<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: History&#8217;s Top&#160;Conquerors</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/</link>
	<description>Speak Victorian, Think Pagan</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 02:04:45 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Marcos</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-72658</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2006 19:16:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-72658</guid>
		<description>Suggestion: for best precision, include invaded area versus time of domination in top table.

Regards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Suggestion: for best precision, include invaded area versus time of domination in top table.</p>

<p>Regards.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lirelou</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70316</link>
		<dc:creator>lirelou</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:01:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70316</guid>
		<description>The only problem I have with the list is that the nature of conquest is to &quot;seize and hold for eternity&quot;, to borrow from Nelson A. Miles&#039; proclamation to the inhabitants of Puerto Rico in 1898. There has been no American conquest in that sense since 1898. 
For Sun Bin, the Indians of Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Argentina did not possess the advanced civilization of the Andean peoples, and were thus largely pushed aside. The original territory of Brazil was quite small compared to present day Brazil. The Portuguese had discovered the Philippines, and the Spanish desperately wanted a foothold in Asia (the original impetus for European exploration being to find a route to the spice islands, or the Indies)  Spain held (European) title to most of present-day Brazil, and were uninterested in it. So they traded it to Portugal for the Philippines by simply moving the respective lines of latitude from the original Treaty of Tordesillas line of demarcation westward. Brazil, by the way, contains roughly 55% of South America&#039;s population, so in shear numbers, Portuguese speakers outnumber Spanish speakers south of Panama. Yet very few Americans, outside of Portuguese-Americans (who are mostly concentrated in the Northeast) speak the language. Brazil also fought no war for national independence as the break-up was amicable. Several wars for regional independence were fought in the mid-19th century, some of which were supported by the Italian patriot Garibaldi and his &quot;red shirts&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only problem I have with the list is that the nature of conquest is to &#8220;seize and hold for eternity&#8221;, to borrow from Nelson A. Miles&#8217; proclamation to the inhabitants of Puerto Rico in 1898. There has been no American conquest in that sense since 1898. <br />
For Sun Bin, the Indians of Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Argentina did not possess the advanced civilization of the Andean peoples, and were thus largely pushed aside. The original territory of Brazil was quite small compared to present day Brazil. The Portuguese had discovered the Philippines, and the Spanish desperately wanted a foothold in Asia (the original impetus for European exploration being to find a route to the spice islands, or the Indies)  Spain held (European) title to most of present-day Brazil, and were uninterested in it. So they traded it to Portugal for the Philippines by simply moving the respective lines of latitude from the original Treaty of Tordesillas line of demarcation westward. Brazil, by the way, contains roughly 55% of South America&#8217;s population, so in shear numbers, Portuguese speakers outnumber Spanish speakers south of Panama. Yet very few Americans, outside of Portuguese-Americans (who are mostly concentrated in the Northeast) speak the language. Brazil also fought no war for national independence as the break-up was amicable. Several wars for regional independence were fought in the mid-19th century, some of which were supported by the Italian patriot Garibaldi and his &#8220;red shirts&#8221;.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lirelou</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70310</link>
		<dc:creator>lirelou</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 07:30:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70310</guid>
		<description>Ron, among others, the 6th and 22nd U.S. Infantry Regiments: &quot;Regulars, By God!&quot; Who fought the &quot;Bloody British&quot; at Chippewa and Lundy&#039;s Lane.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ron, among others, the 6th and 22nd <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Infantry Regiments: &#8220;Regulars, By God!&#8221; Who fought the &#8220;Bloody British&#8221; at Chippewa and Lundy&#8217;s Lane.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kushibo</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70250</link>
		<dc:creator>kushibo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 04:06:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70250</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;does taking the moon count? because we did and its quite alot of land.&lt;/b&gt;

I think &quot;conquering&quot; would require more than just being there for a short time. Also, I don&#039;t think the Moon was claimed by the United States.

