Name a better conqueror than Genghis Khan

...

They also still bang little boys

This

>condoleances
My condolences to you too, nigger

When the Bible mentions him as a great evil and a plague to the world and a thorn in their side, i think he takes the cake.

I'd say Mohammed did a pretty good job at conquering when he started with nothing.

napoleon

Maybe, Alexander the Great?

This or Napoleon
>hundreds of miles of empty steppe
vs
>the wealthiest and strongest empire in the world
And they did 1500 years earlier, too.

>better
>conquers less than a 1/5th

>less than 1/5
Lol wut? The Mongol empire at Genghis Khan's death was only 2.5 times the size of Alexander's.
A few other things to consider:
1) Alexander personally led and won all his battles. Genghis relied heavy on his generals to command for him in his later years.
Alexander also never lost a battle.
2) Alexander conquests were mainly civilized lands. Genghis conquered huge portions of steppe along with his civilized conquests
3) Alexander achieved his empire in 13 years from establish his power base. Genghis achieved his empire in 21 years from cementing his own base (being crowned as ruler of the United Mongols)

All in all, both incredible conquerors, and it seems unfair to dismiss Alexander because of the size of the Mongol Empire well after Genghis' own death.

Genghis Khan left a legacy.

Alexander's collapsed.

Legacies are part of each man's achievement.

Augustus. Greatest territory expansion of any emperor and creator of pax Romans 200 years of peace.

The mong lost it within 1 generation, had no infrastructure and resulted in the loss of Baghdad library by got son.

Alexandet is the story of a man conquering unarmed civilians with new ballista tech and responsible for the inroad the east followed back into the west, ultimately resulting in shit like 'Istanbul' and mudslime being a thing.

>200 years of peace

Just like the greeks of old

Levant and Anatolia were, until the islamic invasions - mostly Hellenized, along with the ruling classes of egypt

a legacy that lasted a thousand years

What?Both had their shit carved up and Alexander continues to be a legend to this day.

>Alexander empire collapses
>Greeks gets conquered by Romans
>Persians takeover Middle East

...

>Greeks get conquered by Romans
>Greece, Anatolia, Syria, the Levent and Egypt remain dominated by Hellenistic culture
>Romans also love Hellen culture
>Greeks become Romans
>a few Germans later
>Romans are now Greeks

Plus you have the Greeco-Indian kingdoms that lasted for hundreds of years too

...

...

In a loose sense, there's some greek cultural transmission, that could count as Alexander the great's legacy. But other than that, its nothing. Meanwhile, Mongol legacy is direct. Genghis Khan's children and grandchildrens and greatgrand childrens conquer pretty much every advanced civilization on Earth. From China to India to Middle East.

Ghengis khan basically spammed horse archers as a fairly unique tech at the time. Once everyone else caught up and learned how to defend against horseback skirmishers they got BTFO and never recovered.

He was basically the asshole who spams one unit type in a grand strategy game.

what, where does the bible mention alexander?

>Slaps your natives in the religion
What do Veeky Forums?

PBUH

Except Mongols also had infantry and heavy cavalry you dumbass. Anyone who thinks the horse archers were the only effective component of his army is retarded

But that's wrong you stupid whore Jamukha. Genghis Khan united a bunch of hillbillies who spent the previous 1000 years stealing each other's women and actively not learnign a damn thing, and fucked up half of the known world them. His successors did good too but that was only because he did that hard legwork in his early days.

>Infantry and heavy cavalary.
As did just about every other civilisation you muppet. Horse archers were what gave them the massive advantage in warfare that lead to them not just being another steppe borne barbarian plague.

Wrong. Mongols didn't conquer China or enter the Middle East and Eastern Europe until after his death. He united the Mongols and the steppes but the conquests the Mongols are known for happened under his successors.

>but that's wrong you stupid whore Jamukha

Lmao dying at that

Is it gay if its only for him?

who conquered more people, Napoleon, Alexander or Genghis?

...

He conquered the most populous part of China and the NE corner of the Middle East.

>conquering unimportant lands.

>my death alone had more consequences on the future of the world than your entire life.

>conquerors
>better
They are all tyrants.

>Alexander's collapsed
>he doesn't know that the spread of Christianity is indirectly a result of Alexander's conquests

Elaborate

The language. By the time when Jesus died and was resurrected, the Middle East was already Hellenised to an extent where Greek was considered the de facto main language. Since the Apostles had knowledge of the Greek language they found it easier to spread their religion through the Roman Empire. Not to mention that the New Testament was written in Greek

How so?

What? The Mongols were known for employing ingenious tactics.

Only parts of Syria and Egypt were that Hellenized and I don't think all the apostles or disciples knew Greek.

The Jews used Aramaic and Aramaic speaking areas converted faster than the Greek speaking world. In fact, some believe the NT was written in it.

No way. Mongols are dumbasses. They only beat the Europeans because europeans are even more of a dumbasses.

>Only parts of Syria and Egypt were that Hellenized and I don't think all the apostles or disciples knew Greek.
The ones who travelled in Europe, Paul and Peter, knew how to speak it.

>The Jews used Aramaic and Aramaic speaking areas converted faster than the Greek speaking world.
Because Jesus himself spoke in Aramaic.

