Search results

It would be bad for France if it occurs as their likely to lose and be very badly treated. However you might be right for Russia, especially if it makes peace quickly and loses minimal lands, say probably their Polish provinces. They still have the problems of the idiot Nicholas II in charge...

That is the issue. In 1870/71 France was alone and saw its field armies defeated, its government overthrown and capital besieged but still fought on for quite a while. Here France is in a powerful coalition and such wars tend to be long because one power struggling can persuade itself that...

Well actually one of the startup links I got this morning points out that revisionism - in the broader meaning of the term - is the basis of all history and goes back at least to its earliest western origins in ancient Greece. The other question on this issue is how much different were the...

True but waging a war under such difficult circumstances was very costly for Britain. Having a peace while Britain can look to rebuild defences and think over what lessons it needs to learn as well as possibly looking to improve its production and for more allies could be useful. The...

Agree with a good bit of what you say although according to some sources I've come across the early Christians weren't always that peaceful. Have read some descriptions that a lot of the persecution - other than periods when a few emperors specifically targeted the group - was often the cases...

Possibly by the church but I doubt that was the interpretation of those who couldn't afford a bribe. ;)

I wouldn't say its that cut and dried. Catholicism has had different systems at different times. Notoriously in the run up to the Reformation there was the indulgences scandal with very much an open 'give us the money and you go to heaven' approach. Later in the counter-reformation a fair...

OK thanks for clarifying. I was reading it as accepting 'god' as the one true god and worshiping him in more than a token form.

What I meant was the previous poster had suggested that older religions "appealed to people's ego's" by telling them to 'be good' then that Christianity was different because it required you to accept god's gift, which is pretty much the Abrahmic definition of "being good". There are marked...

Is there actually that much of a difference here? The older religions demanded you do the right thing, chiefly respecting the gods. With some play on being a 'good' person. Christianity as you say demand you respect - or possibly more accurately worship - a god with some play again on being a...

Agree there might have been another such battle as a trigger at a later stage but going to war, even in a fairly autocratic monarchy, is a big decision when its against a powerful foe and your already deeply in debt. Britain seems to have had a period of serious diplomatic failure, which is...

Eventually although the vast majority of the damage was in the final months of the war as the German defences collapsed. In most areas German production peaked some time in 1944. That was definitely in the interests of both powers but doesn't relate to the issue under discussion. They...

They might have done but its generally the rebel success at Saratoga that presuaded the French that intervention was worth the effort. After all that meant war with Britain which was very expensive even if you end up with some gains and France gained very little out of the conflict. Other than...

As knowledgeispower points out that's the problem when you have a devilish combination of laissez faire in selecting your leaders combined with a restrictive class system. There were talented people but too often they got to positions of influence by so many predecessors [and many of their men]...

Well we could have used the American approach of mass slaughter and deportation to isolated wastelands that no one wants. Or if a group from a neighbouring nation seeks to gain control of some of our territory because a minority in that territory identifies with their nation would the US happy...

I think he was far too erratic and reckless. France could afford de Gaulle to be like that because France, or the Free French anyway, had damned all power to do anything much combat wise for most of the war. Churchill, while he wasn't the only one, made too many rash moves and overstretched...

That would fit in with what I've read about WWI. There was a big victory march through Paris after the war and every nation sending troops included coloured units, generally from their colonies. The exception was the US which only included white troops with Pershing, the US commander being...

Right. Just to let you know I replied to one response to my previous post before I read this but will reframe from responding to the 2nd.

My point is who is defining socialism and what do they mean by it? For instance something like old fashioned socialism of the 1st half of the 2nd century, which was a none violent systems that had similar ideas to communism in terms of widespread nationalisation and state control, the sort of...

Well there goes the neighbourhood. A pathological liar, who made up most of his 'evidence' is far, far from perfect. Communism needs to be defeated like any autocratic let alone totalitarian system. [Which is a much wider category than most people realise]. The problem with socialism is...