. He never ruled the country - there was a huge conglomerate of individuals, lobbyists, military personel, political personel et. al. running things from behind the scenes; they just needed a face to show.
Same thing with Bush senior - he wasn't much of a president, more a puppet of the St. Dept. and the Pentagon (and their employees - namely the military-industrial complex, if you wish to go into antiquitated terminology http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )
Clinton was... well, let's say he's definitely the most intelligent of all US presidents (they allmost all, since Carter, seem to be closer to idiocy than anything else) but he still was a face: Attractive, provocating, with his Monica-cigars and all, playing the sax, admitting he done some weed... well, he was a decent actor and he played his role well. Nothing past that - others took care of the serious issues. And when he tried to rule a tad, we've seen how many Moniquesque cases were revealed - a good way to say "stop it Billy, you are not really governing here, you have crossed the line, step back".
With Shrubya we have taken this whole "Acting president" concept to the edge: The man is a moron at best. But he IS the President of the U.S. of A. Does he pull the strings? No bloody way, he's got houndreds of capable and intelligent people behind him. They do all the work, while little Geordie shows off and plays the bully around, to satisfy a certain portion of Kefir rednecks who wish to see "USA kick some butt".
So, to answer your (rhetoric, but you'll get a reply anyway) question: Yes, Shrubya is an idiot and yes, he is the president of the USA. But... does it takes a genious to be in that office? Certainly not - in fact, geniouses are particullary excluded from that office: They might develop some tendancy to actually govern...
The Black Ship
11-29-2002, 15:18
The prejudice you show Rosacrux is sickening. So all the democratic Presidents are better in your opinion...gee, imagine that, those that espouse similiar philosophies to the average European are smarter than those that don't, LOL.
Rosacrux
11-29-2002, 15:56
That is not what I am trying to say... but... Gee, you are a republican, right? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
P.S. Practically, it's true: Bush jr. and senior and also Reagan were class-A idiots, all three of them can't cope with a shrubbery's IQ. So, yes, all recent Republican presidents are idiots. Clinton was an exception but that doesn't have to do anything with him being a Democrat - I can't see any visible difference between the Donkeys and the Pachyderms as for the essence of their policy.
Surely, to be a ultra-right wing conservative (and that's what the Reps are) you shouldn't have more IQ than, say, Stalone (in the area of -80 or something similar http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )
The Black Ship
11-29-2002, 16:59
Ah Crux...
First, no, I am not a Republican. I'm too fickle inmy beliefs for that:D
Second, you'll be surprised to find tha Ultra-right wing conservatism is a minority position within that party...just look at the credibility Pat Buchanon lacks within that party and you'll see what I mean.
Third, your opinion on the intelligence of these men is based on...what exactly? That they don't believe as you? That they've done the world a disservice? That the Soviet Union is gone? That Iraq was forced out of Kuwait? That Gore lost the election to an idiot? That they failed a Rorschach test? What?
ICantSpellDawg
11-29-2002, 18:52
while i enjoy constantly attacking governing idiocy, i couldnt make statements regarding a shadow government or the personnal intellect of someone ive never met. i must say though, being an american and not hating bush as much as i hated clinton, bush still has most americans beaten in the intellect field. when was the last time you spoke to an american.
i resent your views on right wing conservatives though. i am no republican and wouldnt be caught dead voting in the system that we have here for the issues that i either: dont care about that will ride in on a party ticket OR dont have enough info on to make an informed decision. but i understand why you hate right-wing conservatives. (unless you have a true reason to hate them) you may either watch too much tv or listen to your bleeding heart liberal professors a bit too much. try reading a book or an article that isnt in the course curricullum, you may be suprised by some new ideas. im no religious nutcase or gun toting maniac, but much of my political stances tend to be more toward intelligent conservation of tradition when it no longer threatens people.
i refuse to ever use spellcheck
its better if you continue to think we are idoits anyway
now im the a**hole
OH YEA
William of Orange- a general during the Napoleonic wars was pretty inadept.
He was rumoured to be shot by one of his own soldiers for causing the deaths of hundreds of his own troops by giving ridiculous orders.
He got his command through family ties rather than skill.
Orders for riflemen to form a single line rather than a square when charged by calvary were typical of him. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
Well, the Croatian nobles betrayed and killed their own king in order to give the rulership of Croatia to the Hungarian king who promised they'll benefit from that. Needless to say he wasn't really inclined to do what he has "promised", and the country was ruled by somebody else for nine centuries to come. If we're looking at doing your own country a disservice, I guess this would be way up on the ladder.
And btw, although you cannot be certain about somebody's IQ, not even your own for that matter, you can come up with an opinion based on person's acts and expressions (meaning things things he/she has done, written or said). Ideology etc. doesn't have anything to do with that. At least that's how I tend to form my opinions.
hehehhe I think it's funny how Americans argue so staunchly about there Presidents. You're Republican, you're jsut a Democrat. etc..etc...
Republican, some one whos been at the Pub to long?
Democrat, like Autocrat?
hehehehehehehe
I don't live in the Land of the oppressed http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
But i do think Bill Clinton has to be the greatest idiot the Americans have put forward in my memory.
He really should have been an actor not a politican.
Besides, didn't he have to ask Mrs President first before changing anything? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
Oh my vote for greatest Idiot/Idiots in History. The Popes.
fenir http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif
Lord_Lenny
12-19-2002, 08:27
Quote[/b] (Hakonarson @ Nov. 18 2002,14:11)][quote=Kongamato,Nov. 16 2002,21:03]What about the Naval battle offf-shore there the name of which I've forgotten
That would be Artemisium, technically a draw but both sides claimed victory i think.
chilliwilli
12-20-2002, 17:20
Quote[/b] (fenir @ Dec. 03 2002,23:37)]hehehhe I think it's funny how Americans argue so staunchly about there Presidents. You're Republican, you're jsut a Democrat. etc..etc...
Republican, some one whos been at the Pub to long?
Democrat, like Autocrat?
hehehehehehehe
I don't live in the Land of the oppressed http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
But i do think Bill Clinton has to be the greatest idiot the Americans have put forward in my memory.
He really should have been an actor not a politican.
Besides, didn't he have to ask Mrs President first before changing anything? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
Oh my vote for greatest Idiot/Idiots in History. The Popes.
fenir http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif
Nah Bush is much worse than Clinton. Under Clinton we prospered and peace in the mideast was almost obtained. Bush on the otherhand just makes himself look stupider everyday, he also used coccaine, and he now wants to cut and drill everything in site, so we can get some oil. Oh yeah his "foreign policy", if you can even call it that, has not benefited America at all. Did I mention he is dumb?
How in blue hell did he get voted in ? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif
People "misunderestimated" the resolve of our president (and numerous lackeys) and the resolve of the American people to vote for an idiot.
Major Robert Dump
12-22-2002, 23:52
Bush did poorly in college, and his civilian business dealings were all disasters. And he was an alcoholic. You don't have to be smart to spend daddy's money on a presidential campaign.
I'd rather have his father in office anyday. Bush Sr is a highly intelligent man.
BTW: how in the living hell did we get off topic to this discussion again LOL
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.