>China
>Korea
>Persia
>Mesopotamia
>Eastern Europe

Yeah, totally unimportant.

Any conqueror that hadn't to fight asymetrical wars to win

>Alexander achieved his empire in 13 years from establish his power base. Genghis achieved his empire in 21 years from cementing his own base

Alexander also inherited a proficient and well-disciplined army from his father (a strong general in his own right), was tutored from birth by some of the greatest minds in that era, and well versed in tactical and military employments.

Genghis Khan arose from nothing.

...

Cyrus the Great
Alexander the Great
Subetai

Stop talking bullshit

The Mongols were master psychologists and tacticians. I mean they are directly related to the Japs and Koreans, the top producers of high-tech in the world. They can't be that stupid.

When the fuck is that Russian bastard gonna give us the sequel we deserve?

>t. Afghan
suh dude, lmao

soon senpai

I don't get what's so funny. He conquered you and then moved on to India.

Never

Subutai

Took him three years after blowing through Persia in six months

What fucking legacy did Genghis Khan leave besides death and pillaging? After Ogedei's death his empire went to shit. Furthermore his empire was mostly comprised of steppe territories. Napoleon, Alexander, Caesar, Cyrus are way better because they actually fought STRONGER opponents and conquered important territories, not some desert wastelands.

Meme general.

His army was extremely exhausted by then and they were ready to revolt. This isn't Total War or Europa Universalis.

Are you that kid that says
>Heh, took three of you to kill me!
Whenever you get rekt in CS?

on a side note, where does this "Afghans never get conquered " meme come from when they got conquered by ...
1. Persians
2.Scythians
3. Indians
4. Arabs
5.Turks
6.Timurids
only the British and Soviets failed there

Europeans failed to take Afghan, therefore, if the bastion of civilization can't take it in 20th century, what forces can?

tl;dr eurocentric view

It's a combination of people having a poor understanding of history and being opposed to the US invasion of Afghanistan. They either repeat it because they didn't do any fact checking, or because they don't mind lying to support their position on something that was a big issue until a few years ago.

He killed millions. Hate it or love it, he left more of a historical impact than you ever will.

He had hundreds of thousands of indian allies and diseases as weapons. Genghis Khan started from nothing.

And? It was not good one. I've done in my entire life more than Genghis Khan ever did considering I've actually helped society progress rather than destroy nations and civilizations.

PROTIP: I can't.
The walking meme

>What fucking legacy did Genghis Khan leave besides death and pillaging?
A bigger genetic imprint than anyone, ever. Genetic empire>Meme land empire

Ghenghis Khan literally overwhelmed his enemy's with sheer numbers and ambushes. He conquered huge swaths of vacant land that possessed no real economic value to his empire. Would the West, or the world at large, be worse off if the empire had never existed? Think of all the great achievemnet of western and near-eastern empires, and then compare them to the decadent Asiatic empires of the East.

inb4
>muh gun powder
>muh paper
>muh silk

Fuck off zipperhead's the world would be a better place without you slit-eyed fuckwits.

>Hundreds of thousands of indians who had constantly got their asses kicked by the Aztecs
>Diseases that would have affected his allies as well as his enemies

...

>I've done in my entire life more than Genghis Khan ever did considering I've actually helped society progress rather than destroy nations and civilizations.
>He doesn't believe in creative destruction

Didn't Genghis kill everyone with a dick when he walked into a nation. And then proceed to fuck every woman available until pregnant.

I don't really think he was muh legacy other then a wall and rapebabbies.

Alexander however or even Caesar..... Now that's a different story.

Manlet rage is a path to many abilities some consider unnatural

Say if I kill you tomorrow, would I have left my contribution to humanity? Would that suit you

Genghis, but a lot of them were Chinese so it doesn't count.

The real question is who fathered more rape babies
Romans, Arabs, Mongols, or Spaniards

>tfw big daddy Spain will never come back to reconquer Mexico

Why even live.

One out of every three people is a decendant of Genghis.

He wins.

That could've just been due to asians breeding like rabbits after him though. The Mongols didn't rape nearly as long as the Spaniards, Arabs, and Romans. I'm thinking Rome has them beat desu

Genghis Khan formed a liberal, wealthy, peaceful, disciplined, just, meritorious, safe, secure Empire that lasted until the mid-1500s.

He liberated women, he built Karakorum, and he patronized scholarship.

The deaths he may have caused were due to his strict, righteous enforcement of international law.

He united the world centuries before the Spanish and Portuguese exploration.

And last but not least, our genes.

It was not peaceful after his death.

He killed Muslims, that's a big plus. Btw, why is Genghis Khan looked at in almost a favorable light while Hitler isn't, even though he killed way more people than Hitler even if choose to believe that the Holohoax happened?

The civil wars were personal issues in the dynasty that they tried to resolve with their subjects in mind. Most were not affected.

Jewish education and american propaganda

Because you're objectively wrong about everything except for the Muslim killing

How so? When people speak about Genghis they usually talk about what a great conqueror he is and how he founded the Mongolian Empire, also how great he was for trade between East and West (even though they often forget to mention how he is the main reason the Black Death hit Europe). Literally almost nobody speaks about the atrocities he committed Yet Hitler, who wanted to do the right thing and didn't kill 6 trillion Jews, is thought as the literal Devil in history books.

How does that happen?

...