2 ms·
>> "There is no way you could rule over that many people solely by force with such a relatively small army. It's just not possible." >This completely undersell
by fuzztester 2y ago
>> "There is no way you could rule over that many people solely by force with such a relatively small army. It's just not possible."
>This completely undersells Genghis Khan’s use of terror. Everyone knew what happened if you resisted the Mongols. Khwarazm and Baghdad were illustrations of their willingness for wholesale slaughter. And the massacres were designed to inspire terror with horrific cruelty broadcast widely.
Right. This article explains it:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire
- fuzztester 2y agoSpecifically, the sections about their war techniques, which were clever, and often fooled or overpowered their enemies, although they did lose battles sometimes, too. P.S. Downvoter dude, er, brat, is prolly too lazy, hasty or clueless, to even scan the article (for the Mongols' techniques) that I linked, before their nervously twitching trigger finger touches that downvote icon. Seen this behaviour many times on HN (Hasty and Nervous). :)