Grestest Warrior of World - Genghis Khan

[Manas]

One of three major races is mogolian but this theory of 1 in 200 men direct descent of Genghis Khan is wrong.

Genghis Khan a Prolific Lover, DNA Data Implies

 

[LeGenD]

Not that i underestimate the power of faith, however that is not all that is required to be a great warrior/commander.

Khalid bin Waleed had men under him, men who died like any other.
It was his great courage, steely determination, sheer brilliance and unmatched skill which made him victorious over many armies and top commanders which Persia and Rome threw at him.

You would do well to read in depth about his strategic vision and tactical brilliance which ranks right on top along with the likes of Alexander and Genghis Khan.

However Khalid also had another quality, he was the best duelist of his time and killed scores of enemy champions in one on one encounters which were a tradition in those days. In armed or unarmed combat, Khalid's great strength, supreme confidence, speed and lightning reflexes made him something of a living legend...a legend which only grew as he fought the best armies and champions in the world.
There was not a single Arab, Roman or Persian champion who took on Khalid and was not defeated. This is something most extraordinary for a commander in chief, which to me makes him the complete Warrior.

With his combined traits of military leadership, courage and fighting skills...he was a complete and peerless warrior/commander.

Khalid never lost a battle against the Roman and Persian empires. He was undefeated against two of the super powers of his time and this includes epic battles where the enemy had nearly a 100,000 Troops with Muslims at a disadvantage of 1:3 combatant ratio.

Another very interesting fact about him is that as a non Muslim he was the one responsible for inflicting the only reverse on Muslims when they were commanded by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
Khalid was the commander of cavalry and lingered on waiting for an opening even though the infantry of his Army had already started fleeing. The Muslim archers thought victory had been secured and left their post on a strategic hill against the instructions of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
Khalid immediately calculated his chances and flanked the Muslims and nearly routed the Muslim Army which had to retreat to the hills for safety.

This was a key trait of Khalid, he really never ever gave up and was always precise in his calculation and timing with a counter attack...even in seemingly hopeless situations, he never lost tactical clarity or strategic vision and this inspired his subordinates so much that it became common knowledge amongst all Muslim soldiers that if Khalid was in command, they would never lose any battle.

Fair and decent analysis.

However, muslims faced Byzantine Empire and not the original Roman Empire, which was far stronger.

In addition, battle of Yarmouk indicates that Vahan was not such a great military commander. He was relying on muscle rather then brain.

 

[All-Green]

Fair and decent analysis.

However, muslims faced Byzantine Empire and not the original Roman Empire, which was far stronger.

In addition, battle of Yarmouk indicates that Vahan was not such a great military commander. He was relying on muscle rather then brain.

It was the eastern Roman empire which outlasted the western one and remained a formidable power for centuries.
Byzantine empire was a term developed by historians to segregate this entity, however the eastern Roman empire was indeed a continuation of Rome.

Nevertheless, there is no denying the power of Persia and Eastern Rome.
They were the super powers of their time.
The quality of arms and experience of the Roman and Persian empires in those days was quite significant.

Khalid was a master strategist and tactician and this was the main reason he made his enemies look like fools.
The fact that he was one of the best duelists and cavalrymen of his time only instilled more spirit and courage in his troops who saw him lead from the front in dashing cavalry charges and decisive maneuvers against the enemy.

His maneuvers around the enemy forces to tire or confuse them regarding the objectives of his Army in the initial campaign in Iraq literally played with the minds of Persian Generals.
His tri directional night attack on a strong Roman Garrison using three converging formations at the same time through flooded lands was amazingly bold to say the least.

If you review the battle of Yarmouk, he made sure that the Romans could not properly use their numerical advantage.
He initially split the cavalry amongst the wings and center but held a strategic reserve with which he would intervene at just the right moment to assist which ever division was most hard pressed. In this manner he saved his Army from annihilation in wake of a sustained attack by the adversary for days.

Eventually when the timing was right in his mind, he detached a force at night to block the retreat path and then combined the rest of his cavalry and in a grand maneuver routed the Roman Army.
The fact that this he dared to attempt all of this with inferior number of troops, shows the caliber of the man.

Since he was the commander executing such daring maneuvers, it shows his grasp on military matters that ensured his usually numerically inferior Army was never the one which was left in tatters at the end of the day.

P.S. This is my last post on Khalid bin Waleed since this thread was about Genghis Khan, no doubt a great conqueror and brilliant strategist.

 

[eastwatch]

dont have to explain anything to none history Viets, his purpose is to troll to accuse us to 'steal' others history, the area which those viets do the best

No, no, it is good that someone has stated the current thinking of Chinese regarding Kublai khan and his descendents. Many of us do not really know what fly2012 has stated in his post. This branch is certainly Chinese.

 

[eastwatch]

If you read in detail the history of Arab victories against Persia and Rome , you were amazed that they dont even have proper war uniform and equipments . They always won wars with divine support .

Divine power is always neutral when it is love and when it is war. Why to bring a religious faith in a serious discussion? Men's courage in the battlefield, the arms they have and the tactics they play are responsible for a war outcome. Also, note that in the older days without much military technology at hand, worriors from poor deserts usualy won over well-fed nations with green farmlands. The former were hungry/greedy adventurers and the latter were weak defenders.

 

[eastwatch]

Nader Shah hightlighted the vulnerabilities of the Mughals which emboldened the British to actually rule India.

No, the reason is it was Ahmed Shah Abdali who after defeating the Maratha power at the 3rd Battle of Panipath decided to return to Afghanistan instead of taking over Delhi Sultanate. A new power in Delhi could have recouped (possibly) all the losses of Indian territories in the east in Bengal by the British.

