Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

historytoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 140 posts

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#61

Post by blfr »

jean_tta wrote: post #59
nspattak wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that their martial discipline and military life style is what they are famous for. Again, I think that the failure of the effectiveness of their of their military training simply shows that in war there are a lot of factors. Sth that can be seen even in our times, the US effectively lost in Vietnam or Iraq even though their military was far superior.

You take for granted that the Spartans were good at war, and reconcile "Spartans good at war" and "Spartans lost to other city-states" by concluding that there are "a lot of factors". Why not revise your assumption that Spartans were good at war?

They were certainly quite good at least at keeping numerically dominant helots down.

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#62

Post by planetis »

hrgiger wrote: post #43
planetis wrote: post #13

Quoted post unavailable.

Heya Turkish guy here, some points you mention I agree (our secularism, administration), but I found your lobbying approach for cheering for war and weapons quite disturbing, I love Greek people, we have many commons and differences, when I share my projects or work publicly I always think there is many otherside think like me, peaceful minds concentrated on development rather than destruction. Elections are due we w…

(Original message re-posted to prove there is no cheering for war from my side, that's false information): Contrast this to the present day, where Turkish president, due to the worsening economy and the June 2023 elections and the successful diplomatic trip of his Greek counterpart to the US, has went on a sickening game of war threats on a daily basis. A map of the chronic Turkish revisionism has been released by the Greek foreign ministry in an attempt to counter his warmongering with logical arguments. NATO should see who is tripping the alliance, acting on the benefit of Russia ...and finally accept that Turkey has become the new Iran, it's views no longer aligns with the West. A strong army is a must, and after a decade of economic crisis, Greece has a lot of catching up to do.

[1]: https://twitter.com/GreeceMFA/status/1534867984476516354

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#63

Post by ProjectArcturis »

blfr wrote: post #61
jean_tta wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You take for granted that the Spartans were good at war, and reconcile "Spartans good at war" and "Spartans lost to other city-states" by concluding that there are "a lot of factors". Why not revise your assumption that Spartans were good at war?

They were certainly quite good at least at keeping numerically dominant helots down.

Plenty of places in ancient times used terror successfully to keep large slave populations in their place. But if you count up Sparta's win/loss record in known battles against other armies, they're almost exactly 50%. And they were 0-2 against the Macedonian phalanx.

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#64

Post by tut-urut-utut »

dotancohen wrote: post #15
rob74 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...or it could be a recipe for civil war if those trained and armed people split into different factions. I don't see that happening in Switzerland, but that's probably one of the reasons why this model hasn't caught on a lot.

This is what happened in south Syria. Before the Libyan mercenaries arrived, the real civil war started when citizens armed by the government revolted to a heavy-handed government crackdown against schoolchildren. Those citizens were armed with heavy weaponry by the Syrian ministry of defense, in case of Israeli attack. Then the displaced farmers revolted (this is why the war is sometimes blamed on climate change), t…

How convenient to "forget" "western" factors and blame everyone else instead.

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#65

Post by jcranmer »

nspattak wrote: post #50
nradov wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overall the Spartans weren't even much more effective. They took some losses battling other Greek city-states. Their martial prowess has been somewhat exaggerated. https://acoup.blog/2019/09/20/collections-this-isnt-sparta-p...

I think that their martial discipline and military life style is what they are famous for. Again, I think that the failure of the effectiveness of their of their military training simply shows that in war there are a lot of factors. Sth that can be seen even in our times, the US effectively lost in Vietnam or Iraq even though their military was far superior.

Sparta is famous for having a really, really good PR agency. It's telling that their most famous military operation is fighting a rearguard action where they comprised less than 10% of the total forces. Their famous martial discipline and military life style? Our contemporary sources wax poetical about these... before footnotes saying that's what it should be and used to be, but isn't actually anymore.

It should be noted that, when you compare the descriptions of Spartan military education with modern studies of child soldiers, you realize that's exactly what Sparta was: a society of child soldiers. It's the same procedures of indoctrination and ritual initiation. You want to extol their military life, go to the Lord's Resistance Army or similar counterparts today.

Strip away the romanticism of Sparta, and you're left with a slave society whose military is based on child soldiers that struggles to fight battles next door, which is curb-stomped by next major military force to sweep in (the Macedonians), produced nothing of note in lasting cultural artifacts... but has the best publicists of the ancient world!

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#66

Post by seneca »

kkfx wrote: post #3

The real interesting part is the Swiss model, or instead of having a big army a small one with heavy weapons and a popular conscription one month (paid) per year 18-28 years range, for the rest. That's interesting because: - it's not good to go to war OUTSIDE country borders - power are balanced: the State can count (perhaps) on army, but if it goes against the people they are trained and armed, with less heavy weapo…

Giving the state a monopoly on weapons manufacturing seems like a road to serfdom, exactly the opposite of maintaining a Democracy. One of the critical steps to every dictatorship is disarming the population.

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#67

Post by dotancohen »

tut-urut-utut wrote: post #64
dotancohen wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what happened in south Syria. Before the Libyan mercenaries arrived, the real civil war started when citizens armed by the government revolted to a heavy-handed government crackdown against schoolchildren. Those citizens were armed with heavy weaponry by the Syrian ministry of defense, in case of Israeli attack. Then the displaced farmers revolted (this is why the war is sometimes blamed on climate change), t…

How convenient to "forget" "western" factors and blame everyone else instead.

From the way I saw it the Western factors came later, mostly in response to Russian and ISIS involvement, and thus fall into the category of "the whole mess we see today".

Though I do see your point, many people like to cherry-pick parts of conflicts that serve their worldview and ignore other parts, so it may appear to you that was what I did as well. Both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict love to discuss certain events and limit the discussion to only those periods during which their favoured side was "right".

So that was in fact not my intention. You are invited and welcome to mention the Western factors that you see relevant.

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#68

Post by watwut »

blfr wrote: post #61
jean_tta wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You take for granted that the Spartans were good at war, and reconcile "Spartans good at war" and "Spartans lost to other city-states" by concluding that there are "a lot of factors". Why not revise your assumption that Spartans were good at war?

They were certainly quite good at least at keeping numerically dominant helots down.

Being good at war and being capable of keeping enslaved population via massive brutality and control are not the same thing.

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#69

Post by watwut »

naveen99 wrote: post #46

i wonder how countries with mandatory military service deal with gun control for people after their mandatory military service is over.

When you are in army, army rules apply to you. When you are at home, civilian rules apply to you. Which may mean that you are not allowed to have guns or it may mean there are special regulations.

Sometimes, your ability to have gun is dependent also on you finishing the service - tho I think that is mostly to stop people from dodging the draft. (In Iran, you are not allowed to have passport without military service. They can deny you driver's license too.)

Re: No Army? No Problem: Defending the Home Front in Ancient Greece

#70

Post by watwut »

tut-urut-utut wrote: post #64
dotancohen wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what happened in south Syria. Before the Libyan mercenaries arrived, the real civil war started when citizens armed by the government revolted to a heavy-handed government crackdown against schoolchildren. Those citizens were armed with heavy weaponry by the Syrian ministry of defense, in case of Israeli attack. Then the displaced farmers revolted (this is why the war is sometimes blamed on climate change), t…

How convenient to "forget" "western" factors and blame everyone else instead.

This one was not caused by west in any way. West joined way later.

Oh, and you conveniently ignore Russian factor too - they were the ones targeting hospitals and ranking up civilian causalities as a strategy.

Post reply on HN