Actually, the USA has made a greater impact on the world in their many successful wars: WW2 determined the fate of Europe and possibly the world. USA has a higher kill to death ratio/less casualty rate, and is overall much more orderly and civilized. *waits for someone to laugh at this and go on a rant about how uncivilized and fail the US is*
__________________ Introduce a little government. Upset the established gangs, and everything becomes order...
Democracy is the very definition of awesome.
lawl.
rant content includes:
Death Penalty, Texas, [Texas & Death Penalty], systemic racism, etc.
The only reason those wars were 'worse' or more influential is because a). they are more recent and b). they were total wars- Nationalism made them bigger than older wars.
ALL OF THOSE were also practiced by the Romans, to a MUCH more severe degree.
They TORTURED you before death and for much milder things
They KILLED Jews and Christians
They OPPRESSED and CONQUERED nations. Thinks Iraq/Afghanistan is bad? To the Romans that's nothing.
Just for fun, I shall now argue for Rome (not serious though and NOT intended to be good points...am I allowed to do this?) Responce to myself:
1. The Romans could just move out of the way of the ungainly tanks. You fail.
2. See MY above
3. LOL. Do you really think that assault rifles outrange Roman longbows (who are better than English longbows) The archers could quickly ambush them, and the Romans had longbows that are more effective than guns.
4. They aren't accurate vs something as fast moving as a horse! You should look up how fast a horse is, moron.
5. They move in a tight formation w/their shields up, and their calvarly and archers would distract them; a bunch of horsemen charging at you while the air is filled with a wall of arrows will cause a severe morale drop if you're not used to it (which the USA isn't)
6. No. The catapults are LONGER ranged and MORE powerful.
7. Good god, do you REALLY think that the horses couldn't run a few miles?
__________________ Introduce a little government. Upset the established gangs, and everything becomes order...
Democracy is the very definition of awesome.
Last edited by Hewhoknowsall on May 5th, 2009 at 09:53 PM
__________________ Introduce a little government. Upset the established gangs, and everything becomes order...
Democracy is the very definition of awesome.
If I were, then I'd actually try to make good arguments for rome under the guise of being sarcastic.
And besides, I support USA when I claim that they'll beat 6 billion Romans AND that they are more successful (in some ways) than Rome. I also said that even if USA were to use Roman weapons then they'd still win.
__________________ Introduce a little government. Upset the established gangs, and everything becomes order...
Democracy is the very definition of awesome.
Hewhoknowsall... did you ever play Rome: Total War? The whole "capture the village" brought images of that game. And where the hell do 6 billion Romans come from?
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
It is a little disingenuous to try and compare Roman v American military conquest
ignoring that the Americans have far stricter and, imho, moral attitudes toward military aggression, the types of enemies they fought are totally different.
There are analogs, but effective asymmetrical warfare is, to the best of my knowledge at least, a product of the last 100-200 years (maybe ignoring some of the African campaigns of European generals, and even then, recent history compared to Rome).
What is the Roman equivalent of a car bomb? Or of jungle guerrilla warfare?
You call that a success? After Desert Storm we had to go back in and do it all over again a decade later. And why are we still there six years later? Far more combat happened after the initial invasion than during it. By any military standard Iraq was a failure.
KMC Community Forums
May 3rd, 2009 09:43 AM
" ?
