skel

Hey everyone! long time no see. been a few years since i was here last, but ill cut to the chase. I am having a discussion with someone (actually hes having it with me...) about ancient battles. It sparked when we were talkin about the new movie 300. He said "its only the greatest military achievement in history!" and i said, "are you sure? theres got to be others just as big or bigger." Well he wont let it go and i thought id have some fun and see if i cant prove to him there is. So can yall give me some battles to look in to? I have honestly forgotten so much about history since high school is sad.

i dont get what all the people were saying about that, i mean yah the templars were war hungry and agressive.. but like i said before the whole movie is pretty much somed up with what the priest says to orlandos charactor about religious fanatics. i think that by showing the europeans as the warhungry fantatics (as the muslims are shown today) it is simply just putting the shoes on the other foot so to speak. showing that both side are at fault and are crazy when it comes to proclaiming violence in the name of an intangible spirit such as God.

what do you mean by that? (in an attempt to start a good convo )

wow... dominus! ive heard alot about you from guys like Vhil and kegg and the like. didnt know you posted here. (in case your wondering who i am.. im just a memeber of the uruk-hai, vhils unit...) i may be going to college in maryland or in that general area and was thinking about possibly joining you guys some time...

the link doesnt work for me

it seems to me that rome was such an incredible monster of power and military might that no one no matter how close thay came actually succeeded in destroying rome. through all the enemies and all the attacks and all the years of war rome remained strong. yet isnt it interesting that it took romans themselves through civil war and other things to destroy one of the greatest empires in history? what are your thoughts on that?

that was really interesting thanks forsharing that man!

Brute You are 0% Rational, 28% Extroverted, 85% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant. You are the Brute! You are introverted, arrogant, brutal, and more intuitive than rational. Like a big, dumb animal, you are driven by your emotions more than your reason, and as a result of the fact that you care very little for the feelings of others, you tend to be rather selfish. Because of your selfishness, you also tend to be a bit arrogant, seeing yourself as big or strong or smart or always correct. This makes you a stubborn, irrational, emotional brute. King Kong best represents the gorilla-version of your personality. Emotional, introverted (King Kong was isolated on his own island, after all), brutal, and arrogant (proud to be the largest ape on Earth!), Kong would probably get along very well with you, seeing as how you share many of the same traits. Aside from, you know, all the fur. So your personality defect is simply that you resemble King Kong to a very high degree. Which probably isn't a good thing, you big brute! To put it less negatively: 1. You are more INTUITIVE than rational. 2. You are more INTROVERTED than extroverted. 3. You are more BRUTAL than gentle. 4. You are more ARROGANT than humble. Compatibility: Your exact opposite is the Hand-Raiser. Other personalities you would probably get along with are the Class Clown, the Schoolyard Bully, and the Sociopath.

holy crap 6 hours!?!?! that is a must have!

i just saw the movie myself.. i thought it was well worth the 4 bucks to get in as far as the whole making the christians look horrid and the muslims ritious or what not.. i think the movies purpose was to show how religious fanatics... no matter what religion... are crazy, savage, and warhungry. and for the first time.. i dont hate orlando bloom in a movie. i thought he did rather well as his roll, although i really wish liam neeson had more of a part in it.

heh.. political correctness offends me nazis vs the ragheads... ROUND ONE!!! (im not racist... i hate everyone equally )

werd people used to be small back in the day... which leads me to another thought i had on the whole medieval army verses rome thing... the size of the soldiers in the miedieval army vs the romans...

slackin.. i personally think hes thinking of scipio africanus... hes usually the first one people think of when it comes to that kind of question. i know i do and most of the people i know do...

ooooo the third crusade was no good.... thay shoulda done the 34th crusade! or the 81st! but not the third. bad choice for the third

well i personally like the military ranking thing but yall do what you want its your board