Well, that kind of reducio ad absurdum "what if" thinking has made Frank Miller a mint and a half - not bad for a comic artist, regardless of his talent.
But seriously, even if the Persians had just waltzed through the Hot Gates and burned Athens, their occupation of Greece would have faced an angry population. Perhaps the Athenians would have become crazed guerilla fighters, immolating the Persian vessels with human suicide bombs of Greek Fire ... who knows?
But to say that such and thus "would have" happened is sophistry and oversimplification. And to say that civilization would have changed is wrong.
Here's a thought ... no one ever fought a war for any reason other than profit. Those who engage in war enter in with at least the notion of victory, and history shows that they are wrong more than half the time (sometimes both sides lose a war - see "Pyrrhic Victory").
Wars are about profit, grabbing resources, and may be tipping points in history - the very moment that the tide turns and a government or a people is erased from the pages of history. But they are neither the cause, nor the determiner of history. Wars are the result of history.
Troy, Thermopylae, Carthage, Punic, Germanic, Hastings (to stretch a point), the Crusades, the Mongol Invasion, the Hundred Years War, the American Revolution, WWs I&II, the Cold War ...
Now, that last one was a purely economic war and proves my point. The Americans proved they could waste more energy and resources that the Soviets. The USA spent the USSR into oblivion. It was a collossal, global potlatch (see American Northwest Indian history).
If you want to pick a war that changed history ... I'd have to say it was when our common ancestor Ugh the Plains Ape brained Grog the Less Evolved with the ultimate weapon - the thighbone of a wildebeest - there beside the waterhole in Africa and secured the resources that let his Guh-Buh-Ugh tribe thrive and multiply. Needless to say, Grog's folk died of thirst and failed to pass their genetic material into the future.
Which is kind of my point.
Cheers.
2007-03-12 00:42:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Grendle 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Well Ive heard that before its a bold statement, Marathon was the catalyst that ultimately drove Xerxes to avenge his fathers defeat, therefore was Thermopylae an Iconic statement of defiance that united the Greeks or would Greece have united anyway, The Spartans were on the move after the Carnea, The fleet was ready and the armies were gathering. In my opinion Plataea would probably be the battle that ended it, but what evidence do we have to suggest that Persian rule would have meant total servitude.
A number of Greek cities had already Medized with no Resistance and Greek mercenaries had and would continue to fight for the Persians even against Alexander.
This little Island has never really been successfully conquered if the Romans couldn't do it I doubt the Persians would have succeeded, if the Carthaginians had defeated the Romans the Roman Empire may not have existed now that would have an impact so maybe Zama is the battle to look at. would like to see more comments on this. good question
2007-03-12 05:11:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by JJ 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think you'll have your work cut out here choosing a best answer, but good luck.
I think to choose an important battle, then you have to single out conflicts that have shaped the world today. For example, battles such as Cannae was considered a disaster for the Romans, however that single defeat did not bring an immediate end to Roman rule. I also think you could include the Persian wars in that bracket.
For example, Yes Thermopylae was a fantastic achievement by the Spartans, however does it have a direct bearing on today's world, well that's perhaps open to opinion, and I would be interested to see any arguments to the contrary.
Therefore I have decided to choose the following
The most important Land Battle - Stalingrad with Blenheim a close second
The most important Naval Battle - Trafalgar
The most important War - WWII or War of Independence (English civil war III)
The most important air battle - Battle of Britain without a shadow of doubt
ll have to confess that I have been unable to work out how the battle at Marathon could have had a greater impact on modern Britain, than the battle of Hasting, but as with the rest of my answer this is only my opinion
2007-03-12 00:02:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
The Battle of Stamford Bridge, just days prior to Hastings, only a few longships left the shore, finally rid of the vikings! A remarkable march to the North then South to fight another major battle, those Housecarls must have been like the present day SAS
2007-03-12 02:25:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tony Montana 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Battle at Culloden1745 The English as a result of defeating the army of Bonnie Prince Charlie effectively wiped out and surpressed Scottish Independence until 2006
2007-03-12 02:01:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by jb1 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Battle of Britain 10th July - 31st October 1940,
Britain on her knees and no sign of American help. Europe had collapsed and only Britain stood opposed to Germany. Germany needed complete Air superiority to even consider an invasion, in order to nulify the Royal Navy.
Victory here would have left Britain wide open to invasion, if Britain had capitulated to Germany you have to question how would have america fought a war in europe, with no landing pad form which to attack the mainland.
Outnumbered 3 to 1. Britain achieved this outstanding victory with the help of Superior signals intelligence, Radar and a few brave men.
Victory forced the Germans to put of the invasion for a further year (because of winter). By which point he had decided to attack Russia, which proved to be the second biggest war/battle.
2007-03-11 23:59:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I'll go with World War 2. Millions of people died or were exterminated. We entered the nuclear age in part thanks to that war too. We also had the baby boom period in the United States after the war which altered the economy of this country forever. The cold war was born out of the second world war, as was the atomic bomb.
2007-03-11 23:51:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tyrone T 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not a War but the Industrial Revolution.
Without the Industrial Revolution, weapons would never have been made to the sophistication level needed in Wartime.
The Ottoman Wars never had the massive weaponry use in subsequent actions.
2007-03-11 23:49:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by MANCHESTER UK 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
maximum all people isn't knowledgeable approximately Asian historic previous no longer to point the historic previous of Asian religions. you apart from could forget the Buddhist monk militias of Korea interior the 1590s who helped defeat a jap invasion rigidity despatched there by way of the warlord Hideyoshi. additionally, people who're involved in Buddhism do no longer commonly study too deeply into its many faculties, practices, and historic previous. they have a tendency to have an extremely romanticized view of what they want is a rational atheistic do despite you opt for bypass with the circulate philosophy that endorses psychedelic drugs and tantric intercourse. they are very unsuitable approximately this and could desire to do greater effective than merely study Osho or D.T. Suzuki or Alan Watts whose artwork is by way of a procedures outstripped by way of Thich Nhat Hanh and the numerous translations of the Shobogenzo and the revised translations of the Pali Canon and the superb anthologies positioned forth by way of the likes of Bhikkhu Bodhi, Bhikkhu Nanamoli, and translator/commentators like Taigen Dan Leighton and Glenn Wallis (actual Prof. Wallis is interior the rational atheist camp yet I forgive him lol). besides, jointly as there has been violence in Buddhism that's often an aberration on a plenty smaller scale than that viewed between the Abrahamic religions. that's partly because of the fact the Buddha's teachings approximately non-violence are plenty greater unequivocal yet additionally partly because of the fact Buddhism has not often been made the state faith of an expansive empire or nationalistic state and while it did ensue it replaced into for decrease than short sessions of time. commonly in East Asia, Buddhism has been greater of a non secular counter-way of existence and the two performed 2nd mess around in worldly words to Neo-Confucianism (as in China and Japan) or perhaps outright oppressed by way of the Neo-Confucians (as in Korea from the thirteenth until the early twentieth century). it rather is tough to be a violent crusading colonialist inquisitor once you're merely attempting to maintain your head low in a totalitarian state. Namu Myoho Renge Kyo, Ryuei
2016-10-01 23:48:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by esquinaldo 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rome v Carthage
would we now have a Europe that is/was to be Celtic without ceaser?
would Hannibal have gone on into northern Europe? it is known that he used the Germanic tribes for warriors.
could Carthage have built a civilisation on trade and not the sword.
2007-03-12 00:56:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