cut and paste

[guy]

heres a cut and paste , used in response by myself in another forum, might be worth browsing through, see if you agree.

i believe you can tell alot from the symbols that nations use, i mean i don't see the peace dove on some flags - i see the eagle a creature known for its lightning attacks from on high, it is a powerful beast and also an aggressive one. the germans loved it, so did the romans. you'll find that militaristic units use this symbol.

the fasces represent imperium conferred to the one holding them - it is a uniquely roman symbol that others have used to show that they too hold imperium. symbols tell you alot - britannia (the lady with the helmet and robes with the lion - its on the 50 pence piece? i think) reminds me a little of athena goddess of wisdom rather than militaristic venture. this symbols seems to lean more to using ones head than using ones arms. athena was not averse to a bit of blood letting but only when necessary - though when athena was born from zeus' head (!) she came out with a war cry and fully armed! anyway i suspect britannia is modelled on athena. a parliament bathed in militaristic symbolism does not bode well. when athens (named after the goddess) strayed from democracy to dictatorship and finally war with sparta (the pelopennesian war) it lost. its obvious athens didn't do much thinking and decided war was the only way - you're either with us or against us, after taking such a stupid stance contrary to reason i suppose its no wonder the athenians lost the war. this is all a little meandering i know but i'm sure you get where i'm coming from

[alex714]

no, i'm not sure where you coming from

not to mention you completely incorrectly over-simplified the peloponnesian war

what you wrote really lacks coherence actually

[guy]

ah. this must be because you're a yank

[alex714]

what does my nationality have to do with my response??

which is incorrect by the way.

[hippypaul]

Most nations act in there own self interests - no matter what symbols they use - probably all flags should show a hand - reaching out – for loot. However, I am often wrong.

[Megara]

Wow that is such a simplification of the peloponnesian war.

first off, the spartans started the war. Ok ok, maybe Athens provoked it because they put an embargo on Megara or because they wouldnt let the Corinthians fight Corcyra, or even becaue Athens sieged Potidea but Sparta definitely started the war with Athens.

As for the loss? Heck, even the stupid sicilian expedititon(which wasnt always a lost cause) didnt do in the Athenians. The athenians could have accepted the Spartans peace offer(many times) and would have come out of the war as the winners(pericles wanted to maintain the status quo)..but no, they had to continue and kill of their own generals and finally get their ass kicked.

[guy]

as i've read it athens provoked the war by building defensive walls and harbour. then they demanded money with menace from their "allies" (the delian league) this is where athens and pericles got their money to build momuments to themselves in athens. anyone who tried to get out of the delian league was threatened with war against them. the spartans on the otherhand who had no currency or real financial interest in war realised that athens was building a massive problem on their doorstep. pericles (a man who paid a good fee for his misjudgement) and his cronies were too dumb to realise that the spartans loved a good scrap. sparta on the otherhand was no innocent but a highly militarised and intellectually rigid society that terrorised the original inhabitants and held them in slavery (as a point aside once a year the spartans would declare war against the helots so that the biggest and strongest of them could be legitimately murdered). just imagine what greece could have become if this war had never happened, imagine if that golden age of thought had lasted just a little longer. even now this kind of view is still political heresy . if anything the pelopennesian war should have taught us that war is moreover meaningless and futile. the outcome of it was the beginning of the end for athens and sparta both mortally wounded. go there today and you find their remains and stark testimony to the outcome of war.

ps the first thing i wrote was only a bit of rambling stuff i wrote for people to read at their leisure.

