History discussion - no, hitler has never seeked the spear of destiny - General

So after orkel gently reminded us in [url=http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1245439]this thread[/url] that discussing history on an irrelevant topic is indeed considered derailing, I've decided to create a thread in hope that the gentlemen who enjoy speaking of historical events will come here and do this here. As you may have guessed the point of this thread is to general discuss and/or ask questions about more or less recent historical events. If you want some precisions on some specific era or some specific event as viewed by some country in particular, this is probably the place where you should look for them. Or you can just argue that hitler was a military genius and that napoleon had a tiny dick, whatever, do what you like really. Just so we can have some sort of starting topic, I'll go ahead and respond to something from the thread I mentioned. [QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39497943][QUOTE=Ganerumo;39497484]Also I would argue that the biggest war we ever lost was the War of Algeria, because not only were we defeated, but we also started the war to begin with, we did the worst things in it and the entire thing was just downright cruel. WW2 was a big defeat at first but we actually won it in the end, thanks to the resistance and De Gaulle (without him, we would have been part of the occupied countries just like Germany). The war of Algeria was just a massive fiasco which pretty much exterminated the reputation of France in Africa for a very long time. Thankfully Hollande has recently showed up and clearly admitted France's responsibility in the war and it was really appreciated among the people of Algeria. [/QUOTE] algeria was pathetic because you basically surrendered even when you had won a strategic and tactical victory[/quote] Algeria was a defeat because it was a war of terror against a people that only asked for freedom. We pretty much just sent the army there and asked them to do police work, which ended up in torture and basic executions. We behaved like this because after the huge moral annihilation that was WW2 we needed something glorious to grasp to, and the sight of Algeria and others colonies as proof that the French colonial empire still existed and was actually strong was good enough. When the people of Algeria actually started to rebel and ask for independence, it turned to shit pretty fast.

oh boy I can't wait for itsjustguy vs. Conscript round ∞

Oh cool a history a thread, always wanted one of these, never figured there'd be enough interest to keep one alive. Too bad I know jack-all about French colonial history. Maybe if it hits a Medieval period I'll be all over it.

History is my favorite subject in school, particularly the early 1800s. On another note, shouldn't the title be "No, Hitler never sought the spear of destiny" or "No, Hitler had never sought the spear of destiny"? It sounds weird the way it's worded now.

Who did a better job of expanding their influence - the British Empire or the Soviets? [sp]My money is on the British[/sp]

dinosaurs were bros with the cavemen right?

[QUOTE=J$ Psychotic;39510583]Who did a better job of expanding their influence - the British Empire or the Soviets? [sp]My money is on the British[/sp][/QUOTE] British. The British state has existed for roughly 3 centuries (if we discount the Irish leaving) and has done a pretty good job of spreading their language and setting up states across the world. India and the United States are two obvious countries that were heavily influenced by the British. The USSR only really managed to exist for about 3/4 of a century. Half of their existence was spent on struggling to survive and working on making a massive army. (and for much of it, most countries did not officially recognize them). The second half was basically watching it collapse in slow motion.

since Mesopotamia was with the cavemen, that means that Abraham probably knew dinosaurs right? or even Gilgamesh

[QUOTE=weedscopes;39510714]since Mesopotamia was with the cavemen, that means that Abraham probably knew dinosaurs right? or even Gilgamesh[/QUOTE] Indisputable. Btw, Jesus never existed. Muhammad didn't write the Koran and it is doubtful if he existed. Also the history of the Palestine and Israel from the bible is mostly invented.

