Genghis Khan. Were his actions justifiable?

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we are here today to determine the conclusion of Genghis Khan. The prosecution presents various reasons why my client should be sentence to death, but they did not tell you, the jury, why he did what he did. They also did not even address the positive contribution Genghis has promoted.

Genghis Khan's cruel and unusual conduct can be justified from the horrors of his early life. At an early age his father died from poisoning and Khan was forced to provide for his large family. With his father deceased, Genghis Khan and his family were left to live on their own, being deserted by their tribe. This could have led him to lack the discipline he would have received if father lived. Also, all the anger and malnutrition from struggling to find food and shelter could of lead him to lose his sense of morality in his later life and could be the reason why he committed these crimes. In addition to all these terrible experiences, the Tayichi'ut tribe captured Genghis Khan and held him for several months before he finally escaped. They kept him with a wooden collar around his neck and wrist, and all the fears he faced and hatred for his captors could have lead him to be fierce.

Genghis Khan may have committed many crimes in his lifetime but he also has several positive contributions that have been overlooked. Declaring himself "the ruler of all those who live in felt huts," Genghis Khan united countless of people under a progressive and benevolent rule. He ended numerous civil rivalries and intertribal warfare, bringing violence and countless of deaths to a halt. As his empire grew, Genghis Khan improved internal and external trades; allowing his people to grow and prosper. Through these profitable trade routes Khan made, Europe came out of the dark ages and ideas, technologies, and religions vastly broaden. Genghis Khan was neither a harsh ruler nor an unreasonable person; everything he did was to benefit his people. He abolished chaos and