16 year old visits Iraq alone for personal interest...what!?

[[Rusty Chopper]]

the entire exercise was aimed at his getting attention

"I've been to Iraq, who of you wanna touch me". What the hell?!

Some intellectuals joke that whereas previous empires became civilised powers that eventually became decadent and declined, America is the first to proceed directly to the decadence stage, without the progression through civilization first.

Very funny, but very evil as well.

 

[S]

Lets all pray for him. He better hope doesn't get into any mess, because even the slightest mess results to death or life long scars (not being serious)

 

[Milo]

people are saying this kid has balls, there is a difference between balls and stupidity, he had no purpose, no reason to go other than he wanted to see what it would be like. He didn't tell anyone, just took off to visit a part of the world so he could see how fucked up it was, it's like standing in a busy highway at night just to experience doing so and see what happens...

 

[Duckman]

Lets all pray for him

Yeah, let's all pray that he doesn't do something so stupid or naive again...For all we know he'll end up just doing something stupid and end up 6 feet under...

 

[InTheOnlineAsbestosSuit]

Many of the more educated folks around here think of America as the new Rome, and that the fall of this new Rome starts with George W. Bush's reign of terror. Food for thought.

Do you mean some lefties in America or here at NMA? In my experience, most Americans really hate the comparison of America's Rome to Britain's Ancient Greece.

I mean American Historians, but not 'lefties' as you call them specifically. It's not exactly a revolutionary idea to say that all empires eventually fall, considering it's happened to every empire in history. Rome came to be only after Greece fell, but Greece had come about only after Messopotamia. There are many more examples: Brittain, France, Spain, Austria, the late Prussia, etc, etc. These historians don't say that America will dissapear completely, but they do believe that we reached our peak during the Clinton years and that now we are on our way out, to be replaced as the worlds leading superpower by another up and coming. China looks more and more like the best candidate with every passing day, but who knows what may happen.

And just to clarify, I'm not so much talking about saying "America is to Brittain as Rome was to Greece", I am talking about saying that America is like Rome in the sence that we are a military superpower that nearly ruled the world for a time, but now will soon fall and become another completed and past chapter in the history of this world.

 

[Paladin Solo]

Completed and past?

A nation which is only 200 some years old and achieved much more in those 200 years than any other has to say something about it. We are not completed and past, if anything, we've just begun. Just because a nation isn't always a superpower forever, or isn't always liked, does not bring promises of doom and destruction. Hell, look at China, 5000+ years and still kicking, and lately, kicking harder. Sure, one day Coca Cola might surrender to Green Tea, but until that day, we're still your annoying neighbors.

 

[Big T]

Completed and past?

A nation which is only 200 some years old and achieved much more in those 200 years than any other has to say something about it. We are not completed and past, if anything, we've just begun. Just because a nation isn't always a superpower forever, or isn't always liked, does not bring promises of doom and destruction. Hell, look at China, 5000+ years and still kicking, and lately, kicking harder. Sure, one day Coca Cola might surrender to Green Tea, but until that day, we're still your annoying neighbors.

You do realise that that is just empty rhetoric, don't you?

"Achieved more" is an entirely subjective term. Some would argue that you have acheived little as a nation: your empire is only slightly larger than when it started and is confined to one continent (and a few outlying islands), you've been involved in many profitless (or almost so) wars (WW I & II (only profitable before you entered the fray), Korea, Vietnam, Afganistan & Iraq (2)), you've fostered emnity in virtually all countries governed by Islamic law and in many other, less aggressive countries, you've damaged the planet far beyond the scope of all but one other empire and you came second in the "space race" (which you invested such vast funding into).

On the other hand, you have spread your (modification of somebody elses') language across the globe along with your dress sense and movies.

Also, your analogy of China still being "still kicking" is deeply flawed. China is no longer the same China it used to be.
Did you not know it was not the PRC that built the Great Wall of China?

Damn you PS, you always make me Anti-American.

 

[Wooz]

A nation which is only 200 some years old and achieved much more in those 200 years than any other has to say something about it.

Lolzors?

 

[Ratty Sr.]

A nation which is only 200 some years old and achieved much more in those 200 years than any other has to say something about it.

