160 km/h....Renault has also committed to putting a 180 km/h speed cap on all its new Renault and Dacia
and despite having a low average paint thickness of 88.9 μm, every panel has a consistent finish
Proton Saga armoured up a new infotainment system in the mid-life facelift.
or the Aero Edition accessories package for all variants.The X-Tremer package comprises a two-tone paint
In the Kicks, the engine is tuned to deliver 158 PS and 254 Nm, hooked up to a 6-speed manual or CVT-type
More Honda cars on the road translates to higher Body and Paint (BP) service intakes.As of October 2019
next-gen Honda HR-V, Based on the looks, it does look like a squished Proton Suprima with a hint of a Dacia
Although the suede/leather combo feels pleasant to the touch. 2020 Mazda 2 1.5 Hatchback - Noise
app so they can go about their business comfortably before returning to the service centre to pick up
New Front Fog Light Garnish**for V variant only The multiple configurations enabled by the 60:40 One Touch
Theres another trashed up Kancil back on the streets and it is owned by the same man.
Proton has filed for several new trademarks.The trademarks that Proton has filed for include “iN-Touch
PS and 260 Nm of torque.Exterior features on the new Nissan Kicks include LED headlamps, dual-tone paint
updated for 2020.Both the Alphard’s and Vellfire’s list of safety features have been bumped up
Door 113 103 C-Pillar 117 123 Tailgate 105 Roof 127 Average paint
Every click of the button felt premium and the soft-touch material at every touchpoint was amazing.
donielleWe’ve all been there, squeezing through a tighter-than-usual spot in a car park and ending up
It’s not that Dacia is coming to Malaysia but fuel prices are going down again this week after
in the third-row seats with relative comfort as the second-row seats can slide and recline to free up
You’re rewarded with an armour-plated Dacia Sandero! Just kidding.
Touch ‘n Go has reiterated yet again that it will soon remove all parking surcharges.
not help to repair car scratches.While toothpaste contains mild abrasives, it is not enough to remove paint
All this is before paint and fabrication work.
Perodua has successfully held its first-ever Body & Paint (B&P) Skill Contest in a move to step
compared to May.Although sales figures over the past two months were encouraging, year-to-date figures paint
Things dry up and age faster when exposed to UV rays.
For the first time, there will be a proper 320 PS Tiguan R in the line-up too.The front end is completely
Before we begin - the table above is how the Fortuner line-up is marketed now, after the variant shake-up.The
28 September - 4 October 2019 Fuel price update: RON 97 up 12 sen Monday The largest national eSports
19 - 25 October 2019 Fuel price update: RON 97 up by 1 cent Monday PLUS highway celebrates successful
dacia paint touch up-dacia paint touch up-Насколько хорош турбированный V6 для Opel и Saab? 2.8 Turbo (Z28NET)
dacia paint touch up-KIA SEED after repair
dacia paint touch up-dacia paint touch up-Riparazione logo Volkswagen
dacia paint touch up-2019 Dacia Duster & Logan - PRODUCTION
dacia paint touch up-dacia paint touch up-VIDEO CLIP PDR REPAIR VW GOLF 2 -- VW GOLF РЕМОНТ ВМЯТИН 2
dacia paint touch up-Police Car Doodle Chases Drunk Car | Lucky Doodles
dacia paint touch up-BMW 5. The rear part replacement.
