Who do you choose /pol/?

>>131275255
the finn

>>131275255
I'm torn between Hitler and Stalin. Only reason I don't say Hitler automatically is because... well he made a bunch of strategic errors from what I've learned. Although I think honestly I'll just wait it out, some military strategy autist will come out of the woodwork, make a case for someone I know nothing about, and then I can pretend like that was the obvious answer or just admit I'm an idiot and agree.

>>131275255
Definitely Stalin or Mao.

>Kim Jong Il co-operating with Saddam
>Benito co-operating with Stalin
>Julius co-operating with Napoleon
>Mao co-operating with Genghis Khan

I think Hitler's probably the better choice here.

>>131275255
Stalin
Has modern weapons , unlimited zerg rush army

Hussein probably
He might suck, but at least he had jets and semi-modern tanks

>>131275321
There's three of them dumbass

Hitler when he wasn't on opiates.

>>131275255
Assuming the height of Stalin's power is in 1950, when the USSR has nukes, it's no contest.

>>131275255
If you pick Hitler or Mussolini, you're asking to die. Both shitty military rulers

>>131275494
Stalin has made more mistakes tbf

>>131275255
None of them. All dictator fucks.

File: tumblr_orx7uwYDRj1toqeyzo1_540.jpg (33KB, 540x332px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 540x332px

>>131275586
>Stalin
>"modern weapons"

Yeah. t-34's

>>131275690
youre on the wrong website

>>131275255
>Saddam

kek of a lifetime

So long as they get the same level of technology the only choice is the frog.

>>131275255
Khan of fucking course

>>131275732
IS-2M
Tu-4+nukes
And so on.

>>131275647
>height of Stalin's power is in 1950
Keep in mind that the Soviets were severely crippled promptly after WW2. Mao had nuclear weapons in addition to a massive military.

>>131275255
Stalin because muh nukes.
He can also put me in an underground bunker and completely erase my existence, making it impossible to find me.

File: fgh.png (79KB, 173x193px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 173x193px

>>131275690
>insulting daddy caesar

>>131275494
Watch David Irving lectures. He made those mistakes because he knew his health was failing, so he had to push harder than he wanted to before he died.

>>131275255
Khan if it's a physical fight
Ceasar or napoleon for strategy
Whoever has the most modern weapons if it's the army lead

>>131275255
Caesar.
>Loved his nation and people.
>Wanted to retain his holdings of Gaul.
>Was reforming laws to help his people
>A strongman through n through
>Killed before all his work could come to fruition
>Irony was he was the best chance to maintain the Republic if his reforms succeeded.

File: f03.gif (2MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x270px

>>131275255

Uncle Joe all the way

>>131276344
>Caesar dindu nuffin wrong

~KOK

File: caesar sigh.jpg (53KB, 506x316px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 506x316px

>>131275255
stupid question, Caesar, he has the best connections
>>131275690
enjoy dying then, liberal

>>131275996
The USSR postwar was suffering the damages of the war itself, not much beyond. At the time Mao was at the height of his power, China was suffering the results of the great leap forward and cultural revolution. I'd bet on the Soviets.

>>131275255
Hussein.
Even if his army was incompetent, he has modern artillery and air support.

The others wouldnt stand a chance.

Also, gas.

>>131275255
One of these has functional nuclear weapons. Poorly made image desu

>>131275255
Will they personally fight each other or have their armies to command? With modern technology or those of their day?

This slide thread is too inarticulate to even be bait.

File: stalin.gif (3MB, 291x300px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 291x300px

Is that picture a fucking joke? It's one obvious answer.

>>131275255
Probably the Iraqi

>>131276344
>was a tyrant
>commited war crimes in Gaul, many Roman politicians wanted him trailed for this
>reformed laws to increase his power
>killed by Roman conservative who truly loved his country and traditions
>republic would have been maintained if it wasn't for Cicero swaying popular opinion thanks to his own bickering with Marcus Anthony

>>131275255
On one hand I would say whomever is able to handle well multiple fronts of war at the same time, thus Hitler or Napoleon. On the other hand Russia has never been successfully invaded so as long as the Mongols are wiped out with a nuke I can sit safely in the Urals with Mr Joe

>>131276906
you dare say those things and use that flag?

File: acastro.jpg (191KB, 850x567px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 850x567px

>>131276967
>chooses two losers as best defense

God damn, this board is filled with literal low IQ niggers.

>>131275255
Hitler because even if we get overrun we can just go to Argentina

>>131276344
Reforming is a strong word i would use window dressing instead.

