|
Trin Tragula posted:Everyone knows that puttees are the real best way of displaying the lower leg in all weathers bahahahaha no I can't even do that as a joke they're the most ridiculous thing
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
Baller as gently caress. Puttees just make even the hardest VC winner look like he's got a stack of coins for legs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
who invented them? and for what purpose also, this dude says hi 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
he looks very aerodynamic
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
Does anyone have a book recommendation (or feel like writing an effort post) on the development of tank suspension? Mainly looking for something that covers through WWII but more recent content is welcome too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
I'll crosspost something I wrote up for the scale modelling thread:Throbbing blob posted:Ahem, let me sort of contribute to the thread again. Fish and Chimps fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Oct 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:43
|
|
Another long-winded post incoming!
|
Throbbing blob posted:Now I know Denmark is not exactly a big player on the international stage, being first the whipping boy of Sweden for a hundred years, then a long pause, then Britain and then various Germans. like lost to wallenstein
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Krill Nye posted:Does anyone have a book recommendation (or feel like writing an effort post) on the development of tank suspension? Mainly looking for something that covers through WWII but more recent content is welcome too. I have a very technical book on the subject, but it's in Russian. So uh... Stay tuned I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:don't sell yourself short, you've done far more than that Well, the deciding battle was actually against Tilly, but still, you're right.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
Throbbing blob posted:I stumbled on this thread a while ago, but wasn't confident enough about my knowledge yet, since I had just begun my BA in history. you don't need a degree to post in here, just 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Did those guns in the ironclad Dannebrog shoot solid balls?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:you don't need a degree to post in here, just
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
I know, but whatever I knew, other people knew more about and they could probably explain better. Now I can tell you in detail about a string of Danish defeats!  Edit: Hogge Wild posted:Did those guns in the ironclad Dannebrog shoot solid balls? I don't know, but I would guess not. It was refitted in 1862-1864 with rifled artillery. Even the smoothbore guns in the Danish arsenal had some form of hollow grenade, so I'd imagine the most advanced guns used a modern shell. I'll try and remember to ask my boss. Fish and Chimps fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Oct 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Throbbing blob posted:Now I can tell you in detail about a string of Danish defeats! But enough about your posting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Throbbing blob posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Dang, I didn't realize Danish people were so tiny. So that's why Hamlet found it so easy to escape the pirates in act 4!
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Dang, I didn't realize Danish people were so tiny. That might be the reason we lost so many wars
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Danish means a nice pastry with a jam center and icing. Doesn't inspire fear though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Danish means a nice pastry with a jam center and icing. Doesn't inspire fear though. Sorry you named a cake after us
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Throbbing blob posted:Sorry you named a cake after us you got lucky, sweden was named after a vegetable
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Throbbing blob posted:Sorry you named a cake after us Hey, naming a cake after something is the most  compliment possible 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
I got an email from the Zooniverse, an organization that crowd-sources some scientific data collection, that might be of interest to some people in this thread:quote:Hey there,
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
So who wants an hour of detailed HD video of an 1860s rifled musket? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YRWBDHG4uU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTPwijH9BrQ
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
How come Japan was pretty much the only Asian country to avoid foreign imperialism and modernize up until the mid-late 21st century? Also what prevented Africans from effectively fighting back against European Imperialism?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Compared to the other countries in the area Japan's government generally had their poo poo together, its closed society prevented foreign traders from gaining influence/economic leverage, and were able to modernize relatively rapidly once it became clear how outclassed they were.unwantedplatypus posted:Also what prevented Africans from effectively fighting back against European Imperialism? Whatever happens, we have got The Maxim gun, and they have not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
