Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LibWhacker
We did. We routed their army. In a matter days. That's conquering in my book

Conquered means the people throw themselves down on the pavement so their gaze does not bother the victors.

53 posted on 12/02/2003 3:09:17 PM PST by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: Jim Noble
Damn.
55 posted on 12/02/2003 3:10:50 PM PST by nuffsenuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: Jim Noble
Watched the Gladiator movie recently eh?
56 posted on 12/02/2003 3:12:26 PM PST by Dog (George W. Bush - - - -" Avenger of the Bones..")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: Jim Noble
No, that's subjugation. Check this out (from dictionary.com):
Usage: To Conquer, Vanquish, Subdue, Subjugate, Overcome. These words agree in the general idea expressed by overcome, -- that of bringing under one's power by the exertion of force. Conquer is wider and more general than vanquish, denoting usually a succession of conflicts. Vanquish is more individual, and refers usually to a single conflict. Thus, Alexander conquered Asia in a succession of battles, and vanquished Darius in one decisive engagement. Subdue implies a more gradual and continual pressure, but a surer and more final subjection. We speak of a nation as subdued when its spirit is at last broken, so that no further resistance is offered. Subjugate is to bring completely under the yoke of bondage. The ancient Gauls were never finally subdued by the Romans until they were completely subjugated. These words, when used figuratively, have correspondent meanings. We conquer our prejudices or aversions by a succesion of conflicts; but we sometimes vanquish our reluctance to duty by one decided effort: we endeavor to subdue our evil propensities by watchful and persevering exertions. Subjugate is more commonly taken in its primary meaning, and when used figuratively has generally a bad sense; as, his reason was completely subjugated to the sway of his passions.

62 posted on 12/02/2003 3:26:08 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: Jim Noble; LibWhacker
Well stated, both of you. I like the clean precision of LibWhacker's post. It was very interesting but still I like the spirit of Jim Noble's. Ba'athists should not be allowed to gaze upon our troops. I think they may be on their way to becoming subjugated.
101 posted on 12/02/2003 11:10:40 PM PST by Colorado Doug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson