so how would have the USSR ended if trotsky came to power instead of stalin?
>>1249312
Why is this such a meme?
>>1249326
>country is superpower that has a huge impact on recent history
>country has succession dispute between two extremely different leaders
>what would have happened
You may as well ask why British people care about Hastings.
Imagine The World-Scale Communist Revolution.
Could the Mongols have been stopped if they had reached further than Eastern Europe?
Your asking if the mongols could be stopped if they got further than where they were stopped?
They would have overrun and conquered Europe if the Caucasian Mamluks didnt save the world in Egypt
Literally stopped in poland and hungary - there empire is parts of china, steppes in russia, and iran
Seeing how the Scots were Irish and the Scottish accents we have now especially in the Western Highlands probably originated in the Gaelic settlers from Ireland. And seeing how the Pictish and people were in the same category as the Welsh could it be possible they could have sounded Wes
>>1248848
They all spoke the old Brittonic language so yes, probably would have sounded like very different accents though.
>>1248848
They would have sounded fucking wierd to our ears. Only somewhat similar to Modern Welsh.
What Latin American nation has the most interesting history?
>Hard mode: Post Independence
Paraguay
Quebec
>>1245637
That ... that isn't even wrong
How does one escape from nihilism without becoming a hedonist?
Transcendental acceptance
Jesus
>Be Protestant
>Tell non-Christian that I'm Christian
>They try to use Catholic/Pope sins against me
>Le crusades
>Le gay popes
>>1244175
Nice blog. Now suck a sharp, metallic cock until it pierces the back of your head.
>>1244175
protestants have the advantage of not being one unified church, so the whole movement doesn't get blamed when some local protestant group does something stupid. no wonder that nowdays, all the craziness in christianity (Westboro, young-age creationists, Jack Chick etc.) comes from protestantism. at least the Catholic Church has to keep the craziness in check.
>>1244222
>There's no craziness in the Roman Catholic church
>"The whole movement doesn't get blamed" but then proceeds to blame the whole movement
Reading Exodus now , seems to me old Jews were worse than new Jews.
Why so much Egyptian hate in the Bible? Are there any records of the Jewish-Egyptian relations besides the bible?
I think i know at some point Egypt conquered Palestine ,is that the source of the hate?
Let my people goooooooo
>>1253156
The jews descend from Canaanites too and all of Canaan was under Egyptian control for some centuries untill the Philistines invaded.
>>1253156
Egypt during the early Iron Age, when most of the Old Testament was authored, was a waning power but still influential in the Levant. For example, the Egyptians killed the Judean king Josiah at the Battle of Mediggo in 609 BC and put the Judeans under their suzerainty (until the even worse Babylonians took over). Earlier the Egyptians had ruled the Levant with an iron fist. In fact, the earliest recorded use of the term 'Israel' come from an Egyptian stele celebrating its destruction at the hand of the Pharoah.
The Egyptians, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians and other all vied for power while the Judeans were mostly just a backward sheep-herding chiefdom that gradually grew into a small kingdom. The Judeans who wrote most of the Bible naturally demonized all of these groups. It's not really a treatment unique to Egypt; the Canaanites according to scripture were pretty much subhumans who needed to be genocided. Only the Persians really get a positive treatment.
That said, much of the Exodus story probably reflects earlier patterns of Egyptian/Levantine populations that had been going on for millennia. Egypt had always been interacting with Levantine populations throughout its existence, often ruling the weak Canaanite kingdoms, while Levantine populations often migrated into and out of the Nile Delta. The Exodus didn't happen, but similar events did (such as the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, where they had been rulers rather than slaves) and the story is probably a vague memory of this.
What are some /his/ approved youtubers?
>we have this thread every day
>>1243740
Scholagladiatoria aka le cool bald swordsman.
Lindybeige is pretty good imho senpai
PROTIP: The argument "there is no god" is also a positive claim. Let me explain.
First let's start with the question - what does "there is no god" actually mean? Well, from a very superficial level it means where some higher being exists or not, all other attributes to this god notwithstanding. The phrase "there is no god or gods" could just as easily refer to a conception of gods such as those in Buddhism, who are more sublime and long-lived beings than humans, but still ultimately mortal and don't control any sort of force in the universe. HOWEVER, in our current, monotheistic, created-universe understanding of "gods", when the term is used it is almost always referring to an omnipotent creator god; the *source of all existence.*
So what does this mean then? Well, it means that the question of whether god exists or not is better represented as why is there even existence in the first place. Most reasoned arguments theists use for the existence of a god don't argue about the superficial attributes of this god - they argue that god can be concluded by looking at the mechanisms of nature (i.e. existence) and extrapolating a source of being from that. Hence, the very premise of both theists and atheists arguments about the existence god isn't about god at all - it's about the fact that stuff already exists.