dacia paint touch up-Kwid Rear Camera Installation Full Detail
dacia paint touch up-PDR тест 2 - PDR the test for 2
dacia paint touch up-Ремонт дверной ручки RENAULT DUSTER + сборка дверной карты
DACIA DARK BLUE Year= 84- Colour Code= 113 Touch Up Stone Chip Paint Bottle / Pen Wit http://amzn.to/2eZzZxr
Touch Up Paint Kits
@renault_uk does your Glacier White paint match the Glacier white on a DACIA Sandero? Need to touch up some areas
This is one hell of a good question for me, not only because it’s the only one I got today, but I did travel a lot across the country. So I’m not very good at making a Top of favourite things in general but I can try. I prepared some photos I took with my phone camera in some of those locations and the rest(which I’ll mention) will be taken from the internet. Okay so 10. Şinca Veche Monastery. ,I know what you’re thinking. ,Ugh, she’s gonna show me churches. ,Now hold on. I’m not that hyped about churches or religion at all. It’s just that I got to see some dope sacred places in my country. This is believed to be one of the first Christian churches in the country and also in Eastern Europe. As a Romanian attraction, it’s pretty underrated. Long story short, there is a legend saying that ,Zamolxis,(the main God of the dacians, ancient people who lived on that land) in his human life, had a prophecy about Jesus and asked the people to build a temple for him. Basically, it’s a rupestral temple/church that was built into a cliff. Internet picture of the outside view. The inside is beautiful and has an opening on the ceiling where the sun rays enter and you kinda feel like you’re about to be taken by aliens. The altar is also beautiful, with a portrait and the star of David. There are ,many ,legends about this place. There is also some spring water near it and a monastery was built in the woods, in the area. 9. Iaşi. So I have this list of cities from which I’m going to choose the city I’ll move in after I’m done with Uni+residency and Iaşi is definitely one of them. I sadly don’t have any decent pictures of it because whenever I went there, I was busy and forgot about pictures but I might visit it before I leave for college. This city is so beautiful and so complex you’ll have to google some events depending on when you want to visit it. The building in the picture which I took from the internet is the Palace of Culture which I recommend. 8. Peleş and Pelişor Castles. I finally saw it last year. This is considered a basic place to visit, because you’ll find it in every article about Romania. And it’s worth it. Peleş Castle was built to serve as a summer residence for our kings. And it’s one of the few fancy places I wouldn’t mind living in. Internet Picture for an overview Personal archive picture from my point of view. Obviously, the taxes for taking pictures were not worth it but take my word for it. That place was ,majestic. The Pelişor castle, which is near by, served as a more intimate place for the royal families. And obviously, they loved it more and so did I. Smaller but way cuter. It has separate rooms for the royal kids, filled with memories like paintings, mirrors, musical instruments and so on. Once you step inside, you feel like starring in an oldschool movie. 7. Transfăgărăşan and Bâlea Lake. ,Again. You might have seen it on 9gag or something. These places are ,beautiful. ,(internet pictures). Bâlea Lake is near some point of the road and you can reach it either by driving or by cable car, as we did. Now let me tell you. While looking at the road, I have never seen so many fancy cars at once. Also, it feels good to have a snowball fight in the mountains, in June, while wearing a tee shirt. 6. Braşov. ,Braşov is also on my list. Cities in Transylvania are just purely magical. My favourite thing to do there was climbing a thousand stairs just to see the whole city from the hill. Like I said with Iaşi, a whole damn lot of things to do and see, depending on the time you get there. 5. Bran Castle It is a couple kilometers away from the city, ,of Braşov. It’s ,that ,medieval castle that gives you chills if you see it at night. That’s because it’s one of Transylvania’s ,Dracula Castles. ,The major one to be fair. It’s the polar opposite to Peleş and I swear to God I loved it the most. I took some awful photos due to the bad weather but it was more exciting. I did feel like in an oldschool movie inside it, but it was that kind of classic horror piece. I believe there was a Halloween event when you could sleep for a night in the castle. 