Modern Leaders (circa 2007-present) [Archive]

PDA

View Full Version : Modern Leaders (circa 2007-present)

Boyar Son

08-09-2007, 03:19

Marshal Murat

08-09-2007, 03:42

Ron Paul....

Boyar Son

08-09-2007, 03:56

Ron Paul....

hmm...who's he?

Ice

08-09-2007, 04:30

hmm...who's he?

He's running for president in 08 and is a congressman.

AntiochusIII

08-09-2007, 04:53

hmm...who's he?Ron (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/) Paul (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_paul).

lol. What a weirdo.

Also, I believe InsaneApache thinks that Tony Blair was a great leader. :clown:

CountArach

08-09-2007, 09:18

Huuuuuuugggggooooooo Chaaaaaavvvvvvvvvez!

InsaneApache

08-09-2007, 10:40

Also, I believe InsaneApache thinks that Tony Blair was a great leader. :clown:

He was. :laugh4:

HoreTore

08-09-2007, 11:17

Well, we do have Nelson Mandela...

Husar

08-09-2007, 11:29

Ahmadinejad. :2thumbsup:

Andres

08-09-2007, 11:31

TosaInu

Rodion Romanovich

08-09-2007, 11:44

1. i hope this is the right place to post this

We all read or seen great leaders of nations, Augustus, charlamagne. thats about it on what I could name...

And whaen i mean leader i mean leader of gov. army, u know the country..

our leaders today...everyone hates them and few loves them.

do we have any head of state worth mentioning?
Do you think modern leaders should aspire to become like Augustus? I think not. Here's a list of some of his not so often mentioned sides:
1. getting 3 legions and auxilia slaughtered in the Teutoburg forest due to his overly ambitious unrighteous military expansion plans and his careless disrespectful behavior towards people like Arminius, but blaming the defeat on Varus - the commander of these legions
2. creating a massacre of Cantabrians and Asturians in conquering the last part of the Iberian peninsula that was not yet under roman control. He had a weak to no casus belli for the attack, and the Cantabrians and Asturians posed no real threat left alone, just as there was little useful that justified conquering the area. In the process, almost an entire legion, possibly more, was also destroyed. So many Cantabrians and Asturians died because they refused to surrender, and they refused to surrender and be taken alive because Augustus would enslave the POWs or send them to die in gladiator arenas
3. wasting huge amounts of roman lives and murdering many Illyrians in fighting an uprising in Illyria caused by the governor taking slaves among the population because they couldn't pay the unrealistically high taxes imposed on them by Augustus
4. continuing the civil war of Caesar's time, resulting in a huge number of romans dead
5. giving the roman republic it's final lethal blow and making sure it would never be restored again after Caesar's death, creating the Empire era which would soon degrade into a military dictatorship
6. murdering both politicial opposition and all that were potential better leaders than him, leaving only maniacs such as Tiberius and Caligula after him to inherit the leadership position

I think I actually prefer modern, corrupt mini-devils over such ones as Augustus. In fact, I also think people like Augustus and Charlemagne had their own fair share of haters, even if most of the surviving documents only speak positively about them.

Banquo's Ghost

08-09-2007, 12:19

Well, let me assume you mean recent leaders as well as current (because 2007 is the present, you know :wink:) and that the terms would be an epoch-changing influence.

In that case, I would propose Ronald Reagan, Lady Thatcher, John-Paul II and Mikhail Gorbachev for the immense changes that rid the world of the Cold War and the dangers of nuclear armageddon.

The first two also have a pretty important legacy in the economic and socio-cultural outlook of the West.

If we restrict to current leaders, then I'm hard-pushed to nominate someone who has impacted so greatly in a positive way. Negatively, Robert Mugabe has had an immense influence on the way Africa has developed from colonialism and Vladimir Putin is a colossal influencer of Russia's character after communism - which therefore has an impact on the rest of us.

macsen rufus

08-09-2007, 12:43

Not quite in the expected ambit, but I'd like to suggest Desmond Tutu - amazing charisma and compassion, and had a huge part in preventing the new South Africa from descending into the expected bloodbath following the collapse of the apartheid regime. I think Africa and the world has benefitted greatly from his contribution.

