It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, race or culture, greed or imperialism. The battle was cold versus warm. For much of our history, about 5000years, location location location was our basic difference. People in colder climes attacked those in warmer ones. Simple! Once we had overcome this problem of hot and cold, we "matured" to political and religious disputes. I long for "the good old days of keeping it simple": fire and ice in pure combat without any complicating thought.
rumitoid wrote:
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, race or culture, greed or imperialism. The battle was cold versus warm. For much of our history, about 5000years, location location location was our basic difference. People in colder climes attacked those in warmer ones. Simple! Once we had overcome this problem of hot and cold, we "matured" to political and religious disputes. I long for "the good old days of keeping it simple": fire and ice in pure combat without any complicating thought.
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, ra... (
show quote)
So...on a hot day, if I come slap you upside the head with my...4 lb. Cross peen hammer, and take your frosty root beer...we'll be good?
archie bunker wrote:
So...on a hot day, if I come slap you upside the head with my...4 lb. Cross peen hammer, and take your frosty root beer...we'll be good?
There seems to be some polarization here? This is beginning to run hot and cold. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :shock: :shock: :mrgreen:
rumitoid wrote:
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, race or culture, greed or imperialism. The battle was cold versus warm. For much of our history, about 5000years, location location location was our basic difference. People in colder climes attacked those in warmer ones. Simple! Once we had overcome this problem of hot and cold, we "matured" to political and religious disputes. I long for "the good old days of keeping it simple": fire and ice in pure combat without any complicating thought.
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, ra... (
show quote)
As a history fanatic I find your theory just short of amazing. Napoleon and Hitler obviously wanted a warmer climate when they attacked Mother Russia. Maybe it was religious cause Adolf and the short guy were known to be right wing religious nuts.
But the political option is really cheap on your part. Any war at all can be said to be political.
archie bunker wrote:
So...on a hot day, if I come slap you upside the head with my...4 lb. Cross peen hammer, and take your frosty root beer...we'll be good?
Np. I'd do the same. Love root beer,as AuntiE will tell you.
son of witless wrote:
As a history fanatic I find your theory just short of amazing. Napoleon and Hitler obviously wanted a warmer climate when they attacked Mother Russia. Maybe it was religious cause Adolf and the short guy were known to be right wing religious nuts.
But the political option is really cheap on your part. Any war at all can be said to be political.
This is before Hitler and Napoleon. Before we found a way to manage and produce cold.
AuntiE
Loc: 45th Least Free State
rumitoid wrote:
Np. I'd do the same. Love root beer,as AuntiE will tell you.
I desperately needed a laugh. I am sorry it was at the expense of your possible injury with a hammer. I literally was laughing so hard ProgenyE came to inquire as to the cause of the hysterical laughter.
AuntiE wrote:
I desperately needed a laugh. I am sorry it was at the expense of your possible injury with a hammer. I literally was laughing so hard ProgenyE came to inquire as to the cause of the hysterical laughter.
I am Irish. A slap in the head with anything but maybe four megatons of explosives would not even get my attention. Glad you had a good laugh; we all need a lot more of that.
rumitoid wrote:
This is before Hitler and Napoleon. Before we found a way to manage and produce cold.
I consider myself smart, but I don't have a clue, so I'll bite. Before Hitler and Napoleon how did we manage, and better yet how did we produce cold?
son of witless wrote:
I consider myself smart, but I don't have a clue, so I'll bite. Before Hitler and Napoleon how did we manage, and better yet how did we produce cold?
I am perplexed. How did we 'produce cold'? perhaps doofus can enlighten us.
rumitoid wrote:
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, race or culture, greed or imperialism. The battle was cold versus warm. For much of our history, about 5000years, location location location was our basic difference. People in colder climes attacked those in warmer ones. Simple! Once we had overcome this problem of hot and cold, we "matured" to political and religious disputes. I long for "the good old days of keeping it simple": fire and ice in pure combat without any complicating thought.
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, ra... (
show quote)
You kind of over simplified history.
Take the time to look at the history of tropical Islands.
They had wars and disagreements, but, nothing like the rest of the world.
Then look at the Arctic tribes and Eskimos. They too did not have the kind of wars and aggression the rest of the world has suffered.
The tropics had food aplenty and warm weather all the time.
The Arctic regions were so cold, people had to work together or they would all die together.
Most of the real hard core wars happened where there were fours seasons.
Which is where most of the world lives
I suspect, because, with proper planning, there was great wealth and prosperity to be had.
Unfortunately, if things did not go well their would be much death and suffering before the winter months would be over.
Old_Gringo wrote:
I am perplexed. How did we 'produce cold'? perhaps doofus can enlighten us.
Inquiring minds desperately want to know how we produced cold before Napoleon. That was before refrigeration.
This whole thread's premise makes no sense. Human beings have always warred against one another over land and food and everything else. It's pretty much been independent of climate. Although climate factors did induce tribes to invade new territories.
son of witless wrote:
Inquiring minds desperately want to know how we produced cold before Napoleon. That was before refrigeration.
This whole thread's premise makes no sense. Human beings have always warred against one another over land and food and everything else. It's pretty much been independent of climate. Although climate factors did induce tribes to invade new territories.
You misread what I wrote: BOTH before Napoleon and our ability to produce cold.
This was not meant to be a thesis statement for a Harvard paper; it was just a light-hearted way of simplifying history.
That is why I put it in chit-chat but admin moved it.
Ferrous
Loc: Pacific North Coast, CA
rumitoid wrote:
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, race or culture, greed or imperialism. The battle was cold versus warm. For much of our history, about 5000years, location location location was our basic difference. People in colder climes attacked those in warmer ones. Simple! Once we had overcome this problem of hot and cold, we "matured" to political and religious disputes. I long for "the good old days of keeping it simple": fire and ice in pure combat without any complicating thought.
It had nothing to do with ideology or religion, ra... (
show quote)
I beg to differ... 5,000 years?
We have been coming out of the last Ice Age for about 10,000 years and things are getting hotter. We can expect those in warm climates turning around and start fighting for somewhere a bit less Hot and Arid... Of course they will.
Try about 6 million years of Human struggle... Our ancestors coming down from the trees because of the those G****l W*****g periods and having to learn to walk upright in the treeless Savannahs...
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.