Ursus

The postmodern academic left has deconstructed the above phrase and found it politically incorrect. A "big stick" is clearly a phallic inspired phrase, and therefore reenforces the violent male hegemony of aggressive competition and power struggle. As such it is deemed oppressive to women, and to any minorities who cannot equally compete in the social power game presided over by advantaged white males. Turning away from this legacy of domination, therefore, they say we should appeal to a more nurturing paradigm as inspired by eco-feminism. The liberal slogan should be "speak inclusively, and hug a tree." Meanwhile, for their own part ,conservatives have long moved beyond the stage of speaking softly or carrying sticks. Their modus operandi is to speak obnxiously and carry a Bible (King James Version) backed up by a vast military-industrial complex. Cheers.

I'd stay home and have a beer.

* Discussions of pre-industrial military tactics, especially if they involve extreme speculation or hypothetical scenarios. Notice how much I comment in the legion folder? Almost never. * Philosophy. Bores the hell out of me. Marcus Aurelius put me to sleep.

Whatever you do, young Anakin, may The Force be with you!

As a sociopath with a sense of honor, I thought it only fair to warn everyone I might go postal someday.

I found a $100 textbook on Art History for $10 from a used books vendor. :-) And I love it so far. I never cared much about art beyond the ancient world, but this is really giving me a broader and deeper perspective.

Re: the first bullet. I'm proud of the American people. They are showing common sense and innovation in trouled times. A 3 year degree sounds great.

Good to know.

I am a Sociopath as well.

Well, I wasn't expecting the Spanish inquisition with this thread. I happen to be one of the religious people who do believe in evolution. But then I was never one to take mythology literally. The only religious people who are automatically opposed to evolution are the ones that do take their creation myths at face value. And I'm perfectly fine with them teaching their beliefs to their crowd within the four walls of their own temple, church or mosque - just not in a public science classroom, since their beliefs should not be construed as either public or science. Also, on another point: I'm not here to babysit anyone, and I do appreciate people who contribute to discussion. But I have to say for the record this place is not a debating club. Every thread I walk into I see the same people trying to score points off each other with alleged lack of knowledge or alleged faulty reasoning. Guess what: no one really cares. Not the moderators, not the site regulars, not the odd passers-by. Not every thread is or should be a debate. It gets ridiculous at times. Especially when we start making snotty comments about elementary school analogies. If we want to go down that road, then the moderators can certainly start sending people to stand in the metaphorical corner with their noses against the wall while the rest of the kids get to play nicely outside. So I am locking this thread as a statement. Cheers.

It's a sign. Tom Cruise is the Messiah!

Amen to that. Star Trek was plagued with: - atrocious techno-babble that passed for dialogue - militant utopian morality, combining the worst of 60's hippie excesses and 90's political correctness, shoved down people's throats. - predictable plots that revolved around characters getting trapped in spatial anomalies, hologram generators, or some other silly sci-fi babble Next to all of that, Kirk landing on a planet of women in mini-skirts seemed somehow sophisticated. Or at least more entertaining.

Wotwotius, I don't think you took the same quiz as the rest of us took.

Yep. Nope. That might be interesting, if the price is right. Thanks.

Whoah ... you're right. When I bought a couple years ago it was only $30. You can get a good used copy for around that price: http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/041...ref=ed_oe_p_olp

Yeah, my local one-mule town library wouldn't have them, and probably wouldn't get them on interlibrary loan for me. Oh, well.

Those books do look interesting. Unfortunately, they also look pricey.

Yes, I tried to get that book once used from a third party seller on Amazon, but the order never went through. I am glad to hear it is a good read, though. Maybe I will pay full price for a new copy! Thanks.

Ok, but - and please don't think this sarcasm is directed personally at you, because it is not - but since the Romans conquered the Hellenes, including Macedonia, isn't the original question a bit like asking: What would have happened if only Brutus had stabbed Caesar? Assume Brutus had a sharp dagger. Assume a level terrain on the Senate floor. Assume Caesar had no missle support standing by. I've been moderating this forum for 3 years. This question comes up again and again (as someone mentioned), and far from being the grand question in classical history, it seems like the most useless one.

Yeah. Didn't the Romans conquer the Hellenistic world? Why exactly is this such a pressing debate?

I need reading material to pass away the summer. Recommend me books or DVDs on the following areas: Early Christianity or Roman Catholicism Judaism in the Greco-Roman world Anything on Paganism I might not have already read Roman Slavery Biographies of Roman statesmen (aside from Caesar and Augustus) A Roman literati I have not already read (in English translation) A book on related cultures (Carthaginians, Persians, Germanic tribes, etc) Anything else on Roman history and culture that does not focus exclusively on the military

Yes, good book! I had forgotten about that one. Cheers.

I have not read it, but Pat Southern's [url="http://www.amazon.com/Empress-Zenobia-Palmyra

Couldn't be worse than Star Trek I or Star Trek V. Or "Nemesis." Or at least I hope not. I'm going to see it this week sometime. Everyone I talked to who doesn't practice Star Trek as a religion seems to have enjoyed it.

Yow. I never did get the slash crowd.