Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 3126. page

UN didn't succeed in anything, it's actually fucking useless for anything other than comedic relief in the form of 3rd world cannibal dictators giving speeches about human rights and oppression.

The thing that prevented the outbreak of WW3 were NUCLEAR WEAPONS, not fucking UN.

>>1468190
Depends on what you mean by "success." The UN failed to prevent the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Soviet-Afghan War, the China-India War, several India-Pakistan wars, and all the various civil wars over its 70 year history. Plus, it has failed to prevent genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, and the former Yugoslavia.

We haven't had WWIII yet, but that is probably more a product of the Cold War and two countries having the power to devastate the planet.

The League of Nations failed for a number of reasons, first being that it was a hypocritical enterprise. Germany was excluded at first for having lost WWI, and the Soviet Union wasn't included for a long time because the West didn't recognize the Bolsheviks. The US wasn't in it because Congress opposed it. It relied on collective security, in the form of troop donations, and sanctions to enforce their rules, but the European empires were still playing the colonial game and were unwilling to use their resources to enforce the rules when those same rules might then be used against them. Same goes for disarmament, a major goal; nobody was willing to disarm because they still had their huge empires on the line.

>>1468190
3 things:
-Everyone is a member.
-Veto power.
-Decolonization.
-Enforcement (even how minimal it is).

League of Nations
-Founders USA isn't a member.
-Too partisan (i,e, colonial powers pretty much run it),
-Maintenance of Status Quo (i,e, everyone who has colonies, keeps them).
-...which clashed with ideals of Self-Determination of Nations.
-Has 0 enforcement.

British colonization came from a country called Britain

Spanish colonization was done by the country Spain

And the Portuguese colonizations was done by the great country of Portuguese

Spaniards wanted gold because Spain was poor as shit, they pillaged hispanic America, that's the reason they are so shitty now

Portuguese wanted slaves so they brought Africans to America in massive numbers and made the Indians slaves too

North American white colonizators just wanted land to farm and actually created a great country in my opinion it was the greatest model of colonization

>>1468192
Ebin XD

>>1468081
Define truth.

>>1468081

There are many types of "truth". A mathematical proof is "true", and so is a fact, but they're not at all the same kind of thing. "Truth" is a bucket term like "religion" or "literature", it covers a wide range of concepts that are only slightly related, and seeking to consolidate them all in one concept is a mistake.

>>1468081
>>1468086
>anon asks what truth is
>gets response asking what truth is
What a great thread.

>>1468077
>le action theory meme
>le free will meme
>le decisions exist and aren't predetermined meme
we lad

>>1468416
Is that an argument?

Is your argument that actions do not exist because they are predetermined?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5cab4hgmoE

>was it justified
For sure. It was a mean to please the ambitious sans-culottes and the Paris Commune, to improve drastically the results of the French army, to repress the counter-revolutionaries and it served to empower the executive. Funnily enough, it allowed the Comittees to repress the Hebertists which permitted to prevent other bloodbaths.

>by Robespierre
Of course not

How was the killing of the King looked upon in England where monarchy wasn't as absolute?

What about America?

>>1468016
>Timur invaded Baghdad in June 1401. After the capture of the city, 20,000 of its citizens were massacred. Timur ordered that every soldier should return with at least two severed human heads to show him. When they ran out of men to kill, many warriors killed prisoners captured earlier in the campaign, and when they ran out of prisoners to kill, many resorted to beheading their own wives

>>1468023
what was his fucking problem?

>>1468027
He was a barbarian.

File: Rohan.jpg (52KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1024x576px

>>1467858
F R E E W I L L

>>1467858
>be omnipotent omniscient eternal one and only God the creator
>anon on 4chin presumes to have you all figured out

>>1467858
>Man punishes Man
>God punishes Man

I fail to see your point

>>1467849
I thought they did. And even called Hannibal sort of back some times. Because it was weakening them too much. What Hannibal did.

>>1467914
He basically beat all of Rome's city states and was on the verge of taking Rome but needed more units which Carthage denied.

Eventually he went back to Carthage and with his brother they tried negotiating for more troops but was denied.

This is when Scipio attacked Carthage and Hannibal lost/retreated.

At least, that's how I remember it.

>>1467978
Yeah but that was because rome's best legions were off in Sicily being tied up by other carthaginian forces and the armies Hannibal smashed were little more than massive hordes of armed recruits.

Heck even hasdrubal had a tougher fight than Hannibal did, and hasdrubal arguably performed much better than hannibal, all of hannibal tactics and victories were is the equivalent of stealing candy from a baby

>>1467667
did they have access to horses before they had direct contact with europeans in order to get firearms?

>>1467693
No. But they didn't adopt firearms in mass for their cavalry right away. I think many tribes like the Comanche preferred the war lance, bow and tomahawks/clubs on horseback before the invention of the repeating rifle or revolver.

>>1467707
True, they'd be more used to using weapons that aren't firearms. Also I'm not sure if Europeans would sell them guns in mass in the beginning. I haven't done any research on this but at least it would seem like you'd rather sell them horses first instead of weapons. Do you think Europeans would withhold selling them guns so that they'd have the upper hand in battle?

>>1467644
bit of a nut, but surprisingly interesting and insightful at times

>>1467657

How was he a nut?

>>1467644

He's completely discredited in psychology, he faked his research to push his mysticism and indirectly gave rise to the New Age movement.

0/10, top tier prick.

>>1467305
Well, just consider that when you're holding a guitar, you're basically holding an arab instrument.

File: wojroach.png (9KB, 645x773px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 645x773px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulg1ahV552g

Middle-eastern music comes in one variety: mischievious.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVXnoanopzA

>>1467250
It can't be objective.

Let's say after flipping a coin 1000 times you conclude the chances of getting heads are between 49% and 51%. How sure are you that your conclusion is correct? You are not 100% perfectly sure.

If you then conclude there is a 99% chance you are correct, in turn you can't be sure this 2nd conclusion is correct and so on.

You could use calculus and say there is a 1% chance you are wrong and a 1% chance you are wrong about being wrong and so forth, the end result is a 0.8998998998998998998998...% chance of being wrong. However, again, your calculus could be wrong.

Thus, all knowledge is anchored in the assumption that some things are certain. You might be aware "you can't know nuthin", but lack of omnipotence forces you to make these assumptions.

>>1467300
How about atom decay

>>1467250
>>1467375

It's deterministic, not random.

>>1467187
Philosophy is merely the expression of the desire to relate to someone else and to foster a sense of comradery.
It is a form of therapy for the writer.

>>1467208
And not the reader?

>>1467231
Tricked into reading something, I guess.

>>1467084
my uncle is actually an appraiser of old and historic paintings (been featured on antiques roadshow several times in fact) so if you just send that to me we'll sort you out >:]

Doesn't really look much like a Rembrandt.

If it's authentic, it's probably by some nobody.

Get some evidence that it's yours, and have it appraised, just in case.

>rembrandt
>authentic

You don't know what you're talking about lmao

The Germans also had huge numbers of armored vehicles designed specifically for infantry support. The Stug being the most produced German AFV of the war.

Are you trying to imply that tanks are better used in the infantry support role? Having a armored spearhead of massed tanks proved in the war to be quite useful and really the only way to accomplish large offensive maneuvers (with some degree of speed atleast). The Germans being the first to use tanks in this way.

>>1466722
Have you read Rommel's book "Attention Tanks!'? Deals with this, and minimizes the importance of radios. He did not want to publicize the importance he placed on radios.