Quote Originally Posted by fishfanmiami View Post
Attila was able to unite warring mongol tribes into a cohesive army that conquered most of the known world and stopped just short of taking Rome itself. An example of this style was when they sacked a village his man got to loot and rape the locals before the captains and Attila was last to enjoy the fruits of victory.
Attila did not unite the mongols, his army mostly consisted of huns. Maybe you're thinking of Genghis Khan. And he really didn't conquer "most of the known world." The world is a big place. The Mongols conquered more land, and for a longer period of time. And the Ottoman Empire, after that.

I don't know how you can look toward Attila as some kind of wonderful leader. He was brutal warrior who united a bunch of tribes so that he could invade rich western cities,... and those tribes immediately split apart again after he died. His sons couldn't even hold it together, they fought each other. He was a greedy barbarian who cared more about gold than creating a lasting empire and infrastructure for his people.

And frankly, your depiction of him standing aside while his men "enjoy the fruits of victory," and then he gets sloppy seconds, is offensive at best.