Ivan the IV or "Ivan the Terrible"
If you are referring to Czar Nicholas II, it is because he was not a military commander by training, even though he thought he was really quite fantastic.
Answer this question… Czar Nicholas II's refusal to withdraw from World War I
During the Russian Civil War that began in late 1917, the group that supported Czar Nicholas II was generally known as the 'White' Russians. In contrast to the Communist 'Reds,' the 'Whites' advocated either a monarchical government for Russia or, at the very least, a non-Communistic ruling power.
Russia's involvement in World War I was draining the country's resources.
bloody Sunday happened to mark the beginning of Russian revolution
Which one? 1905 or 1917? Czar was nuts, feudalism/capitalism suck, and the russians were getting their asses handed to them in WW1.
My answer is no. "drug czar" is not an official title. Under Richard Nixon various drug enforcement agencies were consolidated under one head, who might be called the first drug czar. I think the term "drug czar" was first widely used after Bush became president.
The first revolution in Russia, the March one was helped by the oppression people felt toward the Czar. Added to that was food shortages and the war weary people of Russia. Russians feared the Russian monarchy and were happy to see the Czar be forced to step down.
Most people call it the Russian Revolution-- maybe there is a less obvious name for it. The February Revolution of 1917 is the one which forced the Czar to abdicate. It is also sometimes called the Patriotic Revolution. The October, or Bolshevik Revolution, is the one which overthrew the Provisional Government which replaced the Tsar upon his abdication.
Nicholas II was the last Czar. There had been a Nicholas I before him. Your question did not specify which Nicholas was being referred to. There is some theory that either Michael Romanov, Nicholas II's brother, or Alexei Romanov, Nicholas II's son, was the actual last Czar but this is non-sense. The theory that Michael was the last Czar is based on the fact that when Nicholas II abdicated the throne, he passed it on to his brother Michael who refused it, was never crowned and never acted as Czar. The then existing Russian Constitution stated that the Czar could not give the crown to anyone he chose, but that it had to go to his eldest son first. The abdication in Michael's favor was therefore illegal and of no effect. Since he was never the Czar he couldn't have been the last one. The theory that Alexei was the last Czar is also based on the fact that the abdication in favor of Michael was illegal. Since the Constitution stated that the crown fell to the Czar's eldest son, the speculation is that when Nicholas II abdicated, the crown automatically fell to Alexei regardless of the abdication in favor of Michael. The problem with this theory is that Alexei was never crowned Czar and never acted as Czar. Again, since he was never the Czar, he could not have been the last one either.
Yes: the Alexander was one of the ships of the First Fleet. The Alexander was a transport ship, meaning it carried convicts.