Worst Leaders

[Seltwar]

It would be true. Look what he did to our economy. His policies are nation killers, most teabaggers don't get that it was Bush who drove the debt so high and killed our dollar

Yes because when bush was president it was around three trillion and when obama became president his it rapidly became 14 trillion. Obviously bush planned almost go up by 500% so his predecessor was Phucked....Prove that please.

Starvation and freezing to death are pretty awful ways to die.

not as bad as freezing, starving then getting gas chambered.
While stalin and hitler were actions were both atrocious hitler just said...."you know who i hate?...Jews" And then it began. Stalin was paranoid. Hitler did it for the "luls" while stalin was paranoid beyond belief.
1: Hitler
2:Stalin
3: Mousilini
4: Pol Pot
5: Kim Jong ill
6: Mao Zedong
7: Ali Khamenei
8: Ghadafi
9:Robert Mugabe
10: Jihad/crusades.
10 is an honorable mention as they weren't perpetrated by a single leader but were rather a continued policy of shitty leadership.
Off topic. How can you possibly consider Bush JR be called one of the worst leaders? Thats kinda like saying Ya that guy who put us in a shittier spot sucked but i think he competes with mass murderers genocidal maniacs and deceivers.

[Seltwar]

You need proof the middle easterners are killing each other...?

I said proof that the leaders kill their own people.

And don't point out the Libyan civil war.

Egypt. And dont say they were his "supporters" Supporters dont show up suddenly organized during a communications black out with horses and whips.
Iran. Twitter Revolution left dozens if not hundreds dead.
Iraq. Saddam exterminated thousands of Kurds.
Syria. People disappear and then re-appear....dead.
Good enough for you?

[Rolamec]

Like um, Obama sent more troops into Afghanistan and expanded the war to the outskirts of Pakistan. and OMG, I just saw Paul on my computer screeen!!!!!!

Sure, he sent more troops, but he more or less ended our involvement in Iraq. To state that he "led us to war" is simply fallacious. The wars were inherited, and despite whatever troop movement there is, he did not lead the US to war.

I agree. I never said he did. But the notion that he somehow discontinued intervention overseas is simply not true. Obama supported Afghanistan early on and he still does (justly so).

[The REAL Glasers]

It would be true. Look what he did to our economy. His policies are nation killers, most teabaggers don't get that it was Bush who drove the debt so high and killed our dollar

Yes because when bush was president it was around three trillion and when obama became president his it rapidly became 14 trillion. Obviously bush planned almost go up by 500% so his predecessor was Phucked....Prove that please.

Starvation and freezing to death are pretty awful ways to die.

not as bad as freezing, starving then getting gas chambered.
While stalin and hitler were actions were both atrocious hitler just said...."you know who i hate?...Jews" And then it began. Stalin was paranoid. Hitler did it for the "luls" while stalin was paranoid beyond belief.
1: Hitler
2:Stalin
3: Mousilini
4: Pol Pot
5: Kim Jong ill
6: Mao Zedong
7: Ali Khamenei
8: Ghadafi
9:Robert Mugabe
10: Jihad/crusades.
10 is an honorable mention as they weren't perpetrated by a single leader but were rather a continued policy of shitty leadership.
Off topic. How can you possibly consider Bush JR be called one of the worst leaders? Thats kinda like saying Ya that guy who put us in a shittier spot sucked but i think he competes with mass murderers genocidal maniacs and deceivers.

Bush put us into a war and poured billions upon billions of dollars overseas. Obama inherited that, and the conflict still goes on to this day. Then the housing market and banks crashed because of, if I'm not mistaken, Clinton-era deregulation. Obama believes in Keynesian economics, you have to spend money to make money, hence the increased debt.

Because you can be a murderer and still be a good leader. Stalin committed massive genocide, but he made Russia a superpower.

Also, Stalin HATED the Kulak farmers. He didn't do it out of paranoia, he absolutely hated that region and took away more and more crops from it while they starved to death.

Sure, he sent more troops, but he more or less ended our involvement in Iraq. To state that he "led us to war" is simply fallacious. The wars were inherited, and despite whatever troop movement there is, he did not lead the US to war.