4. Sibiu and F.I.T.S.(Festivalul Internaţional de Teatru la Sibiu - ,International Theater Festival in Sibiu) Sibiu is the chill version of Braşov. Since they’re both in Transylvania, they have their similarities. I liked Sibiu more not only because it felt even more filled with culture, but because we got to see some shows from FITS. If you happen to go to Sibiu in June, lucky you! Because for a couple days in June, Sibiu turns into a big theater scene. Not only the usual theaters are filled with shows made by actors all over the world, but the streets and squares are taken over by performers. FITS was an enchanting experience to me. It felt like the European version of the Venetian Festival. 4. Sculptural Ensemble of Constantin Brâncuşi in Târgu Jiu. It is an ensemble of the masterpieces made by one of the greatest sculptors of the world. At his time, Brâncuşi was known in Paris. But then his works were mostly brought back in the country. The ensemble was supposed to be a gift from him to Romania, to the land, to the nation, to the soldier and so on. The works were places all in a straight line and the order and placement is believed to have some sort of spiritual and astrological meaning. Here are some pictures: 2. Sarmizegetusa Regia. You might judge me for picking this place as #2 because it’s, you know, boring at first sight buuuut it just got to me as a place. Sarmizegetusa Regia was the capital of Dacia(you know the Dacians I mentioned a couple paragraphs before). The ,thing ,in the photo is the sacred area but however, this is the most relevant picture. It is located in the mountains, in a beautiful area that makes you sing something from ,The Sound of Music and l,et me tell you, not only the road to there is ,magical ,but so is this place. Lemme show you some amateur shots I took there. A couple years ago, photographing wasn’t quite allowed, with other many things like sitting on the ground, touching anything or staying in a place for too long. Now photographing is okay to them. This place is quite the spiritual nucleus of our land in general and it holds many unknown treasures, that’s why everyone supposes that, at the time when cops weren’t strict around there, many people did creepy rituals or went for treasure hunting only to disturb the place. Now, security is tought… a bit ,too ,tough. I couldn’t sit on the mf-ing grass but A DOG COULD? OH C’MON! Lemme show you some other pic as an intermission. A friend tested this spring water and it’s pretty much …. ummm…close to being ,pure?! ,Pure as it doesn’t have impurities, not that it doesn’t have ,those good things. ,Plus it’s ,very ,tasty. So yeah. This is a love or hate place. I personally love it because it’s filled with culture, history and spirituality. It’s peaceful because it’s not very crowded and you can spot thousands of shades of green. You can see the ruins of temples, walls and other things archeologists are not sure what they were meant for. 1.The ,Sphynx and Babele ,Complex in Bucegi Mountains They are somewhere at 2216m or at least that’s what Wikipedia said. Basically they are some rocks on a top of a mountain that were formed by ,eolian eriosion, ,aka the wind shaped them in time. Here’s the Sphynx: Obviously not my picture, in mine there was a lady standing right in front of the face. The Sphynx only looks like that on a side, on the other one it doesn’t and from the front it looks weird. (I hate when pics on Quora do this) Also there was not that much security here so a lot of people were climbing it. The security was next to Babele which in Romanian it means ,Old Women ,even tho they look like pins to me. Out of all I’ve seen in this country, this is one of the ultimate landscapes here. We do have beautiful mountains and even though they are not among the highest, they’re cool and not so difficult to climb. Here are pictureeees(that are mine just like the two previous ones) I took this one to see what the ,road ,there looked like. There were two ways to get there, just like it was with the Lake but instead of driving, it was climbing. Actually more like half climbing and half walking. It didn’t take us too much time, though… probably less than two hours… But look at the view. And the last one sums up what I was trying to say. We do not only have beautiful spots, but getting there is a truly beautiful adventure. Gosh, I live in a beautiful country. Sorry it took so long to answer this.
