Romans.

This is coolbert:

A lot of pundits proclaimed [many gleefully], that the American defeat in Vietnam was the end of the "American Century".

This meant that the hand writing was on the wall for America.

Having lost our first war, America no longer a power on the ascendancy, now on the decline.

As I have said, this was accepted lore to the delighted pleasure of a lot of pundits.

America was getting her comeupannce.

Well, the Roman model seems to suggest that defeat in war is not always the end of things.

Does not always mean your society is a decadent has been that has run out of rope or steam.

More than two hundred years prior to Caesar, the Romans lost catastrophically on several occasions to the forces of Hannibal. Yet, eventually the Romans persevered and defeated the Carthaginians.

In the years just prior to Caesar, the Romans suffered another catastrophic defeat, this time at the hands of the Parthians.

Did that stop the Romans from continuing to dominate as a great society.

NO.

Under Caesar Augustus, the Romans were defeated terribly by the Germanii tribes at the Teutobergerwald. Three entire legions were obliterated in a desperate battle with Germanii tribesmen, preventing further advancement of the Roman Empire into areas beyond the Rhine.

Did this mean the end of Rome?

Far from it! Roman continued to prosper and grow as a culture and society for centuries to come.

Military loss did mean the demise of Roman society or Empire. Roman culture and yes, military might continued to dominate for centuries to come, some of those cultural traits even being passed down to our current generation.

Losing a war or even a battle does not necessarily signal a culture of society is on the way out.

coolbert.