Lets talk these dudes. Were they right? Wrong?
What were the main reasons for the demise of the Norse on Greenland? Is there currently a consensus among historians?
Let's have a serious discussion with out memes
What do you think about it?
I thinks both sides wanted to win for political motives, wherever won the war won the next term or keep in power
It´s amazing how close Argentina was to winning, or at least to inflict big damage to the task force
> Argie sub gets into firing position right under the fleet but torpedoes malfunction
> Skyhawks skim the waves to bomb the ships, dumb bombs don´t explode
>Argie sub gets into firing position right under the fleet but torpedoes malfunction
Fun fact, british used WW2 surplus torpedoes because their brand new hot shit they were proud of since 60's quite probably didn't work either because it wasn't even tested. They've had it for like 20 years and didn't test it properly.
What happened to the samurai culture that disappeared so quick in Japan after the arrive of the europeans?
Why did they stop being a thing?
Did any civilization not practice it at some point?
Is Rome overrated in the West so westerners can pretend to have a great history like Arabs and Chinese?
Low quality bait, Abdul.
Post the most noteworthy historical persons from your homecountry. Let's bash and insult each other's picks.
What was land of Hungary like and who lived there before the Magyar settled there?
>What was land of Hungary like
like shit for anyone who wasn't a part of nobility
and on top of that, as the WWI approached, they tried to culturally and linguistically destroy their minorities, who lived there before they moved in, which answers the other half of your question.
i wanna be Traditional.
It's served its purpose in the past but the increasing scientific development and individualism has rendered it pretty much useless. That said, buddhism lifestyle appeals to me even though I don't know dick about it.
Anyone have any good entry-tier buddhism books?
It is common to say that someone who is far too conservative or reactionary to modern tastes is "to the right of Genghis Khan", but is it true that Genghis Khan could be considered right-wing?
He did destroy the traditional Mongol way of life and created a whole new multicultural and meritocratic bureaucracy to manage their empire, isn't this sort of a left-wing thing to do?
I've always hated that stupid phrase for precisely that reason
Temujin is an annoying historical figure because just about everyone knows of him yet hardly anyone actually knows anything about him
>Hey, you know how like pretty much every war ever was about gaining ground and strategic points? And then forcing the enemy into a position where they logistically couldnt fight anymore so they would have to give in to our demands?
>Well we are going to reinvent the wheel and do away with that approach to war. Just focus instead on killing as many enemies as you can. Even if you take a hill or something, just retreat from it after. That way, the enemy will go back there and we can kill even more of them
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>Seriously, what the F U C K where they thinking?
Honestly I have no fucking clue. The Vietnam War was the biggest clusterfuck imaginable, I guess they thought that they were fighting against an ideology rather than a country, and therefore the only way to win was to kill everyone with the ideology?
"For them, the war was about heavy bombers dropping thousands of tons of ordnance a day on nothing. You could see planes being loaded with bombs, taking off, and dropping the bombs at the end of the runway, just to land again, so they could fill the papers on their bogus missions, rinse and repeat, all the while we were getting pounded in the jungle..."
-some retired marine
Is it immoral to indulge in luxuries (buying an ApplePhone, going on holidays far away, and so on) instead of giving your money to people who would otherwise starve / live in abject poverty?
You should take a course on ethics if you're interested in this question.
Also, there's a few good TED talks about this topic.
1.You have to use what you have and have what you need. This meaning that if you need some expensive shit of course go and get it without second thoughts.
2. We have to make a distinction between collective actions and individual ones. You cannot take all the heat (even theoreticall) on yourself in affairs that touch thousands, millions or billions of people.
Why don't more people talk about Jean Baudrillard?
1, he is French.
2, he writes about "the theoretical subject" as if we are expected to understand what he means. 3, he has been exposed by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont as an unrepentant, and scandalously imprecise, user of scientific terminology.
4, in 1991 he wrote an essay, called "The Gulf War Did Not Take Place".
>4, in 1991 he wrote an essay, called "The Gulf War Did Not Take Place".
>"Contrary to the title, the author believes that the events and violence of the Gulf War actually took place, whereas the issue is one of interpretation: were the events that took place comparable to how they were presented, and could these events be called a war?"
Lets not throw the...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.