First, Greece and Italy are especially part of the West and have always considered themselves so.
Second, maybe it's better to rephrase your question to: One second when the West DIDN'T THINK that it was threatened with complete annihilation by an Eastern country.
The answer to that question is less simplistic. In short, the Eastern 'barbarian' has been a part of popular thought for a very long time. You can find its origins in the 13th Century B.C. when the Greeks went to war with the Trojans (Troy is in modern day Turkey). However, the term 'barbarian' wasn't used until much later, around the 470's BC, and it was in this era where the concept of the 'other' began to take shape. On two separate occassions (490 and 480 BC) the Persians invaded Greece and were defeated. The Athenians, who played a major role in that victory, began a naval alliance to protect the Aegean from a potential Persian threat. This threat went away very quickly though when the Greeks and Persians signed a peace treaty. The Athenians decided to keep their alliance and this is generally thought of as the start of the Athenian Empire. The important part of this is that in order for them to justify what they were doing, the money that other cities were paying as tribute to them, and the conquest and subjugation of other cities they had to keep the Persian threat alive. There were constant reminders of the destruction that the Persians caused and the point was to show to other cities that the Persians might come back and do this again. They justified their keeping the league under the pretense that the Persians would probably come back, while in reality they were enjoying their new position of power and didn't want to give that up.
The point isn't whether Persia really was a threat or not, because they weren't after 480 BC, the point is that the Athenians tried to convince others that they were.
This can also be seen being played out in the Roman Empire. The Romans fought countless wars against the Eastern Parthians and also made sure to paint them as people who could attack at any moment. In reality, the Parthian dynasty was unstable and wouldn't have had the resources and support to launch such a large-scale attack on Rome. Again the point here isn't whether they were a threat, the point is that the Romans were convinced that they were a threat.
Tracing the conception of the barbarian or Eastern 'other' in our culture is quite interesting and something that continues to exist until this day. I remember a few years ago watching some sort of chat show where they were debating the merits of going to war with Iraq. I was struck by how many people were completely convinced that not only did the weapons of mass destructions exist, but that they were also set to launch and strike the U.S. at any moment. I could counter that with the argument that if they were really poised to strike then perhaps they would've been found more easily. But as stated above, I guess the point really isn't whether they are a threat, but whether you can convince people that they are a threat.
This is something that has been part of our culture for a very long time and I can't really think of a moment when that didn't exist.
2006-12-09 05:19:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jessica 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Germany, Italy, Denmark, Sweden and Norway have always been part of the "West". Further more, China and Isreal have never threatened any Western country with "complete annihilation". Today, Russia does not threaten Western nations with "complete annihilation". This question displays, at the very least, a serious lack of knowledge about world affairs.
2006-12-09 02:29:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by A Person 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't think the west is faced with complete annihilation by any country from the east. Bear in mind that the US easily has the most powerful army in the world and also dominates the markets. Any enemy of the 'west' could cause death and destruction on a massive scale, but I doubt it could completely annihilate the 'west'. On the other hand the we could annihilate the world we choose.
by the way which countries are part of the 'West' and which are part of the 'East'?
2006-12-09 02:31:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends on how you define East
if you mean anything east of the US Atlanitic Coast line, then yes all those nations are "East"
However....
if you look at it from the Pacific Coast of the US they would then be "West" -- making us "East" and I think it is safe to say there are those that would aruge this "Eastern" nation can and maybe has threatened others with annihilation.
Iran, Israel are "Middle-East"
China, Japan, "East"
the rest of your list "West"
I like JIMBO's humor as well - although as a fact it's not that funny
2006-12-09 04:26:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by charlie_2you 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
well before 1000 AD no one knew there was a west. the indians lived here, so those countries you mentioned werent a threat to the west at all.
2006-12-09 04:26:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Spellcaster97 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Japan was a formidable enemy.
But that was taken care of, wasn't it.
I dont think there was any other instant when the west was threatened.
2006-12-09 02:41:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Gennosuke 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your "subquestion" is true.
As to your main question: Yes, I can. All the billions and billions of seconds before European culture (whether Columbus or some apocryphal Scandinavian) came over here.
2006-12-09 03:09:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by JIMBO 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Simple. When the American Indians ran America there were no threats.
2006-12-09 02:31:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by Your #1 fan 6
·
1⤊
0⤋