I agree. I never said he did. But the notion that he somehow discontinued intervention overseas is simply not true. Obama supported Afghanistan early on and he still does (justly so).

Yeah, I definitely wasn't trying to argue that we were totally removed. I'm not exactly against continued presence in Afghanistan.

[Sremski okrug]

I said proof that the leaders kill their own people.

And don't point out the Libyan civil war.

Egypt. And dont say they were his "supporters" Supporters dont show up suddenly organized during a communications black out with horses and whips.
Iran. Twitter Revolution left dozens if not hundreds dead.
Iraq. Saddam exterminated thousands of Kurds.
Syria. People disappear and then re-appear....dead.
Good enough for you?

Funny stuff. The United States is actively supporting the revolution in Iran, meanwhile in Saudi Arabia.....Ironically Iran is one of the most democratic states in the region.

[Laerod]

I agree with you in this one, although I'd put Stalin first and Hitler second

Stalin had a higher body count, but his acts were far less atrocious.

Probably not. Most people count the holodomor for Stalin along with the purges but fail to add World War 2 or the campaigns of starving Eastern Europe to Hitler's bodycount.

[Laerod]

Egypt. And dont say they were his "supporters" Supporters dont show up suddenly organized during a communications black out with horses and whips.
Iran. Twitter Revolution left dozens if not hundreds dead.
Iraq. Saddam exterminated thousands of Kurds.
Syria. People disappear and then re-appear....dead.
Good enough for you?

Funny stuff. The United States is actively supporting the revolution in Iran, meanwhile in Saudi Arabia.....Ironically Iran is one of the most democratic states in the region.

That's not really saying much.

[Mediterreania]

Stalin had a higher body count, but his acts were far less atrocious.

Probably not. Most people count the holodomor for Stalin along with the purges but fail to add World War 2 or the campaigns of starving Eastern Europe to Hitler's bodycount.

Even if Stalin had a higher body count, it's worse to stave, shoot and gas people than to just starve them.

[Fedeledland]

1. Papa Doc
2. Charles Taylor
3. Saddam Hussein
4. Rafael Trujillo

Umm... why? They brought stability to weak and poor countries.

They also killed their own people.

1. The President of Turkmenistan

Why? He's not such a bad a leader. Tyrannic, yes. Bad, no.

1. The Shah of Iran

Which of the many shahs?

The one my family lived under.[/quote]

Well, they might have killed their own people, but being tyrannic doesn't mean they were bad leaders. They, in fact, although killed many, brought a bit of stability to totally failed nations.

[Delfederates]

1.FDR
2.LBJ
3.Obama
4.Lenon
5.Stalin
6.Pol Pot
7.Sadam
8.Jimmy Carter
9.Castro
10.The U.N.

[Josh Sinister]

1.FDR
2.LBJ
3.Obama
4.Lenon
5.Stalin
6.Pol Pot
7.Sadam
8.Jimmy Carter
9.Castro
10.The U.N.

It looks like your trolling. Not because your opinion is different; I hate it when self-righteous jerkoffs say this. I'm asking this because it seems like you put one of the best presidents on number one; LBJ on number 2 (He sucked, but not nearly as bad as Pol Pot or North Korea); Obama on number 3 (A mostly absentee president who managed to do 2 or 3 important things); and Jimmy Carter on number 8 (he sucked, but he shouldn't be 1 space after Raul Castro.)

[Mediterreania]

Umm... why? They brought stability to weak and poor countries.

They also killed their own people.


Why? He's not such a bad a leader. Tyrannic, yes. Bad, no.

Which of the many shahs?

The one my family lived under.

Well, they might have killed their own people, but being tyrannic doesn't mean they were bad leaders. They, in fact, although killed many, brought a bit of stability to totally failed nations.[/quote]

Papa Doc had an insane system of government, Taylor brought civil war, Hussein caused a bloody war with Iran, Trujillo exhausted the national treasury on his own vanity projects, the Turkmeni guy gave nonsensical and unreasonable orders, and the Shah made Iran into an American police state.