Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "History Debunked"
channel.
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@SMITHSONIAN33 Well, one of us needs to do some research, that is for sure. 'The lion symbolism was used right throughout Europe's Royal Houses.' Indeed it was. The Lion has appeared in Egyptian & Greek art from as far back as the third millennium BC, and probably even earlier.
Perhaps because at the time, and perhaps until as late as the 4th Century AD, Lions were to be found in Greece, Ukraine, and the Balkans, as well as the Middle East, or, if you prefer it, the area known by Crusaders as 'The Holy Land.' The Lion also appears in Buddhist & Hindu religious texts, and in Babylonian and Egyptian artwork, tomb paintings, and carvings going back as far as c3500 BC.
Your belief that 'only place with Lions is Africa' is, frankly, absurd.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@williams4434 As you seem disinclined to give a Biblical reference in support of your claim, let me help you out. The nearest thing to a discription of Jesus' physical appearance is in Revelation 1: 14-15, whic in the King James Bible reads :-
'His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.'
Not quite as you said, is it?
By the way, the Book of Revelation probably dates from the reign of Domitian, at around 96 A. D. and was attributed to John the Elder, or John of Patmos, an Ephesian Christian. Certainly, no-one who had seen Jesus would have contributed to it.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the theories of Giulio Douhet, an Italian strategise who died in 1930, well before the flaws in his concept became obvious?
Douhet argued that bombing of civilian populations would result in, put simply, mass uprisings against governments, and the installation of new ones who would immediately make peace, at whatever cost. The idea was popular with such people as Goering, Le May, and the British Air Ministry. After all, it provided the raison d'etre for the large bomber fleets they craved.
Moreover, by mid 1940, there had been plenty of proof that hitler was willing to attack civilian targets by means of bombing. Aside from events in Spain, Warsaw was heavily bombed in September, 1939, on several occasions, as was Rotterdam on 14 May, 1940.
To suggest, or even imply, that German bombing of London was merely in response to British bombing of German towns & cities, is questionable at best.
I urge you to read Douhet's 'The Command of the Air' as it provided the (false) premises under which both the German & British (and later the USAAF) were working in WW2.
Indeed, Arthur Harris, to the end of his days, never managed to rid himself of the idea.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Isn't presenting selected facts what all historians or academics do? You present your argument, and provide evidence and data which you believe support it. People who believe you are in error can then present their own arguments, together of course with the evidence and data which they believe supports them. The result is what used to be called a debate. At least, that was what my old tutor, Professor Foot, told us at Manchester many years ago, when history was an easier subject, because there had been less of it at the time!
This recent and, I hope, transient, phenomenon, of 'I won't listen to what you say, but demand that you be prevented from saying it' is most disturbing.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3