[Megara]

as i've read it athens provoked the war by building defensive walls and harbour. then they demanded money with menace from their "allies" (the delian league) this is where athens and pericles got their money to build momuments to themselves in athens. anyone who tried to get out of the delian league was threatened with war against them. the spartans on the otherhand who had no currency or real financial interest in war realised that athens was building a massive problem on their doorstep. pericles (a man who paid a good fee for his misjudgement) and his cronies were too dumb to realise that the spartans loved a good scrap. sparta on the otherhand was no innocent but a highly militarised and intellectually rigid society that terrorised the original inhabitants and held them in slavery (as a point aside once a year the spartans would declare war against the helots so that the biggest and strongest of them could be legitimately murdered). just imagine what greece could have become if this war had never happened, imagine if that golden age of thought had lasted just a little longer. even now this kind of view is still political heresy . if anything the pelopennesian war should have taught us that war is moreover meaningless and futile. the outcome of it was the beginning of the end for athens and sparta both mortally wounded. go there today and you find their remains and stark testimony to the outcome of war.

ps the first thing i wrote was only a bit of rambling stuff i wrote for people to read at their leisure. Uh, the defensive balls were being built in 461 BC..the war didnt start until 431 bc.

Um, if Athens listened to Pericles the Athenian empire would have lasted a lot longer. Pericles wanted to maintain the status quo, other athenians wanted to continue building the empire. So i'm not sure how he misjudged. He built one of the most highly regarded empires in history, even if it lasted for less than 100 years.

Yes, go to Athens and Sparta and you see a stark difference. Athens is a glorious city that has been immortalized for 2400 years. Sparta is a hole with very little worth mentioning.

The Golden age of Athens HAPPENED because Athens and Pericles built an empire. You act as if a golden age could have occured without Athens doing all the nasty stuff.

i highly suggest you reread thucydides...

[guy]

Uh, the defensive balls were being built in 461 BC..the war didnt start until 431 bc.

Um, if Athens listened to Pericles the Athenian empire would have lasted a lot longer. Pericles wanted to maintain the status quo, other athenians wanted to continue building the empire. So i'm not sure how he misjudged. He built one of the most highly regarded empires in history, even if it lasted for less than 100 years.

Yes, go to Athens and Sparta and you see a stark difference. Athens is a glorious city that has been immortalized for 2400 years. Sparta is a hole with very little worth mentioning.

The Golden age of Athens HAPPENED because Athens and Pericles built an empire. You act as if a golden age could have occured without Athens doing all the nasty stuff.

i highly suggest you reread thucydides...
Uh, the defensive balls were being built in 461 BC..the war didnt start until 431 bc.

Um, if Athens listened to Pericles the Athenian empire would have lasted a lot longer. Pericles wanted to maintain the status quo, other athenians wanted to continue building the empire. So i'm not sure how he misjudged. He built one of the most highly regarded empires in history, even if it lasted for less than 100 years.

Yes, go to Athens and Sparta and you see a stark difference. Athens is a glorious city that has been immortalized for 2400 years. Sparta is a hole with very little worth mentioning.

The Golden age of Athens HAPPENED because Athens and Pericles built an empire. You act as if a golden age could have occured without Athens doing all the nasty stuff.

i highly suggest you reread thucydides...
when britain and germany went to war in 1939 do you not think those countries could see trouble brewing even in 1923 (i think)when hitler led his 'putsch" (a kind of revolution). do you think it possible that the beginnings of a war may not come overnight but gradually over a period of time?

as pericles was first amongst equals and a most convincing leader i find it unlikely that the war was out of his hands. i still come across stuff suggesting that hitler had nothing to do the holocaust as he signed nothing and was obviously not involved with the whole process. of course history is only as good as the reader and the trick is to know when you're being served up junk. the most advertised version of history is the dominant one when this realised you have to read between the lines as it were.

i have been to both athens and sparta. i think it is plutarch who says that in the future people will be amazed that this tiny collection of ruins sat in the pelopennese held such sway. athens is larger, its ruins voluminous. the city itself is sprawling, its air stings your eyes, it is noisy and run down. sparta whilst small is quiet and composed and looks no worse for wear than other places in greece. it is rural and its mountains sentinels over its history, its ruins are neglected but it is certainly more agreeable than athens. when i went there my guide book was "plutarch on sparta".

