<:oh:555739741337812992>

@Deleted User bruh thats wrong

if i remember correctly from studies, only in northern greece,
the slavic gene exists in some cases in up to 25% in many northern greeks

which means that some northern greeks are 1/4th slavic

if you consider that as all greeks are slavs thats 10000 iq

The rest of 75% is arab dna

says who?

Me

cause greeks taking dna tests disagree with you

also its kinda hillarious that people dont know history and how provinces of the eastern roman empire having some similarities with greeks is because greeks moved there and had colonies there for thousands of years, not the opposite

Eastern roman empire was cringe

@IliasSpook let’s keep this 1 to 1, Ik this server is full of white supremcists I’ll just have a debate and leave this shithole. But let me talk about your Carthage vs Roman thing, the first war we got betrayed by one of our nobles that sided with you. If that haven’t had happened you wouldn’t dream of winning It. The second war, you initially got cucked by Hannibal but come on he marched all the way North Africa all the way to Alps that’s a challenge it self and your historians praise him for that it’s shocking that he didn’t perish in the first place but he still took victories and returned because he had lost a lot of soldiers on the way. Unfortunately the rest were losses all thx to mercenaries abandoning Carthage and some traitors. But either way you guys got influenced a lot by Carthage, bad leadership after Hannibal, and lots of traitors caused the fall of Carthage not ur mighty Rome.

@Deleted User pffftt the Vikings sold u to the moors

Including the Slavs as well

A lot of english people from today have some med dna

Carthage lost three wars to Rome because Hannibal, despite all his tactical genius, simply could not compete with Scipio Africanus.
The government did screw him over, but he lost his means of attacking Rome in the alps as well without fault from them
If anything, Scipio was screwed over harder by the senate, having to get troops on his own instead of being granted them

Hannibal was a genius of warfare, but he was a winner of battles

He could not win a war

Especially not against a foe who kept on adapting and recovering from every blow inflicted

The fact that Rome didn’t fall after Cannae was proof that Hannibal was fighting a foe he couldn’t beat

Yeah sure, I wouldn't deny the Romans were great adapters. but majority of the reasons why carthage lost was traitors abandoning it and bad leadership.

Bad leadership is true. That and an over reliance on mercenaries

Mercenary armies NEVER work out in the long run

Rome learned that lesson the hard way later on

Yeah, tho Carthaginian society wasn't as militarized as Rome is

True

Carthage was a better economic and sea power than the Roman republic was, which dominated the land militarily

At least until the third punic war. Even then, Rome barely used its navy in conflicts after taking Carthage

It didnt have to anymore.

Yea

After Greece and Anatolia were taken, its biggest threats were landlocked tribes and an empire whose only coast was the Persian gulf

It was simple, their empire was more trade focused rather then.... you know. that's why they focused more on navy rather then land military.

the Parthians were sort of more nomadic, i doubt they needed an efficient navy.

Well done @Dr. WaveZey, you just advanced to level 4!

Yeah
Under the right leadership, if they only had a few more hannibals, they could’ve defeated Rome in that second war and taken them down for good, even when facing them at their best
But that potential for dominance of the Mediterranean was squandered by a leadership that didn’t know how to use the resources they were given

Parthians mostly used cavalry, which DID pose a huge threat to Rome

Even though Roman cavalry was some of the best, Parthian cavalry was simply better

Hell, the East adapted their tactics in the form of cataphracts

weren't they the first to mass use Horse archer cavalry

Yep.

Mounted archers were the Parthians’ bread and butter