Where am I going with this? Well, since we know now that both sides now have the same starting premise ("stuff exists"), then we can see that BOTH of their conclusions about this existence inherently has to be positive, since by cold, intellectual cognition alone, there's no reason for there to be existence in the first place. The conclusions from theists thus becomes "there is existence, because God made it" (positive claim) and the conclusion from atheists thus becomes "there is existence, but it came about by random chance" (positive claim.)
>>1254210
God exists
Leprechauns don't exist.
>>1254210
Further, in order for the statement "there is no God" to be comprehensible, the person must have infinite knowledge of everything; he must have scoured the entire multiverse on every possible level that God might be, in order to declare "there is no God".
And then I would have a person with infinite knowledge telling me that there does not exist a person with infinite knowledge.
There are no atheists. There are only shitty little demigods running around ruining everything for everybody.
>Carnage: Amid the appalling devastation and bodies of dead soldiers, a crucifix stands tall - miraculously preserved from the shell fire. The powerful image was captured after a bloody skirmish in 1917 - and Walter's son Volkmar says: 'This photograph is like an accusation - an accusation against war'
Horrendous and more valuable than most things.
I don't believe human life has any inherent value. War is generally beneficial but it obviously depends. I don't think we should have any objection to war in general.
>"For I will require the blood of your lives at the hand of every beast, and at the hand of man, at the hand of every man, and of his brother, will I require the life of man. Whosoever shall shed man's blood, his blood shall be shed: for man was made to the image of God."
Genesis 9:5-6
Were there really black people living inside the borders of the Roman Empire?
>>1242851
probably.
>>1242851
Of course.
Absolutely.
I just got done with watching Arrow, and it had a pretty interesting scenario that basically equated to the Trolly problem.
There's a nuke inbound toward a massive population center. It will kill millions and affect millions more. Its GPS coordinates can be changed, but (I forget the line of thought. It's irrelevant anyway) only to a small town of about 10,000.
Would you actively kill 10,000 to save millions or would you stand by and let it hit its intended target?
>>1253835
once an ICBM is launched, there's nothing that can be done, outside of firing a couple ABM's at it.
Obviusly, yes. Yes I would divert it to a small town.
Willful inaction is a choice like any other. Anyone who chooses not to save one million people isn't being moral, they are trying simply trying to stick their head in the ground and pretend they are powerless. They feel like if they don't directly affect the situation that somehow makes them innocent.
Just toss coin and do what it say.
Hi, /his/.
I know that american soldiers executed SS guards at Dachau and probably other prison camps even though the SS had surrendered, and that's already bad, but did the american High Command ever give the order to summarily kill any SS they meet, even if they surrendered?
I've heard that SS were considered all war criminals by default and that the angloamericans just killed them on the spot. Is that true?
If it is, what evidence we have for that order? When was it emanated and by whom?
>>1249704
>and that's already bad
But it isn't, anon. It's very much a good deserving of medals and fame.
>>1249704
The SS were the workers and commanders or Death Camps, whose sole purpose was murder of unarmed noncombatants. That seems like a good reason.
>inb4 holocaust denial
Convert me, /his/. I need a religion other than agnosticism
Atheism
>>1246497
>ifunny.com
>>1246508
this
at least stick to your guns in not believing in sky daddy instead of being a pussy
>The women and children were locked in the church and the village was looted. The men were led to six barns and sheds, where machine guns were already in place.
According to a survivor's account, the SS men then began shooting, aiming for their legs. When victims were unable to move, the Nazis covered them with fuel and set the barns on fire. Only six men managed to escape. One of them was later seen walking down a road and was shot dead. In all, 190 Frenchmen died.
Okay, there's french resistance here and you fucking hate them.
>The SS men next proceeded to the church and placed an incendiary device beside it. When it was ignited, women and children tried to escape through the doors and windows, only to be met with machine-gun fire.
Fucking why? Where there accounts of women serving in the french resistance? Were the men outside not aware that women and children were in the church and they just blew it up on accident?
This is embarrassing.
because Germans are cockroaches
Horrible shit happens in wars, all sides do the worst shit imaginable.
Humans are scum.
>>1252058
Dropping a 2 ton napalm bomb into a weapons factory isn't the same thing as gathering women and children into a church and lighting it on fire.