|
Cyrano4747 posted:The Sole Survivor Policy and making same-unit siblings a massive no-no only happened post-WW2. Pretty sure this has been rescinded, or else there are huge exemptions or waivers available or something. There were two brothers on my boat who were their parents' only children (ca. 2005).
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:49 |
|
|
Reynolds, the first day of Gettysburgh, I think. In the Civil War you were more likely to get killed the higher your rank was, one of the last wars that was true. Though that calculation was done by lumping all generals together, when a brigade commander was in a lot more danger than an army commander.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Don't forget the sad death of the lyrically-named (and near-sighted) Gen. Felix Zollicoffer. Sort of the opposite of a sharpshooting death, however. When riding up to a regiment's colonel to prevent friendly fire, it is wise to make sure they are, in fact, on your side, lest said colonel shoot you dead.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
What, nobody's going to mention JEB Stuart, AP Hill or Thomas "We only lost the war because this guy died, SERIOUSLY" Jackson?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
Those aren't as funny. e: Also, if we're actually making a corps+ list, there's no love for Mansfield or Jesse Reno. Alas for the Union. The Merry Marauder fucked around with this message at 02:43 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
dublish posted:What, nobody's going to mention JEB Stuart, AP Hill or Thomas "We only lost the war because this guy died, SERIOUSLY" Jackson? Jackson's was kind of funny. If you're going to scout out beyond your lines, it might be best to mention that. Because soldiers get jumpy when there's some guy claiming to be the general lurking around the lines at night.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
I have questions regarding AirSea Battle and A2/AD. Bear with me please. CNO Greenert's Navy has been vague about AirSea Battle since the beginning. Stuff started circulating in 2010 and staff officers got excited. Now that it's been in the wild for a few years now, revisionism's crept in regarding what it was meant to be. What was initially sold as a doctrine to replace Full Spectrum Operations (serving as the Navy and Air Force's capstone on the "pivot to China," with the added bonus of putting the army's head in the way of budget cuts) has now become a neutered operational concept, not tied to any timeframe, acquisition strategy or particular threat. In the span of 2012 to 2013, ASB became well known outside the defense community and it evidently spooked some people. Greenert and the CSAF went to Brookings with the intention of clarifying: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo5iV8F6scA ANU's Hugh White articulates some possible criticisms. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mumC_AhZOSU Now, in the Q&A section of the Brookings lecture, Greenert expresses confidence that current and near-tech does not really favor sea-denial over sea-control. I don't see how this can be true, as it's not been true for years. The threat of drones, LRPS Ballistic missles, and missile boats to large surface vessels has been studied and is well known. How confident can the US military really be regarding the survivability of its ships and aircraft within, say, the East China Sea? I think the piece I'm missing is: how has sonar and surface radar detection developed over the last decade and a half? How far have these technologies outstripped their countermeasures? COIN's occupied everyone's mind for so long, there wasn't much time for reading the lastest developments paper on acoustics and poo poo. I'm interested in hearing thoughts on ASB in general as well. And just for fun: should the US Navy be investing in diesel-electric subs? Dilkington fucked around with this message at 03:50 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 03:47
|
|
sullat posted:Jackson's was kind of funny. If you're going to scout out beyond your lines, it might be best to mention that. Because soldiers get jumpy when there's some guy claiming to be the general lurking around the lines at night. They should have given out flash cards, if the arm is held up at an awkward angle on horseback hold your fire.
