America(2005) vs Rome (when they were big)

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- America(2005) vs Rome (when they were big)
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Posted by Frode on Jan-25-2005 20:06:

quote:
Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
"and remember, it took rome a very long time to stop sparticus the gladiator during the slave rebellion, and they never stopped hannibal. and this was in the rome's home turf. america on the other hand, has fought its modern wars all outside its domestic land."

If the Romans didn't stop Hannibal, why wasn't Rome destroyed instead of Carthage?

Posted by Cloudburst on Jan-25-2005 20:07:

quote:
Originally posted by Spartan
Maybe modern day Swedes and Fins will conquer America?

Alright, who's the bastard rat??

Posted by Floorfiller on Jan-25-2005 20:18:

quote:
Originally posted by Frode
If the Romans didn't stop Hannibal, why wasn't Rome destroyed instead of Carthage?

Posted by Cal on Jan-25-2005 20:26:

quote:
Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
maximus(crowe), if u remember was from spain, a spainard.

That was a lie disseminated by Saddam Hussein in cahoots with Billy Dee Williams

Posted by Spartan on Jan-25-2005 20:38:

quote:
Originally posted by Spartan
Maybe modern day Swedes and Fins will conquer America?

quote:
Originally posted by Cloudburst
Alright, who's the bastard rat??

haha dude why is that offensive? and I'm from Stockholm anyways

Posted by DjShlian on Jan-25-2005 21:59:

i think you guys are forgetting the Jar Jar vs. Star Wars Robots theory. technology is nothing against angry apes

Posted by Krypton on Jan-25-2005 23:56:

quote:
Originally posted by Frode
If the Romans didn't stop Hannibal, why wasn't Rome destroyed instead of Carthage?

because when hannibal got word that carthage was under direct threat, he travelled back to carthage. he wasnt defeated in italy, but was defeated in north africa. and with that, carthage was defeated, and the city salted so that it could never be rebuilt.

Posted by Floorfiller on Jan-25-2005 23:58:

quote:
Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
because when hannibal got word that carthage was under direct threat, he travelled back to carthage. he wasnt defeated in italy, but was defeated in north africa. and with that, carthage was defeated, and the city salted so that it could never be rebuilt.

ok...i see what you're saying...but wasn't he still defeated?

Posted by Cloudburst on Jan-26-2005 00:03:

quote:
Originally posted by Spartan
haha dude why is that offensive? and I'm from Stockholm anyways

it was meant as piss poor joke, that someone had ratted out on our plans to conquer the US...

sometimes sarcasm and average english doesn't go hand in hand...

Posted by La5eR on Jan-26-2005 00:11:

Folks I think hes talking in order of magnitude. Not by technology. Granted the technology of war was pretty damn good back then I doubt that in todays war tactics the phalanx would come in handy. Lets make it even shall we. A bow would be an m16, the trebuchets would be mortar or artillery. The horse drawn carriages would be some type of armoured mechanised vehicle. Just think of the romans' war-tech the same as our current war-tech but maybe 10 years in the past from today 2005. This question requires folks to think outside the box.

Posted by Krypton on Jan-26-2005 00:18:

quote:
Originally posted by Floorfiller
ok...i see what you're saying...but wasn't he still defeated?

lol, yes i said that. he was defeated in north africa. not italy.

Posted by Floorfiller on Jan-26-2005 00:43:

quote:
Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
lol, yes i said that. he was defeated in north africa. not italy.

yes i know you did...i'm just saying...that they did stop him because they made a tactical manouevre that forced him to change his plan and give up his attack. the attack on North Africa in essence...stopped him hehehe

Posted by Radagast on Jan-26-2005 00:50:

Unless you, as a futuristic American soldier, bring an infinite number of gas and bullets your tanks and guns will become useless soon. And when that happens, hardened, war-trained phalanx are going to skewer you like the technology dependant fool you are.

Wow, people actually do sleep with their eyes open. Amazing.

Posted by Orbax on Jan-26-2005 01:43:

this is kind of like the horse sized duck or 100 duck sized horses debate

Posted by Krypton on Jan-26-2005 03:14:

Posted by TranceSpeeder on Jan-26-2005 03:19:

Posted by Spartan on Jan-26-2005 04:47:

quote:
Originally posted by Cloudburst
it was meant as piss poor joke, that someone had ratted out on our plans to conquer the US...

sometimes sarcasm and average english doesn't go hand in hand...

aaaaaaaaaah, RAT I get it now

Posted by eRRaTiK on Jan-26-2005 05:47:

should have made the question clearer.

if the weapons and capabilities were equal.... romans would win.

americans have balls, but that's about it.

the french would run.

aussies would chuck some shrimps on da barbie and crocodile dundee on all ya sheilas.

happy australia day!

Posted by Cal on Jan-26-2005 06:00:

quote:
Originally posted by TranceSpeeder

Oh man this pic is just begging to be photochopped

Posted by DJ-Dank-Poo on Jan-26-2005 07:38:

well shave my balls and call them walnuts, but i think that M16's, 50 cals, 240 bravos, 249 SAW's, and the fire team support of mortars and artillery would definitely destroy an army of shields and swords... i mean if i can hit the 300m target 3 out of 4 times, and the 50m target every time, there isn't much of a chance for any of them keeping in mind a sword is only effective within 2-3 meters

Posted by e*motion on Jan-26-2005 07:41:

europeans have soul and heart. Americans.. they have fast food. Go Rome.

Posted by Frode on Jan-26-2005 08:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Floorfiller
yes i know you did...i'm just saying...that they did stop him because they made a tactical manouevre that forced him to change his plan and give up his attack. the attack on North Africa in essence...stopped him hehehe

exactly.
And Hannibal didn't dare to attack the city of Rome. He didn't get any further than Northern Italy were his army was slowly reduced by ambushes.

quote:
Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
suree, but what i meant in the very beginning was rome had a lot of trouble defending their home turf, the homeland. whereas america hasnt been invaded since 1812 by the british.

What's your point? Rome existed for more than 1000 years, that leaves quite some time for invasions, especially when its enemies don't need to cross the atlantic ocean.

Posted by DjShlian on Jan-26-2005 08:03:

dats impossible. julius caesar can't live for 1000 years. it defies logic

Posted by Cloudburst on Jan-26-2005 09:22:

quote:
Originally posted by DjShlian
dats impossible. julius caesar can't live for 1000 years. it defies logic

I see you're having fun with this topic...

quote:
Originally posted by Spartan
aaaaaaaaaah, RAT I get it now

Pages (2): « 1 [2]