Historical Combat, War, Geopolitics History and Analysis

[Anastasius]

One is turkic other is something how Is kıpchaks are their ancestors???

If a group of Turkic people were to establish a state in South America in an alternate history of the 1600s and then 400 years later, their descendants are a mix of the Turkic arrivals and the natives who were there, does that mean that those natives are not the descendants of said Turkic people as well as their native side? Does that mean that their culture is not also an inheritor of Turkic culture in addition to others?

 

[Afif]

I mean, they ARE their ancestors. Mughals were based mainly out of modern-day Bangladesh and while it's true that they have Turkic origins,

@Anastasius mughal were based in Delhi and Nawabs were based in Bangla.

Of course mughal empire included current day Bangladesh but nawabs were autonomous. And sometimes theu even declared independence from the empire.

that doesn't really change the fact that it's Bangladesh' history (also Pakistan and India's but those two don't really consider it the same way as Bangladesh does).

That is correct, we have more Turkic mixture compared to greater India ( which include current day Pakistan )

 

[Chakib.Y]

I was once talking to a lovely French women ( who was student of economics or sowmthing ). Conversation was mostly random. We were talking about hijab ban and that is how Algeria's 'war of independence' enter the conversation. ( For those of who don't know, it was a symbol of resistance against French oppression during the war for Algerian women )

When it came to the matter of mass rape she very unexpectedly yet casually tried to explain it that way,

"even though it was a crime but it was kind of necessary'' children of 'LOVE' is needed to 'merge' two nation during war time''

Tbh I was literally shocked. But hey, I guess for her it was 'pragmatic Realism"

Now just imagine if we use the same logic with Russian war crimes in Ukraine, we would be considered simply as uncivilized and out of modernity.

Not to derive my conclusions from just one conversation, but the truth is over the time i came to realize, even today Almost unconsciously Europe has a different View of what it deserves for themselves compared to what others deserves.

rape babies are children of love... this is either sociopathy of the greatest proportion or good ole schizophrenia
you see the type of delusion and hubris we have to deal with ? you see why you'll find no empathy from the average algerian if every frenchmen or france entirely burned to the ground, if anything we'd cheer for it.
although my only gripe is not witnessing this encounter my guy else's i'd give her a try for a "love child" to mayybe bring the two people together, maybe this time it might work. ****ing skank

 

[Afif]

rape babies are children of love... this is either sociopathy of the greatest proportion or good ole schizophrenia
you see the type of delusion and hubris we have to deal with ? you see why you'll find no empathy from the average algerian if every frenchmen or france entirely burned to the ground, if anything we'd cheer for it.
although my only gripe is not witnessing this encounter my guy else's i'd give her a try for a "love child" to mayybe bring the two people together, maybe this time it might work. ****ing skank

Easy bro! .
I understand your pain. What brits did in Bangla wasn't good either.

But hey, just because they did it we cannot abandon our own moral compuss and code of conduct. Cause then, we wouldn't be any different. And this is very important to remember always.

 

[Chakib.Y]

Easy bro! .
I understand your pain. What brits did in Bangla wasn't good either.

But hey, just because they did it we cannot abandon our own moral compuss and code of conduct. Cause then, we wouldn't be any different. And this is very important to remember always.

I don't think its morally wrong to subject your enemy to his own morality, I mean we do have something similar in islam don't we ? (punishment of banu quraidha)
the difference between brits and the french is that the french are still smug about it and would say similar shit, although alhamdullah the migrants from subsaharan africa and refugees and even maghribi migrants from north africa are putting that theory to test...

 

[Afif]

I don't think its morally wrong to subject your enemy to his own morality,

No, you can't subject your enemy to own his morality!
For example, if they kill women, children and innocent people how could we do the same?

I mean we do have something similar in islam don't we ? (punishment of banu quraidha)

I don't think we can fit the Banu quraidha incident into modern context. Back then every adult man of a tribe used to be a fighter and carry sword ( specially in arabia ) so they were legal target.

It is not the case any more.

 

[Chakib.Y]

No, you can't subject your enemy to own his morality!
For example, if they kill women, children and innocent people how could we do the same?



I don't think we can fit the Banu quraidha incident into modern context. Back then every adult man of a tribe used to be a fighter ( specially in arabia ) so they were legal target.

It is not the case any more.

1-if his doctrine explicitly anounced the permissibility or advocated deliberate targeting of civilians then it must be fair game to subject him to the same treatment, actually this is the basis on which wars had been waged according to since ww1 (in principal, basing it on humanism/anti humanism, Schmitt has a good commentary regarding this issue, he declares it as hypocritical and false but it is how the world exactly been functioning)

2-in the case of banu quraidha the law that was applied on them was the mosaic law of warfare, the prophet consented to it, it wasn't based upon a tactical or strategic assessment of the outcome, it was treating them in accordance to their own law, because Islam spares noncombatant mature or not, would either take them as slaves or set them free or trade them for hostages.

I understand where you're coming from bro and i sympathize with you, but that's just how the world is, our own history from the ocean to the ocean is a demonstration of what would happen to you when you pull punches against your adversary...

 

[Afif]

1-if his doctrine explicitly anounced the permissibility or advocated deliberate targeting of civilians then it must be fair game to subject him to the same treatment, actually this is the basis on which wars had been waged according to since ww1 (in principal, basing it on humanism/anti humanism, Schmitt has a good commentary regarding this issue, he declares it as hypocritical and false but it is how the world exactly been functioning)

Not correct, I would disagree.