|
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
jng2058 posted:Heh, no, not remotely. The whole army was somewhat demoralized, though, because having "The Battling Bishop" on their side had made them feel like the Hand of God was on them. Losing Polk, especially to something not entirely dissimilar to a thunderbolt from God, shook their confidence a bit. It's a reference to ze germans in a church getting shot at by I think a 76mm sherman and saying that as the reason to surrender. When the enemy can afford to snipe with big guns, it's time to step out to first base and say good game. sullat posted:Jackson's was kind of funny. If you're going to scout out beyond your lines, it might be best to mention that. Because soldiers get jumpy when there's some guy claiming to be the general lurking around the lines at night. Action Jackson gonna run riot on the northern army all on his lonesome. A true confederate hero. Generals: Well known for winning wars on their own. Frostwerks fucked around with this message at 04:15 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
Frostwerks posted:Action Jackson gonna run riot on the northern army all on his lonesome. A true confederate hero. Generals: Well known for winning wars on their own. Was he geared out as a super combatant or a battle caster? Should have stayed behind his blockers if it was the latter.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Frostwerks posted:Action Jackson gonna run riot on the northern army all on his lonesome. A true confederate hero. Generals: Well known for winning wars on their own. What I'm getting at is the idea of Jackson winning the war on his own is not an unpopular or obscure one amongst historians, and has less to do with "MY GOD JACKSON JUST CHOKESLAMMED MEADE THROUGH CULP'S HILL SOMEONE CALL AN AMBULANCE" and more with his aggression potentially being the crucial tipping point at a critical battle, if he had survived.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Von Humboldt posted:What I'm getting at is the idea of Jackson winning the war on his own is not an unpopular or obscure one amongst historians, and has less to do with "MY GOD JACKSON JUST CHOKESLAMMED MEADE THROUGH CULP'S HILL SOMEONE CALL AN AMBULANCE" and more with his aggression potentially being the crucial tipping point at a critical battle, if he had survived. I really hate that argument. You might as well argue that had Reno been alive at Chancellorsville, Richmond would have fallen in 1863.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:I read about a suicide today... This rules by the way. You can't really argue over it so people haven't been talking about it much but I'm down to read any stuff like this.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
Von Humboldt posted:What I'm getting at is the idea of Jackson winning the war on his own is not an unpopular or obscure one amongst historians, and has less to do with "MY GOD JACKSON JUST CHOKESLAMMED MEADE THROUGH CULP'S HILL SOMEONE CALL AN AMBULANCE" and more with his aggression potentially being the crucial tipping point at a critical battle, if he had survived. Does anyone else want WWE announcers to do narration for documentaries now?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
dublish posted:I really hate that argument. You might as well argue that had Reno been alive at Chancellorsville, Richmond would have fallen in 1863. It's popular bunk, though. Raskolnikov38 posted:Does anyone else want WWE announcers to do narration for documentaries now?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
Dilkington posted:I have questions regarding AirSea Battle and A2/AD. Bear with me please. ASB was never supposed to be directed specifically at China, nor was it supposed to be a doctrine (I don't know where you got the idea that it was supposed to replace Full Spectrum Operations). It was always supposed to be an operational concept that was geared towards combating adversaries inclined to employ A2/AD capabilities (the strongest of which just happens to be China) by fusing together existing platforms, capabilities, and doctrine in a new manner while developing the next generation of weapons systems in such a way that they were geared towards operating in an A2/AD environment. People who held up ASB like it was the second coming of Air-Land Battle in Western Europe were off the mark. Just because it's an operational concept that isn't tied to a particular threat doesn't mean that it isn't impacting acquisitions (it is) or that it isn't useful in dealing with potential threats (it is). It doesn't need to be a doctrine because we already have doctrine that deals with the areas ASB addresses (counterair/missile defense, countersea, sea control, etc). ASB is just a means of linking those doctrines together in new ways. Dilkington posted:Now, in the Q&A section of the Brookings lecture, Greenert expresses confidence that current and near-tech does not really favor sea-denial over sea-control. I don't see how this can be true, as it's not been true for years. The threat of drones, LRPS Ballistic missles, and missile boats to large surface vessels has been studied and is well known. How confident can the US military really be regarding the survivability of its ships and aircraft within, say, the East China Sea? If you are using your forces in a dumb traditional "high diddle diddle, straight up the middle" method, then no, you probably won't be survivable, but the whole point of ASB is to leverage other capabilities in a new, non-traditional manner so you aren't just sailing your CSG straight into a DF-21D ring and hoping for the best. Dilkington posted:I think the piece I'm missing is: how has sonar and surface radar detection developed over the last decade and a half? How far have these technologies outstripped their countermeasures? COIN's occupied everyone's mind for so long, there wasn't much time for reading the lastest developments paper on acoustics and poo poo. Any intelligent discussion of these topics, particularly in regard to ASB, isn't going to take place in an open forum. A lot of you have probably seen this already, but I was introduced to it for the first time tonight and I laughed my rear end off. quote:France gets thrown through a plate glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change. Italy throws a punch at Austria and misses, but Austria falls over anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
sullat posted:Jackson's was kind of funny. If you're going to scout out beyond your lines, it might be best to mention that. Because soldiers get jumpy when there's some guy claiming to be the general lurking around the lines at night. Fun fact: one of the soldiers riding with Jackson who tried to stop the pickets from shooting him was named Peyton Manning.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