i disagree with you that a catastrophy was needed to create the golden age. the greeks would have been aware of the idea of hubris (arrogance in the face of the gods) they would have been aware of arete (sort of a pinnacle of excellence - being remembered for it). anyone with sense would have seen that the war would drag on. i suspect that athens provoked the war in a game of brinksmanship. it was the ego that told itself that it was arete that drove athens towards war, it was commonsense that would tell the casual observer that athens was fuelled by arrogance. like a tragic hero athens fell prey to its fatal flaw.

i used the germany/britain example as it was something i was aware of. remember we are just having a discussion here this is not somesort of intellectual war to be waged ( no one will give a damn who wins !)

[Megara]

when britain and germany went to war in 1939 do you not think those countries could see trouble brewing even in 1923 (i think)when hitler led his 'putsch" (a kind of revolution). do you think it possible that the beginnings of a war may not come overnight but gradually over a period of time? The reasons for the war are pretty well laid out in thucydides. Corcya/potidea/Megara and if we believe thucydides the fear of Athenian power by Sparta. The defensive walls werent to stop the Spartans but to stop the Persians.


as pericles was first amongst equals and a most convincing leader i find it unlikely that the war was out of his hands. i still come across stuff suggesting that hitler had nothing to do the holocaust as he signed nothing and was obviously not involved with the whole process. of course history is only as good as the reader and the trick is to know when you're being served up junk. the most advertised version of history is the dominant one when this realised you have to read between the lines as it were. Except pericles died at the beginning of the war and didnt last through the whole war. Unless you want to blame him for not living, then i think it is hardly fair to blame him for Athens losing the war.


i have been to both athens and sparta. i think it is plutarch who says that in the future people will be amazed that this tiny collection of ruins sat in the pelopennese held such sway. athens is larger, its ruins voluminous. the city itself is sprawling, its air stings your eyes, it is noisy and run down. sparta whilst small is quiet and composed and looks no worse for wear than other places in greece. it is rural and its mountains sentinels over its history, its ruins are neglected but it is certainly more agreeable than athens. when i went there my guide book was "plutarch on sparta". Greece is dirty as hell. However, if you honestly thought thats what i'm talking about, i dont know why i'm talking with you.

Yes, it is amazing that a city-state that left very little ruins had such tremendous power. Athens is a jewel of civilization though.


i disagree with you that a catastrophy was needed to create the golden age. the greeks would have been aware of the idea of hubris (arrogance in the face of the gods) they would have been aware of arete (sort of a pinnacle of excellence - being remembered for it). anyone with sense would have seen that the war would drag on. i suspect that athens provoked the war in a game of brinksmanship. it was the ego that told itself that it was arete that drove athens towards war, it was commonsense that would tell the casual observer that athens was fuelled by arrogance. like a tragic hero athens fell prey to its fatal flaw. No, i said building the empire was influential in the golden age. Where do you think they got all their money to build their buildings? from the tributes of their empire.

Was athens arrogant? Without doubt. The melian dialogue shows that quite well.

You act as if Sparta wasnt arrogant or did abuse other people. Both sides did horrible things...

[guy]

response to some of your points

the walls: this may have washed with someone except the spartans

i asked if you thought it possible that war could come about gradually over a period of time , you didn't give any response to this.

pericles: i blame him for carrying athens to the point of war. it is unfortunate that he didn't stick around to see his folly to the end.

greece, dirty: maybe you could enlighten me further. tell me about what you thought when you went there.

buildings: whats left of its older buildings

i have said already that the athenians were robbing the rest of greece to glorify themselves - so you agree with me on this point. i hardly think that it would take the wealth of the greek states to support an explosion of thought and excellence. no doubt it supported it to a point but i would argue that the cities own funds could have funded these things, just over a greater time period. you'll find when you go to greece that athens still carts off valuable stuff and takes it to their museums. you'll also that the pelopennese still resists athens.

you agree with me - pericles as its leader led this arrogance.

anyway we'll have to agree to disgree.