Was Gaddafi the most fashionable leader in recent history?
>>2985827
Yes
He was all over the place
Bedouin one day, afrikang the next, generic third world generalismo the third
>>2985827
Let's see. I see a Siberian ear muffs outfit, a green Africa BLM dashiki and a used Major General Stanley costume.
What went wrong? Why couldn't it work?
>>2985733
Hohenzollern and Habsburg autism ruined it
Decentralised to the point where it was literally a load of 'princes' fighting each other over farm houses
Bordergore
Do Northern Europeans even have a culture worth of that name?
>>2985627
Looks comfy
say that to my face
>>2985964
who is this
How do I get into the history books so I'll be remembered?
>>2985547
become autistic enough so people dedicated an entire wikipedia towards you
>>2985547
Burn down one of the wonders of the world.
CAPTCHA: arsons starke
>>2985547
assassinate a president or a culturally important person like a musician or actor
We are going to have a Debate at school with the quote "Spiritual but not religious" as an argument. There will be two groups; one that agrees and one that disagrees. I am with the one who agrees.
Any debaters in here to test with this topic?
Being "spiritual, but not religious" is, in fact, a real thing because other people tend to connect with their subconscious than talking to a superior being.
Religion can be thought of as spirituality with proscribed dogma
Can they exist, as in people who worship an ambiguous higher power? Sure...
But are they aligned with the truth? Could one have a concept of God as being within oneself and also has gone undiscovered? Is it not likely that out of the world religions that one of these have stumbled upon the truth by now?
>you will never have sex with Joan of Arc
I couldnt handle such a fiesty specimen anyways
Disgusting thread, Joan is pure.
>>2985271
Fine by me
Is this meme even true?
>>2985256
The former one wasn't in use in Europe and most of the Middle East anyways. Most just used regal years or the reigning monarch until some English monk decided we might as well use a standard system for all of Europe.
t. someone who lives in the 4th year of Willem-Alexander Claus George Ferdinand, Koning der Nederlanden, Prins van Oranje-Nassau, Jonkheer van Amsberg
Which would translate to the 65th year of Elizabeth II in England.
I guess you can imagine how confusing this gets in the modern world.
>>2985256
Were the Egyptians crucifying on ankhs?
Did Hitler have any friends?
>>2985218
>Mussolini
>Goebbels
>Himmler
>Goring
>Saburō
>Codreanu
Seemed fairly popular t.b.h
>>2985218
He could've made friends if he didn't constantly shit himself.
Historically speaking, what kind of advantages does the EU have from its relationship with the United States?
The reason I ask is because you often see leftists cite European policies in defense of a more socialist approach in the USA. But I always wonder just how much of it is simply possible because they do not have to make the same investments in military, defense research, intel, and in many cases even medicine. I don't know how much Europe does this but in places like Canada, a FDA approval pretty much supersedes any domestic approval process they would have to do otherwise. So there is no capital investment to research the safety and efficacy since the USA just does it.
>>2985178
You're right about the military part, but that's basically it. The medicine part is particularly hilarious because here in Europe your FDA is considered a fucking joke.
First of all the EU isn't a country, it doesn't have any sort of unified social or defence projects let alone a common budget, so stop that.
Second of all the "we can't have social spending because we have to pay for yuropoor defence" is bullshit. France for instance has one of the most extensive social systems in Europe, and yet also has the most powerful military, and doesn't rely on the US for its defence in the least.
>>2985363
Yea the FDA is a fucking joke lol. Europe has much more stringent standards.
Was he the greatest diplomat ever?
>>2984991
>I hate krauts who disagree with me but I hate other countries even more
>t: otto von bismarck
Truly.
Nah the greatest diplomats met at the Congress of Vienna m8, 1814-5 was like the wrestlemania of diplomats.
>Austria
Represented by Prince Metternich, a tactful man who though being challenged by Russian Tsar Alexander to a duel, managed to cement Austria's position in the negotiations and thus a great power in the 19th century.
>UK
Led by Viscount Castlereagh (Later Wellington but he had to go fight Napoleon), the man who came up with the congress system which would be the base plate for the congress of Berlin, League of Nations, and eventually the UN through the concept of collective security.
