U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-25-2016, 04:57 AM
 
4,159 posts, read 4,198,215 times
Reputation: 2196

Advertisements

JFK gave the green light to kill President Diem. That doomed our efforts in that war and ensured a communist victory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-25-2016, 09:09 AM
 
4,805 posts, read 1,552,410 times
Reputation: 7861
1. That it's mostly false?

2. We focus on what is not important, and essentially that all history we are taught is war. Fighting is glorified, battles are looked at as "games" winners, losers and strategies. Nation against nation, people against people. Over and over and over.

3. That inventions that would have benefited humanity have been destroyed/covered up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2016, 03:59 PM
 
3,292 posts, read 4,611,866 times
Reputation: 3070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny DeSurf View Post
I didn't like it when I found out Thomas Jefferson and others had slaves....
John Hancock, John Jay, and General Ulysses Grant owned slaves too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2016, 04:07 PM
 
3,404 posts, read 4,142,973 times
Reputation: 2397
Just yesterday I read that the most famous guitar riff in history-Smoke on the water- is basically Beethovens 5th Symphony backwords. Ritchie Blackmore has said he would owe Beethoven a lot of money. That counts as history I think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2016, 07:39 PM
 
862 posts, read 663,929 times
Reputation: 1046
The most surprising fact about history ?? Even if one has proof that it actually happened does not always mean everyone will believe it. A few years ago on another website for example someone had posted that Richmond, Virginia's then WXEX channel 8 back in the 80's had a news chopper. Within no time somebody who worked at WXEX claimed that the station "never had any god-DAMN chopper" and that people shouldn't be telling such false stories. Later a few other posters put links up showing that WXEX DID have a chopper. One clip showed some people shopping and eating in downtown Richmond pointing to the sky saying "..HEY LOOK IT'S TV 8 !!" and there it was..a shot of TV8's chopper called "TV 8 Eye in the SKY". Another promo showed the then WXEX anchors of Rick Young and Barbara Berlin standing beside the chopper. Did the guy from WXEX took back what he had first said ?? NO !! He claimed that the promos and ads about the chopper were photo shopped. oh well !!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2016, 10:24 PM
 
Location: West Los Angeles
8,857 posts, read 8,985,012 times
Reputation: 9097
That the Flying Tigers were intended to help Chinese opium dealers smuggle their product.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2016, 12:01 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles
2,437 posts, read 1,334,589 times
Reputation: 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHartphotog View Post
When studying for the AP U.S. History exam in high school, I realized that most people don't know that the U.S. only practiced open-door immigration AFTER 1965. During the "glory years" (post WWII boom) when America's working class achieved an incredible level of prosperity, we severely restricted immigration to only certain western European nations that had been proven to provide only incredibly hard-working, intelligent workers who wouldn't sign up for public assistance unless they were literally starving.

This strict immigration system resulted in a balance of power between "labor" and "capital" (or the working class and the wealthy business owner class), where employers had to provide decent working conditions and good pay in order to get and keep workers. Gains due to productivity were equally shared between the two groups. Life was great.
Don't want to turn this into a great debates forum; however, I think that is a very selective reading of history:

1. No open-door immigration before 1965? Wrong. During the 1800's and even the early 1900's we certainly did have a laissez fair immigration policy. And even at Ellis Island, where immigrants (1890's to 1920) were subjected to certain physical and mental health screenings, the rejection rate was only 2.0%.

2. The "Great Convergence" in income equality (1940 to 1970) was not driven by immigration restrictions. Institutional factors played a big role: Union density, union power, wage controls during WWII, higher real minimum wage, more progressive tax/transfer policies and to some degree the GI Bill and expansion of universal education.

3. The increase in income equality from the late 70's to 2016 has been caused by an array of factors including changing technology, decline in unions, tax and transfer policies, etc. Immigration has played a part but certainly not a starring role in rising income equality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2016, 04:59 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
2,773 posts, read 1,221,778 times
Reputation: 5100
As for an actual thing, I'd consider:

Ho Chi Minh - Was once an ally of the United States. They petitioned for freedom after WWI but were ignored. They were armed to fight the Japanese in WWII, but were again shut out from their own independence. Finally Ho Chi Minh turned to those that would see Vietnam free of colonialism....the Communists.

