Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Europe and asia

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 11>
Author
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Europe and asia
    Posted: 09-Sep-2004 at 18:28
since many people here think that the asians were stronger than the europeans I'm saying that the europeans were stronger. The europeans have been the strongest since the ancient greek days. I'm not here to have a serious debate with you but some light replies are fine.
Back to Top
warhead View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
  Quote warhead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Sep-2004 at 21:48

You can back up your statement with sources and analysis, but blind claims that you make right now has no basis and is pointless.

Back to Top
warhead View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
  Quote warhead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Sep-2004 at 21:50
second, its very ignorant to separate Europe from Asia, Europe and Asia is one continent called Eurasia, and throughout history Europeans are far more close in essence to the western Asians than western asians are to central, south and east asians.
Back to Top
Hyarmendacil View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 17-Aug-2004
Location: Indonesia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 114
  Quote Hyarmendacil Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Sep-2004 at 23:34
Well, this is a moot point. Sorry, but I'm not going to join the debate because I strongly disagree with any attempt to show that any culture is superior over another (or all others).
Back to Top
I/eye View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 498
  Quote I/eye Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 00:02

i think he means military, not culture..

 

anyway, you keep saying Europeans were better in every thread you've posted, and if you even want to make a whole thread about it, you should tell us why you think so.. I mean, how can we correct you if we don't know where you are mistaken?



Edited by I/eye
[URL=http://imageshack.us]
Back to Top
Anujkhamar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1027
  Quote Anujkhamar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 04:01
Originally posted by dsjdsj

since many people here think that the asians were stronger than the europeans I'm saying that the europeans were stronger. The europeans have been the strongest since the ancient greek days. I'm not here to have a serious debate with you but some light replies are fine.


i think you should learn asian history first. and i'm not only talking about the chinese, i'm talking about the indians, the arabs, the persians, the koreans, and the mongols. learn their history. and then post back still agreeing with your statement.
Back to Top
demon View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Brazil
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1185
  Quote demon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 04:49

Yeah, just because romans and spartans defeated Persians and stuff, it is doubtful that they would defeat Asians who have very different tactics and weapons.

Grrr..
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 09:53

Europeans without firearms and cannons never manage to carve out empire larger than 3.3 to 3.5 milions square miles. Largest European empire before industrial revolution was Holy Roman empire which was around 3.3 to 3.5 milions square miles while Roman empire with vassal was around 2.4 milions square miles and Alexander's empire was only 2.1 milion square miles. The rest were just many small kingdoms.

Asians managed to create large size empires without firearms. Here are example of Asian empires that exceed 4 to 5 milions square miles1)Mongol Empire, (2) Tang Dynasty, (3)Turuk(Gokturk)Khaghanate. Ummayad Caliphate was around 3.5 milions square miles, Abbasid Caliphate around 3 milions square miles, Han Dynasty without vassal was 2.9 milions square miles and with vassal was around 4 milions square miles, Xiongnu Empire was around 2.5 milions square miles, Seljuk Sultanate and Archaemenid Persia was around 2.3 milions square miles, and the rest like Qin, Jin(3rd century a.d.), Sui, Northern Song, Liao(Khitan), Jin(Jurchen) Dynasties, Yarlung Empire of Tibet, Khmer Empire in South East Asia, Uighur Empire, Turgish Empire, Xianbei Empire, Rouruan Empire, Sassanian Empire, Kushan Empire, Parthian Empire, Kharakhanid, Mauryan Empire, Gupta Empire and Khwarezm Empire were much bigger than those tiny kingdoms in Europe.

Some like Archaemenid Persia, Seljuk Sultanate were larger than Alexander's Empire and probably as large as Roman Empire. While some others like Qin, Jin(Sima-Yan), Sui Dynasties, Turgish Empire, Uighur Empire, Mauryan Empire, Khusan Empire, Sassanian Empire, Liao(Khitan) and Jin(Jurchen) were around 1.3 to 2 milions square miles.

This had already proven that Asian are much better and stronger in military than European(I'm not trying to prove whose culture is better). And please do not assume that European will always win in the melee attack because the European Knight or Roman Legion never fight with something like Korean, Khitan, Jurchen, Japanese, Tibetan or Chinese Heavy Cavalry/Infantry who were also good in melee attack.

And please do not judge all Asian armies as the same. Every nation has different type of army even though sometimes they use the same tactics. For example just because Nomadic Hordes prefer to use hit and run tactics that doesn't mean Asian armies don't know how to fight in close combat. Hit and run tactics and Crossbow(especially Chinese) were often use in warfare but so were melee attack especially East Asian nations fighting with each other.

