Grammar question regarding a phrase

I would use a full colon.

i'd get tense and say

history happens

laughoutloud,

I am very glad you bring that up for I intended the phrase to incite such a discussion regarding the fabric of history (as in the concept and the field of study). I argue that history never happens. When something (an event) happens, it is not history until the moment is passed. History-in-the-making is more apt to describe what seems to be an historical event, yes, but not until it is over or has moved on in the future can it be acknowledged as history. It therefore happened, as an event is described and analyzed (as we do in study of history) from a point of view of the past, not the present.

Also, to roger, would you then say 'History: It Happened'?

Agreed. This is more a headline than a phrase.

(trite and banal, too; what is the point of writing that?)

There are a lot of well-known phrases on this theme: e.g.

That's all water under the bridge
What's done, is done
The moving finger writes....
etc.

History: it's gone! Get over it!

Well funny thing is, it may become a tattoo. Wanted to make sure it was correctly written. It's a running joke amongst some history grads and I.

Well, in that case, do it however you like. Tattoos are seldom grammatical, and usually don't make any sense anyway.

Alright then. Well, I think I'm going to go with:

History: It Happened.

Thank you all for your assistance.

I know a guy who got Llandudno tattooed on his dick.

But it only says Ludo now.

Until he strokes it...

Don't be rude.

Shorty" really says "Shorty's Bar and Grill, Chattanooga, Tennessee".

Shorty's Bar and Grill

Affrays 24/7

I really like your critique. Really well-written and most reflective.

You're welcome.