I will go with Anwar Sadat, he had to know he was signing his death warrant when he signed the peace treaty with Isreal.

I have to say it's a toss up between:

• Bush II
  
• P.M. Abbas (Palestine P.M.)
  
• Prez Harry Truman

DRUM ROLL PLEASE.......


Prez Harry Truman: While mourning FDR, helped a nation finish World War II, thus emerging America as a world superpower. Also, he was a genorous man in sending millions of dollars in aid to Europe so it could re-build it's self after the war

The decision to use the atomic bomb must have taken a great deal of courage also (regardless of if you think the decision was right or wrong.)

I would suggest Mikhail Gorbachev as a possible candidate. One can certainly condemn many of his actions, but he seems to have honestly attempted to make major corrections in a political system which was, perhaps, too seriously flawed to correct.

I think Saddam crossed the line between bravery and stupidity.

When I saw the title of this thread, I immediately thought of Sadat as well. He would be my candidate for the entire 20th century I think.

Yitzak Rabin.

Anwar Sadat is right up there.

Also Lech Walesa, the electrician in Poland who bucked the Communists with Solidarity, that is, if you would stretch your definition of a world leader.

What about Nelson Mandela, too?

Mandela, without a doubt. He may be the right's newest target for character assassination, but some of us still appreciate how someone can see through their hatred and pain and create love.

let's not forget de Klerk. He played a key role in South Africa as well.
I'd have to say Ho Chi Minh and Castro were pretty brave as well.

Since 1950.....hmmmmmm.....no doubts here...Fidel Castro.

Nelson Mandela, for enduring 27 years in prison for his politics, and still valuing love over anger when he got out.

His Holiness the Dalai Lama, who after over 40 years of exile is still the light of his people, and a light for the world.

I'm going to have to agree with one of quarkhead's nominees: Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, without doubt. He's a dedicated and rational spiritual leader, a humane statesman, a pacifist politician, a tireless advocate of freedom, democracy, and human rights, and he's one of the few people left on earth who is still defiantly standing up to one of the world's greatest evils: the People's Republic of China. And, as mentioned above, after forty years in exile - under threat of death - he remains "the light of his people, and a light for the world".

Well it's a toss up, either, Pres. Bush the second, Prime Minister Tony Blair, PM Benjamin Netanyahu or Gorbachev, he basically started the tearing of the Iron Curtain. Fidel Castro? Do brave people imprison those who don't follow their beliefs?

CP

CP, Castro was on my short list too, and here's why he fits: it's not whether or not his policies are right or wrong - undoubtedly many of them are wrong - it's that he has certainly shown his bravery by standing defiant of his much larger and more powerful neighbor for 44 years. In the face of embargo, sanctions, and the collapse of the USSR, he has certainly held strong in his beliefs. So love him or hate him, he has certainly been brave.

I'm not likely to get any support here, but I have to nominate one of my personal heroes, Pierre Elliot Trudeau; the West's only true Philosopher King.

I guess, my only point was that a brave person does not imprison political prisoners that he is afraid of.

CP

Bravery is also not defined as arbitrarily invading and bringing chaos into a third world country like Iraq (courtesy Bush the second, as you say). However, that is for another thread. But, yes, Castro is the bravest, no question. He's survived multiple assassination attempts by the U.S. and yet has stood defiant to the most powerful nation on the planet for nearly half a century. You give that a try sometime.

Since you put it that way....

I have to say the brave one has to be Kim Jong because he's brave to be waving his nuclear sabers & firing test missiles at us, the world's superpower. I don't know any other dictator who would have the guts to do that

I'd say a strong candidate would have to be the Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi (Myanmar is an invention of the regime that keeps putting her in prison or house arrest, so I'll ignore it for now).

She's never been an advocate of terrorism/armed resitance (unlike, say, Mandela, who only converted to peaceeful change while on Robben Island), and she's had to battle with ill health as well as gross violations of her rights, yet she still just keeps plugging away.

I hope that on day her tenacity pays of and that one day Burma attains something resembling democracy.

Aung San Suu isn't a world leader, just an opposition leader, and therefore she doesn't qualify.

FDR - For having the nerve to try and Communize America!

What on earth are you talking about? The man institutes a few government programs to try to get the economy rolling and put people back to work, so therefore he's a communist? Gimme a break...

john - this is the third instance today where it appears you are being inflammatory. Your post has NOTHING to do with the topic at hand. Get back to it or remain silent. Your choice.

Somehow I think that is more of an egotistical/stupid/paranoid move than it is bravery.