Oh? More than the Roman Empire, which encompassed most of the civilized world under its banner? More than Genghis Khan's Mongolia, which ruled all of Asia and a healthy portion of Europe? More than UK, which at one point occupied a quarter of Earth's surface?

I don't think so, *King*.

 

[John Uskglass]

Comparing dicks between historical empires and today's America is silly. We are extremley powerful, and can do more then any other, but in terms of relative power no statment can be made as the technology and the global situation is just incomparable.

 

[Wooz]

Yet all the power you boast is worth fuck-all, considering how America's economy is junkie-dependent on say, China.

 

[Jebus]

More than the Roman Empire, which encompassed most of the civilized world under its banner?

There you go again.

I'm pretty sure the Chinese, the Indian-hellenics and the Maya would disagree with you on this matter. And then I'm only listing the most obvious ones.

 

[Paladin Solo]

Goddamn you bastards for making me sound like a nationalist...

Can someone not defend their own country without it making it seem zealous? Hell... the only thing I was saying "good" about the U.S. is the fact that just because we won't be telling you how to live one day doesn't usher in our collapse (a completed and past chapter).

Big_T, you want to be an anti-American, go ahead, I couldn't give a rat's ass. I'm not here to promote uber fucking America. I'm here to debate the "OMG SUDDEN COLLAPSE OF AMERIKKKA"

You want one-sided arguments, go ahead.

Why does anyone assume when I say America has accomplished so much, they think that I'm refering to the fact that we know how to fight a fucking war. It brings to me the question of YOUR ignorance.

 

[John Uskglass]

Yet all the power you boast is worth fuck-all, considering how America's economy is junkie-dependent on say, China.

I can't say that I am not worried about China, but the EU has it's hands in that cookie jar as well. Maybe even deeper then us, considering their flirting with lifting arms embargo.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

There you go again.

I'm pretty sure the Chinese, the Indian-hellenics and the Maya would disagree with you on this matter. And then I'm only listing the most obvious ones.

At the height of its power, the Roman Empire occupied the entire Mediterranean and Mesopotamia, the cradle of civilization - that must be half of ancient civilizations right there. If that's not "most of the civilized world", I don't know what is.

 

[Sander]

At the height of its power, the Roman Empire occupied the entire Mediterranean and Mesopotamia, the cradle of civilization - that must be half of ancient civilizations right there. If that's not "most of the civilized world", I don't know what is.

The romans occupied most of the world known to them. Not most of the civilized world. China, the Mayans, India, Japan, Northern Europe and, hell, most everything outside of Europe was civilized as well.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

The romans occupied most of the world known to them. Not most of the civilized world. China, the Mayans, India, Japan, Northern Europe and, hell, most everything outside of Europe was civilized as well.

India was known to Romans. China was known to them as well. In fact, trade contacts between China and the Roman Empire were quite prolific. Same goes for Roman connections with the tribal cultures of non-Roman Europe. The only high civilizations of the classical era that were unknown to Romans were the Mesoamerican cultures such as the Maya. When Rome was at the height of its power, it dwarfed every ancient empire that preceeded it and there were only two other major empires in the world at that time - the Indo-Parthian kingdom and China - one of which constantly had to contend with the Romans, often for its very survival. Frankly, I don't think I make an overstatement when I say Romans dominated most of the civilized world in their most glorious historical hour.

 

[Sander]

India was known to Romans. China was known to them as well. In fact, trade contacts between China and the Roman Empire were quite prolific. Same goes for Roman connections with the tribal cultures of non-Roman Europe. The only high civilizations of the classical era that were unknown to Romans were the Mesoamerican cultures such as the Maya. When Rome was at the height of its power, it dwarfed every ancient empire that preceeded it and there were only two other major empires in the world at that time - the Indo-Parthian kingdom and China - one of which constantly had to contend with the Romans, often for its very survival. Frankly, I don't think I make an overstatement when I say Romans dominated most of the civilized world in their most glorious historical hour.

They personally didn't consider any of those civilizations civilized, if I recall correctly.

