pothos.org

Can you imagine, some 2300 years on, what Alexander would have made of recent events? Surreal or what?Would he have laughed or cried?

I think he would have marveled at the weaponary and wished he had had smart bombs. Can you imgaine Alexander's use of a tank? They would sure make short work of an elephant. I alos think he would have laughed at the self righteous, self important, pseudo moralist (better known as imbedden jouranlist). All looking for a story to make the Americans look worses then they were. And I beleive he would have wondered why these same people who caused an early end to the war in 1991 were allowed back in greater numbers with video phones and god knows what else.As to what Alexander would have thought of a policy of risking your own men to save civilians (oh my god), ancient people and modern people are separted by more then time.

I was wondering when someone would notice the battle lines. It's his old war zone. I guess that area is destined to be fought over.

The meaning of your posting completely eludes me dear Dave!
The Americans did a pretty fine job by themselves in looking awful than any journalist would. I mean, it wasn't the journalists killing people, were they?Let's not forget that news coverage of the war was guided by the American military and there were only a few independent voices that were never heard by the major news networks in the US and UK (I might have to partly exclude BBC from that sentence).

And btw, you can't be serious when saying that the journalists forced the war in 1991 to come to an end, can you?PS
Sorry for replying, I know that it's irrelevant to the forum's topic but I just couldn't stop...

thank you yiannis. you have avenged a lady in distress.

Alexander would have found no honor in the way modern warfare is conducted. The scale of destruction would have taken him aback. What martial prowess does dropping a bomb require? Where does one fit that into the Iliad way of war where everything hinges on personal conduct, ability to wield weapons that are intended to kill one fellow warrior at a time. Those who make the war decisions are not even on the battlefield. He would have found that cowardly and rightly punishable by death by the standards of his time.Victory without honor was far more shameful than defeat with honor. You cannot transpose the values of the ancient Macedonians onto moderns, who cannot conceptualize Alexander except by thinking "Oh, he would have wanted victory at any cost. He would have loved WMD's." In fact he would have been horrified.Regards,Tre

Well said. He would have wept.

I find this question interesting as it intercepts my ponderings this morning. In answer to the question as such, I recall that Alexander would not sneak into a battle during the night as it would be a discredit to his sense of honor, so I appreciate your comments Tre. But on a more important note, I honestly believe that each generation reacts in terms of its own times and environment. One cannot truly justapose Alexander and his ideals into this time period as they simply do not fit into this modern age of modern technology, stealth bombers, and submarines, etc. Tommy Franks fought at night using special weapons to see in the night and complained when the Iranians sold some same weapons to the Iraqi's. So the ideals, the goals, and the methods are totally different from the great Greek philosphers and warriors.Americans do not have ennobling ideals as causes for which to fight. The name of the game is to win. Alexander is noted for his idealism.So somehow I do not believe anyone can compare Alexander to either side. Nobody in American military units claim to be born of God or having to represent God. In fact, they have printed on some weapons Hellfire. I think that there is a lot of difference.While those who are intrigued by Alexander can imagine what he would have thought, I imagine that the answers reveal only those of the author. Alexander's thoughts on record are probably distorted and garbled over time as well. If the Bible is changed in its words as often as it is, why would anyone think that all the quotations of Alexander have not been.But as Alexander loved a great battle, he probably would have been impressed at the lack of warfare. This was not a war, but a debacle.Would anyone have imbedded reporters in a real war?

Yiannis, it is'nt nice to patronise your fellow forumers. My Dear Dave???? are you my Mum?On to the topic at hand which, neither you nor anybody else seems to have wished to answer. I would have to say that is pretty much par for the course with a few exception, Marcus, Nick, Ruth, Dean and a couple of others nobody seem to want to answer questions but instead want to expound their own knowledge for their own greater glory.I have an opinion on what Alexander would have thought, do you. Answer the question then complain about mine if you think I am wrong.Alexander was not a great moralist, lets not forget Thebans, Tyrians slaughtered an enslaved. Would he have used smart bombs (of course he would). The equivalent of impersonal and cowardly weapon for the ancients was the arrow (the see th Illiad or anything on Spartan sayings). Did he use them (yep) sure did. And lets not forget the Sarissa, I thought the whole Idea of that was to ensure that your enemy had to get past three weapons before engaging a man. This is not hand to hand, their is romantic notion of hand to hand chivalrous deulling it just mass slaughter of the guys in your way.Alexander was a great hero, but dont kid yourself he was a saint, or a great moralist.See this is how you answer a question.As for Journalist, those are my opinions. I believe that all journalist work for somebody, and that somebody wants a story that sells their medium. Sansation sells. I beleive bad things happened, I as a father feel for the parents who lost children. However I think the American, British and Australians tried to minimise the casualty count for soldiers and civilians. Would Alexander?I may have drifted away a little but it is still refering to Alexander.

Dave (plain Dave this time as you surely noticed), I'm definitely not your mum. On the other hand next time you might want to skip giving me lessons on how to reply to your postings.
I replied to the part of your message where you drifted away and used this thread to glorify the US-led gulf war and blame the media for the early(?) end of the first guld war. We're not supposed to express political views in this Forum otherwise it will turn into a mess.
When it comes to Alexander I believe that he would use all means available (as he did) in order for him to utterly destroy his opponent in a sequence of decisive battles. Open confrontation was his field, not diplomacy.

Thank you Yiannis,I appreciate that, and I take on board your critic of my telling you how to respond. As for Political beliefs, I had no Idea that journalist ( who I criticised) were politicians, I thought they were imparticial observers.