What is with the improper use of the term longbowman in fantasy? There seems to be this massive misconception that the term archer and longbowman are interchangeable which is entirely false. The longbowman were far more highly trained troops even when they were first introduced into the ranks of English armies (late 13th century or perhaps early 14th?). To my understanding they were usually recruited from free landowners and farmers (also known as yeoman) making them much bigger and healthier than the average peasant. This added strength allowed them to use the MASSIVE longbow (which it's draw strength could be up to 180lbs). Also I believe at some point during the 14th century the longbowman began being trained in hand to hand combat making them some of the toughest motherfuckers on the field... Not all archers are longbowman and longbowman are not just archers, simple as that. Now honestly this whole misconception is a whole lot of nothing to most people I assume, but it gets me just about as riled as when someone refers to your average (medieval) soldier as a man-at-arms... Because a little investiagtion will find that there is a distinct difference.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39510743]Indisputable. Btw, Jesus never existed. Muhammad didn't write the Koran and it is doubtful if he existed. Also the history of the Palestine and Israel from the bible is mostly invented.[/QUOTE] Jesus existed but its debatable if he was Gods son/the messiah I don't know much about Islam but it could have been written by Muhammad/any prophet who received the word of god. The bible doesn't say shit about Palestine, only israel.

[QUOTE=weedscopes;39510868]Jesus existed but its debatable if he was Gods son/the messiah[/QUOTE] His existence is entirely debatable.

[QUOTE=weedscopes;39510868] The bible doesn't say shit about Palestine, only israel.[/QUOTE] iirc, The bible only refers to Palestine as a region

Never invade Russia during winter.

[QUOTE=Rammaster;39511121]Never invade Russia during winter.[/QUOTE] "Never start a land war in Russia" [editline]7th February 2013[/editline] Other than the Mongols (who just had better stuff than anyone else in that region), no one has successfully conquered Russia.

[QUOTE=weedscopes;39510868]Jesus existed but its debatable[/QUOTE] No sources record him by name until many years after he died. He is also not on any census records and no record of his death is recorded from the time. [quote]I don't know much about Islam but it could have been written by Muhammad/any prophet who received the word of god.[/quote] It wasn't. It was compiled in the late 7th century, and all other copies of the book were ordered to be burned or boiled. Muhammad himself does not appear in any biography until a century after he died, and even that biography has no existing copies. The first physical documents to record the life of Muhammad were written a few decades after that biography too. The Koran also may have been written originally in Aramaic, which resulted in massive problems when scholars tried to translate it wholly to Arabic, messing it up along the way.

am i the only one who sincerely thinks there's a possibility hitler lived past ww2? if anyone in history was going to have a solid escape plan, it would be hitler, the only remains found turned out to be female, and his followers were probably loyal enough to come up with a solid story of the events surrounding his "suicide" to recite to authorities after the war. If I had to place money on it, I'd say he killed himself, but there's always that possibility.

Pretty sure the soviets found Hitler's skull outside his bunker in Berlin, I think that is pretty definative proof that he died there.

[QUOTE=Winters;39511646]Pretty sure the soviets found Hitler's skull outside his bunker in Berlin, I think that is pretty definative proof that he died there.[/QUOTE] dna tests showed it was female [url]http://abcnews.go.com/WN/hitler-skull-russian-secret-service-custody/story?id=9288287[/url]

I know i'm gonna sound a bit fucked up here but I think hitler was a pretty cool guy except for that jew thing and all.

Anybody who doesn't think that the cold war is the most interesting history topic ever can get the fuck out of this thread.

History majors holla Also can we have a thread rule to not bring up Hitler unless it specifically pertains to a subject we're already talking about?

[QUOTE=thefreeman;39512024]Anybody who doesn't think that the cold war is the most interesting history topic ever can get the fuck out of this thread.[/QUOTE] WW1 is much more interesting.

History majors uniteee

[QUOTE=AWarGuy;39512271]WW1 is much more interesting.[/QUOTE] WW1 is interesting, but the Cold War East V.S West North V.S south is what takes the cake.

