Alexander the Great vs Gwanggaeto the Great.

 They enjoy a childish debate about who will win if they compete over the same path, such as the superiority and inferiority of Alexander and Gwanggaeto's talent. I'm not saying it's bad. It's okay to say that the purpose of studying history as an amateur is one ongoji god. It is good as a hobby if you have a fun life while applying what you learn and realize through this virtual simulation. However, from the perspective of this question itself, I don't think there is a need to insert examples by revealing various opinions or phrases. What's the topography, what it is...Weapons or cavalry...So~ King Gwanggaeto is more advantageous. Why? Our Korean people have good grit.It is a very illogical conclusion. But I think it's really funny. This is because, except for Koreans, it is a question that is not worth asking regardless of the world's expertise or vision. For example, let's say that a chief of the African Zulu conquered a land about Manchuria and heard the sound of a great king. But let's say that the Zulu people now compare this king with Alexander who is greater. Isn't it so funny? We're going to do Gwanggaeto Gwanggaeto Gwanggaeto Gwanggaeto. Honestly, did Gwanggaeto do anything? Have you conquered a proper civilized state?How many provinces did they occupy by invading the empire of China?Did it affect the history of human civilization or the flow of history?Did you leave a proper historical legacy?  It is just expanding the occupied area by targeting the land of nomadic peoples in Manchuria. Why is King Gwanggaeto being revered? This is because King Gwanggaeto is the only one in our 5,000-year history that shows a feat that can be felt by the aggresive pride. And Park Wi's Tsushima conquest? Developing Yukjin? That's funny. Some people say that the Japanese feel inferior to us. It is us who live in a sense of inferiority. There is no reason for Japan to feel inferior to us as much as ants. Compare King Gwanggaeto, the almost only conquest king, and the Japanese Empire in World War II. Aside from the size of the territory, it is not a matter of discussion in terms of its influence on world history. Japan conquered Joseon and Manchuria, occupied China, and dominated East Asia. And he played against the world's strongest country. In front of this reality, Japan has an unrealistic delusion that Japan has an inferiority complex to us, so the nonsense of Gwanggaeto beating Alexander is derived. Then if we go back to Alexander vs. Gwanggaetoyag. Once again, the comparison itself is really nonsense. Alexander is a genius of war and strategy, almost the first in human history. In short, it can be said that Alexander laid the foundation for a strategy that continues to modern times. In the West, war geniuses are often linked from Alexander to Piroz, Hannibal to Scipio, Caesar to Napoleon, and even Hitler, although awkward. In the East, it will become Genghis Khan. To sum up in case of misunderstanding, the geniuses of war and conquest among mankind will be Alexander, Kaisar, Genghis Khan, and Napoleon. These are the people who operated the world's strongest forces at the time in human history and used the best strategies. As Einstein discovered the principle of relativity, they are geniuses who dominated the world with breakthrough strategies and tactics.  But isn't it funny to get King Gwanggaeto right here? Alexander conquered three of the world's four major civilizations at that time. China was like conquering the world from the standpoint of non-exclusive high school and Alexander due to circumstances. That's also a young man who is only 30 years old. At that time, China was in the Warring States period, and it is obvious that if it was the neighborhood next to Persian, it would have been conquered by Alexander. Alexander's military power, strategy, and talent at that time were far beyond that of the Qin Dynasty at the end of the second century BC. The nationwide unification of the Qin Dynasty has expanded the infrastructure of politics, law, and economy by employing foreigners such as Sangang, White Flag, Zhang, Bumsoo, and Director over several generations, but it should be noted that Qin Shi Huang did not unify the country because it was smart or excellent in strategy. Still, since he is ignorant of the original Alexander and is from a distant country, there will be some harms that he cannot get a sense of what a genius of strategy is. Then replace Alexander with Genghis Khan. When it comes to humans similar to Alexander in human history, the first is Genghis Khan and the second is Napoleon. Imagine that the Genghis Khan army pours into the territory of King Gwanggaeto. It won't be a jab even though Hae-hits think about it. You can ignore all of this because you are a soldier or a cavalry. It just doesn't work. If you write this down, there are delusional merchants who will bubble up their mouths, saying, "Is it a colonial view or what?" However, in reality alone, there is only now a history in our history that deserves pride.