swamp waste posted:This rules by the way. You can't really argue over it so people haven't been talking about it much but I'm down to read any stuff like this. For the rest of this week, I've been reading about guys getting into vicious legal wrangles (or quasi-legal: they've been registering complaints against one another with the head of state but I don't think they're suing one another). The common soldiers get drunk and stab each other, the officers ruin their finances spending months cultivating obsessive hatreds. The part where they're supposed to be, you know, fighting wars seems to have escaped them. Also, a dude got punched in the face. I'll be joining a reenactment group at the end of this month, and I'll let you guys know how that goes. (They portray people who were working for the Swedes.  )
HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 13:00 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 12:38
|
|
|
Bringing up Stonewall Jackson getting shot by his own men reminds me about my morbid fascination with those colossal, but individualized, military fuckups--or just particularly bad luck. Does anybody have any neat ones from wherever in history? Some examples: The guy recently who got honorably discharge from the marines, and then nailed for desertion. People were quite apologetic once they figured out what was up, but the guy had his license suspended meanwhile, lost his job "for legitimate reasons" and couldn't get unemployment, and he wasn't even paid for the time he was back because he technically wasn't in the military anymore. The Koreans caught at Normandy that had been progressively captured by most of the major participants in World War 2. I think it was from Korea->Japan->Russia->Germany->US. Personally I think Tibor Rubin, a Medal of Honor recipient qualifies for individuals getting hosed, but I guess he finally got some good attention for it all. He was born in Hungary before WW2 and got to spend it as a kid in a concentration camp. Afterwards, he emigrated to the US because he wanted to be a GI Joe. He got in by having two other people taking the English portion of the test cheating for him, and then got an antisemite for a commanding officer. That guy left him in charge of a hill while they all retreated  , so he sets up guns and grenades randomly around the hill. I guess the Chinese eventually attack the hill--more more precisely--him. He goes running around the hill, grabbing the random guns and stuff, shooting back, and holding their entire advance for 24 hours before getting captured. He's then sent . . . to a concentration camp. I guess while everybody else just resigned themselves to getting hosed, he was like, "Oh I've read this book before" and would sneak out, steal supplies, and bring them back into the camp.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:For the rest of this week, I've been reading about guys getting into vicious legal wrangles (or quasi-legal: they've been registering complaints against one another with the head of state but I don't think they're suing one another). The common soldiers get drunk and stab each other, the officers ruin their finances spending months cultivating obsessive hatreds. The part where they're supposed to be, you know, fighting wars seems to have escaped them. Also, a dude got punched in the face. I love your slice-of-life accounts from history, please post any interesting ones that you find. dublish posted:What, nobody's going to mention JEB Stuart, AP Hill or Thomas "We only lost the war because this guy died, SERIOUSLY" Jackson? Thomas Jackson? I had to look up Stonewall Jackson's first name to make sure it's the same guy. Since he was known as such an aggressive commander, is it possible the unknown Confederate who shouted to open fire after Jackson identified himself was trying to end his dangerous campaigning?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:Bringing up Stonewall Jackson getting shot by his own men reminds me about my morbid fascination with those colossal, but individualized, military fuckups--or just particularly bad luck. Does anybody have any neat ones from wherever in history? Gustaf II Adolf (Gustavus Adolphus) was so fat he didn't like wearing armor (well, he also had some old wounds), and he was nearsighted so he got lost on a foggy battlefield and died because of it. The gooniest warrior king.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Gustaf II Adolf (Gustavus Adolphus) was so fat he didn't like wearing armor (well, he also had some old wounds), and he was nearsighted so he got lost on a foggy battlefield and died because of it. The gooniest warrior king. That sounds odd. I thought the armor thing was mostly due to an awkward bullet still in the neck, and the battlefield was smoky due to gunpowder smoke, which was true of all battlefields of the time.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
I said it a page ago, but James II of Scotland was killed when one of his own cannons blew up while he was next to it. The Scots still won the siege so it wasn't a total disaster, but his successor was really unpopular.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
Who was the last major head of state to voluntarily involve himself in fighting in a battle?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
I'm not big on Great Man stuff, but Charles le Téméraire getting killed at Nancy hosed a lot of things up.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:
There's a movie about these guys called My Way. Its not totally historically accurate but its the best we're gonna get.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Wasn't in the job at the time (nor is prime minister head of state) but Churchill went off to fight in WW1 after his failure as first sea lord at Gallipoli.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Who was the last major head of state to voluntarily involve himself in fighting in a battle? Maybe Józef Piłsudski in 1920 at the Battle of Warsaw; I don't think he was at the front lines but he was certainly commanding the army while head of state. Of course that depends on if Poland counts as "major"; among great powers the last was probably Napoleon III in 1870 at the Battle of Sedan.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
I guess I meant major to exclude small separatist groups, tribal societies, and so on that might stretch the definition of a head of state. And I didn't want to include backseat drivers like Hitler, and people who found themselves suddenly in the firing line in a place previously thought safe. I'm thinking more the traditional romantic image of the King leading his army, like Richard III at Bosworth.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I guess I meant major to exclude small separatist groups, tribal societies, and so on that might stretch the definition of a head of state. And I didn't want to include backseat drivers like Hitler, and people who found themselves suddenly in the firing line in a place previously thought safe. I'm thinking more the traditional romantic image of the King leading his army, like Richard III at Bosworth. Like AARTREK said, I think that was Napoleon III in 1870. That didn't end too well for him or France.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:27
|
|
Don Gato posted:Like AARTREK said, I think that was Napoleon III in 1870. That didn't end too well for him or France. And it made Bismark even smugger than he usually was too. Seriously, poor Napoleon III. The last thing he needed at Sedan was one of the smuggest 'I told you so son' speeches in military history.
