Did you know that many Roman soldiers used to write home regularly?
Today America talks about oil in the Middle East. In the time of Rome, the oil was wheat. Egypt was Rome’s breadbasket. So the Romans said they had to control the Middle East to prevent starvation. They said that control had to include Palestine because it was right by Egypt.
So the Israeli zealot groups harrassed the Roman solders, and Rome would not let its soldiers go in and clean that crowd out.
Sound familiar? And Roman parents wrote to the Emperor:
“Why are you letting our boys over there die and not letting them go after their atttackers? Why are you holding them back?”
Sound familiar?
So in 69 AD, the Romans went in and wiped the zealots out and burned the Temple. That was what we now call “collateral damage.”
Today’s Israelis are all for it.
#1 by Richard L. Hardison on 11/07/2004 - 1:11 pm
Burning of the temple wasn’t collateral damage. The temple mount was used as a fortress by the Jews. If you turn your “church” into a battle ground you should not be surprised if it gets burned down, even in the case, as with Titus, there were orders to preserve it.
#2 by Bedford on 11/07/2004 - 8:32 pm
The guerilla war in Iraq is the one that the US military is least successful at winning. The Europeans are cutting their nose off to spite their face for not joining in here and trying to overwhelm the opposition in Iraq. The situation there needs to be turned over to the Iraqis as soon as possible but it can’t be done prematurely. I see that D. Duke is concerned about Iran – I think he is needlessly concerned because the military is too stretched now – messing with Iran is not an option However, if Iran is close to producing a nuke, a strike on the nuke facility might happen.
#3 by Elizabeth on 11/08/2004 - 12:02 pm
I was watching TV news this morning, and there was something about Iran.
That reminded me of my college days back in the ’70s, when I was repeatedly harangued by Those Who Know Better about the Great Freedom ahead for Iran once the Shah was out. (I was one of the few speaking out in favor of the Shah.)
We haven’t been alone in Iraq, but it would have been nice to have had more European countries along to help, but, I guess, since we couldn’t shovel billions their way like Saddam did (or promised to do), they just weren’t interested…I am very glad to see the progress in Iraq, especially with the Iraqi government forces.
#4 by Marco Polo on 11/11/2004 - 10:59 am
Excuse me but we have no need to fight in Iraq. All Europeans should get out of there and let Zionist Americans and Israeli’s fight.
The sooner Europe becomes independent the better. Come to think of it the sooner Americans become independent the better too!
America will drown if it keeps on warring.