1) Napoleon
2) Cardinal Richelieu
3) Bismarck

Hitler gets an honorable mention. If it weren't for the Holocaust he would be seen as the twentieth century's Napoleon. As it is, however, he loses the -ass and is just bad.

Yeah, Hitler did everything right except the genocide. >_<

I didn't say that.

You didn't; I am.

Not totally seriously, but aside from the racism/genocide, Hitler was pretty awesome.

Teddy Roosevelt
Bismarck
Belisarius

Most recently... Putin. =)

Edward Longshanks and Robbert the Bruce, both seriously bad ass.
Truman:, the only guy in history to ever nuke his opponents.
Arthur "Bomber" Harris: while his American allies were bombing Nazi fuel supplies and weapon factories his planes were busy bombing German cities. The perfected the art of firestorm, bombing a city in such away that fire swept through it. One such firestorm actually killed more people then the either of the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan.

@Chrispminis: =) too.

Hmm... how about Cheney? He's certainly evil enough...

G. Gordon Liddy.

Pope Gregory IX

Badass? Say George W. Bush...
He messed up America in just eight years. Just look at the economy, the messed-up wars, the corrosion of USA's dominance...And he gets re-elected. I don't know why. They even say he has an IQ <100.

I believe the topic is "bad-assiest", not "assiest". ;-)

Okay I didnt feel like reading all the posts, so if any of these have already been mentioned, sorry.

Assuming he existed King David. He went from musician to king, killed a giant with a stone, and created an empire at a time when technologically superior and more populous people occupied the area (Philistines, Egyptions, Sea Peoples(?)) Also the fact that he consolidated and further unified a fractured people. Plus his son was Solomon. And Solomon is easily the most bad assed, if entirely exagerated Jew ever.

My second nomination goes to King Leonidas, who certainly existed and decided to spit in the face of the most powerful empire to ever exist up until that time. He also did it with only 300 spartans. And under his leadership a force of about 7000 spear armed greek farmers (everyone was a farmer in those days, except for athens and sparta, and no athenians were at the land battle of thermopylae) defeated, humiliated and stopped for 3 days a force of anywhere between 100,000 and 300,000 persians. So bad-ass by the american definition

George W. Bush

Most of the other people mentioned here had at least a reason that THEY could state was valid for attacking other countries.

I seem to remember that No WMD was found in Iraq.

Although Saddam Hussein probably runs Dublya a close second as he killed his own people, so whilst I agree that Dublya did the right thing he should have just said he was attacking Saddam because he didnt like him.

What the heck is the criteria here? Bush? Hitler? These are failed leaders. These are leaders that lead their countries into disaster. These are leaders who started wars... but didn't finish them. These are leaders that supported torture and abolishment of habeas corpus rights. These are leaders that squandered the wealth of their countries. How are they "bad-ass" - unless bad-ass simply means bad and an ass? If that is the case than I have a whole list of pedophiles and mass-murderers that are "bad-ass".

I would define "bad-ass" as bravery, fortitude, and dramatic success where failure would come to anyone else. It would be someone who fearlessly puts their ideals or goals above everything else (especially personal safety) - and succeeds beyond any expectation.

Do you have a particular person who you think meets that criteria Dexter?

Sword, there are several in the thread so far... Genghis Khan, Alexander, Bismarck, Patton, Mohammed, Roosevelt. And in the thought that maybe bad-asses could also be outside of the political sphere I offered Ernest Shackleton. Chuck Norris may qualify - though how much of that is his characters and how much is him?

Sorry, :P I didn't see that you had already posted Shackleton.

If Chuck Norris isn't badass in real life, that doesn't really matter, because his percieved persona makes up for it ten times over.

I'm going to stick with Hannibal, out of professional respect if nothing else.

ah - oh yeah, Hannibal definitely qualifies.

Since this thread was begun with the "historical OR fictional" caveat then it's obviously Chuck Norris. If you take the time to read even a small portion of his accomplishments it easily dwarfs any "real" person out there.

http://www.cracked.com/article_16590_6-great-us-presidents-their-crimes-against-humanity.html

Dangermouse: Have you read Mr. Norris' biography? It's a great read and shows just how bad-ass he is in real life. He may not really have a thrid fist behind that beard, but I wouldn't bet on anyone if they went against him mano-e-mano.

If it is fictional apparently Harrison Ford has killed more people / sentient creatures than any other film actor in the history of film. You really don't want to be cast opposite him :)

Emperor Hadrian

From my travels around various far flung Roman sites, he just keeps on cropping up in more prominent ways than any single other Roman leader.

Interesting that Bismarck gets so many votes, when in the 19th Century it was the British Empire on which the Sun never set, while the German empire only ever amounted to a sausage factory in Tanganyika.

I propose Palmerston for the 19th Century.

For the modern era, I suppose I would have to go with FDR for persuading an isolationist American public into successfully pursuing wars on opposite sides of the World's two largest oceans.

Hannibal
Palmerston
FDR

Oops. That should be:

Hadrian
Palmerston
FDR

FDR

The man was the only one who did anything to turn around the Great Depression, kept the Allies together during WWII, and kept Congress whipped in his closet.

Also, he was in a wheelchair and slept with more women than JFK.

bader

The US Government. Absolutely merciless in its execution.