Why not claim all of space then? Look at me, I&#039;m claiming all the space directly above my person, therefore I&#039;m history&#039;s greatest conqueror... until someone with a bigger head and broader shoulders steals my idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>does taking the moon count? because we did and its quite alot of land.</b></p>

<p>I think &#8220;conquering&#8221; would require more than just being there for a short time. Also, I don&#8217;t think the Moon was claimed by the United States.</p>

<p>Why not claim all of space then? Look at me, I&#8217;m claiming all the space directly above my person, therefore I&#8217;m history&#8217;s greatest conqueror&#8230; until someone with a bigger head and broader shoulders steals my idea.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Patterson</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70249</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Patterson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 03:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70249</guid>
		<description>Question to Younghusband:  What U.S. forces entered Canada in the war of 1812?  Are you referring to naval battles on the Great Lakes?  Dont believe U.S. military entered Canada.  Perhaps militia or local bandits.  Honestly seek answer.   I believe that you study at a military academy so you should be able to find the information.   Thank you</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Question to Younghusband:  What <span class="caps">U.S. </span>forces entered Canada in the war of 1812?  Are you referring to naval battles on the Great Lakes?  Dont believe <span class="caps">U.S. </span>military entered Canada.  Perhaps militia or local bandits.  Honestly seek answer.   I believe that you study at a military academy so you should be able to find the information.   Thank you</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cary</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70236</link>
		<dc:creator>Cary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 02:27:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70236</guid>
		<description>Woden is a mythical figure also know as Odin by the anglo saxons and is not a real person who conqured, although the vikings may have had a real leader that would have been one of the top conquerors Woden is not him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Woden is a mythical figure also know as Odin by the anglo saxons and is not a real person who conqured, although the vikings may have had a real leader that would have been one of the top conquerors Woden is not him.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William V O</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70215</link>
		<dc:creator>William V O</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:42:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70215</guid>
		<description>that would be Nixon who took the moon by the way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>that would be Nixon who took the moon by the way.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William V O</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70213</link>
		<dc:creator>William V O</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:38:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70213</guid>
		<description>does taking the moon count? because we did and its quite alot of land.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>does taking the moon count? because we did and its quite alot of land.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WODEN</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-70212</link>
		<dc:creator>WODEN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-70212</guid>
		<description>Woden, as leader of all Vikings (and once the Angles, Saxons, and all Germanic Tribes,) has conquered more territory than all humans ever.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Woden, as leader of all Vikings (and once the Angles, Saxons, and all Germanic Tribes,) has conquered more territory than all humans ever.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cary</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-68327</link>
		<dc:creator>Cary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 00:53:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-68327</guid>
		<description>Will Hitler was an Austrian but he moved to Germany and became the leader of Germany also Hitler considered himself a German and Austria joined with germany for WW2 under the name of Germany.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will Hitler was an Austrian but he moved to Germany and became the leader of Germany also Hitler considered himself a German and Austria joined with germany for <span class="caps">WW2 </span>under the name of Germany.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-46260</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 05:44:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-46260</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mutantfrog.com/2005/11/05/the-origin-of-viking/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The only viking I&#039;d trust Bush to fly&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.mutantfrog.com/2005/11/05/the-origin-of-viking/">The only viking I&#8217;d trust Bush to fly</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norman Long</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-46259</link>
		<dc:creator>Norman Long</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 05:11:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-46259</guid>
		<description>You can&#039;t say that Dubya actually flew the Viking...&quot;You&#039;ve got it Mr. President...&quot; because he did not go inverted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can&#8217;t say that Dubya actually flew the Viking&#8230;&#8221;You&#8217;ve got it Mr. President&#8230;&#8221; because he did not go inverted.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-46160</link>
		<dc:creator>Will</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-46160</guid>
		<description>For clarity, Hitler would be Austria, not Germany</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For clarity, Hitler would be Austria, not Germany</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kushibo</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45758</link>
		<dc:creator>Kushibo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:33:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45758</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;I think the inclusion of Dubya on this list was inappropriate&lt;/b&gt;

Why? 

Is it just because he didn&#039;t get on horseback himself and ride through the Afghan mountains or cross the Tigris in a glorious entrance to Baghdad? 

So he didn&#039;t really get his hands dirty, but the former F-102 fighter pilot &lt;i&gt;did&lt;/i&gt; fly a Navy S-3B Viking all, er, part of the way to the USS &lt;i&gt;Abraham Lincoln&lt;/i&gt; aircraft carrier parked just off the coast of San Diego and his people had &quot;Mission Accomplished&quot; blazoned across the tower, where he declared major combat operations had ended in an inspiring speech that will go down in infamy. 

