Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 dogma wrote:

You should read that Wikipedia article, as it does not equate "Chaldean" with "Babylonian".

"The Neo-Babylonian Empire or the Chaldean Empire was a period of Mesopotamian history which began in 626 BC and ended in 539 BC." - Wikipedia.

It's the first sentence.

Also from Wikipedia:

"Chaldean (or Chaldian) may refer to:

Historical Babylon, particularly in a Hellenistic context
Chaldea, "the Chaldees", Hellenistic designation for a part of Babylon
The 11th dynasty of Babylon (6th century BC) is conventionally known as the Chaldean Dynasty
Chaldean mythology, generalized term used to refer to all the mythologies of ancient Sumer, Akkad, Assyria and Babylon (Mesopotamian religions)"


2 Chronicles 36 from the King James:

17 Therefore He brought upon them the king of the Chaldeans, who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped with age; He gave them all into his hand.
18 And all the vessels of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the Lord and the treasures of the king and of his princes, all these he brought to Babylon.
19 And they burned the house of God, and broke down the wall of Jerusalem, and burned all the palaces thereof with fire and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof.
20 And those who had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia,

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Then you are only opposed to people that use terrorism against you. You're just fine with using it on other people.

Ah, you're one of those guys.

The United States supports those that use torture, terrorism and war crimes when it is in their interest. This is not new.

"General Franco was a loyal friend and ally of the United States."

-Nixon

Very true. if not with the U.S. help. Bourbons will not reclaim its last stronghold in Europe.
And if it's not because of Juan Carlos wisdom, chosing the path of peace rather than pure Catholic rule. Spanish Civil War would erupt again in 1975 and it would be a perfect bloodbath. Imagine a group of Red Witches openly do gunfights against the Holy Inquisition. communists dragged to the streets and burned alive, in the same token. Witches sacked churches and crucify priests and nuns.

if it happens. would it leads to the third world war?

 Lone Cat wrote:


Very true. if not with the U.S. help. Bourbons will not reclaim its last stronghold in Europe.
And if it's not because of Juan Carlos wisdom, chosing the path of peace rather than pure Catholic rule. Spanish Civil War would erupt again in 1975 and it would be a perfect bloodbath. Imagine a group of Red Witches openly do gunfights against the Holy Inquisition. communists dragged to the streets and burned alive, in the same token. Witches sacked churches and crucify priests and nuns.

if it happens. would it leads to the third world war?

Do you read what you type?

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Yeah, it's like that. I can't tell whether you're just that racist or just that stupid, Seaward.

No, you're right. I don't think Hamas is one very special HGTV House Hunters episode away from stopping its campaign against Israel, so clearly I'm racist.

Look, I know Sebster's an expert on everything, ever because he can access Wikipedia from his office computer, but you might still be salvageable. There are plenty of ways to get some firsthand experience of the intractability and irrationality of that conflict - or damn near any other in the region. A couple years ago, even bare bones EMT training could've gotten you a sweet contract with Academi or Aegis or whoever else you wanted. Hell, go as an UN aid worker for all I care. Go on vacation. But staring at it from thousands of miles away doesn't do it justice, because it's not about simple, singular solutions.

It's blood. It's tribal. It's not rational. Rational people don't spit on the path to sovereignty if sovereignty's really what they're after. One's bad, but the other's far worse. Whine about reality's lack of balance if you want, but it doesn't change anything.

 Seaward wrote:

Look, I know Sebster's an expert on everything, ever because he can access Wikipedia from his office computer, but you might still be salvageable. There are plenty of ways to get some firsthand experience of the intractability and irrationality of that conflict - or damn near any other in the region. A couple years ago, even bare bones EMT training could've gotten you a sweet contract with Academi or Aegis or whoever else you wanted. Hell, go as an UN aid worker for all I care. Go on vacation. But staring at it from thousands of miles away doesn't do it justice, because it's not about simple, singular solutions.

Well, other than the part where me reentering Israel is unlikely at best, I've generally found that simple solutions are a good place to start. See, one thing that I've always taken to heart is this: guerrillas don't last long without people supporting them.

While I doubt that stopping both sides crimes against humanity will end this conflict immediately, they have to stop for any hope to exist for future generations to be conflict free. The longer Israel runs their own version of the Warsaw Ghetto and announces more settlements, the stronger the hold of Hamas on the population. That and the fact they launch wildly disproportionate reprisals also isn't helping. They REALLY need to open thier history books and look at how badly disproportionate reprisals backfire when it comes to dealing with an guerrilla force.

