Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 40. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
>national borders
How are people to going even start to overcome the spook of property (which is just borders applied on a smaller scale) if we're still stuck in the age of this massive spook?
>>1399686
>we
revolution is a spook
>I want my country to be flooded by 3rd world savages
Viper, kill yourself my man
>>1399686
>we
Take away your spook of an imagined collective.
>Napoleon ordered Junot to commence the invasion, with the cooperation of three divisions from the Kingdom of Spain.
>Paralyzed by fear and indecision, the Portuguese authorities offered no resistance. Junot occupied Lisbon on 30 November 1807 to find that John and many of the leading families had left for Brazil aboard the Portuguese fleet.
>The French quickly occupied the entire country and appropriated or disbanded the Portuguese army.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Portugal_(1807)
How...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1397071
Napoleon steamrolled other nations too. All of them were pathetic petty kingdoms
>>1397071
>How can a country get BTFO so badly in 11 days?
>>1397086
That was against Napoleon in person though
Portikek got BTFO in 11 days by a nobody
So this shit pretty much wouldn't have happened had France not been all "muh colonies," right?
>>1405853
It's more complicated then that
Somewhat.
If France had managed to create a plausible administration for Indochina that wasn't communist, the Vietnam War wouldn't have happened.
As it stood, they held onto the dream of keeping Indochina until they eventually got blown the fuck out and then left and pretended it didn't happen.
It's the typical mix of arrogance and incompetence you see in 20th century French history.
France didnt matter at all.
Many people on this board seem to be of the kind that wish for Islam to just die off and cease to exist in the world. However, I think that in order for this to even come close to happening, the world also needs to rid itself of Christianity and other religions.
One simply cannot look at the faults of Islam - from the fraudulent Koran to its history of violence - and denounce it while at the same time ignoring both the fraudulent nature of the Christian Bible and Christianity's history of violence and abuse.
In other words, if one wants to get rid of a religion,...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1404536
These are both meme positions, realistically you cannot kill religions that big without resorting to genocide
Yes, Abrahamic faiths should be eliminated.
As a great man once said;
>Jewish books are for the Jews, and Jew messiahs too
>but if you're not of Jewish blood, how can they be for you?
Or just you know not let muslims in?
Christianity will die off on it's own+most of the christians are watered down.
How come no Roman historian ever wrote anything about Jesus when he was alive? Is Christianity a Jewish cult of Paul of Tarsus? Why nobody doesn't give a shit about Gospel of Thomas and The Gospel Of Barnabas? As a deist, I got questions.
he just had a small cult in the beginning and if I recall correctly some roman historian did mention a cult leader from isreal but not by name or something
Why would roman historians write about some shithead cult leader? The place was filled with them. Also they did write his execution order down as far as im aware.
>>1403153
>>How come no Roman historian ever wrote anything about Jesus when he was alive?
Isn't obvious? the historical Jesus was not actually an incarnated deity, he was a jewish religious/political dissident who got executed by the authorities for stirring shit up in an already unstable province.
Will Iran secularize in our lifetime, at least de facto?
>>1397603
Possibly, Iran seems like a weird place. I think I remember seeing something like the government pays, with the people's money, for sex change operations since it's better then sodomy.
>>1397608
Yeah, that's a real thing.
Iranians are surprisingly not-racist but their homophobia is pretty off-the-charts even in urban centers.
>>1397619
>Iranians are surprisingly non-racist
Kek. Confirmed for never having met an Iranian.
They're easily as racist as Indians and Chinese, perhaps almost as much as Turks even.
What is the concensus on pic related? Did his rule ultimately benefit France or did it leave it worse off than before?
Greatest man to ever live
Greatest European ever
Greatest Corsican ever
>the west is more marxist then russia now
how did this happen
>>1408053
Gorbachev decided Pizza Hut and giving free speech to nationalist apes was more important than people not being homeless.
Additionally "the west" isn't Marxist at all.
>>1408053
KGB infiltrators
>>1408053
KGB infiltrating western academia.
How can philosophy boil down to anything other than assertions + marketing when the Munchhausen trilemma clearly shows that all philosophies are based on feelings?
>>1398601
Anon, I'm suffering with you. Know that even though you're suffering, you're not alone.
>>1398601
Well unfortunately you aren't wrong. Every philosophy hinges on at least one irrational assumption to base the rest of the it off of.
But don't let it fret you too much.
Why do people here say Persians are ethnically different than they were centuries ago? Is there any truth to this?
>>1401049
Yes.
Because countless invading parties passed through there like Greeks, Arabs, Turkics, and Mongols.
No
>>1401066
is totally wrong
The fact is, in the Old World, among dense, settled populations, ethnic replacement just doesn't happen. The Greeks, the Egyptians, the Persians, the British, they're all the same people who they were in ancient times, obviously with some admixture at the points of most contact.
>>1401081
That's right, the Mongolian genocide of the Hungarians never happened.
>You are now aware the Mongols killed 95% of Hungary.
>"If you live inside a cave you won't how the outside looks like!"
>"Things are made up of smaller things!"
>"1+1=2"
>"Fire is hot!"
>"Some things are alive, some others are not!"
>"Perfect things don't exist, unless they are perfect!"
>"It's better to be a good person than to be...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1405029
Demonstrate that 1+1=2
>>1405033
Define "demonstrate" first.
>>1405033
>hahahah look Greeks knew of the Peano Postulates long before the 19th century xddd
Yeah except for simple day to day maths is different from algebric conotation
Tell me what this man believes in 10 words or less.
"dude spooks lmao"
spooks
I will use this fixed idea for my benefit
Why Japs attacked USA instead of helping Hitler and attack Soviet Union?
>>1405648
Because
A) They had their own goals which didn't perfeclty coincide with Hitler's
B) They got their shit kicked in the last time they fought the Soviets
C) Siberia didn't have resources they actually needed to the extent they needed them (mostly oil and rubber)
D) It's a fuckhuge frozen wasteland they didn't have the manpower to exploit.
>>1405674
are you suggesting it would have taken more jap manpower to conquor and exploit Siberia than to go to war with the third most populated and highly industrialized western wardemocracy that is the USA?
>>1405681
Quite frankly, yes. Japan never planned on full bore industrial warfare and matching the U.S. They thought they'd have a short, 3-6 month war followed Nya peace settlement in which both sides kept what they had, and for the Japanese, that meant the NEI, with a local population to exploit.
That's a lot less than marching millions of people into the tundra to dig up bauxite and whatever else is in what they grab in a hypothetical successful Japanese push north.
Why do /pol/, stormfront, autistic teenagers, etc fetishize the crusades if they were largely an abject failure?
Because muh deus vult
Ask /pol/
>>1402613
It's my understanding everybody generally had a good time at the crusades
Doesn't sound like a failure to me
Was there ever any battle where massed land or naval artillery strikes actually worked as intended and succeeded in destroying their targets. Because every time it was tried
>WW1 , somme especially: fail to destroy
bunkers
>D-day: fails to destroy fortifications
>Island hopping in the pacific:fails to destroy jap bunkers
Were there any exceptions
I find it weird how resilient fortifications actually are to bombardments.
But i think the main idea is to soften the targets, they know they can't just annihilate them. And they're usually a success in that.
>>1400310
You are badly misinformed about WW1. The whole war was about artillery.
>>1400310
>Artillery.
>Not working as intended.
You mean - besides the fact that modern artillery destroyed fortifications as the guys back then knew of it- artillery also acts as a big act of suppressive fire/fuck-off-from-this-area enabler?
I'd say they were pretty effective.
