Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Who would you vote as the greatest leader of the 20th century? That would be from January 1, 1901 to December 31, 2000 .

Ronaldus Maximus

Ike.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I second OakRidgeStars!

joeshmo wrote:Who would you vote as the greatest leader of the 20th century? That would be from January 1, 1901 to December 31, 2000 .

us-only, or world-wide?

Worldwide. Whomever you think is the greatest

Chesty Puller

Depends on how one defines "Greatest Leader".

The definition lays on your lap my friend. There were no stipulations to the question

Robert Baden-Powell knew a little sumpin 'bout leading....

Richard Petty, led and won more races than any other drive in the history of NASCAR. How's that for a leader? Break out the white lighnting and send a toast!

There were so many great people, within that 100 year span, that were in a position of leadership. World War II, alone, produced so many great leaders that it would be hard to choose from just that period. There was Patton and Eisenhower. Churchill, MacArthur.

Claire Lee Chennault was very important to the Burmese, and still is today. Several years ago, some Burmese tourists wandered into the store that my father owned while my grandfather was there. In conversation, it was revealed that my grandfather had been a tail gunner in one of the Flying Tigers bombers. Next thing you know, my grandfather is getting teary-eyed hugs and kisses from the Burmese tourists, many of which weren't even born until after the war concluded.

I note the nomination for Reagan, posted above. While he is certainly one of my favorite Presidents, I hesitate to refer to a US President as a leader, outside of a military capacity. We are a free people (theoretically) and, as such, we lead ourselves. (at least, that was the idea, anyway) We have representatives.

Of course, there have been great leaders outside of the military, too. We've had great men lead fire departments, Churches, and other organizations, as well.

There have also been men who were great at inspiring men to do their bidding, but were actually rather horrible people. Hitler, Jim Jones, and Charles Manson come to mind.

All this is to say that "Great Leader" is a very broad term that can be correctly defined in many different ways.

Also, it probably implies that I severely over think things, lol.

i always admired Golda Meir.

Meir was one of 24 signatories (two of them women) of the Israeli Declaration of Independence on May 14, 1948. She later recalled, "After I signed, I cried. When I studied American history as a schoolgirl and I read about those who signed the Declaration of Independence, I couldn't imagine these were real people doing something real. And there I was sitting down and signing a declaration of establishment."

Some very good names posted here. All things considered, my pick would be Winston Churchill. I also like Reagan, Ike, and the great US generals and admirals of WWII.

On the dark side - those for whom one hopes there is a special hell:
Hitler, Stalin, Mao and some lesser copies. Note they are of the breed who each intentionally caused the deaths of millions!

OleMan wrote:Some very good names posted here. All things considered, my pick would be Winston Churchill. I also like Reagan, Ike, and the great US generals and admirals of WWII.

On the dark side - those for whom one hopes there is a special hell:
Hitler, Stalin, Mao and some lesser copies. Note they are of the breed who each intentionally caused the deaths of millions!

Agree. SHMIV no ranting there, great post and enjoyed reading it

OleMan- Unfortuantly some do think Hiltler was one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century. Read quit a few other forum where certains think he was the greatest. Some might linger here as well, or do. Cant quite understand why one would think he is the was one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century unless they like the idea of mass genocide.

After much thought I had to limit myself to considering "great" as those who put the welfare of others before their own.

Someone mentioned Hitler/Stalin/Mao...I suppose they could be "great" in the sense they used their will to accomplish what they wanted, but the misery and death that entailed taints my respect for their ambition.

So, I nominate Pope John Paul II, head of the tiny Vatican state. Selfless, a committed enemy of Communism, yet not one to turn his eye away from the human rights abuses committed here in the West either. He touched alot of lives and did alot of good, so, he gets my vote. And when I saw him in person at what happened ot be his last outdoor Mass, close enough to touch, I must admit even this stony atheist heart felt something there and then.

Kreutz wrote:After much thought I had to limit myself to considering "great" as those who put the welfare of others before their own.

Someone mentioned Hitler/Stalin/Mao...I suppose they could be "great" in the sense they used their will to accomplish what they wanted, but the misery and death that entailed taints my respect for their ambition.

So, I nominate Pope John Paul II, head of the tiny Vatican state. Selfless, a committed enemy of Communism, yet not one to turn his eye away from the human rights abuses committed here in the West either. He touched alot of lives and did alot of good, so, he gets my vote. And when I saw him in person at what happened ot be his last outdoor Mass, close enough to touch, I must admit even this stony atheist heart felt something there and then.

You sure about that?

I'd say its a tie MLK and Patton

As much as I admire Patton, I'd say that people like him, MLK and some others, while they did great things, their work was pretty narrowly focused. Eisenhower, George Marshal, FDR, Churchill and Reagan worked on a world-wide basis; considering much greater issues and consequences. That would go for Pope John Paull II as well. Golda Meir, who I admire greatly, was again focused more on just her homeland. Eeven through there were obvious international consequences, she was pretty much pursuing one cause and not balancing multiple interests and trying to strike a new global balance of power and interests. To pick just one as greatest strikes me as rather arbitrary. But if I had to, I'd pick Reagan. Why? Instrumental in the fall of Soviet commumism and also the revitalization of the American (US) spirit. IMHO, that did more for global well-being (at least potentially) than winning WWII (which FDR pretty much bungled by caving in to the Russians due to his ill health and resulting disability).

joeshmo wrote:You sure about that?

About what precisely? Specificity helps.