the Spartians is a bunch of bloody terrorists (like Al-Qaida), with no sense of honor (they killed the persian messenger) and they are fighting the persian empire (like the US army occupying Irak). isn't it obvious ?? will the end be the same ?
2007-03-23 05:17:00 · 7 answers · asked by Thom Jefferson 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
In order for that to be true...history would have to report that the Persians were actually responding to years of agression by some of the Greek city states and that there was more to Xerxes' action than merely taking revenge for his father... Darius the Great...who found defeat at the hands of the Greeks at the battle of Marathon...years earlier....the same Darius that left to his son the task of punishing the Athenians, Naxians, and Eretrians for their interference in the Ionian revolt
Moreover, Xerxes would have had to conclude an alliance with Carthage, and thus deprive Greece of the support of the powerful monarchs of Syracuse and Agrigentum with many smaller Greek states taking the side of the Persians, let's say little Greek city-states such as ...Thessaly, Thebes, and Argos?
And all this before the attack at Thermopalye...yes?
I must admit that I had never really thought about the whole Persian army as symbol for US agression thing. That really caught my attention. I had never even entertained the idea. My question now is will there be blowback...when the end is the same. When...not if. When the end is the same...and what shape those repercussions will take.
Very interesting....
Last time I checked this was a movie. You know...fiction. And this work of fiction is based on another work of fiction....a comic book...sorry...Graphic Novel.
A movie...based on a comic book.. Hmmm.
Want a real show? Read the true nature of what went on between Persia and the city states that made up Greece.
...you won't need to use a work of fiction to make your point...and you will be thoroughly entertained in that space between the cartoon caricatures of the movie...and what really took place. Don't take my word for it. Avail yourself. That's what library cards are for. Isn't it amazing that those things are free?
2007-03-23 06:17:51 · answer #1 · answered by Zholla 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The conflict of Thermopylae is predicated upon historic precedent . The Persians went directly to sack the city of Athens yet not Sparta . Salamis substitute into carried out concurrently with the stand at Thermopylae . 480 B.C. on the conflict of Marathon the Greeks by means of stress of hands repelled the Persians , 490 B.C. (till now Thermopylae) :0)
2016-12-19 12:20:10 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont think it does. The 300 Spartans remind me of the
men at the Alamo. They all died defending the mission
fighting against 5,000 mexicans and they re was only
about 150 texans defending it. The Texans all died
But the war wasnt lost. Cause The Mexicans ended up
losing at San Jacinto. REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!!
2007-03-23 06:33:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the Persians were threatening the Spartans that they would take there land. The Spartans and Leonitus were fighting for freedom. That was the whole point of the movie. FREEDOM! stupid hippie.
2007-03-23 05:25:56 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think you're reading WAY too much into it. And I think you're reading it wrong too.
2007-03-23 05:25:08 · answer #5 · answered by mikehunt29 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Can't really say that I agree with you on that one.
2007-03-23 05:24:20 · answer #6 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
seems so
2007-03-23 05:23:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