Hitler, hirohito, Mussolini, and Hideki Tojo

[injeKT]

120 million? Yeah, sure.

Population of Soviet Union 1920: ~137,727,00
Population of Soviet Union 1939: ~168,524,000
-War (Soviet losses ~ 10,700,000)
Population of Soviet Union 1959: ~209,035,000

Population growth rate: 0.7% (1991) (you can assume this didnt change that much, probably went down during the war and then really high up after te war explaining large increase in population.)

Where in those figures do you place that 120 million? Obviously majority of the people Stalin killed were not Russian but they would have still been in the union.

Also, Hitler should not be in the game, notably because he wasn't a good leader. His millitary was not under his control with most victories, if they were they were easy victories, and when he did take control to a great extent he failed. Economically he didnt have a clue, Speer etc. were much more important. He didnt even lead his own cabinet (or eqiv.) very well with most decisions being made with the idea that that is what Hitler wanted. Hitler rarely came up with ideas for leading the country himself. Mao should be in the game as he unified China, and was overall a good leader. I don't really think it matters what "attrocities" if any were committed. It is down to pure leadership abillity.

(and I know I used wikipaedia for those statistics but I've seen a few and they're (post-glasnost) all the same)

I'm sorry. I can't take this post seriously when he fully admits to getting his stats from Wiki.

 

[ParkCungHee]

I'm sorry. I can't take this post seriously when he fully admits to getting his stats from Wiki.

I'm sorry, I can't take any post seriously from a man who believes it would have been possible for Stalin to kill 120 Million people.

 

[jkp1187]

I argue that all of them should have been included. Two reasons:

1.) (Most importantly) I'm a leader/civ whore. I want more, more, more. More = better as far as I'm concerned. (Yes, I know, these can always be modded, but I prefer 'official' updates with the implied modicum of balancing and playtesting.)

2.) All of them had a significant impact on the world we live in today. Whatever Hitler's flaws as a military leader, and despite his moral code that wouldn't pass muster in a tribe of Barbary Apes (almost Genghis-Khan like, you might say...) the world we live in today exists in no small part because of him. Without Hitler, no Second World War -- at least, not in the time and manner and with the participants that we know. Without Second World War, no Cold War, no NATO. No CIA intervention in Iran, no Khomenei. No Soviets in Afghanistan. No breakup of European empires en masse.

Mao, Stalin, Genghis, Mussolini, Tojo, Shaka. If you let one in, there's no moral argument against the others, IMHO.

If we're talking about new German leaders, though, I still push for Eric Ludendorff. He was the de facto leader of Germany during the end of World War I -- and he came a lot closer to winning that war than Hitler ever did. (Heck, the Germans won on the Eastern Front.)

And it goes without saying that Franco should be included as a Spanish leader.