To say European is stronger than Asian is an absolute nonsense and racist, but if you still keep trying to say European is stronger than Asian then please provide proof and evidence or else what ever you say is just purely bullcrap.

 

 

Back to Top
demon View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Brazil
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1185
  Quote demon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 10:19

Asians managed to create large size empires without firearms

well, just becasue land is big, it is not nessesarly that Asians are stronger.  War especially in that era is mostly about weapons and style/leadership, (well, a war of attrition includes size, production, etc). 

My point is, using land is not sufficient to prove strengh.  I mean, they could just claim empty land .

This had already proven that Asian are much better and stronger in military than European(I'm not trying to prove whose culture is better). And please do not assume that European will always win in the melee attack because the European Knight or Roman Legion never fight with something like Korean, Khitan, Jurchen, Japanese, Tibetan or Chinese Heavy Cavalry/Infantry who were also good in melee attack.

 

I concur. 

Even if European soldiers might have had better and shiny armors as knights and Halbaldiers, they do not actually contribute much to victory, at that time.  Like different types of weapons and psycological factors contribute to a victory if these two forces fought.

Having good equipment is not good if the enemy has got good weapons as well.  As how Frankish knights were mowed down in Agincourt. 

Strategy can also count. 

As how the swiss with poorer equipment defeated an Austrian army 4 times bigger and better equipped at Morgarten, because they chose a good spot (above were the mountains, below the sea, and a narrow path in between).

All these factors should form the basis of your conclusion, dsjdsj. 

Grrr..
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 11:17
I want to know Europeans were fighting with which weapons when in 2700 BC the Sumerian king Enmebaragesi attacked Susa for despoiling the heavy weapons of Elamites?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 11:59
Originally posted by TongShanThaiHiung

To say European is stronger than Asian is an absolute nonsense and racist, but if you still keep trying to say European is stronger than Asian then please provide proof and evidence or else what ever you say is just purely bullcrap.

 

 

go to hell you are an cheap asian jerk

Back to Top
I/eye View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 498
  Quote I/eye Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 12:54
oh, okay.. not misinformed or ignorant, just a racist then..
[URL=http://imageshack.us]
Back to Top
Cywr View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
  Quote Cywr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 12:59
Bah, the Welsh could kick everyone's arses.
Arrrgh!!"
Back to Top
Kalevipoeg View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Estonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1458
  Quote Kalevipoeg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 13:00

Well, here are a few facts: Everybody here knows Liegnitz 1241. We have a topic about the battle in the military forum here if you wish to read how the so called "stronger" Europeans were slaughtered in their shiny armor and were totally outpalyed and stragezised. Then came the Sajo river where the worlds number 1 general (bagatur) Sbedei got down with one of the gems in the history of warfare and strategy. Europeans never managed to get further than Anatolia in the midde ages and were pushed even deeper into Europe in the 15th and 16th century by the Ottomans. European armies never accomplished much against Asia pre to the imperial age of colonization so there is no such weird proof of Europeans being stronger in any way.

And i presume you ment the Roman Empire as Europeans aswell and they weren't stronger than the Asians either, never getting a total victory over the Sassanids.

There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...
Back to Top
TMPikachu View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 14-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 154
  Quote TMPikachu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 14:52

A copy of the Art of War I have talked about how advanced military stratedgy was in China, as was their weapons. Translated by a white historian/military officer (so the view isn't as biased)

There's a part where he mentions Alexander, how if Alexander had pushed a little further out of India and into China, he would have encountered a kingdom far exeeding the strength of his or any he had fought.

Then there's direct comparisons. Take the English longbow, compare it to the composite bows of Asia, the most ready example being the Mongol bow. The mongol bow is more compact (able to fire from horseback) and can be built to require pulls twice that needed of the english bow.

Then again, when you say something is better than something else due to piecemeal info ala history, it really is a bias, isn't it?

If you want to not use the advent of firearms for kingdom size, then the Jin, Sung, and all dynasties to follow would be disqualified.

 

Or challenge each other to games of "Age of Empires" with one's respective nations !

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 14:54
Originally posted by Kalevipoeg

Well, here are a few facts: Everybody here knows Liegnitz 1241. We have a topic about the battle in the military forum here if you wish to read how the so called "stronger" Europeans were slaughtered in their shiny armor and were totally outpalyed and stragezised. Then came the Sajo river where the worlds number 1 general (bagatur) Sbedei got down with one of the gems in the history of warfare and strategy. Europeans never managed to get further than Anatolia in the midde ages and were pushed even deeper into Europe in the 15th and 16th century by the Ottomans. European armies never accomplished much against Asia pre to the imperial age of colonization so there is no such weird proof of Europeans being stronger in any way.

