Iran Outraged by 300

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Ren wrote:
I read that this morning and laughed my ass off. Government propaganda at its finest. Or a bunch of whiners. Maybe anytime a movie comes out that in some way has ties to a current world squabble governments should bitch about it.

I mean come on, its a movie, based on a comic, based on events from over 2000 years ago. At least we are not the only country that buys heavily into the bullshit our respective governments spew.
[/quote]

The Internet may make government irrelevent someday. Information undermined the old Soviet Union. Kim Jung-Il (North Korea) is terrified of the Internet, and what his subjects might find out. Its getting harder and harder to trick people.

The Information Age may also make war obsolete. When people actually have to look at the images of war night after night, it might dawn on them to stop that.

The odds might be long, but let’s hope.

Let’s hear it for science, esp information technology!!

42

This is par for the course. They are allowed to say anything offensive to us (the west). Call us names, burn our flag, call for our death and so on. That is fine and acceptable.

Draw a picture of Muhammad, or drop a Quran on the ground, make a movie, or say one bad thing about Islam and they go absolutely nuts. These are not reasonable people. I hope everyone can see how they honestly believe that it’s THEIR way or death. It’s beaten into their heads every day on TV, in the papers, in school and in the mosques.

I hope they get the message that Persia pretty much gets it’s ass handed to them when facing western armies. Xerxes army, the largest ever assembled in history in one place, was thoroughly defeated by a much smaller Greek army.

About 100 years later, Alexander the Great (a Macedonian Greek) easily swept through Persia with only 40,000 soldiers and defeated Darius, thus pretty much ending the Persian empire. There was a small Persian resurgence after Alexander’s death, but once Rome came to power, Persia was powerless. Then came Islam, and tribalism which completely destroyed any possibility of unity. Very simplified, but there it is in a nut-shell.

43

[quote]PGJ wrote:
This is par for the course. They are allowed to say anything offensive to us (the west). Call us names, burn our flag, call for our death and so on. That is fine and acceptable.

Draw a picture of Muhammad, or drop a Quran on the ground, make a movie, or say one bad thing about Islam and they go absolutely nuts. These are not reasonable people. I hope everyone can see how they honestly believe that it’s THEIR way or death. It’s beaten into their heads every day on TV, in the papers, in school and in the mosques.

I hope they get the message that Persia pretty much gets it’s ass handed to them when facing western armies. Xerxes army, the largest ever assembled in history in one place, was thoroughly defeated by a much smaller Greek army.

About 100 years later, Alexander the Great (a Macedonian Greek) easily swept through Persia with only 40,000 soldiers and defeated Darius, thus pretty much ending the Persian empire. There was a small Persian resurgence after Alexander’s death, but once Rome came to power, Persia was powerless. Then came Islam, and tribalism which completely destroyed any possibility of unity. Very simplified, but there it is in a nut-shell. [/quote]

The Persians weren’t defeated. They lost the first 2 days of battle and then defeated the Greeks and it took them several hundred years to recover. The battle was fought in a choke point so that the full brunt of Xerxes army could not be brought to bear. Bodies were literally stacking up like cord wood.

The Persians were armed with Wicker Shields which could not stand up against the armor and phalnx tactics of the Greeks. Eventually a portion of Xerxes army made their way around the pass and were able to get into the rear of the Persians.

A group defending the pass further up the line, The Phocians (sp?) I believe deserted their position. Once Xerxes was on their front and rear it was a done deal and it has been postulated that Xerxes was fighting more of delaying action.

Alexander was a brilliant tactician and had more than a little luck. I believe research will show superior weaponry and armor also.

I got all this from the history channel special I watched the other night. I love that channel.

44

[quote]

The Persians weren’t defeated. They lost the first 2 days of battle and then defeated the Greeks and it took them several hundred years to recover. The battle was fought in a choke point so that the full brunt of Xerxes army could not be brought to bear. Bodies were literally stacking up like cord wood.

The Persians were armed with Wicker Shields which could not stand up against the armor and phalnx tactics of the Greeks. Eventually a portion of Xerxes army made their way around the pass and were able to get into the rear of the Persians.

A group defending the pass further up the line, The Phocians (sp?) I believe deserted their position. Once Xerxes was on their front and rear it was a done deal and it has been postulated that Xerxes was fighting more of delaying action.

Alexander was a brilliant tactician and had more than a little luck. I believe research will show superior weaponry and armor also.

I got all this from the history channel special I watched the other night. I love that channel. [/quote]

I’m not talking about Thermopylae. The Persians were humiliated about a year later by the Greek army and navy. Xerxes was forced to leave Greece after his navy was destroyed (Battle of Salamis). He left behind an army of over 300,000, thinking it sufficient to handle the puny Greek army. It wasn’t. The last scene of “300” depicts the Battle of Plataea where the Persians faced the reaminder of the Spartan army and the Greeks.