I will say though that no, what made it stupid and racist was the assumption that it's the people in the ghetto that are planning rocket attacks. They're not, by and large. People that don't have money for food don't have money for rockets. Those plans are already planned in nice apartments far from the fighting. The plans get passed down to local guys that then carry them out. Or, at least that's my understanding of how Hamas does it.

 BaronIveagh wrote:




When George Washington ordered what was, if not the first, pretty close, crime against humanity the United States Army committed, .

Except for the tiny detail that George Washington had been dead over 30 years and his policy was assimilation.
TLDR: bull gak

Wait George Washington was a Borg? It explains so much.

YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED!

 purplefood wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:


Typical Lone Cat Stuff

Do you read what you type?

No.

 Seaward wrote:
Look, I know Sebster's an expert on everything, ever because he can access Wikipedia from his office computer, but you might still be salvageable.

No, I just post on things I know about. Whereas you launch into any thread you can, and start posting without spending half a second thinking about whether you actually have any information to give people, or just a noisy, fact free opinion.

No surprise how you've gotten so bitter, so quickly over being corrected on stuff.

It's blood. It's tribal. It's not rational. Rational people don't spit on the path to sovereignty if sovereignty's really what they're after. One's bad, but the other's far worse.

Except, of course, the Zionists were just as bad, and used just as awful measures as their opponents, until they won. Once they got a stable country that provided great economic opportunities for their kids then suddenly sneaking about with bombs and ambushing military patrols started looking like a really unnecessary waste of life.

At the same life for the Palestinians got a whole lot worse, and they started getting even worse with their actions.

It's clear the economic situation can very quickly change how people act, and so your grand theory of irrational, forever war of tribalism is a-class bs.

Now it's up to you whether I could post that because I just looked it up on wiki or because I actually know things. Either way I'm bringing facts to an internet debate, which is apparently cheating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 purplefood wrote:
Do you read what you type?

It took me a while to figure out what was going on with Lonecat's posts, but I think I got there eventually.

Basically think of that particularly dreadful type of cross over fan fiction, where characters are thrown in from all over the place not based on being from the same genre, or having anything even remotely to do with each other, but basically because the author has heard of them. So the stuff where Jean Luc Picard teams up with John the Baptist to stop Sauron from leading the British forces to victory in the Revolutionary War.

Lonecat's posts are basically like that. Any normal impulse to sense or reason is abandoned entirely, and instead you just get everything he knows thrown into a blender. The idea that the House of Bourbon as a meaningful political dynasty is 200 years dead simply doesn't matter - Lonecat throws them in there as real player next to the Catholic Church as major players in a third world war.

sebster wrote:Basically think of that particularly dreadful type of cross over fan fiction, where characters are thrown in from all over the place not based on being from the same genre, or having anything even remotely to do with each other, but basically because the author has heard of them. So the stuff where Jean Luc Picard teams up with John the Baptist to stop Sauron from leading the British forces to victory in the Revolutionary War.

ROFLMFAO.
Sebs sometimes I disagree vehemently with you, but every once in a while you deliver an epic gem like this.
Overall I feel like Lone Cat has the best of intentions and either through translation or a Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory-esque mind it comes out...well the way it comes out. Back when he was more coherent I thought it was Google Translate's fault...

Wow, I can't remember the last time sebster has made me laugh this hard (I literally collapsed on my desk) and it's not because what you're saying is illogical since I do agree with your statements, it's just your descriptions are hilarious.

 AustonT wrote:

sebster wrote:Basically think of that particularly dreadful type of cross over fan fiction, where characters are thrown in from all over the place not based on being from the same genre, or having anything even remotely to do with each other, but basically because the author has heard of them. So the stuff where Jean Luc Picard teams up with John the Baptist to stop Sauron from leading the British forces to victory in the Revolutionary War.

ROFLMFAO.
Sebs sometimes I disagree vehemently with you, but every once in a while you deliver an epic gem like this.
Overall I feel like Lone Cat has the best of intentions and either through translation or a Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory-esque mind it comes out...well the way it comes out. Back when he was more coherent I thought it was Google Translate's fault...

Sebs, exalted.

Auston, QFT

And thanks everyone.

On that Exalted thing, how do people find out they've been exalted. I've exalted a few people, and figured they'd get a message or something. How's it work?

I'm not even sure Lego knows how it works.

Currently, there is no notification system. I know threads you exalt get cashed in your Exalted section so there is some way of keeping track.

