Greace or Hellas ??

[Istor]

Makedonija na Makedoncite i Skopie na SlavoSkopcite !!

[jonas]

slavoturkistan or islamic republic of east albania...whatever you choose we will respect your decision

[Marko MK]

Istor wrote:

Makedonija na Makedoncite i Skopie na SlavoSkopcite !!

Etiopia na Grcite

[Bronzilla]

Marko MK wrote:

<quoted text>
Etiopia na Grcite

YES !!!!!!

the best of Africa !

and is GREEK !!!!

M_A_M_A !!!!!!

[Macedonia in Hurt]

Ah the gipsy when you will learn

[Bronzilla]

Macedonia in Hurt wrote:

Ah the gipsy when you will learn

slavomongol

We try hard to help you but now Greece is OUT !!!!

now you have to deal with your internal devil(s)

[Macedonia in Hurt]

We know that greece is out,in toalet
Go back to azia gipsy first see how slavomongols looks and how we look then compare,compare your look with gipsy from anywhere of world and you will see

[Istor]

Marko MK wrote:

<quoted text>
Etiopia na Grcite

Roseta Stone middle text na Etiopskite.

[Arrianos]

The key word is "Macedonia". Macedonia = Greece.

[Istor]

Would you stop now denying the existence of Greece and Greeks at ancient times?
Would you stop licking your propaganda assssess ?? Would you stop being MALAKES ??

MALAKES !!

[Tony]

Istor wrote:

Would you stop now denying the existence of Greece and Greeks at ancient times?
Would you stop licking your propaganda assssess ?? Would you stop being MALAKES ??
MALAKES !!

Show me a map of Greece in ancient times.

[Tony]

Arrianos wrote:

The key word is "Macedonia". Macedonia = Greece.

And Greece = Germany

[Istor]

Would you stop now denying the existence of Greece and Greeks at ancient times?
Would you stop licking your propaganda assssess ?? Would you stop being MALAKES ??

MALAKES !!

[Istor]

Tony wrote:

<quoted text>
Show me a map of Greece in ancient times.

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/macedonia/T6...

[Istor]

Tony wrote:

<quoted text>
Show me a map of Greece in ancient times.

Not before you confess that Greece and Greeks did exist at ancient times for they are mentionned in the inscription of the first post of this thread.

Well?

[Tony]

Istor wrote:

<quoted text>
Not before you confess that Greece and Greeks did exist at ancient times for they are mentionned in the inscription of the first post of this thread.
Well?

Lol. How can they exist when they didn't

Show me proof. A map would be perfect, is it that hard

[Istor]

Tony wrote:

..........
Show me proof. A map would be perfect, is it that hard

Yet, it is. But then, it seems that it is very easy for you to show us an ancient map of Macedonia !! Well, go ahead.

[Tony]

Istor wrote:

<quoted text>
Yet, it is. But then, it seems that it is very easy for you to show us an ancient map of Macedonia !! Well, go ahead.

You are claiming Macedonia is Greek. So show a map of Greece.

Plenty of Macedonian maps. But none of Greece

[Rosetta stone]

Alexander may have killed at least 50,000 Greeks who where fighting on the Persian side and you clam his Greek your stupidity is beyond belief.

[1] Arrian's The Campaigns of Alexander "The cavalry action which ensued was desperate enough, and the Persians broke only when they knew that the Greek mercenaries were being cut and destroyed by the Macedonian infantry." [p.119-20]
[ancient Greeks fighting against ancient Macedonians and the modern Greeks called Alexander's conquest Greek? Something doesn't add up here.]
[2] Arrian "The Campaigns of Alexander" "When received the report that Alexander was moving forward to the attack, he sent some 30,000 mounted troops and 20,000 light infantry across the river Pinarus, to give himself a chance of getting the main body of his army into position without molestation. His dispositions were as follows: in the van of his heavy infantry were his 30,000 Greek mercenaries, facing the Macedonian infantry, with some 60,000 Persian heavy infantry- known as Kardakes." [p.114]
[Paradoxical juncture: Alexander's conquest can not be called Greek conquest while 30,000 Greeks are actually fighting against Alexander and his Macedonians, while far less,(7,000) were part of the Macedonian army.]
[3] Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander" Patron, the Greek commander, speaks with Darius:
"Your Majesty", said Patron, "we few are all that remain of 50,000 Greeks. We were all with you in your more fortunate days, and in your present situation we remain as we were when you were prospering, ready to make for and to accept as our country and our home any lands you choose. We and you have been drawn together both by your prosperity and your adversity. By this inviolable loyalty of ours I beg and beseech you: pitch your tent in our area of the camp and let us be your bodyguards. We have left Greece behind; for us there is no Bactria; our hopes rest entirely in you - I wish that were true of the others also! Further talk serves no purpose. As a foreigner born of another race I should not be asking for the responsibility of guarding your person if I thought anyone else could do it." [p.112-13]
[50,000 Greeks serving with Darius’ army and fighting Alexander's Macedonians. A legitimate and a very obvious question: If Alexander’s army was in fact a ‘Greek army’, as the modern Greeks claim, then how is it possible for a ‘Greek king’- Alexander, to hire mercenaries - Greeks, from his 'own' country? 50,000 strong Greeks were with Darius fighting the Macedonians, while Alexander took only 7,000 Greeks next to his Macedonians which served him as "hostages" and "were potential trouble makers" (Green), which he got rid of only when he learned that the rebellion in Greece against the Macedonian occupation forces there was suppressed (Green, Badian, Borza). The fact that 50,000 Greeks were fighting Alexander’s Macedonians shows clearly that their loyalty and their numerical superiority lies with Darius and his Persians, not with Alexander and his Macedonians. As Peter Green puts it: "if this was a Greek conquest where were the Greek troops?" Alexander’s conquest can not therefore be at all a Greek conquest, but simply a Macedonian conquest.]
[4] "The turning point in the evolution of Alexander's army appears to have been the year 330. Until then the Macedonian component was progressively reinforced, reaching peaks before Issus and after the arrival of Amyntas' great contingent late in 331. Alexander then thought it safe to divest himself of non Macedonian troops. The forces from the Corinthean League, infantry and cavalry, were demobilized from Ecbetana in the spring of 330;