45

[quote]btm62 wrote:
PGJ wrote:
This is par for the course. They are allowed to say anything offensive to us (the west). Call us names, burn our flag, call for our death and so on. That is fine and acceptable.

Draw a picture of Muhammad, or drop a Quran on the ground, make a movie, or say one bad thing about Islam and they go absolutely nuts. These are not reasonable people. I hope everyone can see how they honestly believe that it’s THEIR way or death. It’s beaten into their heads every day on TV, in the papers, in school and in the mosques.

I hope they get the message that Persia pretty much gets it’s ass handed to them when facing western armies. Xerxes army, the largest ever assembled in history in one place, was thoroughly defeated by a much smaller Greek army.

About 100 years later, Alexander the Great (a Macedonian Greek) easily swept through Persia with only 40,000 soldiers and defeated Darius, thus pretty much ending the Persian empire. There was a small Persian resurgence after Alexander’s death, but once Rome came to power, Persia was powerless. Then came Islam, and tribalism which completely destroyed any possibility of unity. Very simplified, but there it is in a nut-shell.

The Persians weren’t defeated. They lost the first 2 days of battle and then defeated the Greeks and it took them several hundred years to recover. The battle was fought in a choke point so that the full brunt of Xerxes army could not be brought to bear. Bodies were literally stacking up like cord wood.

The Persians were armed with Wicker Shields which could not stand up against the armor and phalnx tactics of the Greeks. Eventually a portion of Xerxes army made their way around the pass and were able to get into the rear of the Persians.

A group defending the pass further up the line, The Phocians (sp?) I believe deserted their position. Once Xerxes was on their front and rear it was a done deal and it has been postulated that Xerxes was fighting more of delaying action.

Alexander was a brilliant tactician and had more than a little luck. I believe research will show superior weaponry and armor also.

I got all this from the history channel special I watched the other night. I love that channel. [/quote]

Just making sure that you know Alexander was not at Thermopylae. [Edit: My bad, I just realized you were talking about the other posting.]
It was actually the Greeks that were fighting a delaying action; they knew they were going to die. They just wanted to give their people long enough to evacuate Sparta and the surrounding areas and form a better resistance. It was Ephialtes who betrayed the Greeks and showed the Persians the secret route to flank the Greeks rear. T men all the way.

46

We gave them “Kingdom of Heaven” what more do they want? Geez, some people are never satisfied.

47

[quote]lizard king wrote:
btm62 wrote:
PGJ wrote:
This is par for the course. They are allowed to say anything offensive to us (the west). Call us names, burn our flag, call for our death and so on. That is fine and acceptable.

Draw a picture of Muhammad, or drop a Quran on the ground, make a movie, or say one bad thing about Islam and they go absolutely nuts. These are not reasonable people. I hope everyone can see how they honestly believe that it’s THEIR way or death. It’s beaten into their heads every day on TV, in the papers, in school and in the mosques.

I hope they get the message that Persia pretty much gets it’s ass handed to them when facing western armies. Xerxes army, the largest ever assembled in history in one place, was thoroughly defeated by a much smaller Greek army.

About 100 years later, Alexander the Great (a Macedonian Greek) easily swept through Persia with only 40,000 soldiers and defeated Darius, thus pretty much ending the Persian empire. There was a small Persian resurgence after Alexander’s death, but once Rome came to power, Persia was powerless. Then came Islam, and tribalism which completely destroyed any possibility of unity. Very simplified, but there it is in a nut-shell.

The Persians weren’t defeated. They lost the first 2 days of battle and then defeated the Greeks and it took them several hundred years to recover. The battle was fought in a choke point so that the full brunt of Xerxes army could not be brought to bear. Bodies were literally stacking up like cord wood.

The Persians were armed with Wicker Shields which could not stand up against the armor and phalnx tactics of the Greeks. Eventually a portion of Xerxes army made their way around the pass and were able to get into the rear of the Persians.

A group defending the pass further up the line, The Phocians (sp?) I believe deserted their position. Once Xerxes was on their front and rear it was a done deal and it has been postulated that Xerxes was fighting more of delaying action.

Alexander was a brilliant tactician and had more than a little luck. I believe research will show superior weaponry and armor also.

I got all this from the history channel special I watched the other night. I love that channel.

Just making sure that you know Alexander was not at Thermopylae. [Edit: My bad, I just realized you were talking about the other posting.]
It was actually the Greeks that were fighting a delaying action; they knew they were going to die. They just wanted to give their people long enough to evacuate Sparta and the surrounding areas and form a better resistance. It was Ephialtes who betrayed the Greeks and showed the Persians the secret route to flank the Greeks rear. T men all the way. [/quote]

I understand that. What does it have to do with my point that Persians have always gotten their asses kicked when fighting western society?