(Hmmm, I'll have to go away and analyse that decision, as a non-religious sort of person selecting a churchman ... :inquisitive: )

naut

08-09-2007, 13:11

Jacob Zuma for teaching the world that taking a shower prevents AIDs.

But seriously I'd have to say you'd have to mention the likes of JFK, Nasar, Ben Gurion, Golda Meir and Che Guevara for having a lasting impact on society as a whole.

More recently I'd have to say Jimjong Il or however its spelt, every society needs a good villain.

Husar

08-09-2007, 13:11

I think Horst Köhler is a nice guy, but he isn't really a leader. Can't think of any other leader who doesn't have faults, even charlemagne killed a lot of people, though he probably thought it was the right thing to do at the time.

My favourite Bismarck started some wars and had rather bad inner politics, apart from that he may not be recent enough to qualify for this thread.

Wilhelm II. and Hitler were beloved here, very shiny people until they started those "shiny" wars and went down the drain like many great leaders do.

Nowadays it seems hard to find a leader who is approved by say more than 90% of the population. And if you find one, you will probably also find some negative human rights history about him, you know the dort of "love me or die" leaders.

HoreTore

08-09-2007, 18:50

I'll add Desmond Tutu too my list, now consisting of him and Mandela :2thumbsup:

Can't think of any others who have been great during the last 20 years... Chirac, perhaps? And Putin in the negative sense? Maybe Schroeder deserves a place, Hussar?

Oh, and the pope, of course. John Paul, that is. And maybe Arafat.

Boyar Son

08-09-2007, 18:51

OK legio now you can give me an opinion of which leader of today u think is the best!

Rodion Romanovich

08-09-2007, 19:03

OK legio now you can give me an opinion of which leader of today u think is the best!
:beam:
I'm afraid my detail knowledge of modern leaders is too limited for me to make anything else than very rough comparisons. In such rough comparisons, most European and North American leaders come out about equal. As persons they may very well be inferior leaders than some non-European and non-American ones, but the fact that the people has an ability to remove them from power when their mandate period ends, means that they usually end up making better decisions than most of the dictators in countries without free elections because of the pressure. I'm afraid that's all I can say - that most democratically elected leaders of today, possibly more due to their situation than personality, are (though I can't rule out that there may be exceptions) the best leaders of today, despite their flaws.

Innocentius

08-09-2007, 21:20

Vladimir Putin, providing the world with irony and black comedy since 2000.

Husar

08-09-2007, 21:24

Can't think of any others who have been great during the last 20 years... Chirac, perhaps? And Putin in the negative sense? Maybe Schroeder deserves a place, Hussar?
well, I liked Schröder when he was new, but then that counts for Putin and Bush as well... Since he didn't really fix any problems, made some weird attempts to keep power and secured himself a job in the russian oil industry using his power here, I'm not that fond of him anymore. I was also hoping he would talk sense into Putin since they were good friends, but now it seems like Putin was the one with more influence on the other.

I like Putin when he talks etc, he makes a nice impression, but his imperialistic, oppressive politics tell another story, always makes me wonder whether he doesn't have a good side somewhere inside though as long as it's only inside it won't make a difference.

Well, bush seemed fine at the beginning as well but turned out he is a bit of a lunatic claiming God told him to start wars and stuff. Well yeah, I'm a christian but that's why I don't believe that God told him to go and start a pointless mess. The bible says "you will recognize my people by their deeds", not their words, so he can claim what he wants.
Rather similar to the pope, whom to elect they need several elections as if God couldn't decide who should be his man on earth.:dizzy2:

Ok, I'm drifting away, I think I could agree about Kennedy, but it just shows that good politicians are always shot down, one way or the other. I came to the conclusion that to make it far in most political parties you have to be a corrupt liar like all the other party members or otherwise you won't get to the top with their votes. It's a real pity, apparently people elect you for showing up at parties and having a big mouth. today people have a better education but they also have to deal with a whole lot more information from all sides, which doesn't really make things easier.

