Punic Wars. They determined control of the Mediterranean and cemented Rome’s prime position for 600 years to come.
“Carthage must be destroyed!”- Cato the Elder
Next thing you know people on the street will say “Carthage must be destroyed!”
Cold war baby! How close we came to actually throwing nukes at each other will always fascinate me. My second choice would have been the “Star Wars” between the Star Trekkers and the Star Wars fans at Comic con that one year. :mrgreen:
“Carthage must be destroyed!”- Cato the Elder
And thus the soundbite was invented…
#726
Punic Wars. They determined control of the Mediterranean and cemented Rome’s prime position for 600 years to come.
“Carthage must be destroyed!”- Cato the Elder
Before there was Ali vs Frasier, there was Rome vs Carthage.
Next thing you know people on the street will say “Carthage must be destroyed!”
I sometimes say it to people on the street. It’s in the signature of all of my e-mails (and my AAA.org posts).
Another interesting war is the Greek and Persian wars. Themistocles and Leonidas are really interesting. I don’t know why but all of those ancient Mediterranean wars were really cool.
WW2, Cold war, War of Terror, Vietnam War, Korean War, and Middle eastern war all lead back to World war 1. Just think about it.
But I like WW2. BIGGEST WAR OF ALL TIME! Thats why A&A exists
As much rich history there is in Both Modern World Wars, I had to vote other. The reason is, I find the Vietnam War the most interesting because a Jungle dwelling 3rd world Nation Beat down and kicked around a modern Super power, using nothing more then AK -47’s, the jungle, and a few modern weapons supplied from out side influences.
One has to ask them selves, how does a nation that has to import all it’s weapons, compete with and win a fight against a country with a arsenal of weapons that includes Nuclear power and Nukes. I just don’t get it…
I understand the politics and politicians involved are a huge reason why the US lost that war. It surely was not the fighting will of the men involved or the equipment they used, but more when they(the Soldiers) were allowed and how to use said weapons.
Even by reading and or watching the book/movie we were soldiers, seeing how 375 US troops could fight off 4000 NVA is remarkable, but never the less makes that conflict more interesting then ever
@Deaths:
I find the Vietnam War the most interesting because a Jungle dwelling 3rd world Nation Beat down and kicked around a modern Super power, using nothing more then AK -47’s, the jungle, and a few modern weapons supplied from out side influences. One has to ask them selves, how does a nation that has to import all it’s weapons, compete with and win a fight against a country with a arsenal of weapons that includes Nuclear power and Nukes. I just don’t get it…Â
There are actually a few parallels between the Vietnam War and the American Revolutionary War. In both cases, a major power was fighting a war across thousands of miles of ocean, using a large regular army optimized for action on a conventional battlefield, against a somewhat ragtag group (at least initially) of local inhabitants who were fighting for independence and freedom from foreign colonial domination, and who made up for their material deficiencies in part by using irregular tactics and by exploiting their detailed knowledge of their home terrain. In a way it’s odd that the Americans, who won the Revolutionary War in the way I’ve described, didn’t seem to catch on to the fact that they were facing a similar situation in reverse during the Vietnam War.
The parallel isn’t the battlefield.
It’s the homefront.
Both wars were lost at home.
ok, then why did we at least get an cease fire out of Korea? That is also thousands miles from home. And it doesnt take 3 months to get there like the revolutionary war under British Sail power. I think US politicians were pussy’s and did not want to bomb Hanoi into submission like they could have if they would have stuck to their guns(bombs) as they say. I think the US could have won southern Vietnams independence if we were not always fighting with one hand tied behind their backs.
Maybe even a direct land invasion in the North from the Sea could have won that conflict. go right for Hanoi from the get go, get rid of Ho Chi Mihn and see what happens. Let the Northern peoples see what a Democracy could do for their country.
Iraq is still a mess, but its in better shape without Saddam, Could the same be said for Vietnam?
Again, the Ceasefire was because there wasn’t enough political will to finish the job.
That’s pretty obvious, otherwise the US would have nuked china, like General Mac wanted to, and you would have ended the conflict.
War lost at home, not in the field.
…otherwise the US would have nuked china, like General Mac wanted to, and you would have ended the conflict.
Yes ended that conflict and started WW3 with Russia, China’s ally at the time
What WW3?..Just because the U.S. was involved does not neccesariily mean it is another WW…I would call it rather a conflict between a Superpower and a greater Power…other then that ,it is that we are in round ??? of World Wars…
Just because USA nukes China and USSR NUKES USA and USA and NATO NUKE USSR and WARSAW Pact invades western Europe…. does not mean WW3?
What does killing 75% of the worlds population across the globe mean?
Population control?
@Imperious:
Just because USA nukes China and USSR NUKES USA and USA and NATO NUKE USSR and WARSAW Pact invades western Europe…. does not mean WW3?
What does killing 75% of the worlds population across the globe mean?
Population control?
That doesn´t justifies a World War if the parties involved only threatning each other!
as long as there is no actual Killing there is no World War , I´m not ignoring the present World wide situation, just trying to be realistic…I agree that there is a hidden War out there but Not a World War…According to the peresnt type of Flag the U.S. shows, she is still at war, but the Federal Russian flag shows a diffrent one.
@aequitas:
@Imperious:
Just because USA nukes China and USSR NUKES USA and USA and NATO NUKE USSR and WARSAW Pact invades western Europe…. does not mean WW3?
What does killing 75% of the worlds population across the globe mean?
Population control?
That doesn´t justifies a World War if the parties involved only threatning each other!
as long as there is no actual Killing there is no World War , I´m not ignoring the present World wide situation, just trying to be realistic…I agree that there is a hidden War out there but Not a World War…According to the peresnt type of Flag the U.S. shows, she is still at war, but the Federal Russian flag shows a diffrent one.
I think IL is referring to the Korean War that was mentioned before, not to the present situation.
So in 1951-53 do you not think the chance is greater of total war if we NUKE China and North Korea?
USSR is just gonna ignore its close ally and let China get NUKED?
Incorrect conclusion IMO.
It would be like USSR sending ICBM to England and we do nothing.
Not happening.
Y would we save England a third time? :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :roll:
and started WW3 with Russia, China’s ally at the time
Actually, I recall them NOT being that good of allies. You can read about that at a number of places on the internet.
ALSO Russia’s Nuclear Missles at that time, were incapable of reaching Continental USA (Hence why 10 years later missles in cuba “we would be living at the point of a gun” the missles became such a big deal).
So in short, NO I don’t think a nuclear bombing of china, would have started wwiii at the time.
Let´s assume that China or North Kora get Nuked by the U.S. ,I think the USSR would have no problem with it. They would send an Ambassador to the U.S. with congrats gifts and a simple note with: Thank you for Removing surgical that abscess from our “Behind”, one foe less!..China wasn´t in any pact and still is not in any, like North Korea…we would have an Intermezzo more likely when the U.S. would have had Nuked the Democrate German Rep. …