48

[quote]btm62 wrote:
Alexander was a brilliant tactician and had more than a little luck. I believe research will show superior weaponry and armor also.

I got all this from the history channel special I watched the other night. I love that channel. [/quote]

Alexander did change Greek warfare quite a bit.

He was the first Greek warlord to make heavy use of Cavalry. “Classic” Greece (Athens, Sparta, Thebes, etc.) is very hilly and mountainous, and isn’t good for horses, so the Greeks used primarily infantry in their militaries. Macedonia to the north had lots of plains and flatlands. Alexander raised the first powerful Greek Cavalry and used it to devastating effect.

Second, Alexander altered the Greek Phalanx. He gave Hoplites much longer spears so that Hoplites four or five ranks deep could still reach the enemy with their spears. Before, only the first two ranks of Hoplites could reach the enemy while the rest of them just pushed and waited. Now, five ranks of Hoplites could reach the enemy with their spears. This only increased the effieciency of the phalanx.

If you see pictures of Alexander’s phalanxes, they were literally walls of spears. You could barely see the soldiers through the spearheards.

Third, Alexander pioneered the use of siege engines. Before Alexander, a siege meant that an army would surround a city, cut off the supply lines, and wait for the city to submit or starve. Alexander was the first to say “Hey, why don’t I just tear down the city walls and storm into the city with my army?”

Many military campaigns stalled because an Army had reached a city and was held to a draw. Winter would come, or the army would get tired of waiting, and the invading army went home. Defenders knew that if they could defend the city walls, they might be able to outlast ANY army.

Alexander changed that. He simply destroyed the city walls, and then stormed in with his army.

This was a HUGE development in warfare. City walls were the final protection; armies and citizens knew that if all failed, their walls would hold. By destroying the walls, Alexander took away the defender’s final defense. It was truly was like a metaphoric rape of a city.

If not even the walls could stop Alexander, then what could?

His new-and-improved phalanxes assured superiority on the ground. The Macedonian cavalry assured superiority on the army’s flanks. The siege engines assured that not even running and hiding could save you from Alexander.

THAT is how Alexander conquered the world.

49

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

The Information Age may also make war obsolete. When people actually have to look at the images of war night after night, it might dawn on them to stop that.

[/quote]

I hope the world isn’t that pussified.

50

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
We all know how much Hollywood supports Bush and his policies.[/quote]

Har Dee Har Har, good one.

51

[quote]HardcoreHorn wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

The Information Age may also make war obsolete. When people actually have to look at the images of war night after night, it might dawn on them to stop that.

I hope the world isn’t that pussified.[/quote]

Is it coincidence that the most violent places on the planet are also some of the least technologically advanced?

52

[quote]Grimnuruk wrote:
War epic “300”, a smash hit in the United States for its gory portrayal of the Greco-Persian wars, has drawn the wrath of Iranians for showing their ancestors as bloodthirsty “savages”.
[/quote]

Nuh hu-uh!

EVERYBODY knows the sparta-Persia war never happened. Like the holocaust.

Yeah.

Like the holocaust.

53

[quote]SeanT wrote:
adziar wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:

Give me a f%@king break.

No, the real funny thing is that most people that see this movie wouldn’t know where Persia is.

DB

Or the fact that about half the people going to see this movie don’t know that it’s originally based off an actual event… which I don’t understand why they’re even complaining about it since it d.id actually happen in the past it’s just a part of their history.

Besides why do people have to read into everything these days, they should just accept it as it is, a form of entertainment.

Actually it was based on a comic book. There never was a million persian soldiers to fight the battle. Remember history is written by the winners. I think it was 10,000 vs 300. Still very slim odds, but they outsmarted them and won.[/quote]

Actually it was close to a million soldiers, although that number was exaggerated and it may have been around 500,000 - 750,000 by some experts.

And they didn’t win, the spartans were all killed when the light armored persians realized they couldnt’ defeat the heavily armed greeks in combat and drew back their troops, assaulting them with arrows until everyone of them was dead.

54

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
otoko wrote:
…Don’t you mean government not people? Sounds like you are a victim of propaganda. I do not know if there are many Iranians in your community but tere are alot in Tokyo. I have spoken to some and they say Iran isn’t how it is portrayed in American media. Some aren’t even Muslim but since Islam is the state religion(they can’t choose not to be) they are “Muslims” when in Iran. …

Sounds about as repressive as it is portrayed in the American media.

We understand Iranians are people just like us but their government sucks. They are forced to pretend to be Muslim!

Also the fact that the Iranians refer to cultural official is telling.

