Virgil61
-
Posts
851 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Virgil61
-
-
Sunni v Shia attacks have been going on a smaller scale since the aftermath of the '03 invasion. I remember one instance were we arrived on the scene with a couple of Marine LAVs just in time to head off a mini-battle between a Sunni clan that had power under Saddam and a hundred or so p*ssed off Shia ready to even the score. There were countless numbers of smaller reprisals going on as well.
I'm not surprised at the Mosque's destruction, it was in a region made up of both populations and whether Iraq Sunnis or Al Queda are responsible something like this was bound to happen. The Sunnis, under 25% of the population, are ticked off, they controlled the power for years and received the benefits. To be blunt the Shia and Kurds with some exceptions got sh*t on for most of that time. When my unit patroled the Shia area of the south for several months we suffered no casualties at all. When we moved north fto the Sunni triangle it was a different story.
Intellectually I hope that somehow we can get the Sunnis to come to terms and everyone can bask in the warm glow of a secular liberal democracy. But my gut wishes the Sunnis reap what they've sown, the Shia and Kurds give them the beating they so richly deserve.
-
...
Exactly! And why weren't the Communists hauled up on charges of crimes against humanity? Why is Lenin's corpse--like a fish in a box--still on display in Red Square? Why can people deny the crimes of Pol Pot, or Mao, or Stalin? In fact, if every intellectual who denied Stalin's crimes (like Bertrand Russell) were in prison, half of the universities of the 1940s would be empty! Why are there memorials to the Holocaust all over the world, but none to be found for the victims of Stalin's orchestrated Great Famine or Mao's blood-soaked Cultural Revolution? Where are the Amnesty International fund-raisers for victims of class genocide????
OK, I'm done. But this issue REALLY gets me steamed.
As far as the Soviet Union and Russians, go the dirty little secret is that much of the population were complicit in the crimes. Those millions that were sent to the Gulag weren't all arbitrarily picked up off the street due to a list from Stalin's office (although he loved to review and approve thousands of arrests). Countless numbers were given up by jealous neighbors, rivals, and for your benefit, not a few academics reported as spys, counter-revolutionaries and wreckers by their colleagues. One way to get that cherished departmental chair I suppose. Two of my closest friends, both Russians, one a researcher at Wake Forest Hospital and one a prof at UNC-Chapel Hill, are surprisingly ambilavent about the carnage and shake it off with 'that's life in Russia' shrug. Perhaps it's a sort of collective guilt that makes many Russians at least, not up in arms about it. Thankfully there some who feel otherwise.
Funny, when I lived in Kiev and worked at the US embassy for a few months in the early '90s there very few Ukrainians were much concerned about the Great Famine. They were more p*ssed off about the destruction of dozens of churches by Stalin and by association the Russians. Go figure.
-
Just to be clear--there are no American laws prohibiting racism, racist language, or racist writings. Social ostracism, of course, will be swift, and many employers (who are at liberty to fire anyone they wish at any time) would be likely to remove racists from their businesses, but unless racist language is accompanied by the use of physical force or the threat of it, it's legal. What Irving did would be legal in the US.
Virgil can correct me if I'm wrong, but I do think it's important that we're clear about what is and is not legal.
Good catch. It crossed my mind to post something similar earlier. Government attempts at regulating hate speech are very carefully scrutinized by the courts and difficult to implement. Generally, as you've said, as long as you aren't advocating actual violence or intimidation you're untouchable by law enforcement and the court system.
-
...
Bahrain and Kuwait, you would assume they are moderate and pro-American, but infact they are anti-American especially the younger generation.
To be fair, the Kuwaitis are the only ones who gave Americans a thumbs up as they drive by or stop and talk with us. I've found that those who've gone to school in the US, quite a few of them really, are still very pro-American.
The plight of Arab Christians, especially in Egypt and Iraq, is pretty sad. We were in civilian clothes in Cairo and were accosted by a group of friendly young Egyptian girls. It turned out they were Christian and had the Coptic cross tatooed between their thumb and forefinger so as to identify them if they were kidnapped by muslims while children. Pretty harsh.
-
I do care what moderate (majority) muslims think and feel about such things...
