Monday Morning Politics from NY Times

[Dave Schwartz]

This is an interesting story from Roman history.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/30/opinion/30harris.html?ex=1159934400&en=2e054a0a83d41143&ei=5087%0A

Note: May require a subscription. I do not know.)


Dave Schwartz

[46zilzal]

in the book BLINK the author describes the millenium war games and how a retired Marine general did the same thing vs. a "Middle East dictator" who needed to be removed. Embarassed them until they changed the rules on him and subsequently wiped him out by making sure he was so weak he lost.

[Dick Schmidt]

I think the author of that piece is really reaching when he tries to fit that incident from Roman history into a lesson on today's situation. For one thing, the policy of the Roman government was that war was a business and they were to be fought for profit. Worked for a thousand years or so. The best description of Roman attitude regarding their neighbors I have read is that they were pirates on land. You had it, they wanted it, they took it.

Had the author bothered to study Pompey's campaign, he would have found it to have lasted a great deal longer than three months, that it was just one more expansion of the Empire (which showed a profit to the Roman state) and that the Roman constitution already contained provisions for appointing a "Dictator" with absolute power. It had been done several times before. By the way, when Pompey was finished with the pirates, he returned all power to the Senate and retired to the countryside, at least for a while. He was wildly popular among the people and Senate. Rome fought most of its wars of expansion under the Republic, including some of the most savage. The Emperors were much more conservative in their conquests.

I do hate it when someone with a political ax to grind tries to force "lessons" from history into supporting some aspect of current events. This guy has no more insight into Roman war practices than he does into the war on terror.

Dick

"Stop quoting laws to us. We carry swords"
- Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus

[bigmack]

The use of Pompey the Great is far removed from the story of the UK authors analogy, with the exception of the build-up

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d1/CS002910.jpg/200px-CS002910.jpg

[ljb]

I think the author of that piece is really reaching when he tries to fit that incident from Roman history into a lesson on today's situation. For one thing, the policy of the Roman government was that war was a business and they were to be fought for profit. Worked for a thousand years or so. The best description of Roman attitude regarding their neighbors I have read is that they were pirates on land. You had it, they wanted it, they took it.

Had the author bothered to study Pompey's campaign, he would have found it to have lasted a great deal longer than three months, that it was just one more expansion of the Empire (which showed a profit to the Roman state) and that the Roman constitution already contained provisions for appointing a "Dictator" with absolute power. It had been done several times before. By the way, when Pompey was finished with the pirates, he returned all power to the Senate and retired to the countryside, at least for a while. He was wildly popular among the people and Senate. Rome fought most of its wars of expansion under the Republic, including some of the most savage. The Emperors were much more conservative in their conquests.

I do hate it when someone with a political ax to grind tries to force "lessons" from history into supporting some aspect of current events. This guy has no more insight into Roman war practices than he does into the war on terror.

Dick

"Stop quoting laws to us. We carry swords"
- Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus

Have you bothered to check Halliburtons bottom line lately ? Duh

[Dick Schmidt]

What does Halliburton have to do with this thread? We're talking about the misapplication of a historical precedent being used to support a current political opinion. Read the thread before you post.

Duh!


Dick

It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

[Dave Schwartz]

Dick,

We're talking about the misapplication of a historical precedent being used to support a current political opinion.


Actually, my intention was not to support any current political opinion.

In fact, if anything, I found the entire comparison ludicrous.

Nevertheless, I found the history lesson interesting.


Dave