I initially typed no, then yes, then, yes and no, to start this answer. The more I have thought about this question the more I can see grey areas. (as all good Quora questions should make happen). To get to the nub of the matter I should probably unpack some of my thoughts, especially some of those that led to my indecision. Step one seems to be tackling history is written by the victors. This phrase is one of those trite simplistic phrases that is both really useful and leads to some facepalm worthy nonsense. History is written by historians regardless of them being winners or losers. The useful part of this phrase is that it shows that when there is a power struggle the winner will paint themselves in the best possible light and the loser in the worst light. Where the notion falls apart is people not realising that it doesn’t refer to literal winners in battles and losers in battles. Or wars etc. Writing is a cultural activity and is governed by the feelings prevalent in the culture dependant on audience and the bias of the writer. My favourite go to here on Quora is the relationship between the UK and India. (my reasons for this are too woolly and complicated for this answer but just take my word for it being a great comparison for many things). Take my answers on the international relationship between the UK and India. being English there is a clear bias. I try to stop this coming through (just like any historian) but it will be there. An Indian will answer the same question in the same manner (trying to cut as much bias as possible) yet it will be obvious they still have their bias just as an Indian reader would easily spot mine. What does this have to do with victors? Well, when India came under the yoke of the British Empire clearly Britain was the victor. When the Indians gained independence clearly they were the victor. This is where the example shows the inherent weakness of the victor writes history for one very good reason. Pakistan. Now we all know about the issues over Kashmir, the Muslim-Hindu conflicts (not contained to this area obviously), and what is seen by many as a partition of the Indian subcontinent. But wait? Didn’t Colonial India win? Why yes it did win independence and Pakistan did too. And there we have it. I don’t think the soldiers who have died in the fighting between India and Pakistan felt like they ‘won’ anything. This leads to a larger issue and that is the post-colonial era. After WW2 the colonies of all of the empires left those empires in several different ways. Those ranged from bloodshed on a national scale, through protests (peaceful or otherwise), to a simple administrative agreement. The web of winners and users has been well and truly messed up. If we delve into the past then we can see some clear victor writes the history situations, Celts being called the Celts, Welsh being called Welsh, the concept of the barbarian, the westward expansion in the US and the concept of the Dark Ages. A basic run down for those that don’t know. Caesar named the Celts, well the ones he didn’t kill anyway. Welsh comes from a root that means foreigner. The language? Germanic root so the Angles, Saxons and Jutes. (everyone forgets the Jutes). Super ironic considering the above point about Celts and why Germanic is even a word. Barbarian comes from an ancient Greek concept. The concept? They couldn’t understand them so took the piss out of how they spoke and said they were saying bar bar because the Greeks thought they were superior. That doesn’t even touch on the concept of panhellenism either. The westward expansion of the US. That one is a tad more recent and the trail of tears is probably one of the best known examples. The Dark ages were so called because a bunch of Victorian toffs loved the Romans and were disappointed with those damned barbarian Germanic tribes and Celtic peoples regaining/taking the land. The term is also the basis of the middle ages and the renaissance. Plus the noble savage concept often attributed to the native American peoples. (notice how all of those terms fit so easily together). First section conclusion is that history has been written by the victors but the more modern you get the less that has an impact. As an addendum here it is important to consider the role of the power of the people and media in these ideas. We know of the Gulags and Russian atrocities, just like we know of those of the US and the UK from the second world war. Those three were the big three of the allies. Throw in others such as France (Vichy France, the colonies as per a European empire, while pre world wars there is the ,Dreyfus affair - Wikipedia,) Even Belgium, Belgian Congo ring any bells? The Belgian one and the last French one are super important. Two world wars where they were on the winning side, if in exile for the second one. Major powers in Europe politically even now and with atrocities akin to the Nazi’s or at least the attitudes of the Nazi’s. The power of media and mass communication has meant tackling these issues and makes it harder to cover things up. The next part is going to tackle the question of whether history has been altered. There are a few angles. You might say history as we know it, history as the layperson knows it, history as an incorporeal concept. The third is easily dismissed. History is what it is and therefore from an abstract incorporeal sense it is unalterable without a time machine. That would require negative mass and a jump on the Kardashev scale in terms of power output. The first two though are intertwined. What a historian knows and sees as the current accepted sequence of events is different from that of a layperson. This isn’t a conspiracy at all. This is simply a case of knowledge and being an expert. It is no different to you fixing your car and a well trained and experienced mechanic fixing the car. That mechanic just knows more and can debate the minutiae of the subject. What you will often find is that the layperson will say a fact because that is what they were taught but they won’t know the oddities. For example if I asked who the Iron Duke was at a UK pub quiz then I would expect Wellington to be thrown out as the answer. Rightly so that is what was taught in school. ,Iron Duke - Wikipedia, is a list of the people that Wikipedia has with that nickname. The historian would want context. even if they were pretty sure that was the right answer. UK pub quiz you would expect that as the answer. Sports round and you now have two different people so would have to name the sport etc. What that shows is that in school there is a limited time to teach history. It will be taught with basic facts relevant to the main subject matter of the term and year and country for that matter. A historian with a higher level of research and education will be expected to know odd quirks like this, even if like me you know the term had been used elsewhere but weren’t 100% sure where. That would be called research. Within that concept is the term historiography. Now most historians (and archaeologists for that matter) will have had training in historiography to at least a passing level. Historiography is the meta subject of studying how historians study history and the themes and biases that are part of that milieu. it is mainly focused on the academic study side but archaeology does go a step further with how to dig and the changes in how and why over time. That is a different matter for another question though. What I am getting at here is that historians know that there is bias. Above I showed how easily we can see bias even with effort taken to not be so. The point there is to point out the bias so that can be factored in. Let’s take a super early example. The battle of Megiddo. Ancient Egyptians not so politely pointing out they were in charge via the use of pointy things. Our only source is that of the Egyptians. However, we full well know the bias, we have a ton of other sources to see what that bias is too so we can get a decent idea by extrapolating and also by adding the archaeological knowledge we have. You can then look at the battle of Kadesh. Again the Egyptians, this time under Ramesses II but with the pointy stuff on chariots. However, they were against the Hittites. Not so shabby as far as opponents go. Really good ancient record to go by too. So much so we know that the Egyptian source was propaganda. What makes it interesting is both sides claimed a win. I bring this up because it completely destroys the myth of the victors (as in won the battle) write history. It also reminds us that quite frankly you don’t trust any historical source as far as you can throw it. Leaders lie, then and now. Humans really haven’t changed in that regard. I could carry on for a while but I’d rather write it as a book and be paid for it. Also if you are interested in history then you really should go and do some research yourself. That really is the best bit. Anyway, the point here is that the victors can only alter history if they are allowed to do so. Fine, one last example of this. Picture round is this: Source: Alvesgaspar / CC BY-SA (,Creative Commons - Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International - CC BY-SA 4.0,) That right there is Trajan’s column. Favoured tourist spot. Well studied piece of sculpture. A treasure, a masterpiece, the equivalent of proudly displaying a monument to the holocaust as a nazi. Wait? what? Yes, that’s right people. Trajan’s column depicts the destruction of Dacia. Essentially Dacia kicked in the faces of a bunch of Roman legionaries. This, quite obviously, annoyed the Romans just a bit so they decided to up armour the legions and go back to explain how Romans are better (look up Roman helmet design for a good example of the Falx issues and uparmouring). When they did that the Dacians were not safe at all. Everyone, man, woman, child, and dog was put to the sword. They didn’t mess about, simply a bloodbath of epic proportions. Trajan then decided a fancy column was needed to show how good this was. Think about that for a second. It is literally a monument to, what would be later termed, genocide. We see nothing odd about looking at this column now, nor about studying it. It does not elicit the same response as a picture of Auschwitz either. The Dacian king at the time also has an interesting history ,Decebalus - Wikipedia, (yes I am using wikipedia for entry level explanations). The point here is not that the Romans won so we see history their way but that time erodes feelings towards such acts. We full well know of the acts and in current times Trajan and his generals may well have been seen how we see Hitler. But we don’t see it that way at all. Not because of the Romans and their win though, but because time exists. So, let’s pull this all together into some sort of conclusion. Yes history, the records of it, the way we think about it, has been altered by the victors. But not just the victors, the maligned and those who had a way to express their displeasure also got a voice. While a popular history may perpetuate that victor wins myth anything with slightly more depth will disabuse you of that notion. This is where I point out why I used wikipedia as the easy source. Precisely because it is easy and is a popular source that shows both sides. It also gives references and that knowledge is easily accessible to anyone who can get onto the internet. It shows that the effect of propaganda on history is heavily minimised. When it isn’t, the bias is clear and present as well as studied in its own right. The biggest part of history being altered by the victors is not what you think it is though. You win, you are in charge, and you get to change things. The previous path no longer exists. Every second that passes adds to history. Altering the future is after all altering the history of those people. So, no. There is no grand altering by victors that means we no longer have the correct history or the ability to find it out. For a time those victors will be able to shape the world so that people view the history differently but it won’t change what the history is. Whether you believe those Dacians had it coming or that the Romans were a bunch of genocidal maniacs it doesn’t alter the fact that those campaigns happened. History doesn’t change, merely how we look at history. Thanks for the A2A ,Sai Vishal,. I enjoyed exploring the question.