[QUOTE=Winters;39510857]What is with the improper use of the term longbowman in fantasy?[/QUOTE] Longbowman as we know them were made up of English peasant levies and contracted soldiers. Thanks to various English archery laws all peasants were required to practice archery on Sundays and own a longbow and a padded shirt (I believe) in case of war. Upper classes were more often recruited as Men-At-Arms, who usually fought mounted, though during the Hundred Years War the English dismounted them to use in their now famous battles, Crecy, Poiters, and of course Agincourt. Longbowmen were not trained much after being called up or contracted as they were expected to already have the required skills to fight. Perhaps some work identifying officers and getting a rhythm down for massed volleys, but not much formal training. Hatchets, daggers, and the mallets they used to hammer their stakes made up their hand-to-hand armament. Their only real bonus was that they attacked after the enemy, usually plated knights or mail-wearing infantry, had been worn out, either by allied troops, arrow fire, or both. They were quick and not as tired as the enemy, not better skilled. Their use as jack-of-all trades bowmen in fantasy can easily be attributed to the fact that, for the most part, longbowmen were the average archer of an English host. Aside from men from Gascony and Normandy, most English archers were longbowmen. And since we live in a world where fantasy is [I]extremely[/I] heavily influenced by Medieval England, it's obvious that the English longbowman would fill the archers role in said fantasy. Honestly, all that makes a longbowman a longbowman is the bow. The training regimen is optional. If you have an army, say one from the [I]Ice and Fire[/I] series, and they deploy archers armed with longbows, they are longbowmen. By the way, if anyone is interested in the history of the Hundred Years War, I have to suggest [url=http://www.amazon.ca/The-Hundred-Years-War-1337-1453/dp/0140283617/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1360292656&sr=8-5]this book[/url]. It was a cracking good read that kept me engaged the whole way through.

History major here too. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;39511299]No sources record him by name until many years after he died. He is also not on any census records and no record of his death is recorded from the time. [/QUOTE] Romans didn't keep a census like modern nations do today. Even if they did, it would most likely focus on Roman citizens, not second class natives of conquered region. And even on top of that, odds that such a census would survive 2,000 years is rather difficult. The simple lack of written records of some poor beggar Jew that got executed with a bunch of other criminals isn't a great weight toward absolute unexistence. [editline]7th February 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=AWarGuy;39512271]WW1 is much more interesting.[/QUOTE] Especially the Eastern and Mesopotamian Fronts.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39512587]Romans didn't keep a census like modern nations do today. Even if they did, it would most likely focus on Roman citizens, not second class natives of conquered region. And even on top of that, odds that such a census would survive 2,000 years is rather difficult. The simple lack of written records of some poor beggar Jew that got executed with a bunch of other criminals isn't a great weight toward absolute unexistence.[/QUOTE] Except the area was a very well recorded one at that point in time. Jerusalem was a center of learning to boot. That no contemporary source ever mentions him (given that from the bible he was apparently very popular, or at least popular enough to be warranted a mention in a book), it seems strange that a prophet who was crucified would not warrant any real mentions. People wrote graffiti all the time, and extensive records were kept for administration purposes. Yet not a single mention of a jesus who was crucial tp a judeo-christian sect seems to appear anywhere.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39512879]Yet not a single mention of a jesus who was crucial tp a judeo-christian sect seems to appear anywhere.[/QUOTE] They wouldn't have called him Jesus during his lifetime; I think that name was applied by the people writing the gospels after he died. I think his given name was "Yeshua" but I'd have to check to be sure. The reason a prophet who was crucified warranted no mentions was because there were [I]tons [/I]of people claiming to be prophets, and a lot of them had followings, and a whole lot of them got crucified. Jesus's following just happened to get bigger and spread into Rome and eventually become the dominant religion of the world for centuries. I think that there's probably a kernel of truth to Jesus's historiocity; why would a group of people get together and say "Yeah, let's make up a guy who lived 30 years ago and base ourselves on his life!"? There probably was a guy named Jesus (or, ahem, Yeshua) that did stuff in Judea around 30 CE, but whether or not he did any of the stuff reported in the bible (and exactly how accurate the bible's account of the stuff he did do is) is the real question. [editline]a[/editline] (the answer to those questions are "maybe" and "probably not")

[QUOTE=TMBGFan;39513007]I think that there's probably a kernel of truth to Jesus's historiocity; why would a group of people get together and say "Yeah, let's make up a guy who lived 30 years ago and base ourselves on his life!"?[/QUOTE] Cults are pretty capable of this thing all the time. It just managed to grow and form loads of splinter cults until the late Roman Empire when people decided they should start forming a proper religion.