So who is your choice? No point in being unconstructive in our posts

Oh yes, I forgot. I would go with Patrice Lumumba. It is truly brave to fight against the colonialist forces-that-be. Even after being arrested several times, Lumumba still fought against French control of the Congo. I'm sure that he realized the ever-present threat of assassination, yet he went on to be the first elected leader of the Congo. You really have to admire him, and you have to admit that he was truly brave.

Certainly not President Bush! He's not brave in attacking Iraq.

I would plump for the Yugoslav leader Tito, a man who stood up to Hitler, Stalin and the West and won.
Not many people have survived taking on these great-powers.

The Venezula president Chavez, who withstood a US supported military coup recently.

Saddam Hussein for suriving and chalenging the might of the United States for over twelve years. Even now, he seems to have been brave enough to stay in iraq and lead the anti-occupation forces rather than relax in exile in Russia. Saddam is a evil bastard, but his track record shows bravery (at th age of 17, he almost assassinated the countries president, not many would have the balls to do that!!!)

Winston Churchill, for standing up to the Nazis when they looked likely to destroy Britain and its Empire.

Laventry Beria, for having the bravery to kill Stalin in 1953. Most men, even ruthless son-of-bitches in Stalinist Russia quivering in fear at Joe Stalin.

George W. Bush is a candidate. I think he has been brave in front of extreme criticism from members of my party. A brave leader does what's right even when it's not popular. In that sense, he is brave, just not the bravest. Reagan is a candidate, though my family couldn't stand him while he was in office. His stance against the "Evil Empire" was admirable after so many years of appeasing that morally bankrupt empire.

I think also of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. MLK qualifies as a world leader in my mind because of the changes he wrought in the world's greatest superpower.

However, my vote goes to ... Tony Blair.

He is a member of the Labor Party (equ. to the Democratic Party) and has stood up to radical factions of his own party, his own country, and the EU, to face down a tyrant, and wage a war against terror. His courage and eloquence make me wish he were an American!

Kevin S. Bailey

Johnlocke,

FDR was the BRAVEST and GREATEST president of the 20th Century! He got us through the Great Depression and through WW2. He also gave us Social Security! I was a beacon of hope for the greatest generation that ever lived and the WORLD owes him a debt of gratitude for saving it from fascism!



FDR died in 1945, so he wouldn't count for this topic. I would say Dr. MLK Jr!

Anwar Sadat.

John's opinion seems perfectly valid to me and is completely on topic. Why is his opinion any less valid than anyone elses??

Don't continue to derail this thread by asking a COMPLETELY off-topic question. PM me or take it up in Comments and Suggestions.

there are a few I would put up there.

MLK jr.- despite being jailed numerous times he challenged a system that doesn't like to be challanged.

fidel castro- anyone that sees a messed up situation and takes action that can result in his death is brave in my opinion. while some of his policies may be messed up, so are some of america's and bush's. also, those he locks up are not because he's "afraid" of them but they are(or were rather) in the process of trying to destabilize his government. many are also capitalists, which is against their laws. and I should point out he has less people in prison per capita than we do. (we exceed CHINA)

nelson mandela- for many of the reasons MLK jr is on here.

yakitz rabin(sp?)-while I don't know much about him I know he was assasinated for trying to make peace with the palestinians. he had to know there were some out there that mght try to kill him for it, that takes guts.

Actually Stalin died in his sleep. I think that the comment that brave people don't lock up their political opponents is quite true. In addition brave, adding leadership to the mix, means actually accomplishing something. Since we are not talking about personal bravery, with the exception of Sadat/Begin etal, it comes from taking unpopular though correct stances and making them stick for the betterment of all even those not intelligent enough to realize it. Since 1950, Ronald Reagan.

Well, that is debatable, according to this link:
The Mystery of Stalin's Death

Sorry for the off-topic post... I'll slink back into the shadows.

Not to be rude Birdie, but I do know more about USSR history than you. It is quite clear that Beria ordered the murder of Stalin.

Thomas
There is no evidence that Stalin was murdered. Only conjecture.

The above linked BBC page ends thus;



Which is my point. People do not like to think that a man like Stalin was just a man. So rather than accept the fact that he probably died of natural causes, they speculate on his death and embrace conspiracy theories which enhance the aura of mystery and dread which surrounds Stalin's name.




Considering the fact that even the most experienced Russian journalists cannot say either way whether Stalin was murdered, then I don't see how you can... No matter how many books you've read.

Moif, the main guard Khrustalev was very close to Beria. Stalin would never have ordered his bodyguards to retire, he was too paranoid, it was obviously a way for Khrustalev to murder Stalin.

Ok, everyone, we're getting WAY off topic. If you want to discuss the death of Stalin, start a new thread. Otherwise, let's keep the discussion to whom you feel is the Bravest World Leader since 1950.