So how did Siam stay independent?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:How come Japan was pretty much the only Asian country to avoid foreign imperialism and modernize up until the mid-late 21st century? For Japan it was mostly because it was really close to China which was a much bigger prize. China had more resources, bigger markets and etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Kind of scary we're suddenly talking about the Soviet disaster in Afghanistan, as I started watching this documentary just before JCDent posted. Wow that starts with that trademark Russian depression. Is there an American GWOT version of this? So many tanker wreaks from ambushes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:For Japan it was mostly because it was really close to China which was a much bigger prize. China had more resources, bigger markets and etc. It probably also helped that before the Suez and the Panama Canal Japan was maybe the furthest from Europe one could possibly go when counting actual travel distance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Compared to the other countries in the area Japan's government generally had their poo poo together, its closed society prevented foreign traders from gaining influence/economic leverage, and were able to modernize relatively rapidly once it became clear how outclassed they were. I realize the Europeans had technological superiority, but we're still talking about foreign powers fighting distant wars against people with the home field advantage and who weren't devastated by plagues like the native Americans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:How come Japan was pretty much the only Asian country to avoid foreign imperialism and modernize up until the mid-late 21st century? I think the being an island thing really helped.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Also what prevented Africans from effectively fighting back against European Imperialism? I suggest Guns, Germs, & Steel by Jared Diamond to get a basic overview of that question. It covers far more than just the usual "Why did white people steamroll everything?" question, but the basic gist of his theory is that geography and climate provided a favorable environment for Eurasia to develop the technology necessary for conquering faster. If you don't want to read a whole book on the subject, Wikipedia summarizes the theory. One nice example he gave was the conquering of the Moriori by the Maori. Both came from the same group of initial Polynesian settlers, but some of them struck out to colonize the Chatham Islands to the southeast of New Zealand. The Chatham Islands are a colder and less hospitable climate than New Zealand, not suitable for large scale crop production. The settlers who would become the Moriori were forced to revert to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, which was unable to produce a crop surplus that would allow for people not actively engaged in food production to flourish (something necessary to create complex societies and technological innovation). Because of how small and vulnerable their population was, they could only survive by becoming pacifists and settling their disputes through ways that didn't involve bashing the other guy's brains out when he disagreed with you. They even castrated some boys at birth to prevent overpopulation. Of course, when the Maori rediscovered the Moriori they beat the poo poo out of them to the point where they were virtually exterminated and the surviving genes just ended up mixed with the Maori conquerors until there was little trace of what was once the Moriori people. This is just one small experiment that demonstrates what exactly led to Eurasia (and North Africa) to develop the means to conquer their neighbors so easily.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:How come Japan was pretty much the only Asian country to avoid foreign imperialism and modernize up until the mid-late 21st century? Up until the late 1800's, the M.O. in Africa was to plop down a trading post by the coast and trade random poo poo for slaves/ivory/whatever else you wanted. Your local allies would provide you with the stuff you wanted in exchange for European/Arab trade goods. After the scramble for Africa... well, riflemen, Maxim guns, and sheer ruthlessness kept the locals from organizing effective resistance. Especially in a land decimated by 300 years of the slave trade. Japan survived by not having much worth trading. China was full of all sorts of cool stuff, while Japan had rice and animes. The Portuguese and then the Dutch were happy enough to run a trading station for whatever they wanted to buy/sell, but they were both concentrating on the spice trade, while the Brits and later Americans were mostly concerned with the China trade. Sure, the US "opened up" Japan to trade, but mostly as a market for American manufactured goods, so they didn't really need to do so until a) they had an industrial base worth catering to, and b) had the ability to project power into the Pacific.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:I realize the Europeans had technological superiority, but we're still talking about foreign powers fighting distant wars against people with the home field advantage and who weren't devastated by plagues like the native Americans. Long story short, European colonies mostly co-opted existing power structures and played opposing parties against each other. Protectorates set up by colonial offices were not a euphemism for annexed land, but the recognition of local power holders of British authority in exchange for British assurance of newly elevated influence. For the British, Colonial rebellion was usually low-scale and locally suppressed. The greater crises that concerned the government were mutinies of locally-recruited troops, as their loss necessitated the transportation of regular army units which were not plentiful. This happens in India, Uganda, and Sudan, among other places.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:Long story short, European colonies mostly co-opted existing power structures and played opposing parties against each other. Protectorates set up by colonial offices were not a euphemism for annexed land, but the recognition of local power holders of British authority in exchange for British assurance of newly elevated influence. You also have big swaths of areas 'claimed' by Europeans but not really under their control. Pretty big chunks of Africa's interior, a few Saharan oasis towns, Anatolia, depending on how you count 'European,' and big chunks of Siberia/steppe land in Central Asia. Also I think Siam technically only folded under Japan (and kept their King), mostly because if was a convenient buffer between French Indochina and British Malay/Burma.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Compared to the other countries in the area Japan's government generally had their poo poo together, its closed society prevented foreign traders from gaining influence/economic leverage, and were able to modernize relatively rapidly once it became clear how outclassed they were. China's government during the Tongzhi restoration had its poo poo sort of together, but it was also completely committed to Confucian Conservatism. They tried to adopt the technology like rifles and steamships but balked at the social and economic reorganization associated with modernizing along western lines. Japan much more fully committed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
