"Each betrayal begins with trust."

Throughout history, countries, causes, families, and virtually everything else have been betrayed and broken by one of their own, someone they trusted. There have been some truly horrific backstabbers throughout the ages. Who, in your most humble opinions, were among the worst traitors, with the least justified actions?

Thanks to Mr. Alighieri (and to avoid the obvious), Judas, Brutus, and Cassius should be excluded from further conversation...

benidict arnold betrayed his country for no other reason than he felt slighted:(

To kick things off:

Tostig, jealous of his brother Harold Godwinson newly crowned King of England, sold his homeland (the British Saxons) out to the Dane Harald Haardrada. While King Harold (Saxon) managed to defeat his traitorous brother and Hardraada at Stamford Bridge, killing them both, the cost was steep; the Saxon army was weakened and exhausted when they turned to fight William the Conqueror a mere two weeks later. Had Tostig remained loyal to his people, the Normans would most likely have met the full might of the Saxon army and been repulsed, forever changing the course of English history...

Originally posted by pawpaw
benidict arnold betrayed his country for no other reason than he felt slighted:(

Yeah, what was up his arse? He was a spectacular general, and Washington really trusted him. He's a turncoat, if I've ever heard of one :mad: .

ok, so my "to kick things off" wasn't posted quickly enough... :)

editing to remove the double post... !$#@ lag...

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg greatly heightened the tensions immediately following WW2 by giving atomic secrets to the Soviet Union, helping precipitate the beginning of the Cold War. It may have taken several more years for Russian scientists to build the weapons on their own.

and you doubled posted, posted:D

Originally posted by wildWolverine
..

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg greatly heightened the tensions immediately following WW2 by giving atomic secrets to the Soviet Union
however recent KGB files seen after the fall of the berlin wall and ussr say they were nothing but minor spys, sacrified to keep the u.s. from finding the real moles:eek:

at the battle of manzikert in 1071 the emperor romanus was abandoned by his reserves under the former emperors nephew and overwhelmed ,losing most of modern turkey forever and making the byzantine empire a shell of its former self.

Originally posted by Benderino


Yeah, what was up his arse? He was a spectacular general, and Washington really trusted him. He's a turncoat, if I've ever heard of one :mad: .

Arnold won a brilliant victory and was pernamently crippled. He asked for a promotion (and therefore, a raise) so that he could live with his injured leg. The Continental Congress did not give him the raise.

I'm not justifying treason, but he did have at least some motive.

John Tyler is another example from American history.

Tyler, a former Democrat and governor of Virginia, was nominated by the Whigs in 1840 to balance the ticket geographically, as William Henry Harrison was from Ohio. Harrison ran on a ticket of high tariffs and internal improvements (cannals, roads, etc.). (Also a ticket of hard cider, parades, parties, etc. -- this the first "modern campaign"). The Whigs also gained full control of Congress that year, on the same economic ticket.

After Harrison died, Tyler assumed the Presidency and basically reverted to his old Democratic ways. He informed Congress that he considered internal improvements and any tarriff higher than 20% to be unconstitutional and that he would veto either of these; and veto them he did, several times. This sparked a full-blown war between the Whig Congress and the "Whig" President and meant that none of the Whig adgenda would be legislated. Tyler was expelled from the Whig party (he attempted to found his own party but failed and ended up supporting Democrat James K. Polk) and the Whigs soon lost control of Congress for not having done anything during an entire session.

I'm not sure that Tyler was necessarily a "traitor" per se. His political flip, while inopportune for the Whigs did not really involve a betrayal to the American people.

edit: Upon further review (and just a little thinking), I have come to see your point of view. Tyler did indeed betray the Whig party; I just wasn't thinking along those lines. :crazyeye:

Antenora, the Trojan soldier who betrayed his city to the Greeks.

Can you elaborate on that?

In the later Middle Ages, people disapproved of the pagan portions of the story of Aeneas. THe story of the fall of Troy changed from the original tale of Odysseus' horse. In later versions of the tale, the horse was reduced to a symbol above the door through which the Greeks snuck into the city to sack it. The door was opened by Antenor and Aeneas.

The Walker spy ring of the US in the 1980's who gave the USSR Naval secrets for money. The spy ring Consisted of John Anthony Walker , his Son, Micheal L. Walker (serving on the USS Nimitz), and one of John's close friend's. Finally to be caught when the John's former wife told the authorities of their activities.

Most experts agree with the Information that they gave the USSR, if the two superpowers had come to blows back then, the Soviet Navy would have had the advantage over the US Navy.

They say that communist spies in the fifties were doing their actions based on ideals, but that by the eighties, it was purely for money........ What does it take to make one want to sell one's country out for money?

Originally posted by wildWolverine
They say that communist spies in the fifties were doing their actions based on ideals, but that by the eighties, it was purely for money........ What does it take to make one want to sell one's country out for money?

In Walker's case, being low on money and in debt, not to mention having a job in US intelligence. He just walked up to the USSR Embassy in Washington and told 'em "I'll give you US secrets for money" or to that effect, and the ring started. He didn't recuit his son until after he had retired from government work IIRC, to keep a steady stream of funds.

I have a story to tell about Walker.

About a month before Walker was tried, a Navy Chief Warrant Officer named Brown and I had a discussion about capital punishment, where I expressed some reservations about it. A couple of months later, I was due to be transferred and needed my security clearance updated. This update (SBI Bringup, for those who care about such things) included an interview with the Command Security Manager, who was Mr. Brown. After a few questions about general security, Mr. Brown asked me "what do you think of John Walker?" I replied "As you know, I have my doubts about capital punishment. However, in Walker's case I think they should bring back public hanging." Brown smiled at me and signed off on the interview.

Walker gave the American KW7 and KY8 crypto equipment to the Soviets, which let them read messages in real time. Among other things, it cost over a billion dollars to develop, build and distribute replacement crypto gear.

Originally posted by Falcon02


In Walker's case, being low on money and in debt, not to mention having a job in US intelligence. He just walked up to the USSR Embassy in Washington and told 'em "I'll give you US secrets for money" or to that effect, and the ring started. He didn't recuit his son until after he had retired from government work IIRC, to keep a steady stream of funds.


I don't care how much in debt I am, I would most definitely not sell state secrets. Perhaps I am too young, and "still view everything in black and white," but I would like to believe that my views on this topic will never waver.......

Originally posted by wildWolverine



I don't care how much in debt I am, I would most definitely not sell state secrets. Perhaps I am too young, and "still view everything in black and white," but I would like to believe that my views on this topic will never waver.......

I feel the same way, even though I wouldn't sell out my country doesn't mean I can't comprehend how someone else could be motivated so much by money.

In Scotland, the Campbells are proverbial traitors and in Mexico, the people of Tlaxcala. Both are scapegoats though; I think you can only ever call individuals or small groups of individuals traitors. And history is full of them. All the Persians who helped Alexander; all the Romans who murdered their emperors; all the Masters of Soldiers who betrayed Rome; all the vassals who betrayed their lords; all the Indians who helped the whites; all the Scottish parliamentarians who took bribes from the English; all the Scots who fought for the British in the 18th Century; all the spys that helped out the enemy. But the badness and goodness of all these people is entirely subjective. :p

lol. More expansive then I intended with this thread. Originally, I was looking for only the "baddest of the bad".... Shows how threads never behave as expected... :cool: