Well I could see how they might not debate about the overall purpose, but what kind of strategic value it had. Actual fortification? Raised causeway to enable efficient travel around the border? Continuous observation platform/high ground for defense? But then they should be more specific about what is being debated
Yeah sounds accurate. At the very least, more explanation of “who?” and what the discussion about it is.
Digging a ditch and then a raised thing behind it is best practices for levels 1 through 5 of fortification design for thousands and thousands of years, basically all the way up until firearms. To me it’s weird to see someone find a ditch with a raised thing behind it all along a disputed border and then talking about we’re not sure what could this thing be, but maybe I am missing something
Well I could see how they might not debate about the overall purpose, but what kind of strategic value it had. Actual fortification? Raised causeway to enable efficient travel around the border? Continuous observation platform/high ground for defense? But then they should be more specific about what is being debated
Yeah sounds accurate. At the very least, more explanation of “who?” and what the discussion about it is.
Digging a ditch and then a raised thing behind it is best practices for levels 1 through 5 of fortification design for thousands and thousands of years, basically all the way up until firearms. To me it’s weird to see someone find a ditch with a raised thing behind it all along a disputed border and then talking about we’re not sure what could this thing be, but maybe I am missing something