2-in the case of banu quraidha the law that was applied on them was the mosaic law of warfare, the prophet consented to it, it wasn't based upon a tactical or strategic assessment of the outcome, it was treating them in accordance to their own law.

There is a disagreement in this whole matter between scholars. But let's not go down to that 'rabbit hole'

The fact of the Metter is, it is agreed upon that, the only law that Muslims can apply in today's war is the islamic law.

there is no way you can deliberately kill women or children to subject your enemy to his own morality ( if they happened to do the same. ) No sane islamic scholar would permiss that.

our own history from the ocean to the ocean is a demonstration of what would happen to you when you pull punches against your adversary...

Could you care to explain it farther?

 

[B_A]

Completely agreed. To fight with the US, you have to destroy a military infrastructure equal to about twenty Ukraines and eleven super carriers. That's before you get to the mainland. US can't be matched in the couple of decades we'll see. However, it can fall to internal factors.

The thing we'll gain by having this plane is:

• A high level of deterrence which no US vassal in our proximity can attain. They can't send greeks against us and watch from afar as a regional competitor speds its energy with a miniscule affair that escalates into a full conflict.
• A high level of independence regarding arms embargos.
• The ability to export military power to our allies to a huge extent.
• The ability to respond to a leveled escalation. Example: North Korea can't do shvt against small infractions because their playbook is only two levels deep: chill or nuclear holocaust. You need steps between that in order to 'erode' the political will of the US.
• The technical capability, facilities and personnel to make this happen, which can be used in other projects as things wind down.
• The pleasure of saying fuck you to the world's superpower and not be a joke while doing it (cough iran cough).

These are worth the sacrifices we are making, and then some.

No

Just 2 or three CV needs to destroyed and Chinese and Russian would do remained job

US needs a least 7-8 carriers to deal with Chinese in east Asia.

 

[Philip the Arab]

No

Just 2 or three CV needs to destroyed and Chinese and Russian would do remained job

US needs a least 7-8 carriers to deal with Chinese in east Asia.

If only it was that easy, never underestimate the Americans my friend. 9/11 and Pearl Harbor are great examples of FAFO.

 

[boredaf]

No

Just 2 or three CV needs to destroyed and Chinese and Russian would do remained job

US needs a least 7-8 carriers to deal with Chinese in east Asia.

I'm going to assume this is a joke, if not, you're talking from a point of utter ignorance.

Setting nuclear weapons aside, there isn't a coalition of countries on this planet that could set foot on US soil. No country has the power projection capability to even see their shores. And, US in a complete war time economy mode is an ungodly beast in terms of industrial production that is impossible to surpass.

There is nothing even worthy of discussing here.

 

[B_A]

I'm going to assume this is a joke, if not, you're talking from a point of utter ignorance.

Setting nuclear weapons aside, there isn't a coalition of countries on this planet that could set foot on US soil. No country has the power projection capability to even see their shores. And, US in a complete war time economy mode is an ungodly beast in terms of industrial production that is impossible to surpass.

There is nothing even worthy of discussing here.

So American is impossible to lost the Korean war and Vietnam war.

Even a poor countriy likes Chinese in 1950 can fight and stop the American,force them to retreated hundreds km.

And the American in 1950s was far powerful than now.

Just go back to read more history.

 

[B_A]

If only it was that easy, never underestimate the Americans my friend. 9/11 and Pearl Harbor are great examples of FAFO.

If that's true.

Why Douglas MacArthur the greatest American general, can't even beat Chinese in Korean war?

 

[Philip the Arab]

If that's true.

Why Douglas MacArthur the greatest American general, can't even beat Chinese in Korean war?

Comparing 1950 America to modern day America is like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[B_A]

Comparing 1950 America to modern day America is like comparing apples to oranges.

Yes the 1950 American was much more powerful than American in 2023

1950 American had 50% gdp and 90% nuclear war of the world and full of wasp people.

Not the 2023 one which had great deficit to Chinese and Japanese.

 

[boredaf]

And the American in 1950s was far powerful than now.

This is enough for me to understand that you have no idea what you're talking about and certainly oblivious to the inner working of the US society during the time of those two wars, which was just after WWII and war weariness was at an all time high.

Before telling people to read something, you should try to do it yourself lad.

 

[YeşilVatan]

No

Just 2 or three CV needs to destroyed and Chinese and Russian would do remained job

US needs a least 7-8 carriers to deal with Chinese in east Asia.

I also liked C&C Generals when I was a kid

 

[B_A]

This is enough for me to understand that you have no idea what you're talking about and certainly oblivious to the inner working of the US society during the time of those two war, which was just after WWI and war weariness was at an all time high.

Before telling people to read something, you should try to do it yourself lad.

Just go and check how powerful was the American industry and gdp in 1950s Compared to the world.

1950 American was the centre of industry,by now they import everything from Chinese

Even Trump said he would make American strong again.

But the people here know American better than Trump and suggested American is far far great than before.

The American fan boy just want to destroy every thread by doing Anglos Saxon god worship.

 

[Nilgiri]

I also liked C&C Generals when I was a kid

China will grow largeuh....we have BIG plans!

 

[B_A]

This is enough for me to understand that you have no idea what you're talking about and certainly oblivious to the inner working of the US society during the time of those two wars, which was just after WWII and war weariness was at an all time high.

Before telling people to read something, you should try to do it yourself lad.

I understand western is weaker and weaker now but you don't,just replied Anglos Saxon powerful powerful.