Iran is pretty messed up. The sooner they get rid of their government the better for them and the world.[/quote]

They did, at least for a while. Mohammad Khatami (president from 97-05) was attemting (and succeding) to reform the political system, limit the religious extremism, improve rights to women and establish free speech. The difficulty is that the Supreme leader is a religious leader who can block alot of the presidents reforms.

As well as this there are the constant death threats and a few assasination attemts by extremist groups.

Despite all this, he was doing an excellent job and seemed to have the support of the Iranian people and the international community. However he lost the election in '05 because post 9-11 Iran was named in the “axis of evil” and the US ivaded Afganistan and Iraq (both of which neighbour Iran).

In my opinion it was the fear of an apparent imminant invasion that gave the hardliners the support they needed. (FYI most of the moderate cadidates were banned from parliament by the supreme leader, thus preventing them from voting.) One of Khatami’s key points was that Iran would be accepted by the world if it made these reforms.

But instead Bush did everything but declare war on them.
Sorry about the long post but to sum up the moderate Iranians tried and we, the international community, failed to back them up.

55

I didn’t know Persia or Sparta had anything at all to do with the Iranians…and I bet 90% of the population didn’t either.

56

God damn religion.

57

[quote]HardcoreHorn wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

The Information Age may also make war obsolete. When people actually have to look at the images of war night after night, it might dawn on them to stop that.

I hope the world isn’t that pussified.[/quote]

You’re obviously a guy that’s never seen combat.

58

[quote]HardcoreHorn wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

The Information Age may also make war obsolete. When people actually have to look at the images of war night after night, it might dawn on them to stop that.

I hope the world isn’t that pussified.[/quote]

Problem is that the ability to kill is increasing dramatically. Ever watched ‘2001’? Why’d God put that obelisk on the moon? God knew that our ability for spaceflight would about coincide with our ability to destroy ourselves.

59

Pretty much off-topic, but I just wanted to chime in and say, this stuff totally fascinates me… I don’t remember learning any of it in school (that’s not to say they didn’t try to teach it to us), but I’m getting the itch to hit the ol’ library and get me some books on this topic!

Thanks for giving me something else to try and squeeze into my free-time deficit. :^)

Bob

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
btm62 wrote:
Alexander was a brilliant tactician and had more than a little luck. I believe research will show superior weaponry and armor also.

I got all this from the history channel special I watched the other night. I love that channel.

Alexander did change Greek warfare quite a bit.

He was the first Greek warlord to make heavy use of Cavalry. “Classic” Greece (Athens, Sparta, Thebes, etc.) is very hilly and mountainous, and isn’t good for horses, so the Greeks used primarily infantry in their militaries. Macedonia to the north had lots of plains and flatlands. Alexander raised the first powerful Greek Cavalry and used it to devastating effect.

Second, Alexander altered the Greek Phalanx. He gave Hoplites much longer spears so that Hoplites four or five ranks deep could still reach the enemy with their spears. Before, only the first two ranks of Hoplites could reach the enemy while the rest of them just pushed and waited. Now, five ranks of Hoplites could reach the enemy with their spears. This only increased the effieciency of the phalanx.

If you see pictures of Alexander’s phalanxes, they were literally walls of spears. You could barely see the soldiers through the spearheards.

Third, Alexander pioneered the use of siege engines. Before Alexander, a siege meant that an army would surround a city, cut off the supply lines, and wait for the city to submit or starve. Alexander was the first to say “Hey, why don’t I just tear down the city walls and storm into the city with my army?”

Many military campaigns stalled because an Army had reached a city and was held to a draw. Winter would come, or the army would get tired of waiting, and the invading army went home. Defenders knew that if they could defend the city walls, they might be able to outlast ANY army.

Alexander changed that. He simply destroyed the city walls, and then stormed in with his army.

This was a HUGE development in warfare. City walls were the final protection; armies and citizens knew that if all failed, their walls would hold. By destroying the walls, Alexander took away the defender’s final defense. It was truly was like a metaphoric rape of a city.

If not even the walls could stop Alexander, then what could?

His new-and-improved phalanxes assured superiority on the ground. The Macedonian cavalry assured superiority on the army’s flanks. The siege engines assured that not even running and hiding could save you from Alexander.

THAT is how Alexander conquered the world.[/quote]

60

[quote]jwillow wrote:
HardcoreHorn wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

The Information Age may also make war obsolete. When people actually have to look at the images of war night after night, it might dawn on them to stop that.

I hope the world isn’t that pussified.

You’re obviously a guy that’s never seen combat.[/quote]

I haven’t seen combat but that’s not what the post said. I have seen, as the post puts it, plenty of images of war (you can find them on the internet pretty easily) and none of them have discouraged me from war.