I respectfully disagree with that statement. I come orginally from Lebanon, I lived there for 10 years, I've been to Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, UAE and Pakistan. I'm a christian by religion but an arab by ethnicity, I know the culture well growing up around muslims and especially during a civil war. One thing I noticed in my country and the other countries I visited, there is a clear majority that are absolutely fundamentalist and a moderate minority. From my experience I would estimate it to be 65% hardliners and 35% moderate. In terms of their hatred towards jews, I would say 85% despise them and 15% accept them. These are my own rough estimates but I do think a westerner's experience may be different than mine. Usually, what typically happens in an interaction, your average muslim citizen might give the impression he is open minded to the westerner just to impress him, but when the westerner turns his back, that same muslim will go to his friends and curse the hell out of him and his country. I've personally witnessed this on many occasions.
I think people make a serious mistake when they try to be politically correct about the numbers of fanatics, it hides the real problem, which is not that the minority is supporting terror but rather the majority wants it to happen, and thats exactly why the terrorists keep increasing in numbers. They have a majority supporting them.
A lot of the moderates emigrate to the west, thats why most muslims living in the west are open minded.
I've spent quite some time in the ME myself; Egypt, Saudi, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq.
I hesitated to go down this road, but your experience there reflects mine. I'm not convinced of moderation's hold on a large part of the Arab Islamic population.
-
So many choices. Pertaining to Roman history, obliterate the Goths at Adrianople or the Turks at Manzikert so thoroughly they cease to be effective opponents at least for the short-term. Discover the ambush about to occur at Teutoberg Forest. Maybe saving Constantinople.
-
Maybe I'm in a reviling mood tonight, I just spent two days going toe-to-to with some Brit soldiers on another site attacking the U.S. Army's performance in Iraq that ended up with accusations of gun-toting 'merican nuts, slavery, inbred Southerners and counter-accusations of poor dental hygiene, English slavers and Boer concentration camps.
You have my sympathy. Arguing with European anti-Americans makes me see red--to have to deal with stupid American provincialism simultaneously would leave me in the mood to jail everyone! (I am assuming you weren't the one hauling up the old 'poor dental hygiene' argument, right Virgil? Please!?
)I have to admit I did, but I think I added a decent enough twist. While making fun of Americans and their poor skills at geography one asked me where the state of East Virginia was (he claimed to have stumped an American soldier once with that question).
I answered it was right next to the UK School of Dentistry.
Edit: Apologies to Pertinax, Princeps, Andrew Darby and the rest of the UK contingent who I hold in high regard (and who's dental hygiene is I am sure immaculate) but one has to defend one's country.
-
That doesn't make the law right or justify the imprisonment of an historian. Moreover, it strikes me as the height of hypocricy to demand that the Muslim world appreciate the value of free speech over religious sensibilities (in the case of Salmon Rushdie and the Danish cartoons of Muhammed) while there is no outrage in the West when a man is jailed for his anti-Semetic* opinions.
It does make him an idiot not worthy of sympathy in my mind. Looking at it from the perspective of Germans it's a bit different. Anti-semitism--if what Goldhagen and a few other historians have stated are true--was rife in Germany before the Nazis took power. It didn't just rise from the Hitler and company, and we know the ultimate outcome after they took the reigns. From the perspective of a civilized culture that has to bear the burden of the end result of anti-semitism and responsible for the gold-standard of genocide I see the rationale and argument for holocaust denial laws. Perhaps the Austrians by virtue of cultural affinity share that sentiment. Viggen could chime in on the validity of that better than myself.
As for Islam, perhaps a few laws against against the demonization of Christians and Jews might be in order(not likely or effective I know). Not a bad insight to see the connection between the cartoons and Irvings jailing, but really, the death of 6 million Jews and another 6-10 million Poles, Gypsies, etc aren't in the same league. The Islamic world won't see that I'm sure. Admittedly I'm not prepared to argue dispassionately regarding them. I frankly feel, at best, a stoney indifference and at worst nauseous disgust towards that religion and culture. Two tours there are still a bit fresh, maybe in time.
But that's exactly what makes the law worse than ineffective--it creates sympathy for behavior that is otherwise completely unsympathetic. Even his chief accuser in the case realizes this and asked the court to let him go.That's actually the best point against the laws and some anti-holocaust threads on another site back it up. I chose not to link to them, but it's scary reading, although they're a bit disgusted that he tried to apologize and pray for the victims.