Looks like I'm ranting around randomly today, don't want to take this off-topic, I just don't expect a lot from politics anymore, they never reverse old things they always moaned about, they just introduce new laws and make everything even more complicated to the point where noone knows how to fix it despite claiming so. Also makes it hard to become a great leader if you're stuck in bureaucracy up to your throat.

Well, at least we have peace and wealth in Europe which is worth quite a lot so I don't complain usually, people in africa have it a lot worse even though their "politics" are less bureaucratic.

Now I need a punchline or something to finish but I can't think of one.:sweatdrop:

Kralizec

08-09-2007, 21:25

HoreTore

08-09-2007, 22:13

Hmmm.... I've been thinking some more, this is a good thread :2thumbsup: There are two definitions of "recent here, however, with one counting it as around the last 20 years, and the other one counting back to the war. So, I think I'll make 2 lists this time! Yes, I do love lists...

Last 20 years:
- Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela - these two are the definite tops of my list, South Africa could very well have been a hell-hole by now if not for these two(yes, among others)...
- Pope John Paul
- Putin, because everyone can't be good...
- Kim Jong Il, because every villain needs someone to look up to...
- Yitzhak Rabin goes too, but I refuse Sharon... His last part was, well, a complete mess.
- George Bush. Say whatever you want, the man has left his mark on the world(as opposed to Clinton, who unfortunately left his marks on something else...).
- Arafat.
- Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden and Harald V of Norway, for providing endless joke/stand up/sketch material.

Ahmadinejad(sp?) might be another one, but he hasn't been in power long enough IMO...

1945-present:
- Gandhi
- Mao Zedong
- Reagan
- Thatcher
- Castro&Che
- Nasser...At least for a few months.
- JFK
- Gorbachov(sp?)
- De Gaulle
- Franco
- Einar Gerhardsen...As a Norwegian, I'm obligated to mention him...

Kralizec

08-09-2007, 22:26

If it's back till the end of WW2, then I think marshall Tito deserves a mention- the only person that could keep Yugoslavia from falling into pieces while he was alive and being a socialist country independent from Moscow or the Warsaw pact.

And Ayatollah Khomeini

Husar

08-09-2007, 23:35

If were talking about leaving a mark we have to mention Osama bin Laden, in some ways he is a leader and he turned into a "celebrity" within a day, left a pretty big mark.

HoreTore

08-09-2007, 23:40

If were talking about leaving a mark we have to mention Osama bin Laden, in some ways he is a leader and he turned into a "celebrity" within a day, left a pretty big mark.

I thought about it, but then decided to leave him out, seeing as he is not a head of state kind of leader... That, and he has shown very little actual leadership...

KrooK

08-11-2007, 01:17

1) Tony Blair - despite being member of Labour Party, he showed what means modern liberalism. He turned his country into strongest into EU.
2) Vladimir Putin - he practically re-established monarchy into Russia.
3) Helmut Kohl - he wrote new chapter into polish-german relationship.
4) Bill Clinton - he haven't done anything great, but he kept doing small but important things. Despite that he showed that politician can be real MAN.

Fragony

08-11-2007, 10:32

leaving only maniacs such as Tiberius and Caligula after him to inherit the leadership position

Read a good revisionary book about Caligula, few things are interesting. There are no records of insanity that are written during his reign, started out pretty good actually. He did actually make his horse a senator, author believes he did that to humiliate the senate, not because he was nuts. Also, no records of him having a relation with his sister during his reign. It is all written afterwards, author most is just not true, a brute like Tiberius who wasn't very keen on the Senate and humialted them whenever he had the chance but not insane. Murder, plenty, hey it's Rome.

Beirut

08-11-2007, 11:32

:canada: Pierre Elliott Trudeau.

Canadian Prime Minister 1968-1984.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/horsesass/Trudeau-1.jpg

Intellectual giant, statesman, humanitarian, athlete, adventurer, ladies man, warrior. Few were his equal.