7326

[ENOUGH]

Rosetta stone wrote:

Alexander may have killed at least 50,000 Greeks who where fighting on the Persian side and you clam his Greek your stupidity is beyond belief.
[1] Arrian's The Campaigns of Alexander "The cavalry action which ensued was desperate enough, and the Persians broke only when they knew that the Greek mercenaries were being cut and destroyed by the Macedonian infantry." [p.119-20]
[ancient Greeks fighting against ancient Macedonians and the modern Greeks called Alexander's conquest Greek? Something doesn't add up here.]
[2] Arrian "The Campaigns of Alexander" "When received the report that Alexander was moving forward to the attack, he sent some 30,000 mounted troops and 20,000 light infantry across the river Pinarus, to give himself a chance of getting the main body of his army into position without molestation. His dispositions were as follows: in the van of his heavy infantry were his 30,000 Greek mercenaries, facing the Macedonian infantry, with some 60,000 Persian heavy infantry- known as Kardakes." [p.114]
[Paradoxical juncture: Alexander's conquest can not be called Greek conquest while 30,000 Greeks are actually fighting against Alexander and his Macedonians, while far less,(7,000) were part of the Macedonian army.]
[3] Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander" Patron, the Greek commander, speaks with Darius:
"Your Majesty", said Patron, "we few are all that remain of 50,000 Greeks. We were all with you in your more fortunate days, and in your present situation we remain as we were when you were prospering, ready to make for and to accept as our country and our home any lands you choose. We and you have been drawn together both by your prosperity and your adversity. By this inviolable loyalty of ours I beg and beseech you: pitch your tent in our area of the camp and let us be your bodyguards. We have left Greece behind; for us there is no Bactria; our hopes rest entirely in you - I wish that were true of the others also! Further talk serves no purpose. As a foreigner born of another race I should not be asking for the responsibility of guarding your person if I thought anyone else could do it." [p.112-13]
[50,000 Greeks serving with Darius’ army and fighting Alexander's Macedonians. A legitimate and a very obvious question: If Alexander’s army was in fact a ‘Greek army’, as the modern Greeks claim, then how is it possible for a ‘Greek king’- Alexander, to hire mercenaries - Greeks, from his 'own' country? 50,000 strong Greeks were with Darius fighting the Macedonians, while Alexander took only 7,000 Greeks next to his Macedonians which served him as "hostages" and "were potential trouble makers" (Green), which he got rid of only when he learned that the rebellion in Greece against the Macedonian occupation forces there was suppressed (Green, Badian, Borza). The fact that 50,000 Greeks were fighting Alexander’s Macedonians shows clearly that their loyalty and their numerical superiority lies with Darius and his Persians, not with Alexander and his Macedonians. As Peter Green puts it: "if this was a Greek conquest where were the Greek troops?" Alexander’s conquest can not therefore be at all a Greek conquest, but simply a Macedonian conquest.]
[4] "The turning point in the evolution of Alexander's army appears to have been the year 330. Until then the Macedonian component was progressively reinforced, reaching peaks before Issus and after the arrival of Amyntas' great contingent late in 331. Alexander then thought it safe to divest himself of non Macedonian troops. The forces from the Corinthean League, infantry and cavalry, were demobilized from Ecbetana in the spring of 330;
7326

Learn this is your motto

The weaker the data available upon which to base one's conclusion, the greater the precision which should be quoted in order to give the data authenticity.

You waste bandwidth to no end.