|
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
Mitsuo posted:That sounds odd. I thought the armor thing was mostly due to an awkward bullet still in the neck, and the battlefield was smoky due to gunpowder smoke, which was true of all battlefields of the time. Gunpowder smoke and fog--that morning was foggy as all hell. I think Hogge Wild may actually be a Swede, though, so if there's some folklore there that says he was fat--hell, maybe he was fat.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:And it made Bismark even smugger than he usually was too. Seriously, poor Napoleon III. The last thing he needed at Sedan was one of the smuggest 'I told you so son' speeches in military history. To be honest, if I baited another country into declaring war by editing a telegram and then beat them silly on their own turf to finish my decades-long plan to unite my nation, I'd be smug as all hell, too.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Yeah, he wasn't thin or fat that I could see and the armor thing was because, as you said, he got shot in the neck at some point in the '20s and the bullet pressed on a nerve which extended to his right hand, making the hand hurt. Armor made it worse. Hahaha no, it's just something I've read  .
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:To be honest, if I baited another country into declaring war by editing a telegram and then beat them silly on their own turf to finish my decades-long plan to unite my nation, I'd be smug as all hell, too. Don't forget that you end the war by capturing the guy trying to build his idea of the empire his uncle built that tore rear end all over Germany 60 years previously. That Bismarck didn't collapse into a singularity of smug is a miracle.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
The Merry Marauder posted:Those aren't as funny. Jesse Reno, that poor bastard. What a way to go. wikipedia posted:He was hit in the chest by a Confederate sharpshooter's bullet. He was brought by stretcher to Brig. Gen. Samuel D. Sturgis's command post and said in a clear voice, "Hallo, Sam, I'm dead!" Sturgis, a long-time acquintance and fellow member of the West Point Class of 1846, thought that he sounded so natural that he must be joking and told Reno that he hoped it was not as bad as all that. Reno repeated, "Yes, yes, I'm dead—good-by!", dying a few minutes later.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Hahaha no, it's just something I've read Edit: Also, their standard of beauty was fatter than ours was, I'll give them that. Check out Titian's nudes--dudes should be beefy, chicks should be...opulent. Edit 2: Speaking of beauty standards, check out Ana Mendoza, Princess of Eboli (1540-1592), universally acclaimed as one of the most beautiful women in Spain at the time:   She lost the eye in a mock duel with a page when she was a kid. I really like these people. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 18:51 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
She isn't bad. The eyepatch is actually sexy. Though: I'm sure there is a word in art history to describe what we'd today call photoshopping. Look at all the portraits of the Habsburgs. I'll never trust a portrait again after seeing stuff that did display them more realistically. These people must have looked absolutely horrifying in real life. This one is called "Actually is Habsburg"  or look at this one: 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Well, everyone looks a little round in their pictures, but that's because they wore many more layers of clothing than we do. (Little Ice Age.) Pre-baroques loved them some goths JaucheCharly posted:This one is called "Actually is Habsburg"
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:49 |
|
|
I presume we only count people who were actually heads of state at the time of the war? If so, I'd say maybe Nasser could get a shot, I remember reading that during the Suez Crisis he was seen in the streets himself handing out guns and organizing a last-ditch defence of Cairo from an expected Israeli advance. That advance never came, though. And Pilsudski definitely was leading the army from the front lines (as much as it could be said about a modern-day general). However, just before he had left to lead the decisive offensive, he has suspended himself as head of state so that the rest of the government could heap all the responsibility on him in case it backfired.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 20:40
|
|