I think its a work in progress thing at the moment.

 sebster wrote:
And thanks everyone.

On that Exalted thing, how do people find out they've been exalted. I've exalted a few people, and figured they'd get a message or something. How's it work?

Lego is withholding the info from all of us, I don't know why though.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

"The Neo-Babylonian Empire or the Chaldean Empire was a period of Mesopotamian history which began in 626 BC and ended in 539 BC." - Wikipedia.

It's the first sentence.

"Neo-Babylonian" does not mean "Babylonian", much as "Chaldea" does not mean "Mesopotamia" or "Sumer". The region of the world in question has had many names, and it is important to be precise when discussing it.

To be brief again: Ur and Babylon were city-states in a region known both as Mesopotamia and Chaldea. Ur was once the prominent power, but it was succeeded by Babylon.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 sebster wrote:
And thanks everyone.

On that Exalted thing, how do people find out they've been exalted. I've exalted a few people, and figured they'd get a message or something. How's it work?

Lego is withholding the info from all of us, I don't know why though.

I was under the impression that they're still trying to figure out what exactly to do with the system, so they're just gathering data on how we use it as is.

ITT:: Possibly the best idea for an RPG ever made. Ever.

 purplefood wrote:
ITT:: Possibly the best idea for an RPG ever made. Ever.

Um, I'm a little confused.

 Cheesecat wrote:
Lego is withholding the info from all of us, I don't know why though.

Ah, okay then.


And thanks for the extra info KalishnikovMarine.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
ITT:: Possibly the best idea for an RPG ever made. Ever.

Um, I'm a little confused.

So the stuff where Jean Luc Picard teams up with John the Baptist to stop Sauron from leading the British forces to victory in the Revolutionary War.

Am I the only one who'd want to see that in an RPG setting?

 dogma wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

"The Neo-Babylonian Empire or the Chaldean Empire was a period of Mesopotamian history which began in 626 BC and ended in 539 BC." - Wikipedia.

It's the first sentence.

"Neo-Babylonian" does not mean "Babylonian", much as "Chaldea" does not mean "Mesopotamia" or "Sumer". The region of the world in question has had many names, and it is important to be precise when discussing it.

To be brief again: Ur and Babylon were city-states in a region known both as Mesopotamia and Chaldea. Ur was once the prominent power, but it was succeeded by Babylon.

Abraham predates Chaldea by about a millennia. But probably as a product of being written by Hellenized Jews the Septuagint calls them קסדים.a term that probably was t used until much later.

 purplefood wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:


Very true. if not with the U.S. help. Bourbons will not reclaim its last stronghold in Europe.
And if it's not because of Juan Carlos wisdom, chosing the path of peace rather than pure Catholic rule. Spanish Civil War would erupt again in 1975 and it would be a perfect bloodbath. Imagine a group of Red Witches openly do gunfights against the Holy Inquisition. communists dragged to the streets and burned alive, in the same token. Witches sacked churches and crucify priests and nuns.

if it happens. would it leads to the third world war?

Do you read what you type?

I do! I'm talking about what will happen if Juan Carlos chose the wrong path. because he was bound to inherit Francisco Franco's rule. This was made possible with the help of the USA and Nato.
I don't appreciate all of your insults and saying that i am not reading every posts i did!
what is your "What if"? version of Post-Franco Spain?

I don't have a "what if/" version of post-franco Spain...
I accept that what happened happened and don't particularly trouble myself with it. Mostly (If not solely) because there is nothing I can do about it.
I'm not insulting you by saying "Do you read what you post?" I'm genuinely interested. Because in my mind a post asking about whether a several hundred year royal dynasty might return to somehow reclaim Spain and start a civil war between a totally defunct institution (The Inquisition) and a more or less imaginary (as far as I can tell) witchcraft group and whether it would start world war 3 seems not only off topic but also... kinda dumb... especially in a topic where we are talking about he UN voting to recognise Palestine as a state.

 dogma wrote:

"Neo-Babylonian" does not mean "Babylonian", much as "Chaldea" does not mean "Mesopotamia" or "Sumer". The region of the world in question has had many names, and it is important to be precise when discussing it.

To be brief again: Ur and Babylon were city-states in a region known both as Mesopotamia and Chaldea. Ur was once the prominent power, but it was succeeded by Babylon.

Neo-Babylonian is the name of a period of the Babylonian empire, to differentiated it from the Kassite Babylonian Empire and the Amorite Babylonian Empire of Hammurabi. In much he same way 'Old Kingdom' and 'New Kingdom' break up Egypt's history. In particular it coves the ascension of the Chaldean Dynasty to the assimilation by the Achaemenid Empire.


