Where I live would be the spot where the war will first start, So I would have the choices of being a slave or a part of a resistance group. I would choose to fight the evil commies.
same here…
North Korea
-
No, 22 Chinese divisions crossed the Yalu River, which is the border between Manchuria and North Korea during the Korean War when Macarthur’s forces approached the river.
-
ah
-
Macarthur also wanted to expand the war into China which is what led to Truman firing him from the military.
-
yah, that and dropping the Bomb… :-?
-
If MacArthur had his way, the six major bridges accross the Yalu River would have been take out six weeks previous to the Red invasion of 300,000 soldiers…
-
Well, we’ll never know how it would have turnedo ut.
-
@city:
If MacArthur had his way, the six major bridges accross the Yalu River would have been take out six weeks previous to the Red invasion of 300,000 soldiers…
mcaurther was still alive?
-
Yes, eh was alive but his carrer wouldn’t be for much longer…
-
Yes, eh was alive but his carrer wouldn’t be for much longer…
-
and he was still in the army?
-
MacArthur was the most decorated man in US Military History. :)
-
he was eh. didnt know that
-
Before the first punic war, Rome had no navy. They then captured a stranded carthagan galley, took it apart, and rebuilt lots of them, inventing the “raven” to turn sea-battles into land battles. So, Rome turned it into “army on rafts”, but before it was ramming and/or setting enemies ships on fire.
This is Roman myth which was recorded as history
-
This is Roman myth which was recorded as history
GRIN
well, give me evidence that it is a myth then….
and what the real situation was, with proof.
or (being unfair now, perlase ignore if you like:) is it a myth a proven as the bible is none ;) ? -
Let me explain,
What I was stating was the opinion I have seen that it is unlikely that the Romans suddenly built a powerful navy out of scratch. However, I can’t remember where I read it, so I will yield the point.
However, this is different than the bible.
-
What I was stating was the opinion I have seen that it is unlikely that the Romans suddenly built a powerful navy out of scratch. However, I can’t remember where I read it, so I will yield the point.
AFAIR: the building of the navy in such a short time has indirect proof…. they have cut the wood from their penninsula, a massive change in the ecosystem that (still afair) can be traced back.
ANd of course: “unlikely” is hardly enough to qualify something as a myth… it should be “very unlikely” at least :)However, this is different than the bible.
yup.
-
It is just as much fact as Hector’s stand or the founding of Rome in 762 B.C. by Romulus and Remus.
For Roman historians, myths and any good stories were legitimate history.
How do you know all of that wood was cut in an extremley short period of time?
-
It is just as much fact as Hector’s stand or the founding of Rome in 762 B.C. by Romulus and Remus.
For Roman historians, myths and any good stories were legitimate history.
Please, to bring back the bible. You accept it as history, but take this above as myth? Why is there a difference, and which?
How do you know all of that wood was cut in an extremley short period of time?
It takes much longer for trees to regrow. Plus: depending on the soil where the trees stood before, they might not grow back at all, if you have…. ack… if you lose the soil through the influence of wind and water.
Another example:
We still can tell (here in northern germany) that the Hanse built a lot of ships during the medieval age. The ecosystem created by that is just slowly growing back to be a forest. -
The Romans never considered their histories to be divinely inspired or even accurate.
Unlike the Christians, Jews, Muslims.
-
The Romans never considered their histories to be divinely inspired or even accurate.
Unlike the Christians, Jews, Muslims.
Well, i guess they considered it accurate to a point.
But then, we are talking of todays historians and their work to recover the truth out of what survived. And if you look there, you will find more evidence for “Rome had no navy before the first Punic war” than not.And that is what we where talking about. You called that a myth, while somewhere else claimed the bible to be true. The evidence for the history of the romans is there, and less controversly discussed than any evidence for the historical correctness of descriptions found in the bible.
Suggested Topics