Hopefully we learn not to support repressive governments.

Except maybe the Shah of Iran....who we then armed Saddam Hussein to keep in check.
Or let's not forget Afghanistan....where we armed a guy named Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets.
How about the Sandanistas and the drug trade? I mean, the opium wars in China kept them slumped for a long time. Why would we turn illicit drug use on ourselves?

We haven't learned that nobody wants a colonial power, even a benevolent one, to run foreign affairs. I believe it was Jefferson that warned about the intrigues of Europe, perhaps the costs of standing armies.

Oh well. Maybe we'll figure out someday how much dividends we could have by having the 10x stronger education system than everyone else. Or 10x more efficient transportation system. Or simply being the home of the free and the brave, where we have 10x more freedom...maybe that's what got this whole party started to begin with.

Until then, we have 10x military strength. England used to have it. France had it. Rome had it...even Macedonia briefly....before they head back to the Middle Eastern Empires. The all had big, expensive, hard to modernize militaries.

Conversely, I always found it odd how old and beautiful Prague is, given the number of wars historically fought. One person told me, that's easy, we always surrender and fly a new flag...and continue on.

Not sure that's the right way either...but maybe there's some low hanging fruit...some really bad mistakes that seem to keep coming from the same group...that we could cut back on a bit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2016, 07:23 PM
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
4,016 posts, read 1,786,328 times
Reputation: 13833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unsettomati View Post
Weird.

It's as if most ancient peoples have based their civilizations around water - the sea, rivers, lakes. And that things like floods, hurricanes, tsunamis and deluges happen almost everywhere that peoples have lived.

Oh, wait. That is where most ancient peoples lives, and those phenomena do happen where most peoples live.
It's not interesting that ancient people lived near water ... it's obvious & defies the need for explanation (unless you are in elementary school).

And floods, hurricanes, tsunamis & deluges are not really phenomena; they are ... weather.

If every ancient civilization (pre-trade routes) were to simply maintain oral historical accounts of "Great FLOODS" ; that wouldn't be very interesting either. Maybe in an "Almanac" sense if anything.

But it's been estimated that there may be as many as 500 legends of The Great Flood. It's understandable for island peoples to maybe have the perception of "the whole world being underwater" but many of the myths come from areas with geographical features that would make this assumption improbable; Italy, Greece, the Alaskan Inuit, Kolusches & Tlingit & the Papago Indians from Arizona...

What IS interesting to me was the universal presence of the account of "THE Great Flood" which included the element of a "warning" that caused for boats to be built, species to be pre-selected, the use of birds to determine if waters had receeded & water levels that did not receed in days or even weeks but months.

The information that we don't have & likely won't anytime soon; is what would make it even more amazing: The anthropological & geological evidence that could pinpoint if the Great Flood actually occured, in the locations where the myths originated from & at the same time.

In 2012, Robert Ballard, the archaeologist who's high tech team found the remains of the Titanic in 1985; found evidence 400ft below the surface of the Black Sea of an ancient shoreline. Using carbon-dating they were able to establish that a catastrophic event, involving a flood of epic proportions may indeed have taken place around 5,000 BC.

I mean; thats at least interesting; isn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2016, 07:41 AM
 
Location: Glasgow Scotland
14,530 posts, read 11,516,146 times
Reputation: 21035
Marie Antoinette never said “Let them eat cake.”
When told that starving French peasants lacked any bread to eat, the queen is alleged to have callously declared, “Let them eat cake!” There is no evidence, however, that Marie Antoinette ever uttered that famous quip. The phrase used to encapsulate the out-of-touch and indifferent royals first appeared years before Marie Antoinette ever arrived in France in philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s description of Marie-Therese, the Spanish princess who married King Louis XIV in 1660. The remark was also ascribed to two aunts of Louis XVI before it was apocryphally tied to Marie Antoinette.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top