Romafags BTFO

He even forgets that Arminius was a Romefag.

Most of Rome's barbarian foes were. Look at all the barbarian kings in the 4th and 5th century.
Hell a few times the barbarians literally elected to have a roman lead them, like with Sertorius in Spain.

[spoiler]he was only pretending[/spoiler]

The Romans returned and slaughtered the Germans just a few years later. They even got their captured standards back. Why is this battle so famous and the latter equally one-sided Roman victories almost unknown?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Weser_River
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angrivarii

because Augustus had an autistic fit over it and Rome never secured territories past the Rhine again.

Because Rome lost fucking legions.

That shit is very important to the Romans.

Because Rome has lots and lots of ridiculously one sided victories. Their defeats, especially in the days of the early empire, are much rarer and thus more notable.

For the same reason brits and frogs idolize Boudicca and Vercingetorix: 19th century nationalism.

That shit happened in literally every war. It even fucking happened during slave rebellions. It was shameful for the general, but not particularly noteworthy.

he was a Cherusci who was roman educated. he was not a Latin.

>That shit happened in literally every war
No. A bunch of legions lost men, but still retained their organization. That is a usual Roman loss.

Romans remember when WHOLE legions were lost. As in the unit is virtually wiped out. MULTIPLE legions wiped out. Now that's a shit to remember.

And this was during the time when Romans literally almost lost very few battles versus foreigners. And versus barbarians.

Don't ask me why this battle is remembered so much, Romans seem to think it's a big tragedy.

that battle basically guaranteed that Rome would never try and take and hold Germania again, and look what that decision birthed
[spoiler]you're speaking it[/spoiler]

Dude Rome lost whole armies a bunch of times. Understrength legions were split up to reinforce others all the time too.
Just look at Noreia, Arausio, or a shitload other battles.

>that battle basically guaranteed that Rome would never try and take and hold Germania again
They tried not even a generation later. And they were even winning before Germanicus croaked.

>Understrength legions were split up to reinforce others all the time too.
Not the same as losing whole lot of them to the barbarian enemy.

>Not the same as losing whole lot of them to the barbarian enemy.

they lost the MAINSTAY of the legion at Cannae.

Varus pls

Did you purposefully ignore the rest of the post? Do you think that no legions were lost at Arausio?

And Teutoberg (or whatever its name is in Roman) is in the same shelf as Cannae filed under "Shitty defeats, pls. remember" for the Romans.

youtube.com/watch?v=uJRISJmqhGQ
youtube.com/watch?v=6oxyj-jQW54

Cannae was Pearl Harbor for Romans, Teutoburg was the Vietnam.

>They tried not even a generation later.
They warred, as in to defeat and cripple them but they didn't try to subjugate and rule them

And Allia was their 9/11

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vercellae
Seriously how can you fuck up this bad