Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Easier in the sense that you're more likely to survive? Yes, I'd say so, and this is true for any number of reasons (diplomacy, military strategies, etc).
To answer your previous question – no, I haven't seen any distinct traffic from it. Someone can search Google and in the search results you can find some links to this forum. What you'd see in the results title is the subject of the post itself. In fact, we already get some decent traffic from Google as it stands.
Wow…..and I'm just sitting here with my piddly 2000 or so that I won while playing! I don't think I can add a higher amount but I can add some additional games if need be.
That's pretty brutal – they were shot for supposed “cowardice”. This during an age when soldiers would perhaps be sent in waves against an enemy's bullets. We should be thankful that militaries have changed their tactics since.
You guessed right. Congratulations! You can see more about the pics below:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:AssasinationPresGarfield.JPGhttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Garfield_assassination_engraving.jpg
Stumpfoot, I think that if that were true Saudi Arabia would be less of a center base for terrorism and/or Islamo-fascism. I think this was at the heart of Skiguy's question. I'm not sure that it's the wealth that causes nations to be friendly to the West, but rather the socio-political structure that does this. The economy, though, likely has some influence on nations' friendliness to the West.
Here is another image that was probably in the same series (looks like the same artist). It describes the same event.
This is a good question. The answer might lie with freedom of religion; in Saudi Arabia Islam is the official religion and the practice of other religions, including Christianity, is against the law. In the UAE Christian and other churches exist.Since cities like Mecca are in Saudi Arabia, the religion is probably more entrenched in Saudi Arabia and militants therefore probably have a greater stronghold there. Since the UAE is the third wealthiest nation on earth and has its fortune tied to the international market, Islam probably doesn't have as great of an influence there on daily or political life.
The fact that he relinquished the Presidency after his appointed term was up, is remarkable in of itself.
I could be wrong but I thought he lost a primary...
Really, what would we do if it weren't on topic? It's not as if there is some punisher waiting on the wings for someone to post something in the wrong topic. The Recent History area seems the best place for modern political stuff; there's a board for general history questions that don't fit into other areas; and I suppose if you have a question on non-Western Civ stuff (e.g. history of China, Japan, etc.) it would be ok to post it in the General History area as well. Of course if you have something non-history or non-political you can always post it in the Roman Senate area. I don't want you to think you're doing something wrong if you post something in the wrong area….at this point the forum is somewhat organic.
Well I removed the link from the guy here in his post. Copying and pasting the same text around the internet, linking back to one's site, and doing it all for commercial reasons suggest that it's the equivalent of spam, even if it relates to a degree with this forum in general. I agree about the ICQ field and the nature of links. SMF has some pretty darn good ways to keep robot spammers from posting; once I posted them I don't think I've had a single robot spammer sign up or post - even in areas where guests can post. I don't know if the same can be implemented for phpbb.
It seemed like Ford was perhaps the least conspicuous president in the second half of the Twentieth Century. His years in office did not seem to be as notable as those of other presidents, such as Nixon before him. He also did not seem to be as active in public life after his term was over.
Well, he's not a robot since he was able to write in “Qin Dinesty [sic]” as his historical period of choice. However, I did a search for his name and I see that he kind of pasted the same message around on other forums and stuff. Maybe it's just that I'm so used to dealing with robot spammers that when human spammers come around I breath a sigh of relief. 🙂
It appears that the answer to your question is “yes”. I have found that Martin Luther's views on Jews were brought up by Nazi Julius Streicher during the Nuremburg Trials, that over a hundred synagogues burned on Kristallnacht (similar to Martin Luther's call), and that his views were cited as justification for the Final Solution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_their_Lies#Impact_on_Nazi_ideologyHowever, here is a possible difference between Martin Luther's views and those of Hitler:
While there is little doubt that Christian anti-Semitism laid the social and cultural basis for modern anti-Semitism, modern anti-Semitism does differ in being based on pseud-scientific notions of race. The Nazis imprisoned and killed Jews who had converted to Christianity: Luther would have welcomed them.
