Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Napoleon. Not only was he one of the most successful military commanders of all time he was also a great lawgiver and one of the best rulers France has ever had. The Napoleonic Code is still what French law is based upon. I read somewhere that after he became first consul he spent something like 80% of his time on non-military matters although that is not what he is remembered for. As to his military abilities how amazing are his achievements when one considers that he was essentially fighting everybody else in Europe throughout his career and almost consistently beat them.
It has been a lifelong dream for me to see Gettysburg. We are traveling to Boston before we fly to Germany in a month and I told my wife that we absolutely have to spend a day at Gettysburg.
Here is a little gem I found today while trolling the web. How Dark Was It? A New History of Medieval Europe This guy does a pretty god job of dispelling the myth of the Dark Ages.
What do the stars under our name mean? I notice some people have one and some five, I am just curious if they mean anything or are they just random?
I think, but may be incorrect that only those Norsemen from present day Norway and Sweden were actually called Vikings. I believe that the Danes were always called by their national name, as well as the Normans. Normandy is named for the Normans who settled there, not the other way around. It is only in later histories that Viking became a catch-all term for any early medieval Scandinavian Raiders.
It is the old saying all over again. “Bureaucracy begets still more bureaucracy”. It is also why the government will never get smaller, There is something wrong with a country when the national government is the single largest employer even when the military and law enforcement is subtracted from the government workforce
Indeed, the science is confusing, isn't it? This is why I've regularly taken the position that the earth is such a complexity that when we add solar influences on it there is really no way we can know with great certainty what is going on. This is the same with all science, but less complex systems are easier to understand. It may or may not be the case that "man-made climate change" is going on but I don't see how we can be very certain in our understanding if we haven't even defined all the variables involved.So a few years ago when I heard certain people claim that the issue of global warming was "closed" and not up for further debate I couldn't but help think that they were trying to pull the greatest political stunt - stifle discussion about scientific inquiry which one would think naturally demands discussion (i.e. continued scientific inquiry).
Wholeheartedly agree with you. GW is no longer science, now it is politics with a thin, very thin, scientific mantle.
I agree with Plato that the best form of government is a benevolent dictatorship. The biggest and insuperable obstacle to this form of government is the problem of succession.
What I find to be the most relevant to my specialty is that it was the 1848 revolutions that led to the Prussian king granting a constitution with minimal representation. Granted, the Prussian constitution after 1848 was only eye candy with little substance but it was a start. Gordon Craig does an excellent analysis of the effects of 1848 on Prussia in his history of the Prussian Army.
Speaking loosly here, but I am thinking the Japenese spyed us really good after WW2. The Germans too, and comes modern developement, et cetera. Oh, and Vice Versa. We learn by beating down adversaries, and yes, we still learn, but we have not learned that beating an oppenent yields anything. I suppose that makes us stipid.Glad I am not stipid. But we did get beat in Viet Nam, and stipid commanders insured it. Now we are in Iraq, stipid as that seems. Stipid is, stipid does. Oh, well. Glad we are not stipid.
huh? First what is Stipid i.e. definition please? If you mean stupid then your post is self-defeating.Second, I don't see what you are driving at by claiming the US has failed to learn lessons. What lessons?
Given Israel's geographic position in the midst of enemies, I would think that it would be weary about getting on the bad side of its big friend in the West. I agree that we probably spy on the British, French, etc., and they probably spy on us as well. But Israel is in a different position.
Why should the rules of the game be any different for Israel?
Isn't an even better question, why wouldn't they? Surely this only proves that they are not so naive as to think we tell them everything. If I were their leader I would probably sanction their spying on the US. Is it really believable that we don't spy on our own allies? I would be willing to bet that we spy on the British, French, Germans, Israeli's, etc.The only problem is that they sometimes get caught.
Yeah, but in a way (and I'm no scientist nor do I have much interest in it) it doesn't seem like science in and of itself is infected, it's when people outside science politicize it.
But are not some of the scientists going along with it's politicization? Else how do you explain the list of scientists claiming we are killing the planet? Everybody wants their 15 mintues.
