General Forum

General Forum

  1. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29872
    14 Mar '16 00:52
    To paraphrase Napoleon, if I may:

    History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon.

    What are your favourite beefs with historical received wisdom and/or conspiracy/alternative theories [about what you think actually came to pass] that you subscribe to or are tempted by?
  2. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    14 Mar '16 01:43
    Originally posted by FMF
    To paraphrase Napoleon, if I may:

    [b]History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon.


    What are your favourite beefs with historical received wisdom and/or conspiracy/alternative theories [about what you think actually came to pass] that you subscribe to or are tempted by?[/b]
    History repeats itself because each successive generation has to learn all over again what the previous generation learned in the same way. It's the same story retold time and again. Brother killing brother.

    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it! 😉
  3. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29872
    14 Mar '16 02:08
    Originally posted by josephw
    History repeats itself because each successive generation has to learn all over again what the previous generation learned in the same way. It's the same story retold time and again. Brother killing brother.

    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it! 😉
    Thanks. But something more directly connected to the OP question would be even more interesting. 😉
  4. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    14 Mar '16 02:26
    Originally posted by FMF
    Thanks. But something more directly connected to the OP question would be even more interesting. 😉
    I'd have to think about it for awhile. I'll sleep on it. 😴
  5. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Mr. Wolf
    at home
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    14 Mar '16 03:52
    Originally posted by FMF
    To paraphrase Napoleon, if I may:

    [b]History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon.


    What are your favourite beefs with historical received wisdom and/or conspiracy/alternative theories [about what you think actually came to pass] that you subscribe to or are tempted by?[/b]
    WW2 myths
    The Spitfire was the plane that won the Battle of Britain.
    We (Allies) were fighting against Fascism/Jewish Persecution.
    The US came to Europe's aid.

    The Interregnum (1649–1660)
    An important part of British History "brushed under the carpet"
    Royalists = "Goodies"
    Roundheads = "Baddies"
  6. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    14 Mar '16 04:46
    Originally posted by FMF
    Thanks. But something more directly connected to the OP question would be even more interesting. 😉
    Well we'll all get to work on making it more interesting. Any suggestions?
  7. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29872
    14 Mar '16 05:44
    Originally posted by JS357
    Well we'll all get to work on making it more interesting. Any suggestions?
    'History repeats itself' and 'History is all about brother killing brother' would perhaps make interesting threads in their own right. wolfgang59 on the other hand, I would suggest, has understood the point of this thread. 🙂
  8. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29872
    14 Mar '16 07:321 edit
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    WW2 myths
    The Spitfire was the plane that won the Battle of Britain.
    We (Allies) were fighting against Fascism/Jewish Persecution.
    The US came to Europe's aid.

    The Interregnum (1649–1660)
    An important part of British History "brushed under the carpet"
    Royalists = "Goodies"
    Roundheads = "Baddies"
    Myth: The coup d'etat in Indonesia starting on 30 September 1965 was staged by the PKI (Indonesian Communist Party).
  9. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    14 Mar '16 07:55
    If personal history is irrelevant, as it pales in comparison to the
    meaninglessness of such a brief existence, why would collective history
    be any more worth pondering about?
  10. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Mr. Wolf
    at home
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    14 Mar '16 08:19
    Originally posted by Seitse
    If personal history is irrelevant, as it pales in comparison to the
    meaninglessness of such a brief existence, why would collective history
    be any more worth pondering about?
    The worthiness is not being debated is it? ... although that might make an interesting thread.

    Do you believe all history?
    Do you know some "accepted" history is bunk?

    Share ...
  11. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29872
    14 Mar '16 08:22
    What theory do most people in the US subscribe to when it comes to the assassination of JFK?
  12. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    14 Mar '16 08:383 edits
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    WW2 myths
    The Spitfire was the plane that won the Battle of Britain.
    We (Allies) were fighting against Fascism/Jewish Persecution.
    The US came to Europe's aid.

    The Interregnum (1649–1660)
    An important part of British History "brushed under the carpet"
    Royalists = "Goodies"
    Roundheads = "Baddies"
    Although the Spitfire is a beautiful plane, the version that fought in 1940 was inferior to its main German rival, the Messerschmitt 109E. Spitfires merely had eight Browning machine guns with 14.7 seconds worth of ammunition, which compared badly to the ME-109E with its 55 seconds of ammunition and two 20mm cannon. Although the Spitfire may have been more manoeuvrable at high speeds, such an attribute was not particularly relevant for the form of air-to-air combat being practised above the skies of Southern England. The Me-109E could climb faster, accelerate faster, and dive faster – three attributes that made it a far more effective fighter than the 1940 Spitfire.

    YouTube
  13. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35774
    14 Mar '16 09:43
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Although the Spitfire is a beautiful plane, the version that fought in 1940 was inferior to its main German rival, the Messerschmitt 109E. Spitfires merely had eight Browning machine guns with 14.7 seconds worth of ammunition, which compared badly to the ME-109E with its 55 seconds of ammunition and two 20mm cannon. Although the Spitfire may have bee ...[text shortened]... ar more effective fighter than the 1940 Spitfire.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moreRketqek
    Really? Then the Germans won the Battle of Britain?

    Defenders always have more to fight for than the invaders.
  14. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    14 Mar '16 10:40
    Originally posted by FMF
    What theory do most people in the US subscribe to when it comes to the assassination of JFK?
    No idea. Mine is, echoing Malcolm X, that is nothing else but a case of chickens coming home to roost.
  15. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    14 Mar '16 10:42
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    Do you believe all history?
    I philosophically negate the existence of anything close to what history, as a field of study, claims to be.
Back to Top