Look, I know I'm not arguing a popular stance regarding free speech, I'm even contradicting my own strongly held beliefs in that area. Maybe I'm in a reviling mood tonight, I just spent two days going toe-to-to with some Brit soldiers on another site attacking the U.S. Army's performance in Iraq that ended up with accusations of gun-toting 'merican nuts, slavery, inbred Southerners and counter-accusations of poor dental hygiene, English slavers and Boer concentration camps. Irving makes a pretty good target you've got to admit.
-
...
Also, it seems that in many Western countries, Jews are (actively and overtly) afforded special privileges when it comes to this type of thing (one recent example was London Mayor Red Ken calling a reporter a "concentration camp guard" - no crime there you might think, but wait, the reporter was Jewish), as are Muslims in other areas (of law - religion, for example). Is this true, or am I a bigot for suggesting this?
...
Since 6 million Jews living in the Western countries, Poland, Ukraine, etc., were slaughtered for nothing more than being born Jewish perhaps that's a special privilege I'd be prepared to allow. I suspect collective societal guilt is involved in these laws--read "Ordinary Men" by Christopher Browning or "Hitler's Willing Executioners" by David Goldhagen.
Irving knew the law in Austria, knew he'd been at odds with it and chose to go there anyway. He's got only himself to blame, I suspect he enjoys the aura of martyrdom it brings to the eyes of quite a few. I've lurked at a few sites sympathetic to holocaust denial and white-supremacy (I slow down to gawk at car wrecks as well), he's a hero to them.
-
Contrast the years of the rise of Rome to the years of its fall, and one of the most striking differences you'll observe is the investment private citizens are willing to make in the state. Whether building theatres or serving in the military, Romans made Rome great because they thought the system benefitted them and their families much more than the alternatives--in terms of potential for advancement, for wealth, for honor, etc. When all of the best opportunities were monopolized by one family of dynasts, the whole system of rewards was undercut, and civic participation was threatened accordingly.
This is similar to one of Peter Heather's observations of what occurred in Late Antiquity when the Dominate began to centralize control at the local level and how it effected cities. No incentives were left for elites to contribute to local civic life as they opted instead for positions in the Emperor's beauracracy and dramatically different demands on their efforts.
-
Born/Raised just south of San Francisco, CA, here. I pulled a 6-year stint outside of Sacramento, followed by another 6-year stint in Austin, TX...both for ed-joo-mi-kay-shun. Now I'm back home...and might I add, I'm damn glad about it, too. I missed the ocean...and I have now realized that heat + humidity = mucho sucko.
Oh, and I will be an Italian citizen in 2 years (give or take)! Mom's grandparents were from Milan-area and Genoa, and since they didn't become American citizens, we can get the citizenship. Viva Italia!!
I stumbled into here via Google (God Bless 'em)...and I'm grateful for it. Finally some people to talk shop with!
I was born in Italy on an American army base--Italian-American father and Italian mother. Believe it or not I recieved a draft notice when I turned 18 from the Italian government.
Did you grow up anywhere around San Fran's Italian community? My family's a part of the original small community in Portland, Oregon.
-
...
In spite of what writers quoted above may say, I don't think there's any evidence that soldiers ate a lot of it, and I would doubt strongly whether soldiers had the time and inclination to make it themselves (NB without a pasta machine!)
You have a point. Certainly while not in garrison and on the move pasta wouldn't be a choice. In garrison if they had time on their hands it might be a bit of a different story.
Speaking as one who's spent hours helping his Abruzzese mother prepare homemade pasta.
No, no mention of dried pollen cakes I'm afraid, there are a couple of other things I was suprised by though, namely that the Italians loved pork and bacon, and that as the Italian contingent in the Army dropped, so the finds of bones at fort sites include much more cattle, sheep and goat bones, than the pig bones that used to be predominant.Interesting. One common (and excellent) contemporary Italian pork product called proscuitto is heavily salted and preserves easily. There are several others. I wonder this or a forerunner made up part of an Italian soldier's diet.
-
...
I used to think this must be true. By the time I had finished /Language in Danger/, I felt that to say that would have been to make a logical error. If the language phenotype evolved out of nothing, yes, it can hardly have done so more than once -- because all languages share a universal structure) and it is impossible to accept that it evolved without being used. So its first bearers must have spoken the first language, ancestral to all others. But animals do communicate, so in all likelihood the language phenotype evolved gradually out of something simpler. In that scenario, more than one prototype human language might have developed (with mutual influence) in parallel. As I said in that book, in all likelihood Eve was multilingual, like so many of her descendants.
