Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 2866. page

Because

>
>
>

>>1644287
They might have survived if they became a tri-monarchy (Austro-Hun-Slavic Empire)

>>1644322
South Slav I mean

>>1644270
Because it doesn't fucking matter. Everyone knows native Americans = Injuns

>>1644280
What if a Native American from Canada moves to India?

File: 1455661859632.png (12KB, 431x600px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 431x600px

"First Nations" does sound more reverant, but "Native Americans" is more clear and the Average US denizen doesn't really quite know what "nation" means.

File: edgy goths.jpg (321KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 1600x1200px

>>1644117
Edgy Jacobins.

>The fuck was up with the french revolution?

ftfy

>>1644139
People freeing themselves from the aristocratic yoke.

There is evidence of many great civilizations that are 100's of thousands years old. Don't beleive everything they teach you.

>>1644086
Source?

>>1644086
which ones

They sandnigs
T. Historian

>>1643827
While the Middle East and North Africa are certainly drier and less fertile than they were centuries ago, the "decline" really has to do with the discovery of the New World. The ME was so wealthy and luxurious because of the Silk Road and being in the center of the East and West, so every body had to pass through there. But in the Age of Discovery, with the West getting all of the wealth coming in from the Americas and ships traveling from Europe straight to the Far East, there was no longer any need for the Muslim middleman.

>>1643978
Yeah nah fuck off nigger. Civilization started there before a "silk road" could ever be thought of, and the silk road was made for trade between the middle east and the east, only after it expanded to include the west.

there's far too many boards already
religious topics work well here
delete this thread

>>1643820
So /his/ lose 99% of it's inhabitants?!

>>1643820
>his splits into rel
>rel splits into /px/ and /heath/
>/px/ splits into a billion christian denominations
>/heath/ shrivels up for lack of traffic
>dude just create a board for every topic lmao

This is why (sq4)*2 chan exists you simpleton, get with the program

>>1643727
>Why didn't they just let the Nazis and Commies fight it out?
because they invaded france and they were fixing to invade the UK

>>1643727
The Cold War didn't really start until after WWII when the U.S. and Russia emerged as the two real, clear world powers.

>>1643727


Several reasons. In no particular order:


Because the U.S., especially FDR, focused on winning the war they've got now over geostrategic concerns after the war. Plus, it would be enormously hard to sell to the electorate a notion of

>Well, it's 1944, we've built up enough to make the invasion across the Channel and back onto the continent do-able, but we want the Nazis and the commies to bleed each other dry first.

You also run the risk that Germany is substantially more able to resist such an attack, driving up your own costs, especially in people, which is not a good thing. LL focuses more of the war into Russia, and unless your recruiting can keep up with your arms production (which it already was having trouble with in the case of the U.S.) giving that shit to the Soviets beats having it sit in a warehouse in Oklahoma or something.

But most of all, there was a view that if the Soviets weren't our friends, at the very least they could be dealt with. They were not about to break treaties left right and center to launch on a campaign of conquest anytime soon, and that softer power could be employed against them, where it really couldn't against Germany.

>>1643706
During the Enlightenment.

With the advent of Puritanical streaks of Christianity, coupled with wide dissemination of the Bible, it was only natural that eventually the Bible would be seen as oppressive and hateful, because a lot of people had to grow up under parenting that made them deathly afraid to ask questions or live their life. Heck, even Dostoevsky covers this in The Brothers Karamazov: Smerdyakov, as a child, asks a question about a contradiction in Genesis and Grigory, in indignation, beats him for it.

For many, the Bible is associated with that to this day. Say whatever you will about William Lane Craig, but at least he's right that parents discouraging the natural inquisitiveness of children is the major reason many people who are raised as Christians end up hating the Bible. Children should be encouraged to ask questions, even if such questions scandalize their parents.

>>1644138

You're using your trip again. I guess you're a liar. Guess I shouldn't have expected any different from a heretic who believes Jesus was born from anal sex.

They needed to look very neat for their riverdancing

File: Gaelic_clothing_Ireland.jpg (93KB, 565x600px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 565x600px

>>1643424
Not op, im bumping this, anything i can search for like pic related? Googling Irish Gael warriors or something only brings cringy tribal fantasy art

File: 51+QxwZgHTL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (42KB, 333x499px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 333x499px

>>1643424

>>1643408
tactic specific instance
strategy unifying adoptions

>>1643408

http://www.militaryfactory.com/dictionary/military-terms-defined.asp?term_id=5118

>strategic level of war

>The level of war at which a nation, often as a member of a group of nations, determines national or multinational (alliance or coalition) strategic security objectives and guidance, and develops and uses national resources to achieve these objectives. Activities at this level establish national and multinational military objectives; sequence initiatives; define limits and assess risks for the use of military and other instruments of national power; develop global plans or theater war plans to achieve those objectives; and provide military forces and other capabilities in accordance with strategic plans. See also operational level of war; tactical level of war. (JP 3-0)

http://www.militaryfactory.com/dictionary/military-terms-defined.asp?term_id=5283

>Tactical level of war

>The level of war at which battles and engagements are planned and executed to achieve military objectives assigned to tactical units or task forces. Activities at this level focus on the ordered arrangement and maneuver of combat elements in relation to each other and to the enemy to achieve combat objectives. See also operational level of war; strategic level of war. (JP 3-0)

http://www.militaryfactory.com/dictionary/military-terms-defined.asp?term_id=3878

>Operational level of war

>The level of war at which campaigns and major operations are planned, conducted, and sustained to achieve strategic objectives within theaters or other operational areas. Activities at this level link tactics and strategy by establishing operational objectives needed to achieve the strategic objectives, sequencing events to achieve the operational objectives, initiating actions, and applying resources to bring about and sustain these events. See also strategic level of war; tactical level of war. (JP 3-0)

1/2

>>1643408
>>1643435
>And wouldn't strategy be more about placement and timing, for instance where do you maneuver your forces and when do you order the attack?

No, that's definitely tactical.

>Wouldn't tactics be something like equipment, gear, fighting style and the like?

That one's a bit tougher, as depending on how much control you have over your polity's warmaking ability, it can either be operational or strategic, or possibly even none of the above if the state has very little control over what shows up, and you're just trying to make do with what you have.

>>1643177
it proves transgenerational attachment doesnt disapear overnight and that you probably shouldnt comment on history unless u got at least SOME clue as to the biological threads that run the place

File: 1467303240657.jpg (46KB, 720x554px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 720x554px

>>1643205
>it proves transgenerational attachment doesnt disapear overnight and that you probably shouldnt comment on history unless u got at least SOME clue as to the biological threads that run the place

>>1643177
That wasn't actual communism

I feel like alcohol doesn't really influence your thought process. I mean when I am drunk, I am always fully aware of this at the time.

amanita schrooooms duuuuuude

>>1643170
cannabis sativa or indica is irrelevent but

cannabis

why?

1 000 000 years of symbiotic evolution with it

humans=weed(remover)

>>1643109
probably because a rectangle is closer to a human penis than a square just like the girl in ur pic looks like the much venerated cow that was worshipped for 10-20+++ thousand years of human evolution straight. idoltory

idolatry

Pieces of cloth are usually rectangular by default.

>>1642874
It's all spooks my man

>>1642874
i do u dont ur move nigger

>>1642924
this is what I figured

>>1642868

I approve

I doubt it, at least anywhere the ice sheets covered. The sheer damage they did to the upper layers of rock and soil is like running the archaeological record through DBAN and a wood chipper.

>>1642868

if they manage to tunnel inside gunung padang and find rooms that are carbon-dated to then and contain stuff that indicates an advanced society then yes