Is there a precedent in Roman history for the current situation with ISIS in Europe? I.e. random attacks by an uniformed enemy that can't just be attacked in the field.
I wonder if there's something we can learn from Rome. What would someone like Crassus do about it?
>>273711
Drink a pint of Gold
>>273711
Crassus would sell the refugees as slaves.
The sengoku jidai
Christianity.
You mean creating a caliphate in Europe?
Well, you have Iberia.
>>273711
No. This retardation is unprecedented.
>>273711
Bagaudae might be the closest thing, but we know almost nothing about them.
And Romans never stamped them out. The remaining Bagaudae merged with barbarians in 5th century.
>>273718
>implying you could sass the Crass
Some of you slaves are all right
Don't go to the Appian way tomorrow
t. ML Crassus
>>273729
What's the metaphor here?
The EU is the Ashikaga? ISIS is Nobunaga? Paris is the emperor??
I'm trying to think of what the earliest terrorist attack could be - of the sort that the attack is mostly unpredictable and done by conspirators that would be hidden/undetectable in the populace before the attack.
The Gunpowder Plot of 1605?
>>273711
Jewish Sicarii.
Though arguably it's closer to Foedoratii betraying the Empire.
>>273736
The Iberian conquest was conventional warfare by an identifiable group that you could engage in pitched battles. It wasn't terrorism, where you can't even see the attacker before they're killing civilians.
Honestly, I think terrorism is impossible to fully defend against. You can only take solace in the fact it's necessarily small-scale. Otherwise it's forced to take on traits of conventional forces, at which point the actual conventional forces wreck it.
>>273816
The gunpowder plot was an assassination attempt, it's purpose was not to cause terror
>>273846
This, fucking zealots
>>273846
Actually, the Sicarii do sound similar to this situation.
Rome #shrekt Jerusalem, which solved the immediate problem, but the real question is how they administered the area immediately after that so the situation didn't arise again- Attacking ISIS territory is all well and good, but unless you root out the underlying dysfunction, they'll just be back in a different incarnation
>>273711
No Romans would defend the Germanic barbarians invading Rome.
And yet here we are, western SJWs crying about Islamophobia and saying shit like we need to tolerate and take in more Muslims.
>>273756
good meeming
The Assassins: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins
>>273761
I think he means Nobunaga versus the monk sects
>>273761
Ikko Ikki niqqa
False Analogy though as the Ikko-Ikki wasn't hidden. It was literally a Buddhist ISIS version of Sengoku Japan. Only difference is its not theocratic: it's actually an elective confederacy made up of monks, village chiefs, devout Buddhist lords, and angry disenfranchised samurai
>>273903
Rome was extremely multicultural, was anti-germanic sentiment even a thing?
>>274298
Probably not against the foederati at first, but against Germanics in non Roman lands, maybe. Later in I'm guessing it became more prevalent.
>>273711
>>274285
Technically that's what ISIS is in a broad manner. The hardcore follow a religious leader as their Caliph, but most of it is a confederation of Sunni tribes and their elders working with the ISIS core.
>>273711
Rome during the early imperial period would have massacred all people of the same faith in roman lands and raised several legions to conquer, subjugate and if necessary genocide the home lands of the faith. In either case roman colonies would have been erected on the ruins and roman soldiers would be given land in them.
Rome during the late imperial period would have barely noticed. They were too busy getting wasted and fucking boys.
>>274298
>Rome was extremely multicultural
only during its waning years
>>274298
This meme again.
yes Rome was "Multicultural" in the sense that it covered a vast area, however it wasn't like modern day London or something where dozens of different peoples were living on top of each other, they were spread out in their own land.
Only towards the end did the Barbarians outnumber the Latins, and oh yes you can bet your ass the Latins hated them.
>>273711
>what would someone like Crassus do about it?
he'd reach Parthia and get fucked by ISIS horse archers
>>274828
When and where did the barbarians outnumber latins?
>>274846
Apart from the army, of course
Not Roman history but the Maccabean war was between the Hellenistic Jews protected by the Seleukid monarchs and the extremist Maccabes who would slaughter the Hellenised moderate Jews comes rather close to what you're looking after.
>>274846
In Rome itself, non Latin speaking people started to outnumber Latin speaking people in the 5th century.
>>274846
Also basically anywhere outside of Rome throughout the Empire's whole existence.
>>274298
>>274465
There ws anti-germanic sentiment and specifically against the foederati. In De Regno, Synesius literally tells Arcadius that the empire must fire all the barbarians (germanics, as he specifically talks about blond barbarians) from the army and the government, and put them all to work the land as slaves or expulse them.
In his Libri contra Symmachum, Prudentius compares the huns, the sarmatians and several germanic peoples with animals like dogs, pigs and donkeys. He specifically declares that the difference between roman and barbarian is the same than between bipeds and quadrupeds.
Stilicho was assasinated mainly because he was half-germanic, and his death was followed by xenophobic attacks by latins against germanic innocents.
>>273761
The militant monk sects were cleansed
How many militant monks can you find threatening Kyoto today?
>>274298
>was anti-germanic sentiment even a thing
Contrary to popular belief, being "multicultural" doesn't mean bending over at every opportunity or living side by side.
There is one, the rise of the Caliph8. Rome did not do to gr8 m8.