>Russia
Headed by Tsar Alexander, who wanted Poland and to suppress Secular Republicanism, both of which he succeeded in doing.
>Prussia
Karl August von Hardenberg was the front man who embodied Prussia, whilst he failed in his dream to dismember France he did succeed in bringing Prussia, Austria, and Russia into an anti French alliance despite being lesser to that of Metternich.
>France
Represented by the most electrifying diplomat in all of historical entertainment (And this is coming from a Perfidious Anglo) France had the greatest diplomat of all, Talleyrand. This motherfucker flipped the Congress of Vienna on its head and despite everyone in Europe out for blood against the French, he secured not only their position as a great power in the 19th century, but also managed to maneuver France into the great powers negotiations changing the "Big Four" to the "Big five." He gathered support from all the lesser nations and used it as diplomatic leverage against the Great powers and not only that but he preyed on the shortcomings of the Russo-Prussian-Austrian alliance to make a secret treaty with UK and Austria against Russia and Prussia spelling the end of the anti French sentiment before it had even been acted upon. Whats more he secured Frances borders to its 1792 state without having to pay anything to the Coalition powers.
Truly Politics is now shit.
>>2984991
I don't know about "ever", but he certainly was great.
Stop saying atheists go to hell.
With all due respect, i never said that.
>>2984929
>I can do whatever I want and still get into heaven
hooray for a liberal pope
>>2985440
pr*testant pope*
I want to know everything about ww1 and ww 2 and i mean everything from the allies and axis' sides. can you help me out /his/?
>>2984918
Fuck off poohead, i hop yu get raped by a huge niger ape
its almost impossible
its tens if not hundreds of thousands of pages
ive read several thousands pages just about "minor" military operations of the wehrmacht and the waffen SS, and thats just 1 author /operation, theres probably more about well known ones
tone it down boy, be a bit more specific or start with seeing an overview if you lack that
>>2984918
You're gonna have a hell of hard time cause there's just waay to much to cover in depth. But start with something like the Cambridge History of WW1 and WW2.
Read them and then continue your research into whatever you find most interesting from each period.
How accuratly is the Holy Roman Empire represented in EU4?
> Europa
> Universalis
> 4
not very, maybe at the early start date but to thats it
even geographically its not, it was a clusterfuck, you cant model it with autism
its a great game, but dont get your knowledge from there
>>2984903
100% scientifically accurate.
Post-grad thread?
I'm 6 months into my history phd and wondering if there's anyone in here who is actually a researcher or if this is all just shitposting from "history buffs".
My research is WW1 Australian generals on the Western Front, anyone else doing something good?
>>2984847
You have to read actual history books to be a (post)grad history student; you can't cite YouTube videos or charts from /pol/. Besides, as /pol-with-dates/ there's a lot of conspiracies about academia here.
>>2984888
So that'd be a no then?
I haven't spent a lot of time on /his/ because every time I look at the catalog it's a crapshoot of Hitler, racism and varying flavours of Christianity threads.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of accurate historical knowledge being shared, just a lot of faux-history being used to justify political feelings.
Pretty shitty.
>>2984906
Yes, and instead of trying to better the board you make some pseudo-blog thread to bitch about how shit the board is.
If you're the average representation of someone "knowledgeable", I'd much rather take an enthusiastic amateur.
Is there any difference between insane cults and more official religions?
>>2984830
The backing of state power.
Truthiness of the religions
1) Hinduism - I think the Upanishads contain some truth. They then formed a wild mythology to explain the rest of reality.
2) Buddhism - A man thinks he discovers enlightenment, and probably understood some truths of the meditative path, but was entirely wrong about emptiness.
3) Judaism - Monotheistic but folklore religion. People claimed to speak for God for political aims.
4) Christianity - Jesus was the Son of God and the gospel contains his truth.
5) Islam - Muhammad saw what Jesus did and decided to steal his truth to further his political agenda.
Most cults are either delusional or facetious to further some personal agenda.
>>2984834
/thread