Greatest Diplomat in History

Metternich is the cliche answer.

He may be the Cliche answer, but he saw through some of the great minds of his time (Napoleon etc), and managed to use them to his gain. True he may have set up the stage for WWI, but then look at the state of Austria, Metternich restored its status as a power, about which Europe pivoted, and he did this for Austrias gain, not Europes. (kinda fell to pieces when he died of course)
 
taillesskangaru said:
How about Le Duc Tho? He managed to get the Americans to leave Vietnam and opened the way for the reunification of Vietnam.
I don't know if opening the door to communist tyranny and oppression was necessarily a good thing for the once-free people of Vietnam.
 
rmsharpe said:
I don't know if opening the door to communist tyranny and oppression was necessarily a good thing for the once-free people of Vietnam.


Free? Ngo Dinh Diem?
 
rmsharpe said:
I don't know if opening the door to communist tyranny and oppression was necessarily a good thing for the once-free people of Vietnam.

Neither side was free. North Vietnam was relatively less opressive because they were more popular and didn't have to resort to brutal supression compared to th south. But both sides had political enemies that they killed (which is why many fled Saigon to America).

Still, this is about greatest diplomats. Matternick wasn't exactly nice to the Serbs, hungarians, etc. in his territory by trying to supress democracy and liberalism. But he helped Austria in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars.

Likewise, doing good things for North Vietnam makes someone a good diplomat, not a bad one.
 
Talleyrand.

Not only a good diplomat with foreign governments, but also with different governments in his own country. :)
 
theodere rosevelt's 14 points comes too mind it stopped round one of the world wars:mischief:
 
s.c.dude said:
theodere rosevelt's 14 points comes too mind it stopped round one of the world wars:mischief:
Surely you mean Woodrow Wilson? And no, it didn't. Only three of the fourteen points were accepted into the Versailles Treaty, and two of them the ones mostly likely to cause another war: dividing up Germany and Austria-Hungary.
 
Cheezy the Wiz said:
Surely you mean Woodrow Wilson? And no, it didn't. Only three of the fourteen points were accepted into the Versailles Treaty, and two of them the ones mostly likely to cause another war: dividing up Germany and Austria-Hungary.

I think dividing Austria-Hungary was rational step, not only humane. Others things are these ones mentioned in one thread there.
 
Austria-Hungary divided itself. The 14 points only recognized these divisions and didn't try to force them back together as they would have in the past.
 
Go to the "Peace without Victory" thread for an argument on the Fourteen Points and Wilsonianism. ;)

Talleyrand and Metternich are the basic answers that come to mind, IMHO (as has been said by many in-thread). I don't really think that you can say most people were good diplomats other than those already mentioned, except maybe Flamininus, for his actions after Cynoscephalae.
 
Neither side was free. North Vietnam was relatively less opressive because they were more popular and didn't have to resort to brutal supression compared to th south.
You couldn't be farther from the truth; North Vietnam was as oppressive and brutal as Uganda, Cuba, Albania, or North Korea.
 
Back
Top Bottom