>>131277054
They lost because the whole fucking civilised world allied against them.

>>131277043
Yes

>>131275255
At least 7 of the list were not able to protect themselves, how could they save me?

>>131277258
you should switch it to the LGBT flag, Caesar was the greatest man who ever lived, brutus and cassius were cunts

File: Tropico-5-Art-1.jpg (29KB, 610x347px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 610x347px

Guys...guys...all of these Dictators failed in the most horrible of ways. There is only one Dictator that can win through almost anything.

EL PRESIDENTE!!!

>>131275255

As a ruler and military genius Caesar was unrivaled, maybe matched only by Napoleon.

Problem is the line:
'he has its full army at the height of its power'.
Iraqis or Norks in the 90s would smash legions, mongols, french or nazis.
A company of T-72 would easily match a regiment of WW2 era or the entire Grand Armee.

So OP is a faggot is the only answer.Sage.

File: iconic autism.webm (1MB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 540x304px

did the chinks have an elite spy agency. The only reason I dont want to pick stalin over mao is stalin siccing the KGB on me

>>131277054
>Reading comprehension of a two year old
The Che Guevera pic is enough

>>131275255
Obviously Stalin.
The soviet army in the 50s were unstoppable. Not to mention they successfully tested a nuclear weapon in 1949 I believe.
So what the fuck can anyone do to stop them? Nobody on that list would even stand a chance against the Soviet army with nuclear weapons.

>>131275255
this is a pretty stupid question, why even put the people who were pre firearms and tanks?

>>131277370
Nope, ceasar only cared about his own power, he gave his own daughter to Pompey for support, he didn't care about Rome as much as he cared about himself

File: aface2.png (9KB, 155x165px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 155x165px

>>131277198
Yeah, that's how wars are fought. Like, I don't know what you declare FAIR in war, dumbass.

>>131276906
Some people have to be inconvenienced for real progress to be made. Caesar may have been brutal, but he was responsible for greatly expanding the power and influence of the Roman Republic at the expense of her enemies, and not of her people.

>>131275255
>3 generals with historical military conquests
>6 dictators that could never be military leaders because of their actual stupidity.
This is so retarded. Why not include 6 other generals? Why is /pol/ obsessed with Adolf? He was a terrible wartime leader.

>>131275255
Napoleon but he has to stay in other room because of the gastrointestinal thing.

Easily the greatest tactician of the group.

>>131275255
Julius actually fought in battle IIRC

>>131278776
Napoleon fought in sixty battles and lost 7. Caesar fought against highly inferior forces. No comparison.

>>131275255
Hmm...

Stalin or Kim Jong probably have the largest army size/technology ratio. With Hitler as a close third. Saddam has chemical warfare.

If I could lead those armies or appoint a commander I'd take Hitler I guess. I'd rather have fascist nationalism on my side than communist nationalism or religious fervour. At least it's relatable...

If I can't then Napoleon. He's tenacious

>>131276190
Pure conspiracy theories. Hitler wasn't dying, he escaped to Argentina and lived a long and happy life.

>>131275255
Stalin probably has the best technological advantage of all of them, Genghis and Julius are using medieval/ancient weaponry so they're fucked

>>131275255
Julius Caesar has got to be the ultimate choice of all these men. Life in the Roman empire wasn't sci-fi utopia, but it was as bloody close as it could get for the time.
Hitler is an inspiration, he was a very charismatic and intelligent man who went awry, but Caesar? I've yet to hear of any reason why he wouldn't be someone's first choice.
The Roman empire offered the highest standards of living seen in the entire world during its day.

>>131275255
I'll go against all 9 of them at the same time with only the stiff upper lip of the British and the zeal for freedom of the American

>>131275255
Genghis Khan probably had the best parties.

Oh, and with my response, I assume all armies are put on even footing, in terms of technology?
Otherwise the answer can only go to Mao or Saddam, for the literally undeniable technological advantage would be too overwhelming.

>>131275255
Mao at the height of his power had the most powerful nukes. He lived until 1976. Stalin only just started getting nukes when he died in 1953.

Saddam and Kim would have the most advanced tech but I'd still give it to Mao.

>>131279847
>I've yet to hear of any reason why he wouldn't be someone's first choice.
Rome was already great before Caesar turned the republic into a dictatorship.
Also faggot.

This is so unclear, are we talkin physical protection? If so, Khan would probably lay waste to the rest of them 1v1
Army? Which time period? Who has what weapons?

Hitler and Sadam Hussein, obviously

>>131277043
Caesar was part of the Populares. In no way he was a guy who had Rome's traditions at heart. He even neglected to govern Gaul to return to rome and act like a smug fag in front of the populace. Also he became a Dictator Vitae, how is that preserving the Republic? The empire in itself was a mistake and a sign of Rome's future instability and decay.

>>131275255
Stalin at the height of his power no question. He has all the body's needed to throw at it. And I hate Stalin, he's a commie piece of shit

File: nazikek.jpg (8KB, 224x224px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 224x224px

>>131275255
For the LULZ!

File: image.jpg (83KB, 615x409px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 615x409px

>>131275255
Been feeling suicidal lately so I'll take Stalin

>>131275255
Kim Jung II ? Is that supposed to be a fucking joke OP ?

>>131280967
>Stalin at the height of his power no question
You think the soviets from 1953 can beat the Chinese from 1976 who are are allied with North Korea from 2011 and Saddam from 2003? The best chance is to pick China and quickly use all the nukes on North Korea and Saddam before they give their tech to Russia

>>131275255
Can they use their empires, or is it just them fighting on their own? Makes a big difference

Oh fugg
>Each of them has their own respective army from the height of their power.
In that case, Kim Jung Il is actually the correct choice. He died in 2011 with a 1 Mil standing army and modern technology.
I missed that at first.

>>131275255
damn boi i see 3 fucking italians in that pic

>>131275255
Hate to say it but Stalin. It'd be a crazy ride, I don't know where I'll end up, but if the deal is that he'll protect me and not redact me, I think he'd be the best one.

>>131275732

10 t34-75>1 Tiger

File: IMG_0428.jpg (69KB, 408x514px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 408x514px

Where's Robert E. Lee ?

>>131275255

Stalin or Mao since it would mean the population of this country thrown at the enemy plus atomic weapons.

>>131276554

This. If Papa Stalin wants to keep me safe, he'll create a corpse island for me in the middle of an ocean of blood.

>>131282719
He'd be the worst of them all. Horses against tanks? Well okay maybe Khan is worse but yeah.

Give me Stalin anyday. He'd win no matter what.

>>131275255
Stalin

Genghis all the way

Genghis Khan easily. He was the greatest and most ruthless Kebab remover of all time. He made mountains out of Muslim skulls.

>>131275255
That's Ogedei not Genghis, also wouldn't Caesar, Genghis and Napoleon automatically lose to the other six because they're not as technological advanced?

>>131275255
Stalin obv.

>>131275255
Stalin or Mao.

Maybe even Mao because they have prototype nukes.

>>131278049

I really thought that "Huurrr,, too pussy for 1v1" was reserved only for butthurt losers on the online games.

>>131275670
He still won. The amount of stuff the Soviets were throwing at the Germans like it was nothing toward the end of the war was unbelievable

File: 1493541345927.jpg (232KB, 699x761px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 699x761px

>>131275255
Khan and Stalin. They never lost.

>>131275255
Stalin, I can just turtle inside Moscow and wait. Invading Russia is historically equivalent to suicide.
Mao is just as good, but I'd rather not live my entire life with gooks.

>>131283856
Stalin had nukes before Mao

>>131275255
Caesar obviously

>>131275255
Kim Jong il has the most modern army

>>131275690
yeah, these guys dont stand a chance against the invisible hand

>>131275255

I probably choosed Napoleon if he had a more modern army.

>>131284416
>Invading Russia is historically equivalent to suicide.
I don't actually read history. THE POST.

>>131275494
He was a high addicted amphetamin abuser at the end, thats when his tactics where all like "no one backs up even 1 cm"

Read his medical Casebook

File: Mongol Empire.jpg (116KB, 749x589px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 749x589px

>>131275255

Genghis Khan

He's the only one who wasn't a retard when it came down to actually fighting (Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Il, Bonaparte, Caesar) all sucked dicks in war

Pic related

Hitler

Stalin wont be having the massive American lend lease so it'll be nothing more than a bunch of slavic savages with rifles.

>>131284839

Let's see...
The Swedish invasion of Russia - Failed
French Invasion of Russia - Failed
Operation Barbarossa - Failed

All three not only failed but played a huge part in the downfall of all their respective leaders.

The only successful invasion of Russia was the Mongol invasion, which was mid-13th century and it succeeded because the Mongols didn't care about keeping Russia, they just destroyed multiple cities and moved on.

Not a single King; interesting.

File: Trudeau-Castro-2.png (674KB, 562x842px) Image search: [Google]

674KB, 562x842px

>>131277054
Hello Justin.

>>131275255
I would choose Franjo Tuđman, all other leaders can suck my mighty Croatian dick.