Was it genocide?

>invade for no reason besides personal glory
>kill everyone

yes

>>3279975
Yes but genocide is always justified by the laws of nature.

>>3279975
>>3280006
I'm not even trying to be edgy. The only thing between me and getting wiped the fuck out is the thin veneer of civilization. I like my hotpockets and waifus.

>>3280006

>laws of nature

how does gravity or biology or geology morally justify genocide?

>>3280009
Biology justifies it. Red squirrels out-compete and displace grey squirrels. Ant colonies destroy other ant colonies. Aggressive African carp replace more docile native fish. One breed of people wipes out another in the eternal struggle of the natural world.

Some people justify what Caesar did as a defensive, preemptive invasion for Rome. I think they're right. Rome would have been fucked in a few generations by a stronger northern neighbor. He extended the life of Rome. He did it for selfish reasons, but he was right.

>>3279975
Do you see any Gauls around today?

>>3280018

>Biology justifies it. Red squirrels out-compete and displace grey squirrels. Ant colonies destroy other ant colonies. Aggressive African carp replace more docile native fish. One breed of people wipes out another in the eternal struggle of the natural world.

no, your narrow interpretation does. all organisms co-operate and have symbiotic relationships with each other to survive. l2ecology

>Some people justify what Caesar did as a defensive, preemptive invasion for Rome. I think they're right.

the historical consensus is that caesar did it for his own gain and it was an aggressive war of expansion.

>Rome would have been fucked in a few generations by a stronger northern neighbor.

there is 0 historical evidence to back up this scenario

>He extended the life of Rome.

caesar did nothing for the institutions and organisation of the roman state. augustus was the one who patched things up for the future

>He did it for selfish reasons, but he was right.
>i admit it was selfish and morally wrong, but it was right

what did he mean by this?

>>3280018
>Literary not knowing about the is-ought problem
How about finishing high-school before posting

>>3280055
>>He extended the life of Rome.
>caesar did nothing for the institutions and organisation of the roman state. augustus was the one who patched things up for the future
There was a mass migration at their borders. What would 300,000 barbarians do to Roman culture and cohesion?

>>3280020
Depends what you mean. I mean, the genes still exist right? Maybe you could say it just became one facet of another bigger group, the French.

File: 1503261186755.jpg (570KB, 2518x1024px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 2518x1024px

>>3279975
Nope

>>3279975
I like the Dan Carlin podcast too.

>>3280572
His dick is wonderful! Why did no one care about it?

>>3280058
>considering the 'is-ought' paradigm the sole approach to morality/ ethics
how about finishing an intro to ethics pamphlet before posting

>>3279975
I don't think the word 'genocide' can be used here as it is hard to tell exactly how many gauls there were and how many of them were killed. We only have little sources concerning the gaulish wars and they are AFAIK all from the roman perspective. If there were archaeological evidences for a 'genocide' I'm sure it would be known.

The process of assimilation that happened afterwards in Gaul, to make France a latin country was mostly cultural and not a replacement of population. Today, I believe most french people (except maybe in the south on the mediterranean coast) are genetically closer to ancient gauls than to ancient romans.

>>3279975
He bring civiliization, i don't remenber french being assblasted about.