Looks like an interesting read (cheap plug offered up). I'm curious about a couple of 'dying' languages with special interest to those of us who are interested in Roman history, perhaps they aren't your area but I'll ask anyway.
I'm assuming much of the population may be descendents of those who lived under Roman rule and fled to Wales during the Saxon incursions, if true, is there a Latin influence or loan words in the Welsh language and do you think efforts to reinvigorate it will be successful?
Something that fascinates me is the fact that Greek is still spoken in two small areas of Italy (Griko ), remnants of the scores of Greek settlers in southern Italy from the ancient era. The last speakers number maybe in the low tens of thousands and apparently speak a language that may more closely related to old Greek. Are you aware of this population and, though the prospects for survival seem bleak to me, what's you take on it?
-
Excellent review, Virgil. This book was already on my to read list, and now its been moved to the top.
Thanks, I think you'll enjoy it, it's a good read.
I've already spotted grammatical errors, omissions in mentioning his use of primary sources and a few other things. Uggh.
-
I'm a very long-suffering Cubs fans (why do I always choose the underdogs?), but I don't follow them religiously. FWIW, I think the whole "baseball is the American pasttime" idea is a bit over-blown (much like our supposed reverance for the flag). Most people I know think baseball is boring.
I get the sense it's a slowly dying sport, well maybe dying is too strong. I've no statistics to back it up but I can't help but think that the various player strikes and shutdowns in the MLB (nine over the last thirty years) have significantly impacted popularity.
-
Just recently there was a special on the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest which was a bit of a soup sandwich.
Is this the meaning of soup sandwich?
Exactly, great site. Nice photo on the upper left, I think I've been that guy before.
-
I find most things (Rome) outside PBS tend to get sensationalized, THC and NAT Geo in particular.
I saw one special on one of the discovery/history/A&E channels on the Battle of Chalons where the computer animated legions were in lorica segmentata--about two hundred years after they stopped wearing it. Just recently there was a special on the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest which was a bit of a soup sandwich.
-
I'm sure it was a gradual process rather than one fine point. Even though the whole Empire might adopt a law from a good emperor on the practice, or even if the Empire adopted 'Christian values', you can be sure of little villages in the mountains holding out against the progress of time.
One could probably expect it to happen in the poorer areas, Christian or not, when mouths to feed could have been a problem in hard times and a potential son in the fields was worth more than a daughter. Not to draw this off-topic but it hasn't died out today if stories about the effect of China's One Child Policy are true.
-
I saw a similar programme on the BBC last year; in which a female archaeologist tried to rebuild the Crane that the defenders of Syracuse used to topple Roman battleships. They did manage to pick it up a little but with a lot of diffuculty, plus the battleship was completely stationary. I doubt any navy commander would be stupid enough to sail up to enemy battlements and sit there patiently as the enemy try to topple the ship.
The only thing I can think of is that they probably may have had to anchor the ship in place or somehow grapple it to the sides of the defensive works to keep it stationary and stable while soldiers tried to assault the walls. That might give the defenders time to 'hook' the ship, one could assume the crew wasn't expecting it and didn't react in time until the ship was hooked. Just a guess.
-
...
No kidding, what else can be said?
I must admit I find these comments somewhat disturbing coming from what I consider to be two 'core' members. And I certainly don't mean that in a critical way, but in a developmental way. I guess it underscores to some extent what interests us the most about Roman history and the adage Each to his own springs to mind. However, for me and I'm sure others, the late republic is the meat and potatos of Roman history. I know there is MUCH more to Rome than Caesar/late Republic, but I would council there is also much more to Caesar/late Rebublic also. I thought I knew everything there was to know about the subject, but to-ing and fro-ing with Cato has been fun yes, frustrating at times, but above all challenging and I have thoroughly enjoyed the thought provoking experience and I hope it continues. Because of these 'idiological' clashes I am now backlogged in books, books that I cannot wait to delve into. I have learned and re-learned and I for one look forward to the next 'clash'!
Fair enough. In my case I should have phrased it better, there is a lot more to be said on the topic of course. I frankly got bored with the JC good/evil thing, call me human. I have my own 'ducks in a row' in my mind and knew at some point I wouldn' t convince Cato of my position nor could he convince me. I really didn't want to spend every time I visit this forum arguing as JC's defense counsel and arguing the point with Cato. I made my views known, knew where Cato was coming from and decided I'd let the topic lie fallow until some later time.