And i presume you ment the Roman Empire as Europeans aswell and they weren't stronger than the Asians either, never getting a total victory over the Sassanids.

The mongols had 5 time the number of europeans in liegnitz. And in the devil's horsemen chamber said that the europeans were more safe than they have thought they were.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 14:54
Originally posted by I/eye

oh, okay.. not misinformed or ignorant, just a racist then..
And I said that because he called my posts bullsh*t.
Back to Top
TMPikachu View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 14-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 154
  Quote TMPikachu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 15:06
Originally posted by dsjdsj

Originally posted by Kalevipoeg

Well, here are a few facts: Everybody here knows Liegnitz 1241. We have a topic about the battle in the military forum here if you wish to read how the so called "stronger" Europeans were slaughtered in their shiny armor and were totally outpalyed and stragezised. Then came the Sajo river where the worlds number 1 general (bagatur) Sbedei got down with one of the gems in the history of warfare and strategy. Europeans never managed to get further than Anatolia in the midde ages and were pushed even deeper into Europe in the 15th and 16th century by the Ottomans. European armies never accomplished much against Asia pre to the imperial age of colonization so there is no such weird proof of Europeans being stronger in any way.

And i presume you ment the Roman Empire as Europeans aswell and they weren't stronger than the Asians either, never getting a total victory over the Sassanids.

The mongols had 5 time the number of europeans in liegnitz. And in the devil's horsemen chamber said that the europeans were more safe than they have thought they were.

So the Europeans underestimated the mongols. Really badly. Horribly, really.

Number accounts are unreliable though. Many Europeans recorded their numbers as much greater as they thought because

1) They were very very mobile and organised, beyond anything they had ever experienced. So they assumed "Hmmm, another horde must have been hiding here!

2) They were embarassed. Everyone makes excuses for losing.

"Storm From the East" is a good book to read about Mongols with a good focus on the European Theatre.

Really, the Europeans thought the mongols were better than them.

You don't get called "Hammer of God" by the Pope for nothing.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2004 at 18:38
Originally posted by TMPikachu

Originally posted by dsjdsj

Originally posted by Kalevipoeg

Well, here are a few facts: Everybody here knows Liegnitz 1241. We have a topic about the battle in the military forum here if you wish to read how the so called "stronger" Europeans were slaughtered in their shiny armor and were totally outpalyed and stragezised. Then came the Sajo river where the worlds number 1 general (bagatur) Sbedei got down with one of the gems in the history of warfare and strategy. Europeans never managed to get further than Anatolia in the midde ages and were pushed even deeper into Europe in the 15th and 16th century by the Ottomans. European armies never accomplished much against Asia pre to the imperial age of colonization so there is no such weird proof of Europeans being stronger in any way.

And i presume you ment the Roman Empire as Europeans aswell and they weren't stronger than the Asians either, never getting a total victory over the Sassanids.

The mongols had 5 time the number of europeans in liegnitz. And in the devil's horsemen chamber said that the europeans were more safe than they have thought they were.

So the Europeans underestimated the mongols. Really badly. Horribly, really.

Number accounts are unreliable though. Many Europeans recorded their numbers as much greater as they thought because

1) They were very very mobile and organised, beyond anything they had ever experienced. So they assumed "Hmmm, another horde must have been hiding here!

2) They were embarassed. Everyone makes excuses for losing.

"Storm From the East" is a good book to read about Mongols with a good focus on the European Theatre.

Really, the Europeans thought the mongols were better than them.

You don't get called "Hammer of God" by the Pope for nothing.

They did not make excusses, the numbers were likely to be real. The mongols never had a great number disadvantage like the spanish did in mexico. The mongol army was larger than any european countries' and they are excellent fighters so they have achieve what they have. But they although suffered heavy losses in europe that they could not afford so they withdrew. Europe was not as feeble and pathetic as some people says, it's more than capable to hold back the mongols.

Back to Top
Kalevipoeg View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Estonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1458
  Quote Kalevipoeg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2004 at 00:15
What are you jibbering about dsjdsj, what losses that made them retreat? It was either two things: The death of Ogedei Khan in Karakorum or the lack of grazing grounds past Hungary. The Europeans, even if the Mongols had taken Paris, would have had internal wars probably, there was no amazing strength to withstand the Mongols. Europe wasn't much bigger than a fly in a soup compared to Asia which they had conquered.
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 11>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.129 seconds.