Abdali probably left in a hurry because he was gravely ill. But, the outcome of his battle with Marathas made the Maratha power very weak on one hand and on the other hand he himself also did not stay in Hindustan to fill up this power vacuum.

 

[ice_man]

i believe for any great leader to be succesful he has to have a goal an aim or an inspiration whatever you call it! something he madly believes in and his troops rally around him!



Alexander wanted to conquer the world and make macedonians powerful and rich his men believed in him and in the process got power and bounty! similarly with ceaser & napoloeon! even hitler and genghis khan to an extent! both wanted to make their people powerful and rich.

however, with Khalid Bin Waleed his major motivator was religion and i say this because he was not the ruler as well as a miliatry commander like all the others he was just a man that won his rulers wars and moved on. his motivator was simply religion. even Salahudin is debatable but Khalid bin Waleed without a doubt had only religion as his motivation.

 

[haviZsultan]

Genghis Khan was a great warrior.

In 1258 AD Baghdad fell to his ever conquering horde. Islam would have fallen to him if it wasn't for the Mamluks who halted him in Egypt.

The Mongols actually brought a complete end to the Abassid Caliphate. They crushed the Poles in the north and Khwarezmians in Iran. He wiped out entire cities.

 

[LeGenD]

It was the eastern Roman empire which outlasted the western one and remained a formidable power for centuries.

After the first major collapse, the Roman Empire would never regain its fomer glory and power. Primary reason of this collapse was common occurrences of internal assasinations, which indicated unstable leadership system. Quality leadership was vitual to survival of any Empire. History reveals that most Empires progressed and expanded under quality leadership. They faced decline under weak leadership.

The remnant Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) had its golden moments but periods of crises too.

Byzantine empire was a term developed by historians to segregate this entity, however the eastern Roman empire was indeed a continuation of Rome.

Agreed.

Nevertheless, there is no denying the power of Persia and Eastern Rome.
They were the super powers of their time.
The quality of arms and experience of the Roman and Persian empires in those days was quite significant.

I would not consider then as superpowers. The concept of superpower emerged during the age of colonization. A superpower is a state that could exert its influence at global scale. This was not the case in those days.

Khalid was a master strategist and tactician and this was the main reason he made his enemies look like fools.
The fact that he was one of the best duelists and cavalrymen of his time only instilled more spirit and courage in his troops who saw him lead from the front in dashing cavalry charges and decisive maneuvers against the enemy.

His maneuvers around the enemy forces to tire or confuse them regarding the objectives of his Army in the initial campaign in Iraq literally played with the minds of Persian Generals.
His tri directional night attack on a strong Roman Garrison using three converging formations at the same time through flooded lands was amazingly bold to say the least.

If you review the battle of Yarmouk, he made sure that the Romans could not properly use their numerical advantage.
He initially split the cavalry amongst the wings and center but held a strategic reserve with which he would intervene at just the right moment to assist which ever division was most hard pressed. In this manner he saved his Army from annihilation in wake of a sustained attack by the adversary for days.

Eventually when the timing was right in his mind, he detached a force at night to block the retreat path and then combined the rest of his cavalry and in a grand maneuver routed the Roman Army.
The fact that this he dared to attempt all of this with inferior number of troops, shows the caliber of the man.

Since he was the commander executing such daring maneuvers, it shows his grasp on military matters that ensured his usually numerically inferior Army was never the one which was left in tatters at the end of the day.

P.S. This is my last post on Khalid bin Waleed since this thread was about Genghis Khan, no doubt a great conqueror and brilliant strategist.

You need to establish that Vahan was also a brilliant strategist in the first place. He had issues with other senior figures in the army under his command during the Battle of Yarmouk. This resulted in poor coordination.

I doubt that Vahan never got the chance to plan and conduct offensive missions. He conducted limited offensive missions and did not use cavalry under his disposal effectively. He actually wasted time.

Khalid Bin Waleed took advantage of the situation like a brilliant strategist would do.

Point is that Vahan proved to be incapable of using resources at his disposal effectively because of his own incompetence. He lost this battle even before he began.

The victory of Khalid Bin Waleed was rightfully his.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

I was simply noting that Nader Shah's invasion of Dehli was a like a catalyst to the British coming into power in India, as it might not have have happened at all or may have happened in a different way.

When Shan invaded the Mughals, the Mughals were a small, small, fraction of their strength. Mughals lost huge parts of their land to the Marathas and were basically left in Dehli when Shan invaded. So they weren't the powerhouse they used to be. Europeans im sure they knew this.

 

[Desert Fox]

When Shan invaded the Mughals, the Mughals were a small, small, fraction of their strength. Mughals lost huge parts of their land to the Marathas and were basically left in Dehli when Shan invaded. So they weren't the powerhouse they used to be. Europeans im sure they knew this.

Mughals didn't stand a chance against the Brits and Marathas even if Nader Shah didn't attack, since most of their wealth was spent on building gardens and palaces instead of strengthening their armies.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Mughals didn't stand a chance against the Brits and Marathas even if Nader Shah didn't attack, since most of their wealth was spent on building gardens and palaces instead of strengthening their armies.

No, Mughal spend huge amounts of money for their army, especially under Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb and the Mughals drained a lot of the empires wealth in the 27 year war with the Marathas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_War_of_Independence

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Many of the passionate pakistani posters are perhaps forgetting that mongols were responsible for the near destruction of islam,butcherig of damascus and baghdad and the end of islam and arabian golden age and scientific innovation.

 

[Icewolf]

Many of the passionate pakistani posters are perhaps forgetting that mongols were responsible for the near destruction of islam,butcherig of damascus and baghdad and the end of islam and arabian golden age and scientific innovation.

well im not sure of end of scientific innovation..

---------- Post added at 12:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:31 AM ----------

science actually prospered in mughal times

 

[chrisallen]

Its all been awesome and got really helping information.