sullat posted:
Japan was a rich nation that produced silk and porcelain, in addition to being a large market, if not as big a market as China. In fact Japan continued trading with Asian states throughout the Edo Period, primarily Chinese but also South-East Asian partners as well, so long as they flew Chinese flags. Before Perry arrived there had already been several efforts to open China, and the market was valuable enough that the Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch and English were fighting over access in the 17th century. In my opinion Japan survived through good luck and good policy. If the sengoku jidai period had happened 100 years later Japan would have ended up like China or worse, and restrictions on trade successfully placed foreign influence and commerce under the Shogun's thumb. By the time the government was serious about modernizing the Dutch had given them all the technical know-how necessary to begin industrializing, and Japan was literate and organized enough to put it into practice. unwantedplatypus posted:I realize the Europeans had technological superiority, but we're still talking about foreign powers fighting distant wars against people with the home field advantage and who weren't devastated by plagues like the native Americans. This question is complicated and varied a lot by colony. On one end of the spectrum you had places like South Africa and French North Africa, where large conventional wars were fought by colonists against local states. However in many places there really weren't any local powers that could resist. Like literally there was no government or even sense of identity beyond the village level. You didn't even have to fight a war to conquer these places, because there wasn't anybody organized enough to put up a fight. A good example of how this could happen occurs in the novel Things Fall Apart in an Igbo village in Nigeria. One day white guys move in and build a church and market. The villagers are glad, although the church is weird markets mean wealth and prestige. Some people then convert, but the people are afraid to respond, a neighboring village killed a white man and was slaughtered by colonial troops in retribution. Soon colonial administrators come in with enough money to buy support and enough fire-power to scare everyone else into compliance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 08:34
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Also what prevented Africans from effectively fighting back against European Imperialism?  This particular atrocity outrages me. Leopold II does this, in order to give more money to 16 year old French prostitute? The wanton and careless nature of this series of crimes make it even more disgusting to me than the Holocaust. For those who are unfamiliar, Leopold II convinces people to give him the Congo as his personal fiefdom, he gets his goons to train indigenous thugs, said thugs run around terrorizing the local people into collecting rubber from wild vines, wild vine amount is basically static since they are a wild plant and essentially have a fixed maximum produce per year, other places in the world compete with rubber driving down price, Leopold II increases quotas, already heavily stressed local people are subjected to orgy of violence, including mutilations due to Leopold II's goons requiring that black thugs submit severed right hands of people they killed because they were not trusted to not instead use the (expensive) ammunition for hunting. Massive cycle of poverty and death occurs, money that was produced thereby squandered on various frivolities as per Leopold II's whims. Essentially you might as well ask what prevented indigenous Americans from effectively fighting back against European imperialism. The sheer mathematics of the amount of energy each group of people had access to made it over before it began. How can any amount of valor, brilliant thought and hard work compete against fossil fuel exploitation? How can even the strongest flesh repel steel? Klaus88 posted:Its terrifying that people can read these sorts of stories and still think War is a glorious and honorable activity. IMO I still think it is, because I long for an honorable death in service of a greater cause. I had about two paragraphs written here but I have removed them as they are not really useful to answer your question in a general sense. If you wish to discuss personal opinions I invite you to contact me personally. My pseudonym is known and I do not hide behind the screen of anonymity. Edit 2: I see now that you were not asking why they could still think this, but instead expressing your distaste for it. Ok, I guess. Agean90 posted:i konkur I've been a moderator for about 4 years on a forum where concurring is a bannable offense.  ↓↓↓↓↓ I answer the question that has been asked. My reasons are not yours. My thought processes are not yours either. Suffice it to say there are many people like me, and there have been many in history. You, who have read the elaborations I have now omitted,hopefully understand that this is an oxymoronic conflict essential to the nature of living creatures- that violence is not always undesired. Keldoclock fucked around with this message at 09:23 on Oct 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 08:53
|
|
|
Keldoclock posted:IMO I still think it is, because I long for an honorable death in service of a greater cause. I just haven't found a cause worth dying for. Essentially the thing that draws men like me to war, martial arts, competitive sports etc. is the desire for a definite purpose in life that can be measured, a struggle that will eventually end and with great effort can be surpassed. lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 09:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
Keldoclock posted:I answer the question that has been asked. My reasons are not yours. My thought processes are not yours either. Suffice it to say there are many people like me, and there have been many in history. You, who have read the elaborations I have now omitted,hopefully understand that this is an oxymoronic conflict essential to the nature of living creatures- that violence is not always undesired.  Do you understand now Rabhadh? Is keldoclock, in fact, a tank destroyer?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2015 09:22
|
|
