Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 625. page

>>3076996
Basic bitch contrarianism. Everyone's heard of Rommel, most normies have never heard of Guderian.

>>3076996
Rommel is overrated. Majority of people that jerk off to Rommel don't even know shit about him lmao.

Guderian and Manstein underrated.

>>3077006
Or perhaps he was a really bad Field Marshal?

What for? It's just a made up popo written in english but another alphabet

>>3076984
Incorrect. It goes deeper than that.

>>3076977
something something coffee

>>3076890
A black guy fucked his wife

>>3076890
"It means that white people invented racism and slavery." - Professor Goldstein

File: Anglo-Saxons about Africa.jpg (80KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 850x400px

>>3076890

>>3076823
moderated nepotism is better than unmoderated

>>3076823
It is and it's not a bad thing as long it doesn't coast efficiency.

>>3076823
It has exceptions. We had a client who wrote into his Trust that none of his relatives would ever work for the company he built up. (multi-billion dollar company)

>village burns non-Christians
>they weren't adhearing to MY version of christianity
>REAL christianity never existed

File: 1450049853307.jpg (99KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 413x395px

Remember kids, it's only communism when it works. Otherwise it's revisionist totalitarianism. It' only socialism when it works. Otherwise it's state capitalism. However everything else is imperialism or capitalism. There are many flavors of imperialism and capitalism. There's only one communism. There's only one socialism.

>>3076784
No true Scotsman fallacy. Literally all of those regimes self-identified as communists. You don't get to impose your classification on them.

>>3076780
>lose 99% of your land in Europe
>move the capital from Europe to Asia
>claim to be European

They controlled european land at the time, and they still do control a part of it, that's why they were called the sick man of Europe. They're still not european though

>>3076780
Why exactly did they join the great war? I fail to see how the ottomans were going to benefit from getting involved.

>>3076664
He convinced himself that he was a master strategist. When many of his generals warned that France might not fall easily, when indeed it did, he thought he knew better than his generals.

>>3076664
Then you haven't done much research, in fact, I've doubt you've done any research.

How did Hitler fuck up El Alamein? Yelnya? Torch? Husky? Avalanche? Dragoon? Bagration? Jassny-Kishniev? Crusader? Vyzama?

>letting the British escape in Dunkirk just to show his Generals who's the boss
This is wrong. Both Von Rundstedt and Von Kluge recommended the halt order. How exactly was Hitler "Showing them who's the boss" by agreeing with their recommendations?

>or literally sleeping while the Allies invaded Normandy.
As opposed to doing what? Launching an immediate counterattack that very notably failed when they tried that at Salerno?

>>3076664
Hitler had no major tactical disagreements with his general staff until 1943, at that point the war was over.

>>3076587

I'm not sure if it is accurate to say that people read more. Literacy rates in general were much lower back then. It might be accurate, however, to say that people who could read, did read more often. Especially women, because they didn't have jobs back then so they had to have filled up their day somehow.

>>3076587
TVs were only owned by the rich, so there was a lot more reading, sports, card games, etc. going on.

>>3076587
People were more social. And there was a lot more busy work to do around town because there was no internet. You had to go to the post office and bank quite often, for example.

I don't know if I would call him the best but he is pretty GOAT tier.

For me The leviathan feels a tad defeatist, but i can understand why his theories are popular.

OP why Hobbes?

>>3076470

Rome's intricate web of alliances tended to bail them out of any situation they couldn't handle themselves. During the Republican era, Rome's strength wasn't that they were necessarily better fighters, but rather the sheer number of men that they could deploy, and the speed with which they could deploy them. However, this is not very "unexpected" as it was a carefully maintained web of alliances that made this possible.

A better example would be assistance of Russia to the United States during the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln was able to work out a deal with the Czar that the Russian navy would defend northern ports while the American navy was busy blockading the south. There was a real fear that Britain would take advantage of the civil war to raid north harbors, and the Russian navy presence helped make sure that this didn't occur. During this period, the Russian navy also performed general anti-piracy work that US navy would normally perform. Both Russian and the United States weren't very fond of Britain at the time, so it was very much a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" sort of deal.

>>3076470
I don't know the numbers, but during the War of 1812, Andrew Jackson had to hastily assemble a force to protect New Orleans. There were regular military types, but the folklore makes it sound like the force was this motley crew of soldiers, pirates, Indians, free blacks, and others who volunteered to repel the British.

We are part of the same normiebook group

>>3076437
The Carthaginians were from modern day Lebanon and intermarried with various North Africans, so they would look like MENA people today. While it's possible there were Sub-Saharan Africans in the military, it's doubtful Hannibal or any other Carthaginians were Sub-Saharan.

>>3076437
SADLY THERE ARE NO CARTHAGINIAN SAMPLES AVAILABLE... WHAT A SHAME!

File: 1499170601366.jpg (71KB, 700x426px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 700x426px

>>3076437
Like this , this is your average carthaginian

File: samaritan-israelite.jpg (222KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1024x683px

>>3076434
They have a much cooler looking Hebrew too.

>>3076434
Looks like an Arab

File: samaritan.jpg (51KB, 549x771px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 549x771px

>>3076492
>samaritans
>look like arabs

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>3076382
I can tell you the Nagant is a piece of shit.
A direct downgrade from the Smith and Wessons they had issued earlier except for "muh smokeless" and "muh suppressors"
>t. 1944 Nagant owner

>>3076382

Japanese rifles during WW2 were generally of excellent quality until the American submarine campaign took its toll.

Japanese rifles were typically of excellent quality and were rugged. Apparently the Japanese soldiers loved them. Once the USA started winning quality dipped sharply towards the end of the war.

>>3076294
Somewhere in the 1600s or 1700s gunpowder weapons rendered even the thickest wearable armor (4 mm) ineffective. It wasn't all at once, though.

>>3076294
Never; effective body armour has always existed. It just went through periods of being either too impractical or too expensive to use. Most if not all modern armies are equipped with armour that can stop rifle rounds.

>>3076294
I mean. We still have Kevlar vests and helmets in the modern day that are fairly effective. I think even some Soviet shock troops in WWII sometimes wore bulky ceramic armor if thats the kind of stuff you want.

>>3076244
Judging from how the war was run it's more accurate to say that Russians are good at killing Russians.

>>3076244
They're both mongols

>>3076244
That person in the picture isn't him though, that's a Swede.