What are your thoughts on Carthage and Hannibal.
he tried so hard, got so far
>>2427384
Carthago delenda est
>>2427384
Hannibal is legend
>>2427206
In her story, perhaps.
I wonder what it feels like to fuck a young queen.
>>2427209
Please do not offend Her Majesty, thank you very much.
>"The Incas lacked the use of wheeled vehicles. They lacked animals to ride and draft animals that could pull wagons and plows...[They] lacked the knowledge of iron and steel...Above all, they lacked a system of writing...Despite these supposed handicaps, the Incas were still able to construct one of the greatest imperial states in human history".
Well, how did they do it?
Are you implying the Incas accomplished nothing and people lie about them?
Lots and lots of cheap human muscle
>>2427130
he brings up a good point. before they broke the Mayan language they made up all this bullshit that they were a peaceful people.
Once they cracked it they realized they were just as warlike as the aztecs and practiced human sacrifice
The problem with these oral cultures is we dont know what they were really like. So we fill in the blank with modern day bullshit
You can see this bullshit in action with the viking series
>had a private militia
>change sides constantly
>don't believe in nothing
>conquer easily hearts of people
>coward
>corrupt as a fuck
Who was the real version of this guy?
>>2426369
Trump tbqh
>>2426369
uhh Benedict Arnold?
Alcibiades? I'm sure there are some better choices.
If WWII Japan and WWII Italy were to fight against each other, who would win?
>>2425874
WW2 Italy never went into war economy while WW2 Japan was the most heavily mobilized economy. They produced arms at a similar rate. You figure it out.
>>2425883
Japs had a better trained army and larger navy
>>2425874
Japan.
historical pictures that make you feel
>>2424040
>Germany went war against the whole world and lost
>This is Jewish people's fault
What the hell happened?
>>2423627
They ran out of gas.
>>2423627
No Gas
Maybe just a propaganda not to scare Jews to get in..
Recently I went on a bit if a history binge, both over the internet and books.
One thing which always made me curious was chainmail. It was used a lot and most historians and writers say, it wouldn't be used a lot of it wasn't effective.
Modern chainmail reinventions are tested and show it was good at preventing cuts and in some cases arrows.
However what has me thinking is this: are the recreations of chainmail we have today as accurate to what they had back in say the 1100s or 1200s?
Historians looking back 1000 or 2000 years from now may see our traditional armoured vests as being extraordinarily effective with their own modern replications of our armour being near bullet proof. But that would be replications using their own quality material.
However the reason we use it today is cause its the only armour available and yes while the grade of armour in the modern military has varied resistence, virtually none are going to stop more than a dozen rounds nor full automatic fire.
How some people discuss chainmail is that it was exceptionally potent and effective armour. But was the quality of material of the same level as some replications we make as of today to make a proper accurate depiction in how tough it was?
That and the varied quality of chainmail, was it not of a much more lower level? During war time I'm sure some armour makers (sorry, don't know the proper name) would cut corners or simply lazily construct it rendering their chainmail inferior to ours?
Just curious, particularly in regards to Norman Knights of the 1100 to the later Knights of 13-1400s.
Cheers in advance.
>>2423407
>Modern chainmail reinventions are tested and show it was good at preventing cuts and in some cases arrows.
They use butted mail a lot of the time, which is not how chainmail was made and is totally useless, you can literally destroy butted mail with your hand.
Mail was good armour, it stopped cuts, and most stabs, it didnt stop force, but the padding undernearth did that.
It's quite heavy though. Heavier than plate.
>>2423538
I see. I guess I am so used to looking at all different forms of media and seeing chainmail getting sliced to pieces.
In one form, I am used to seeing men dying in droves in battle scenes. While the depiction may not be right, there have been historical battles where men got butchered in stupid high numbers.
In contrast many historians compliment the effectiveness of armour, counter acting the pop culture depiction of it, particularly chain mail.
So the conflict between one side saying chainmail and other armours were effective vs the disastrous battles which resulted in massacres is making it hard for me to get a proper idea how good chainmail really was.
Roman Warrior vs Samurai
Much more fair than Knight vs Samurai, due to cheaper Roman steel and lighter armor.
WHO WIN??
>>2422423
samurai would beat knight and roman warrior
>>2422435
>Implying
The roman legion would beat pussy knights and pussy samurai assholes.
What was Russian rule in Central Asia (Russian Turkestan) like?
>>2422131
probably boring
>>2422131
central asia is probably the most boring place in existence
they just occasionally send migratory groups that end up in other areas like the bulgars or the turks
>>2422327
>Most boring place in the world
>Not Oceania
ITT: We discuss the history of modern nations that don't get any /his/ attention.
Fuck yeah. Sri Lanka is the greatest. It's time you fellas learned who's in charge here.
I think what turns most folks off from Sri Lanka(the greatest country on earth) is the pretty ugly civil war that tore the place apart in the 70's and 80's.
The former areas of Tamil Eelam are actually doing much better now than they ever were under LTTE rule.
The assassination of Ranasinghe Premadasa has to be one of the strangest political assassinations I've ever heard, next to Trotsky's. Who the fuck uses a bicycle as a getaway vehicle?
What are some of the saddest moments in history?
inb4 OP's birth
When you got squirted out of your mum's pussy.
>>2413874
2016 trump victory.
>"Truly I say to you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" (Matthew 24:34)
Are christians autists, or simply unable to red?
>>2435217
Better question: is OP retarded, or simply unable to spell "read"?
>>2435217
They have a number of apologetic explanations for it actually. some reinterpret it as a "spiritual" event that occurred when the Romans destroyed the temple that everyone was unaware of. those that recognize that the scriptures are fallible in some respect will simply claim that this line was pulled out of context and deny that it can ever be understood . By far the best I would say comes from C.S. Lewis who admits that Jesus was wrong but then flips it around to say this shows the faithfulness of the christian writers to keep this failed prophecy in which somehow proves that Jesus really was God
>>2435233
I missed a letter, you guys missed almost two millennia.
Is C.S. Lewis the greatest philosopher of the 20th century?
He debunked Nietzsche, Stirner and still pisses off atheists today.
>>2433343
>He debunked Nietzsche
>word games and circular logic
>literally renown for not being able to argue in public
Should have stuck to fiction. But I know this is a bait thread and you're ready to spam a million anti-science posts and claim "evolution has been debunked! Religion IS science!".
But hey, I couldn't help myself.
I wouldn't say greatest but he's up there.
I've only read "Mere Christianity" so I'm aware of the arguments for objective morality. I like this channel which summarizes his points: https://www.youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos
Kierkegaard's "Existential Problem" and "Religious Solution" also great watchings.
Who here can explain briefly why sexual promiscuity and sex without marriage is associated with the downfall of civilizations that were once the opposite?
The historian Livy comes to mind I believe when he wrote about how Rome slowly degraded over time in terms of individual morals, values and how near the end the per-occupation of most people was greed and pleasure over anything else.
If society tomorrow reversed itself and everyone was expected to get married before sex that's not the kind of society I'd want to be in. I love casual sex and casual relationships.
Problem is you will want to settle down eventually. Suddenly barfly #748 you decide you want to keep around a bit longer is not looking so hot as a long term partner and mother.
Casual sex is kind of a meme though. Most people I've met outside of frats and their soroistutes vie for monogamous relations.
>>2433235
Because most people want to just have a loving partner, and when you create an environment that does the opposite you end up with bad results
>>2433235
>I love casual sex and casual relationships.
>Asking /his/, so you could justify that you're part of problem, rather than correcting the issue itself.
How about you grow up, learn from the past and stop your mental illness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RkZXZx6HCI