Rumsfield bans cameras in military compounds!

Maybe Rumsfeld GOT the idea from the 'Daily Farce.'

 

1st link "The Business newspaper reported May 23, 2004
2nd link The Business newspaper said May 28, 2004
3rd link Britain's The Business May 24, 2004
4th link The Business newspaper said Sun May 23
5th link The Business newspaper said May. 23
Notice anything that is the same here?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/25/iraq-camera_phone_ban/
That statement was actually a satirical story from The Daily Farce.

 

Actually, thats not true. The oldest civilization they have found to date has no sign of war. No weapons, no fortifications, nothing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/caral.shtml

And they had religion:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0417/p02s02-woam.html

http://archaeology.about.com/library/weekly/aa050901a.htm

 

Skip is right! I couldn't agree more

 

Rumsfield...is obviously not an intellegent man. By the way you won't have to worry about Bush, I garuntee he will be out of the White House this year. Bush's primary thought when he was first elected was Iraq. We're tired of Iraq.

 

I saw a documentary on Caral (earilest civilization discovered to date) on the National Geographic channel, and had to read more about it. Many people up to this point have theorized that war is something that has been with us since the beginning of civilization. This site proved them wrong.

They traded with other cities, practiced religious beliefs, did drugs, and lived in peace. It gives me hope for humankind really. At least for what we once were.

 

might want to read cloesr...the oldest known civilization IN THE AMERICAS...the Sumer civilization is older


and there was warefare

"

Around 4000 B.C. city-states began to develope in ancient Mesopotamia. With their growth, conflicts developed among them.
​

Warfare often arose as the result of wealth, control of the Tigris and Euphrates for transportation and irrigation, boundary disputes, and the need to acquire luxury goods such as timber, stone and metals.
​

​

The almost constant occurrence of war among the city-states of Sumer for two thousand years spurred the development of military technology and technique far beyond that found elsewhere at the time.
​

​

Although it is not the earliest conflict, the first war for which there is any detailed evidence occurred between Lagash and Umma in 2525 B.C., two Sumerian cities located eighteen miles apart.​

​

​

http://joseph_berrigan.tripod.com/ancientbabylon/id46.html​

 

Eevn then, Caral dates before 2627 BC, a thousand years before the first documented war.

http://www.archaeologychannel.org/caralint.html

The point is, war is a product of the way we live, but it isn't somehitng that has always existed in our civilization.

 

your math is kinda off its 100 years..not 1000 years...The caral civilization isnt the oldest. There is no indication that war hasnt been apart of civilization since its start.

Even if it didnt exist in caral, it did elsewhere in the world. Fighting is natural. Look at other animals.

the point is, facts matter. Caral isnt the oldest civilization and it doesnt show that we started off without war.

 

I like what they refer to as 'The Century of Peace'.
Approx 1000AD to 1100 AD

Overall.. there wasn't much in the way of war anywhere in the world.
Not bad by human standards!

Sadly, that seems to be a feat we have been unable to match!?

There is no doubt war is something ingrained in the human condition.
Maybe those good folks back in the 11th century were more advanced in finding ways to change how they thought of life from 'the inside' rather than outside socio-politico manipulations?

 

hehe i guess if you overlook the norman conquest or the first crusade it would be a peaceful century

 

Thats unusual for you Meagain ... you didn't mention dozens of other wars that were even 'worse' than those.

The Crusades and the Norman Conquest were not that big of a deal by human standards.
The Crusades certainly helped keep down a lot of warring anyway
(ok not 'war' but hostile take-overs)

In this case.. it was a relatively peaceful century or so.

Put it this way - its considered a triumph of sorts when in any given century there are actually more countries not warring than are!!

So far the 21st is not starting off on the right foot

 

huh? those are the 2 major wars of the 11th century......wtf are talking about. The only 2 wars of the 11th century that i know of off hand. Which war was so much more horrible during the 11th century, because those are the only 2 i know about offhand.

Whats with your insistance to change my name?

 

Excuse me Meagain... I was refering to 'Megara' not 'Meagain'.
My bad.

Re: 11th century. Some historians like to point out some nasty business going on in South American. The Bulgarian//Byzantines. The Chinese wars (against Viet Nam I think) and Japan had a good little war in there somewhere too.

All in all... pretty good compared to the 20th century.

 

Sad thing is with no camera's most will soon forget about this. And if it happens again we will never know. When we do find out maybe a few years down the road. Know one will care because its ancient history.