Anyway, you just say that the possibly larger empires in Meso-America, the larger Indian-Parthian empire and the much larger Chinese empire are civilized. Since these empires obviously constitute a majority of both the population and the land-mass of civilized civilizations, how can you still claim that the Romans occupied most of the civilized world?
And your sneaky weakening of your own statement isn't working, Ratty. Your original statement was 'More than the Roman Empire, which encompassed most of the civilized world under its banner?', which is obviously not the same as 'Romans dominated most of the civilized world'.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Anyway, you just say that the possibly larger empires in Meso-America, the larger Indian-Parthian empire and the much larger Chinese empire are civilized. Since these empires obviously constitute a majority of both the population and the land-mass of civilized civilizations, how can you still claim that the Romans occupied most of the civilized world?

Roman Empire:

Notice that it includes Italy, Greece, Egypt, Palestine, Turkey, Mesopotamia... regions that cradled most of the high ancient civilizations.

Parthia at the height of its power, 1st century B.C.:

Around 20 A.D. Parthia lost Bactria and northern India when the Indo-Parthian kingdom seceeded. When Rome was at its greatest extent (during Traian), Parthia also lost Mesopotamia to Romans. At that time, it was in decline and completely dwarfed by the Roman Empire in every way.

China during the Han dinasty:

My rough estimate is that China had between 4 and 5 million km^2 at the time when Roman Empire exceeded 5.9 million km^2. Chinese population was about 50 million at most, while Roman was closer to 100 million.

As for the biggest Mesoamerican civilization - the Maya - I have no idea how populous they were, but I do know that they never existed as a single political entity, but rather a bunch of small kingdoms. Romans would kick their asses. Well, if they were aware of their existence, that is.

And your sneaky weakening of your own statement isn't working, Ratty. Your original statement was 'More than the Roman Empire, which encompassed most of the civilized world under its banner?', which is obviously not the same as 'Romans dominated most of the civilized world'.

I stand by both of my statements. When Romans are involved, "dominate" means "butt-rape with the sharp end of the spear".

Roman Empire trivia:

1. Did you know that Romans played Russian Roulette with revolvers loaded with six bullets and always won?

2. Did you know that dinosaurs messed with Romans... once?

3. Roman soldiers' tears could cure cancer. Sadly, Roman soldiers never cried.

4. A Roman soldier's smile could save a dying man. Too bad a Roman soldier smiled only when killing someone.

5. The chief export of the Roman Empire was pain.

 

[Sander]

Roman Empire:

Notice that it includes Italy, Greece, Egypt, Palestine, Turkey, Mesopotamia... regions that cradled most of the high ancient civilizations.

Eh....so? That has nothing to do with the civilizatoin of the rest of the world.

Parthia at the height of its power, 1st century B.C.:

[snip]

Around 20 A.D. Parthia lost Bactria and northern India when the Indo-Parthian kingdom seceeded. When Rome was at its greatest extent (during Traian), Parthia also lost Mesopotamia to Romans. At that time, it was in decline and completely dwarfed by the Roman Empire in every way.

China during the Han dinasty:

[snip]

My rough estimate is that China had between 4 and 5 million km^2 at the time when Roman Empire exceeded 5.9 million km^2. Chinese population was about 50 million at most, while Roman was closer to 100 million.

Now, add to that those Chinese numbers the size and population of more or less entire Asia and Meso-America and you have more or less all of what you would call the 'civilized' world outside of the Roman empire. And that is easily larger and with more people in it than the Roman Empire. Hence why your claim was false.

As for the biggest Mesoamerican civilization - the Maya - I have no idea how populous they were, but I do know that they never existed as a single political entity, but rather a bunch of small kingdoms. Romans would kick their asses. Well, if they were aware of their existence, that is.

I'd highly doubt that, mainly because it cost the Spanish with gunpowder almost two centuries to subdue all of the Mayan centres. Furthermore, the Romans were also ass-raped themselves by mainly 'barbarian' hoardes.

I stand by both of my statements. When Romans are involved, "dominate" means "butt-rape with the sharp end of the spear".

Patently untrue, as the Roman Empire was known for its tolerance toward the people they conquered, and the fact that Roman culture dominated quite a bit of the un-conquered peoples as well.