|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 13:13:04 GMT
It would be mad to try to say if cheese or bread is more important on a sandwich, both of them played important role in their own way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 3, 2016 13:26:09 GMT
It would be mad to try to say if cheese or bread is more important on a sandwich, both of them played important role in their own way. Yes, but the question is which is more important, not "Are both important?". Obviously both are incredibly important. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Aug 3, 2016 13:29:29 GMT
I say Franco-German (German in the wider perspective of the German nationalism at the time) played a somewhat larger role (to me).
|
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Aug 3, 2016 14:12:53 GMT
But if the Franco-German War didn't happen or Prussia lost both the World Wars would have been very different if it happened at all because Germany wouldn't have been such a major power. I dare say the European theatre of WW2 was more impactful (not tryin to downplay what happened in the Pacific but I feel Europe influenced today more than the Pacific) and it wouldn't have been like that if the Franco-Prussian War didn't happen or worse Prussia lost. But thats the point: They wouldnt be such a major power. Still a huge power to be reckoned with. Hardly a real difference with or without Lorraine and Alsace for German population and area. Granted, whoever has it earns the enmity of the other, no matter which one has it. That specific Franco-Prussian war was a footnote in the long rivalry between the two peoples (if you count HRE as Germanic). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 14:32:14 GMT
It would be mad to try to say if cheese or bread is more important on a sandwich, both of them played important role in their own way. Yes, but the question is which is more important, not "Are both important?". Obviously both are incredibly important. Both are important, and I don't think any war can be considered more important than other |
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 3, 2016 14:35:32 GMT
Yes, but the question is which is more important, not "Are both important?". Obviously both are incredibly important. Both are important, and I don't think any war can be considered more important than other I definitely beg to differ, while every war is important for their own reasons, there definitely can be a lot of debate over whether a certain war is more important than another. Also, according to your definition, would the Football War be considered as important as the First World War? Would the Anglo-Zanzibar War be considered as important as the War of the Seventh Coalition? |
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Aug 3, 2016 14:42:47 GMT
Both are important, and I don't think any war can be considered more important than other I definitely beg to differ, while every war is important for their own reasons, there definitely can be a lot of debate over whether a certain war is more important than another. Also, according to your definition, would the Football War be considered as important as the First World War? Would the Anglo-Zanzibar War be considered as important as the War of the Seventh Coalition? Of course they are! Without them, there'd be less entertainment. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 14:43:03 GMT
Both are important, and I don't think any war can be considered more important than other I definitely beg to differ, while every war is important for their own reasons, there definitely can be a lot of debate over whether a certain war is more important than another. Also, according to your definition, would the Football War be considered as important as the First World War? Would the Anglo-Zanzibar War be considered as important as the War of the Seventh Coalition? Every war has its own reason and every war has changed the world. |
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 3, 2016 14:59:04 GMT
I definitely beg to differ, while every war is important for their own reasons, there definitely can be a lot of debate over whether a certain war is more important than another. Also, according to your definition, would the Football War be considered as important as the First World War? Would the Anglo-Zanzibar War be considered as important as the War of the Seventh Coalition? Every war has its own reason and every war has changed the world. No doubt about that, but trying to argue that we shouldn't debate if a war is more important than another is incorrect in my opinion, otherwise: A. History would become really boring in my opinion. B. There is certainly a lot to debate about when it comes to whether a war is more important than another, and just having it be said that every war is as important as the next is certainly incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 15:35:42 GMT
Every war has its own reason and every war has changed the world. No doubt about that, but trying to argue that we shouldn't debate if a war is more important than another is incorrect in my opinion, otherwise: A. History would become really boring in my opinion. B. There is certainly a lot to debate about when it comes to whether a war is more important than another, and just having it be said that every war is as important as the next is certainly incorrect. Every war has made its respect and we shouldn't try to dishonor it, it is as simple |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Aug 3, 2016 15:39:45 GMT
But thats the point: They wouldnt be such a major power. Still a huge power to be reckoned with. Hardly a real difference with or without Lorraine and Alsace for German population and area. Granted, whoever has it earns the enmity of the other, no matter which one has it. That specific Franco-Prussian war was a footnote in the long rivalry between the two peoples (if you count HRE as Germanic). But the spite factor, bro (will elaborate later) |
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 3, 2016 16:28:40 GMT
No doubt about that, but trying to argue that we shouldn't debate if a war is more important than another is incorrect in my opinion, otherwise: A. History would become really boring in my opinion. B. There is certainly a lot to debate about when it comes to whether a war is more important than another, and just having it be said that every war is as important as the next is certainly incorrect. Every war has made its respect and we shouldn't try to dishonor it, it is as simple Did I every say that any war hasn't made its impact or that they shouldn't be dishonored? No, of course not. Im refuting your point that we shouldnt try to argue if a war is more important than another, because, quite frankly, that claim is ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 17:23:17 GMT
Every war has made its respect and we shouldn't try to dishonor it, it is as simple Did I every say that any war hasn't made its impact or that they shouldn't be dishonored? No, of course not. Im refuting your point that we shouldnt try to argue if a war is more important than another, because, quite frankly, that claim is ridiculous. It is ridiculous to discuss if Great northern war was more important than crusades, or any other war and the same for any other war, we can discuss what was impact and what were the reasons of them and other stuff related to wars, but every war was important for world to be as it is nowadays. |
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 3, 2016 17:45:05 GMT
Did I every say that any war hasn't made its impact or that they shouldn't be dishonored? No, of course not. Im refuting your point that we shouldnt try to argue if a war is more important than another, because, quite frankly, that claim is ridiculous. It is ridiculous to discuss if Great northern war was more important than crusades, or any other war and the same for any other war, we can discuss what was impact and what were the reasons of them and other stuff related to wars, but every war was important for world to be as it is nowadays. But the argument factor is arguing what wars are more important to history. When people ask "Which war was more important", they are asking which one affected our world more, not if one affected the world and the other didn't. Theres a difference. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 17:49:38 GMT
It is ridiculous to discuss if Great northern war was more important than crusades, or any other war and the same for any other war, we can discuss what was impact and what were the reasons of them and other stuff related to wars, but every war was important for world to be as it is nowadays. But the argument factor is arguing what wars are more important to history. When people ask "Which war was more important", they are asking which one affected our world more, not if one affected the world and the other didn't. Theres a difference. I would say that in this case it would be which war had bigger influence on timeline /history. |
|