In all seriousness, why should he not be counted as a conqueror of Afghanistan and Iraq, especially considering that other military leaders (which the president is) couldn&#039;t do it AND we have not yet completely given either country back to the people in toto?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>I think the inclusion of Dubya on this list was inappropriate</b></p>

<p>Why? </p>

<p>Is it just because he didn&#8217;t get on horseback himself and ride through the Afghan mountains or cross the Tigris in a glorious entrance to Baghdad? </p>

<p>So he didn&#8217;t really get his hands dirty, but the former F-102 fighter pilot <i>did</i> fly a Navy S-3B Viking all, er, part of the way to the <span class="caps">USS </span><i>Abraham Lincoln</i> aircraft carrier parked just off the coast of San Diego and his people had &#8220;Mission Accomplished&#8221; blazoned across the tower, where he declared major combat operations had ended in an inspiring speech that will go down in infamy. </p>

<p>In all seriousness, why should he not be counted as a conqueror of Afghanistan and Iraq, especially considering that other military leaders (which the president is) couldn&#8217;t do it <span class="caps">AND </span>we have not yet completely given either country back to the people in toto?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sun bin</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45757</link>
		<dc:creator>sun bin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45757</guid>
		<description>who conquered brazil for portugal?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>who conquered brazil for portugal?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Curzon</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45743</link>
		<dc:creator>Curzon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Nov 2005 05:50:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45743</guid>
		<description>I think the inclusion of Dubya on this list was inappropriate, but I just copied and pasted as I recieved the list from another site.  Both Louisiana and Florida were purchased.  And the Philippines/Cuba/Puerto Rico from the Spanish-American War are pretty small in the context of world history.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the inclusion of Dubya on this list was inappropriate, but I just copied and pasted as I recieved the list from another site.  Both Louisiana and Florida were purchased.  And the Philippines/Cuba/Puerto Rico from the Spanish-American War are pretty small in the context of world history.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mutantfrog</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45459</link>
		<dc:creator>Mutantfrog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2005 05:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45459</guid>
		<description>The Louisiana purchase gave the US control of the territory in the eyes of European international law, but neither the French beforehand or the US immediately after had any real control over the most of it. That was accomplised by informal settlers, bit by bit, without much government help.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Louisiana purchase gave the US control of the territory in the eyes of European international law, but neither the French beforehand or the US immediately after had any real control over the most of it. That was accomplised by informal settlers, bit by bit, without much government help.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sunbin</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45433</link>
		<dc:creator>sunbin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2005 04:41:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45433</guid>
		<description>wow, kushibo! :)

1. louisiana, i know it wasn&#039;t really &#039;conquest&#039;. i was assuming the french didnt really control all those areas

2. what about spanish-america war? Florida+Phillipines+ some pacific islands?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wow, kushibo! :)</p>

<p>1. louisiana, i know it wasn&#8217;t really &#8216;conquest&#8217;. i was assuming the french didnt really control all those areas</p>

<p>2. what about spanish-america war? Florida+Phillipines+ some pacific islands?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kushibo</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45425</link>
		<dc:creator>Kushibo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2005 02:46:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45425</guid>
		<description>phil, I think FDR&#039;s conquered territories would have to be divided with his Allies, at least the Chinese and the Soviets (hey, wouldn&#039;t Tojo or Hirohito be on this list?). 

sun bin, the Louisiana Purchase was 828,000 square miles, which would put Thomas Jefferson at #7, between Hitler and Napoleon. 

But the question is, was that &quot;conquering&quot; or just buying? The French had already &quot;conquered&quot; the territory, at least nominally, so what Jefferson did was just take over the deed. 

And the Texas annexation was not a conquering situation either, if I recall. The Treaty of Velasco made Texas an independent nation in 1836, so the Texans themselves were the ones who conquered the area (which was &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wpdms_republic_of_texas.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;significantly larger&lt;/a&gt; than its present-day shape, since it included half of New Mexico, and sizable pieces of Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas, and even Wyoming). In 1845, it was annexed by mutual decision. 

The Mexican-American War that came afterward led to the US getting the 525,000-sq-mile &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wpdms_mexican_cession.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Mexican Cession&lt;/a&gt;: all of California, Nevada, and Utah; almost all of Arizona, and most of the remainder of New Mexico not already part of Texas (the rest of present-day Arizona and New Mexico would be bought as part of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsen_Purchase&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Gadsen Purchase&lt;/a&gt;); and a good deal of Colorado and Wyoming.