Rodion Romanovich

08-11-2007, 14:18

Read a good revisionary book about Caligula, few things are interesting. There are no records of insanity that are written during his reign, started out pretty good actually. He did actually make his horse a senator, author believes he did that to humiliate the senate, not because he was nuts. Also, no records of him having a relation with his sister during his reign. It is all written afterwards, author most is just not true, a brute like Tiberius who wasn't very keen on the Senate and humialted them whenever he had the chance but not insane. Murder, plenty, hey it's Rome.
Caligula's level of mental stability was of minor importance to the point made in my post, but I'm aware of the revisionism of a lot of roman history lately. There are however still indications to a greater degree of political cleansing of potential rivals during certain reigns than during others, and assassinations more crucially damaging to the country than other. And as for Caligula (it was mainly Tiberius and Augustus I referred to in relation to murdering of political opposition), his main disadvantage was not murders, which I believe even the old views claim he carried out in relatively small numbers compared to certain others, but his excessive spending of money, emptying of the treasury, and causing a breakdown of the economy.

Lemur

08-11-2007, 17:51

I don't think OBL will count for much in the long run; he's had a disproportionate impact, sure, but nothing of his political/religious agenda has been advanced. The caliphate is no closer to restoration now than it was a century ago. He has failed to ignite a world war between muslims and everybody else. Were such a war to get rolling, his side would not win. So OBL does not get to go on the list.

Dick Cheney (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I), on the other hand, has created an unprecedented role for the VP, and his impact may be long-lasting. More than any other member of the current administration, he has redefined executive power and privilege. You may disapprove of his actions (and according to polls, the odds are very high you do (http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_6514223)), but there's no denying his impact.

Boyar Son

08-11-2007, 19:06

Beirut

08-12-2007, 00:37

Thats a ladies man??:laugh4:

Keep in mind he's about 65 in that picture.

We had something called Trudeaumania in Canada when he was running for Prime Minister. The girls went wild. He was dating Hollywood starlets, some pretty sweet musicians, and partied with John Lennon. The guy had an IQ of about 180, and while other world leaders were blustering about in three-piece suits, Trudeau was doing high dives and handstands and racing around in his Mercedes convertible with a rose between his teeth. The guy was a total playboy and the women loved him.

I was at a baseball game in Montreal back in the 70s and Trudeau came into the stadium. They announced his arrival, everyone stood up, and he came down the aisle right next to us and sat in the VIP section about ten rows down from us. (My dad had great company seats.) After he sat down, they announced over the PA that the Prime Minister brought a rose for every woman in the stadium. Then all the ushers and usherettes came down the aisle with armloads of roses and handed them out. The place went nuts. You better believe he was a ladies man.

Marshal Murat

08-12-2007, 00:48

Wow.
That is certainly...charming?
I hope the President never does that.

CountArach

08-12-2007, 05:09

That sounds suspiciously close to bribery...

KafirChobee

08-12-2007, 05:18

Wow.
That is certainly...charming?
I hope the President never does that.
Bush would have to pass out "gold star" flags.

Trudeau, had style. One must give him that. He was sort of Canada's JFK.

Rodion Romanovich

08-12-2007, 10:21

After he sat down, they announced over the PA that the Prime Minister brought a rose for every woman in the stadium. Then all the ushers and usherettes came down the aisle with armloads of roses and handed them out. The place went nuts. You better believe he was a ladies man.
That doesn't seem very nice, more like he's trying to steal everybody's wives :furious3: by flattering them to make them cheat on their real husbands when he wishes it, and as if it wasn't enough he's doing it with the husbands' tax money :no: How could he avoid getting murdered, surely he must have broken down plenty of men with that kind of behavior, which seems like power abuse? :inquisitive: And worst of all: caused inflation on the effect of roses given to GFs, so that maintenance costs for GFs must have increased horribly :laugh4:

Incongruous

08-13-2007, 11:16

Well, I don't hate to say it.
But if Global you know what, is real then Gore will be a giant. imo.