[Norse]

Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great were NOT despicable tyrants. Especially Caesar. Caesar treated those the Empire ruled with great mercy. There were many times when large parts of the Empire could have easily left Roman influence - but didn't - because being part of the Roman economy that Caesar - the great administrator and conquerer, built largely by himself. Julius Caesar is a hero of the western world and should be treated as such. The Roman Empire was one of the greatest things that ever happened to Europe, and without Caesar, there's a good chance its golden days would never have been.

[Savage Beast]

There are certainly good things that are the legacy of Rome, but, all in all, the Roman Empire was one of mankind's most dubious achievements, and Julius Caesar was its father.

[Destro]

While Julius Caesar was a dictator (Tyrant in Greek) Alexander the Great was what we would term a "constitutionally appointed" monarch of the Greek kingdom of Macedonia. He was Captain-General of allied Greek states (true they were forced into a military alliance after defeat) and was greeted as a liberator and confirmed as Pharaoh by the Egyptian priesthood. When Alexander became Shah of Persia, it was admittedly coronation by the sword of conquest, so it is in Persia that he came closest to being a tyrant but Alexander saw his war as a defensive war against Persia which threatened constant invasion of Greece. So if his conquest can be justified so in that regard he was also not a tyrant, like the victorious allies in Iraq or Germany were not tyrants.

Since the Macedonian Army proclaimed a king-it was the Macedonian army that stopped Alexander's conquests (no way a Roman legion or a Mongol Horde would pull that off) and Alexander had to abide by the decision of his congress.

Many people mistake powerful men for Tyrants. What makes men tyrants is that they are answerable to no one, cruelty to defeated enemies plays no role in the definition.