The only history in that movie is that Leonidas and 299 other guys (blus a held off a massive Persian invasion for a long enough time for the rest of Greece to rally.

The actual history is far more entertaining than the film. If the movie serves as a gateway for people to learn about one of the pivotal battles in the western world, then great.

It is true that OUR captured German scientists developed our ICBMS (and the Soviet’s captured German scientists developed theirs).

And it is also true that many of OUR Manhattan Project scientists (but not all) were Europeans who fled Nazi Germany, including the granddaddy of it all, Einstein — who, BTW, wrote FDR in 1940 to start developing nuclear weapons, ASAP). And it is also true that our ally England assisted our efforts in developing it as well.

But the American taxpay paid the bills to build them, test them, and used them against Japan, and to most people, this means that we “own” the technology.

It is also fair to say that since the Soviets stole the weapons technology from us (thank you, Julius and Ethel), that a good part of the weapons techology that Pakistan and India have was derivitive from that stolen US technology, while the rest was stolen directly from us by Indians and Pakistanis.

lorien1973′s claim that we are the only country with the right to own nuclear weapons fails to be convincing in the same vein that the inventors of gunpowder (China) would be if they claimed that only they had the moral right to own modern firearms.

Like that old Walt Disney cartoon, nuclear weaponary is a genie that, like it or not, is out of the bottle. And it won’t go back again.

We developed the technology, we went thru the angst on whether or not to use them, we developed the delivrey system.

lorien1973 on May 6, 2007 at 12:18 PM

Not exactly.

Are you talking about the Richard Gere/Shilpa Shetty “hugging incident” involving outraged Hindus in India?

I wouldn’t call what we’re seeing with Islam a “rise”.

mesablue on May 6, 2007 at 1:40 PM

I’d disagree with you here. Look at the subservience islam already gets in Europe, in the democrat party and even in mainstream america. It seems that blowing up stuff all the time is working as well as the Digg tantrum did last week. concessions and concessions.

I wouldn’t call what we’re seeing with Islam a “rise”.

mesablue on May 6, 2007 at 1:40 PM

I’d disagree with you here. Look at the subservience islam already gets in Europe, in the democrat party and even in mainstream america. It seems that blowing up stuff all the time is working as well as the Digg tantrum did last week. concessions and concessions.

Has anybody ever seen the 1961 version? “The 300 Spartans” was more accurate but also kinda cheesy.

Tony737 on May 6, 2007 at 1:16 PM

I have a copy, and as far a anything goes, censorship is still chensorship. What the mullahs are afraid of is obvious to all who live in non-mawslem countries.
The real question is why are they repressing their people. The “hugging incident” is a symptom of the disease. Help cure islam.

I wouldn’t call what we’re seeing with Islam a “rise”.

mesablue on May 6, 2007 at 1:40 PM

In terms of numbers you’re right. I’m talking about all the attention it’s getting on the world stage. If Christendom is paying attention it will take steps to protect itself from the retrograde effect that Islam has on progress.

The rise of Islam will be the death of reason.

I wouldn’t call what we’re seeing with Islam a “rise”.

French “conservatives” are like our moderate liberals. The French election was between the center left and the fall off the edge of the world far left.

Tony737 on May 6, 2007 at 12:16 PM

That’s a fact. We have to remember that no matter what he’s STILL French. Just like the eskimos have a couple of dozen words for “snow”; I wonder how many different ways you can say “surrender” in French?

I’ll bet Nazi propoganda films are big in Pakistan. It’s funny how you can see reruns of “Baywatch” all over the world but a semi-historical film isn’t allowed. The rise of Islam will be the death of reason.

Has anybody ever seen the 1961 version? “The 300 Spartans” was more accurate but also kinda cheesy.

There was never a point in which the producers, writers or director of the film 300 ever said that the movie was historically accurate. What is accurate is how it portrays the Persian Islamic army and its lust for power and rule over the whole earth
americaslaststand on May 6, 2007 at 12:48 PM

You do realize that the events portrayed in 300 took place 1000 years before Mohammed was born, don’t you?

screening in Islamabad of the historically inaccurate Warner Brothers film “300”.

There was never a point in which the producers, writers or director of the film 300 ever said that the movie was historically accurate. What is accurate is how it portrays the Persian Islamic army and its lust for power and rule over the whole earth, and how the are still some people such as the Spartans that will spill blood and die to keep that from happening. This film may be a loosely based on historical facts, but it is quite relevant to the times in which we all live.

Sarkozy wins, that’s good news but don’t get too excited, French “conservatives” are like our moderate liberals. The French election was between the center left and the fall off the edge of the world far left.

Lorien!

I dunno if you forgot the /sarc off tag, but I have to say.

I agree!

well put!

-Wasteland Man.

Bring it on you French faggots! The French police haven’t had to bust some heads in a while, and, I’d like to see a frenchman have some balls and do a beat down on someone.