Israel and Iran are threatening each other, but “The Levant is threatening Persia” wouldn’t make sense as a 55 BCE statement, as Rome is, well, not the Levant. The only reason it works as a 260 AD statement is because the Roman territory Persia is invading is in the Levant, and thus relies on the Levant being used as a region, rather than a political actor, to make the 260 AD comparison valid.
Oh what’s the lore? (Both in present and the past)
In 260 AD, the Sassanids invaded the Roman Empire, deep into the Levant and Anatolia.
Currently, the Iranians are trading fire with the Israelis.
Yeah but this is more like 53B.C. where Romans initiated the attacks no?
In terms of aggression, yes, but “Rome is threatening Persia” has a touch less relevance to the modern situation.
How so?
In my opinion they’re both threatening each other
Israel and Iran are threatening each other, but “The Levant is threatening Persia” wouldn’t make sense as a 55 BCE statement, as Rome is, well, not the Levant. The only reason it works as a 260 AD statement is because the Roman territory Persia is invading is in the Levant, and thus relies on the Levant being used as a region, rather than a political actor, to make the 260 AD comparison valid.
I get that. There’s not better historical statement that I would be able to place there either.
Thank you for the clarification