-
...
There is evidence that points to some areas coming under intense violence with the new barbarian arrivals and others of realtive calm. Peter Heather is an excellent scholar, though I have read books by J.H.W.G Liebeschuetz, (and a few other not so famous ones), who refute Heather.
Then again... it seems to a lot of scholars, they are right and everyone else is wrong...
Overall I'd say the areas I see hit hardest with violence is Hispania and Gaul, the other provinces, (when compared), got off kinda easy...
I'm sure it was very regionally specific and as usual the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle between the barbarian yearning to be a Roman and the foaming at the mouth pillagers. It's academia, new scholars have to make their mark so what's old is often new again and so on.
The area north and northwest of Macedonia got hit pretty hard as well when the Goths crossed over and set up shop for a couple of years. I'll look up Liebeschuetz and see what he's written.
-
I'd participate, but I'm rather burned out on the Late Republic/Caesar threads.
...
No kidding, what else can be said? And I'm a friggin' lawyer at that.
That being said you'd probably want to vet a jury, not just anyone should be allowed on it. Preferably six, or whatever number, members of UNRV who'll admit to not having made up their minds on the issue--good luck finding them.
A decent mock-trial will have opening statements, calling a witness and giving them a direct and cross examination and a then closing argument. A judge could limit each sides attempts at exam to either say twenty questions or perhaps a 24 hour period and the final statements to say 500 words. The judge would also make sure that no non-sourced evidence be allowed ton be referenced during the trial.
It might be effective to have individuals play two of the conspirators (keep the number down to make it easy), each taking the stand and responding--honestly--in the manner one would think was reflective of Brutus, Cato and company.
The above is a simple but doable I think if people were interested.
-
Spent one year at the state university here. However since I currently can't afford any more schooling there without taking on loans, I've discovered the wonderful world of self-education and free enterprise.
Hey, there's always this option. It's how I funded my education but, all things considered, perhaps the timing isn't right for that sort of commitment.
-
.. beside this reasons was the fact that many romans of late empire did not care much about being a part of the empire and that their view of invaders was not so dark as we see it today.
The inhabitants of Byzantium resisted alone the forces of Septimius Sever for three years, long after Niger was killed. They had a good defensive position, is true, but so had Carthage that was taken so swift by vandals after a long campaign in unfamiliar conditions.
The only example I know of bitter resistance was that of the christians in Lebanon against the first arabian caliphs in contrast with Egypt that was taken and holded very easily.
Recent scholarship seems to be pulling back from the view that it wasn't all that dark with barbarians aspiring to be Romans in favor of a more violent interpretation of the era. One thing comes through, in spite of the barbarian leaders supposed affinity for Roman culture the rank-and-file were far less admiring and prone to looting, pillaging and all those sorts of things. Both Professors Peter Heather--whose book I've recently read--and Brad Ward-Perkins have weighed in on the side of the incursions being definitely on the ugly side of things. Carthage and it's province weren't quite a walkover, the Vandals landed in Africa in 428 AD and the city didn't fall until 439 AD.
Sectarian Violence/civil War In Iraq?
in Hora Postilla Thermae
Posted
I don't think the majority of Shia would turn on the Americans, especially in the south-central areas from Najaf to Al Kut south to Nasiriyah, but a smaller clique run by a Shia imam named Sadr and based out of east Baghdad has always been as much at odds with the US as with the Sunnis. It was his thugs who infiltrated Najaf a couple of years ago when the Marines pulled out and took over the mosques against the wishes of the local Shias. We've sewn a lot of goodwill in many of the Shia areas with a lot of effort being made to build up electricity, water distribution and schools that were left to rot under the Baathists. Not that they love us, but they tolerate us. Certainly the most influential Shia imams outside of Sadr, like Sistani, and their instructions not to interfere with Americans has helped.
Your right in the sense it's a two edged sword. The Sunnis are much more secular generally than the Shia, even the Iraqi Christians think so--the Sunni areas are where the majority of them choose to live. Is it worth staying in the long run? Well, we helped let the mess get out of control by some poor decisions made early in the invasion/occupation by Rumsfeld and Bremer. We owe it to help clean it up.