The Jewish Encyclopedia, (1906)
Entry: Chaldea

"The Chaldean country, in the strict sense, lay in southern Babylonia, on the lower Euphrates and Tigris. But the name was extended by the Biblical writers to include the whole of Babylonia, after the Chaldean Nebuchadnezzar had established the new Babylonian empire and brought his people to world-wide fame. Indeed, it is doubtful whether the Biblical "Chaldea" and "Chaldeans" ever connoted the ancient country and people; these terms, until the eighth century B.C., were restricted to the region along the head of the Persian gulf (see Babylonia)."

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Neo-Babylonian is the name of a period of the Babylonian empire, to differentiated it from the Kassite Babylonian Empire and the Amorite Babylonian Empire of Hammurabi.

You have just distinguished between 3 Babylonian Empires.

 sebster wrote:

It took me a while to figure out what was going on with Lonecat's posts, but I think I got there eventually.

Basically think of that particularly dreadful type of cross over fan fiction, where characters are thrown in from all over the place not based on being from the same genre, or having anything even remotely to do with each other, but basically because the author has heard of them. So the stuff where Jean Luc Picard teams up with John the Baptist to stop Sauron from leading the British forces to victory in the Revolutionary War.

Lonecat's posts are basically like that. Any normal impulse to sense or reason is abandoned entirely, and instead you just get everything he knows thrown into a blender. The idea that the House of Bourbon as a meaningful political dynasty is 200 years dead simply doesn't matter - Lonecat throws them in there as real player next to the Catholic Church as major players in a third world war.

Sebastien.
1. Don't you believe that Spain is stragically important to the US dominance over Western Europe? in 1975, there's still Cold War, USA and Soviets are always at throat to each other.
2. If you say "Bourbon is no longer a political dynasty". then why is there a Coup d'Etat in Spain in the 80s (or many years after Franco passed away) and the King says 'No' to that rightwing movement. the Coup was suppressed? and then why only ETA (Basque separatist movement) and some few hardcore Falangists still 'wages war' against tne new Spain government (and its war is simply a series of terrorist attacks rather than a full fledge civil war). Juan Carlos did guide Spanish politics to ensure that neither vengeful Republicans nor paranoic Falangist gains any dominancy in the Post-Franco politics (until the two were 'diluted') otherwise there will be the civil war. Soviets (and another Communist power in general) did support Spanish Republicans in one way or another. if the King did not arrange a secret deal to bring them back to politics. Soviets will resume its interests in Ibrea.
3. Roman Catholic Church never says good thing about Communism. yet Pope John Paul II (he who came from the then Communist-ruled Poland) simply denounced the Communism and Soviet Union not because of its anticlelical policy. but because series of persecutions, repressions, crackdown, massacre the regime did and still doing by then) he did not, however, call for any Crusade against the Commies. but as you can see, Roman Catholic Church is a worldwide orginization (argurably the first orgization to become really global). it is impossible for the Pope to rule every subject directly. in fact, the Church gave Bishops and Cardinals a considerable sense of autonomy and not all of them acts in unison, in Nicaragua, Cardinals and Bishops were openly oppose Communism and supports the 'Contra' movement (or any non-communist dictators). in El Savador however, in the reign of the U.S. - backed tyrants, local Cardinals opposed the regime regardless of its anticommunism sentiment. in turn the regime did hound so many priests. That is. The Church wouldn't play a major role leading to the WW3 but a few Bishops ruling over a dioclete that overlaps the 'hot zone' might bring the war. Giving a bless to a tyrant troop does not count amongs it, overseering anticommunist armed group does.
The Holy See in the cold war had abandoned the concepts to restore the Inquisition. the local Bishops might revivive it simply as a defence mechanism against communist encroachment.
4. Red Witches refers to communists. especially those armed one.

 dogma wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Neo-Babylonian is the name of a period of the Babylonian empire, to differentiated it from the Kassite Babylonian Empire and the Amorite Babylonian Empire of Hammurabi.

You have just distinguished between 3 Babylonian Empires.

That's a matter of debate. The gap between each of them was shorter than most succession disputes.

And you're trying to drive me off on a tangent to avoid the fact that I've given several sources that show your assertion about Chaldean and Babylonian not being synonymous to be wrong.

So cite a source saying I'm wrong, or stfu.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

That's a matter of debate.

No it isn't. You just nominated each by name.