Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
As to history, I believe the human dynamics of populaces and their governances is timeless. The facts change, the dynamics stay the same. Its a matter of degree and perception.
Quote Originally Posted by Chris jM View Post
I agree. The facts do change, and I see a lot of historical comparison trying to directly relate the facts of Roman/ Vietnam/ Iraq etc to another parallel. If history informs dynamics, theory or understanding, then that understanding will probably be more robust and relevant.

America is not Rome and Roman facts do not apply to America as a direct import - they do, however, have salient relevance to the conduct of politics and war.
Well, you know me, Bob, so I'll dispense with the comment that "fact" comes from "factum; made or constructed" (guess I didn't dispense with it, eh ?).

Content, context and situation change, but if we want to draw comparisons between Rome and the US, then it's best to do it on as close a basis as possible. Rome is much closer to the US than many people now want to believe, including the "external" governance structures. Outside of language games ("empire" comes from "imperium" which actually translates as "sphere of influence", not "empire" in the autocratic sense), the entirity of the H&M campaign concept, plus all the disaster relief, etc., use fo troops, actually fits in with how Rome used their legions to construct an infrastructure that increased the dependency of "conquered" areas on the core.

Basically, I do agree with you, Bob, that the dynamics remain the same, although the specifics and context change.