ChairmanMeow

http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/002what.html
The two kingdoms are distinct.

http://courses.wcupa.edu/jones/his10...c%5Cpersia.htm
Neighbors, not countrymen.

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ancie...ia/people.html
The Medes, being a seperate people, settled the area seperately from the Persians.

http://www.cultureofiran.com/b_history.php
The Persians themselves considered the Medes to be a seperate people!



This took a whole 3 minutes to find. If you really need more information than this, just search the thread.

Edit: removed pointless maps.

sugarhitman

The U.S. is a European power controled by European-Americans.


Read the Council of Foriegn Affairs internet Journal titled "America, A European Power." America is a European power.



And the United Nations was jointly founded by Europeans and Americans....headquatered in America on land donated by co-founder Rockefeller. The U.N. is an attempt to unite the world under the umbrella of the Western powers.

Sheshonq

Wrong.

How long do people have to live here before they're considered Americans?
By your argument, Great Britain is an Asian country, since the Germanic migrations originated in Asia.

The above, by the way, is another reason why getting you to provide a definition of "empire" is so important. You tend to stretch and bend the definitions of commonly used words, whenever your pet interpretation of prophecy needs rescuing from reality.

So?

This is an article by Richard Holbrooke published by CFR. It happens all the time. The fact that he wrote an article with that title does not prove your assertion - especially since you've never read the article.

Who cares. It doesn't prove your argument, no matter who founded the UN.

sugarhitman

Nonsense.

1. If Daniel considered the kingdom of the Medes and Persians to be a single one...why didnt he say Your kingdom is given to the Persians? Why is there a law of the "Medes and Persians" instead of law of the Persians. Why was a Mede MADE king over Babylon? The fact that he says "divided and given to the Medes and Persians" shows that he considers them to be a dual kingdom if he didnt the Medes would not be mentioned at all only the Persians.


2. Your sources of history that seperates the Medes and Persians are talking about the days before Cyrus united them. Can you qoute a (neutral) source that denies this unity in the days of Cyrus?


3. Who cares if the Medes and Persians are two distinct groups. Does this prove that unity did not happen in the Cyrus kingdom....no.



You will have to try better than this my friend.

2.

ChairmanMeow

This is a fine example of 1984-style thinking. The fact that it is stated as divided between "Medes and Persians" is evidence that they are considered different. If he wanted to combine them, he wouldn't have used the term "divided." This is, of course, assuming for the sake of argument that any of this is even close to historically accurate.

di·vid·ed [di-vahy-did]
adjective
1. separated; separate.
2. disunited.

Their unity in the "days of Cyrus," if we apply your definitions and logic, is irrelevant. Hellenic culture dominated the Romans, "uniting" their people -- yet you consider them to be seperate. On the other hand, the Ottomans conquered the Byzantines in much the same way that the Persians conquered the Medes -- yet you consider the Ottomans to be an extension of Rome (). You haven't defined what you consider an empire. You are applying a ridiculous double standard. Before any further debate can occur, you must make some solid definitions.

:banghead: It's like debating someone who is making the story up as they go along. It took this long to get you to admit that they are seperate and distinct -- yet you concede nothing, shifting the goalposts back even further.

sugarhitman

www.livius.org-Cyrus Says Medes and Persians a Dual Monarchy-Non-christian site?

www.persiandna.com Says Medes and Persians united

history-world.org says the same


There are many more who back up my arguement.


Daniel does not seperate the Medes and Persians

1.Babylon
2.Medo-Persia
3. Greece
4. Rome
4. Divided Rome (Modern Europe)

funinspace

And by your own very loose usage of Empire continuance, the Roman Empire is still just an out growth of the Greek Empire. You have still not shown anything that would suggest a stronger linkage between the Roman Empire and power emanating out of Washington DC, than the very clear Greek cultural, societal, and political imprint upon the Roman Empire.

For the tenth time: By your own waxing from white supremacist sites about German dominance and other flaky places, you have no fourth empire as long as the US is just an outgrowth of the Romans. You are still trying to have your cake and eat it as well, without a shred of support…

Either way Frodo, I tire of hearing unsupported tales from what your ring tells you. So I will let others continue trying to get you to back up the tales you weave.

sugarhitman

Daniel said the KINGDOM (Babylon, if the Persians was a single monarchy why divide it with the Medes?) was divided between the Medes and Persians not that the Medes and Persians were divided. If they were divided than how can their kingdom stand? If this Persian empire was a single Monarchy Mede would not even be mention....it would be Persian pure and simple.




Greeks appeared in both the Roman and Greek empires. The Roman empire is only different because it also included the Latins and Nordic tribes as well as its extended territory into Europe.

Sheshonq

No, it does not. It says that Cyrus had a personal monarchy that was dual. Clearly you don't understand the difference.

Besides, you seem to mistakenly believe that ruling over two countries means that they are equals, or that both countries participate in the governance. Maybe you should review the history of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, to see if all the players in that arrangement have dual, or equal, standing.

It does? Where? You know that isn't a historical source anyhow, right? It's a group of Iranians posting on the web?

It does? Where?

No, there aren't.

Sheshonq

1. Laughably incorrect.

2. The Greek empire also included non-Greeks. Therefore both empires are the same in that they were not confined to the nationalities of their originators.