That was an actual case of conquering. That would put President Polk or General Zachary Taylor at #8, between Ghazni and Pizarro (General &quot;Old Rough and Ready&quot; Taylor, the hero of this war and others, was elected president in the following election, even though he&#039;d never held public office and allegedly never bothered to vote).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>phil, I think <span class="caps">FDR&#8217;</span>s conquered territories would have to be divided with his Allies, at least the Chinese and the Soviets (hey, wouldn&#8217;t Tojo or Hirohito be on this list?). </p>

<p>sun bin, the Louisiana Purchase was 828,000 square miles, which would put Thomas Jefferson at #7, between Hitler and Napoleon. </p>

<p>But the question is, was that &#8220;conquering&#8221; or just buying? The French had already &#8220;conquered&#8221; the territory, at least nominally, so what Jefferson did was just take over the deed. </p>

<p>And the Texas annexation was not a conquering situation either, if I recall. The Treaty of Velasco made Texas an independent nation in 1836, so the Texans themselves were the ones who conquered the area (which was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wpdms_republic_of_texas.png">significantly larger</a> than its present-day shape, since it included half of New Mexico, and sizable pieces of Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas, and even Wyoming). In 1845, it was annexed by mutual decision. </p>

<p>The Mexican-American War that came afterward led to the US getting the 525,000-sq-mile <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wpdms_mexican_cession.jpg">Mexican Cession</a>: all of California, Nevada, and Utah; almost all of Arizona, and most of the remainder of New Mexico not already part of Texas (the rest of present-day Arizona and New Mexico would be bought as part of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsen_Purchase">Gadsen Purchase</a>); and a good deal of Colorado and Wyoming.</p>

<p>That was an actual case of conquering. That would put President Polk or General Zachary Taylor at #8, between Ghazni and Pizarro (General &#8220;Old Rough and Ready&#8221; Taylor, the hero of this war and others, was elected president in the following election, even though he&#8217;d never held public office and allegedly never bothered to vote).</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sun bin</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45418</link>
		<dc:creator>sun bin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2005 01:22:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45418</guid>
		<description>I know you want to push W into top 10.

But what about Louisiana purchase, and the Texas annexation (and  california)?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know you want to push W into top 10.</p>

<p>But what about Louisiana purchase, and the Texas annexation (and  california)?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: phil</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45414</link>
		<dc:creator>phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2005 00:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45414</guid>
		<description>How about FDR during WW2? At the time of his death the US exercised power over vast regions of the globe that certainly outstripped previous conquerors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about <span class="caps">FDR </span>during <span class="caps">WW2</span>? At the time of his death the US exercised power over vast regions of the globe that certainly outstripped previous conquerors.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sun bin</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45331</link>
		<dc:creator>sun bin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 17:08:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45331</guid>
		<description>&quot;All told, [catherine] added some 200,000 mileÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â² (518,000 kmÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â²) to Russian territory&quot;:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_II_of_Russia</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_II_of_Russia">All told, [catherine] added some 200,000 mile&amp;Atilde;ƒ&acirc;€š&amp;Atilde;‚&amp;Acirc;&amp;sup2; (518,000 km&amp;Atilde;ƒ&acirc;€š&amp;Atilde;‚&amp;Acirc;&amp;sup2;) to Russian territory</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sun bin</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45328</link>
		<dc:creator>sun bin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 17:05:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45328</guid>
		<description>I think Catherine the Great got half of Siberia in her reign.
that is 10M sq km.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Catherine the Great got half of Siberia in her reign.<br />
that is 10M sq km.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sun bin</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45327</link>
		<dc:creator>sun bin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 17:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45327</guid>
		<description>Qing emperorShunzi (Huang Taiji) conquered the whole of China proper. (subtract Yunnan, Taiwan, Xinjiang, Tibet, Manchuria, Inner Mongolia)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunzhi_Emperor.

that is about 4M sq m.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Qing emperorShunzi (Huang Taiji) conquered the whole of China proper. (subtract Yunnan, Taiwan, Xinjiang, Tibet, Manchuria, Inner Mongolia)</p>

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunzhi_Emperor">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunzhi_Emperor</a>.</p>

<p>that is about 4M sq m.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kushibo</title>
		<link>http://cominganarchy.com/2005/11/03/historys-top-conquerors/comment-page-1/#comment-45325</link>
		<dc:creator>Kushibo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 15:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cominganarchy.com/?p=1247#comment-45325</guid>
		<description>This browser is completely whack! Just now, after hitting the refresh button, the text BELOW the top-ten list finally is revealed. 

That might explain why my Canada comment didn&#039;t show up: Curzon had already beat me to it in the original post and the &quot;egg-on-the-face control function&quot; prevented by comment from going through. Now that&#039;s a blog function I can use!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This browser is completely whack! Just now, after hitting the refresh button, the text <span class="caps">BELOW </span>the top-ten list finally is revealed. </p>

<p>That might explain why my Canada comment didn&#8217;t show up: Curzon had already beat me to it in the original post and the &#8220;egg-on-the-face control function&#8221; prevented by comment from going through. Now that&#8217;s a blog function I can use!</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
