who were the most imcompetent rulers ever?

[Kraxis]

Good old Darius does not deserve to be up there.

His every step was quite clever.
He managed to hire far more Greek mercenaries than the Macedonians (Philip and Alexander), that shows rather competent thinking since it was common knowledge that the Persian infantry was about worth... Well not much. There were the Immotals and the Kardakes and that was it. He obviously didn't trust the grey mass of spearmen, and rightly put them where they belonged, in the rear, to be a sort of human wall.
He is thought to have helped Olympias with the murder of Philip, that in itself is a very clever move. By helping her he would have stirred up things more in Macedon than just outright killing Philip (and causing international outrage).
In his tactical dispositions he did everything that he should.
First he let the very capable Memnon wage a very succesful war of attrition and counterattacks in Asia Minor (why do you think it took so long to get through Asia Minor?), but he was unlucky that Memnon died. Then he launched an offensive in the north that managed to do rather well. But it was called back as Alexander was about to cut it off at the Cilician Gates.

At Issus he massed his cavalry for an overwhelming attack. Right choice!
Had Alexander done the 'right' thing and deployed to meet the threat he would have been rolled over by sheer numbers. Instead the insolent Macedonian dares to a trick and a flanking attack on the cavalry. Unfair to judge him on that.

At Gaugamela he clearly showed that he had learned his lesson.
He made great use of flat terrain to either side, making certain he would outflank his enemy. This usually meant a sure victory. He also employed the usual dense formation breakers, elephants and heavy chariots.
Again Alexander digs deep in his genius and deploys in two lines to deny any rear attacks and has the light infantry deal with the chariots and elephants. While he lures the enemy cavalry on a chase so that he can strike at them when broken.
What could he ever have done against this? Nothing.

Further, and this might not be taken as much of a positive note, but he did try to get a peace going with Alexander, knowing that he couldn't win in battle. It takes a great man to see his own limitations, one of the vitues Alexander for one lacked.

So while Darius was no great leader, and not a superb commander, hewas more than capable, and he was bright. He does not deserve to be on this list.

[AntiochusIII]

Yeah, I always pitied old Darius for inheriting a falling, corrupted empire and tried his best (and quite good, A for the effort ) to slow down the advance of greatest military genius the world had ever seen.

This thread seems to show that many are very prejudiced in judging who should be the most incompetent ruler ever. Some rulers face the pattern of being notorious that while there are a lot of worse rulers out there, they were chosen; Pyrrhus, Napolean III, and Darius are examples. Others are chosen because of being local ones, and their details are well-known to the poster.

A few were chosen despite the fact that they're not incompetent; rather as a result of the poster's political position and a reaction to the demonization of the "opponents." That Clinton and Bush are being put up shows such cases.

While in some cases the rulers are just plain mad; retarded. Caligula, Henry VI, etc. Should that count as a case of incompetence? Probably it should.

Me? I'd say many of you guys makes horrible rulers. Seriously, try to rule a country, and watch the result!

Bite me, O incompetent ones.

[caesar44]

Good old Darius does not deserve to be up there.

His every step was quite clever.
He managed to hire far more Greek mercenaries than the Macedonians (Philip and Alexander), that shows rather competent thinking since it was common knowledge that the Persian infantry was about worth... Well not much. There were the Immotals and the Kardakes and that was it. He obviously didn't trust the grey mass of spearmen, and rightly put them where they belonged, in the rear, to be a sort of human wall.
He is thought to have helped Olympias with the murder of Philip, that in itself is a very clever move. By helping her he would have stirred up things more in Macedon than just outright killing Philip (and causing international outrage).
In his tactical dispositions he did everything that he should.
First he let the very capable Memnon wage a very succesful war of attrition and counterattacks in Asia Minor (why do you think it took so long to get through Asia Minor?), but he was unlucky that Memnon died. Then he launched an offensive in the north that managed to do rather well. But it was called back as Alexander was about to cut it off at the Cilician Gates.

At Issus he massed his cavalry for an overwhelming attack. Right choice!
Had Alexander done the 'right' thing and deployed to meet the threat he would have been rolled over by sheer numbers. Instead the insolent Macedonian dares to a trick and a flanking attack on the cavalry. Unfair to judge him on that.

At Gaugamela he clearly showed that he had learned his lesson.
He made great use of flat terrain to either side, making certain he would outflank his enemy. This usually meant a sure victory. He also employed the usual dense formation breakers, elephants and heavy chariots.
Again Alexander digs deep in his genius and deploys in two lines to deny any rear attacks and has the light infantry deal with the chariots and elephants. While he lures the enemy cavalry on a chase so that he can strike at them when broken.
What could he ever have done against this? Nothing.

Further, and this might not be taken as much of a positive note, but he did try to get a peace going with Alexander, knowing that he couldn't win in battle. It takes a great man to see his own limitations, one of the vitues Alexander for one lacked.

So while Darius was no great leader, and not a superb commander, hewas more than capable, and he was bright. He does not deserve to be on this list.

But just look at the facts...
I think that Coresh the great (Cyrus?) would have crushed the tiny Macedonian army , Alexander or not ! he was genius , Alexander was also (some say...) so the Persian would have won because he was at home and had the better numbers .
So yes , Darius should be in the list .

[Soulforged]

No i really think that non of them should be in the list. We're judging them by today's standars, they lived in harsh periods without the science and rationality that exists today in our governors. I really can't think in any ruler of that time that bad to be included on this list.

[caesar44]

No i really think that non of them should be in the list. We're judging them by today's standars, they lived in harsh periods without the science and rationality that exists today in our governors. I really can't think in any ruler of that time that bad to be included on this list.

???
Harsh periods , what is the connection here ? WW2 was not a harsh period ?

[Steppe Merc]

A politician today that did what even Alexander did would be dubbed an idiot and reviled, is what I think Soulforged is trying to say.

[Soulforged]

A politician today that did what even Alexander did would be dubbed an idiot and reviled, is what I think Soulforged is trying to say.

Yes something like that. But i really don't think that you can compare the harsh political situation of ancient times to what is comtemporary or modern. In those times the head of a government could easily change with the wind. Besides i give one more reason, science, to me this is more important than anything.

[AggonyDuck]

Well IMO most of the guys listed were not the most incompetent rulers ever, because usually the most incompetent rulers are those who get replaced rather quickly. (and thus are not that known at all)

[Kagemusha]

The one of the most incompetent ruler´s ever would be Nikolai II of Russia.The last Czar took over one of the greatest Empires of Europe and lost everything including his and his familys lives.

[Shambles]

id give sir loyed george the vote,

Pm Uk

Is mostly his fault that we are at war now,
and why israilies are being mooved out of there houses.

He was the guy who just split the place up and gave the "freindlies" The land there now beeing mooved out of,

Couple that with americas refusal for years to Let the Real land owners to take back there land.
This Caused a rift between cultures which is More apparant toda than ever before.

If you read Old translations of the keran "pardon me if i spelled it wrong"
And i know the next quote wont be very precice So please bear with me"

any way the old translations Read.

"any one who beleves in alah or lives a reightious life can go to paradice"

These days they read.

"only true belevers of alah may enter paradice"

Undoubtedly A by product of loyed georges initial intervention,
And americas refusal to play nice,

This to me is What a incompitent leader is.

Of course You can add Hitler,All the Bush's,And tony blair to your incompitent leaders board.
But Prehaps if it wasnt for loyed george Tony blair and the bushe's Wouldnt need be such idiots,

So i say loyed george was most incompitent.

I may come back and edit this message with more details,
But at the moment im not about to give tomany details As i am A little unshure about details.

ShambleS