Quote Originally Posted by Leon the Batavian View Post
Was it not of their fear for another Hannibal / Carthage who might not make the same mistakes the orignals made ? Carthage had the ability to recover fast financially at least.

I mean Scipio learned from Hannibal, Rome learned from others, so maybe when they let Carthage live to fight another day who knows what would happen.
Personally, I doubt this economical recovery amounted to much. Carthage probably resumed her position as the dominant port in the south-western Mediterranean, but without her possessions in Sicily and Iberia and no strong hold over other African ports she would be nowhere near as wealthy. Those highly lucrative mines in Iberia were now exploited by Rome, too.

Strategically her position was even worse. Carthage had lost the two previous wars so it was unlikely that anyone would come to her aid a third time, especially not against an enemy as implacable as Rome. Also, knowing Roman policies it is likely that former pro-Carthage rulers had either capitulated or suffered the consequences; while pro-Roman ones had prospered. There would be no shortage of willing allies to support a Roman invasion.

Basically: even if Carthage did have an economical resurgence, she was still in no position to assert political or military control over her neighbours, and any attempt to do that would have given Rome a casus belli. There was no rational basis for Roman fear. They were either projecting or attempting to justify the settling of an old score.