|
spectralent posted:A mix of "whatever's handy" and "whatever's comfortable" then? Pretty much. You got whatever you could find or the quartermaster could supply you with. Add to that a mix of several types of uniform designs and/or camouflage and you get a mish-mash of stuff anywhere.
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
Improvising and scavaging what you can from the enemy or friend, whether living or not during the campaign is a long and proud military tradtion for every nation or culture.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Buy the book please 100 Years Ago Zee Germans have learned something from a year and a half of fighting Tommy Atkins: his silly "cricket" game and its frequent pauses for rain actually have something to teach them. They begin a series of rolling postponements at Verdun, with frequent pauses for certain officers to look at the sky, make meaningful noises, consult meterologists/barometers/bits of seaweed, and so on. Good for me, because it leaves plenty of space free to talk about today's farcical attempt to attack Salaita Hill. Unsurprisingly, it doesn't go well, and the South Africans now know what war is about. (The Baluchis tut irritably and take the opportunity to make a point to their incredibly racist allies.) The Russians push on at Erzurum after literally taking a concrete fortress by charging at it with bayonets fixed; Captain Fred Roberts of the 12th Sherwood Foresters publishes the first Wipers Times (with some truly epic poetry that puts Graves and Sassoon to shame); and Malcolm White goes to see a nice show in Rouen while he waits for orders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Buy the book please Wow, the Wipers Times loving owns??? Also enjoying the guy who left his rifle behind at Salaita Hill and had to go back and get it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Empress Theonora posted:So, who are some monarchs or rulers of countries who managed to get themselves captured in (or in the immediate aftermath of) battle? Off the top of my head there's Napoleon III, John II of France, and that poor fucker Emperor Valerian, but I'm sure there's more. There was David II of Scotland, who was captured by the English. Also Richard I, who got imprisoned by the Holy Roman Empire on the way home from Crusades, for reasons of some dynastic squabble I don't understand, and had to be ransomed for an absurd amount of money. The most humiliating incident must be James II, who was trying to escape Britain down the Thames, and got roughed up out in the estuary by a bunch of fisherman who thought he was a Jesuit. Eventually someone realised who he was, and arrested him, but William III just wanted shot of him by this point, and told his guards to turn a blind eye while he escaped. Mr Enderby fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Buy the book please Would it be a dumb question to ask why Joffe thought it was impossible for the Germans to attack at Verdun?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Empress Theonora posted:Wow, the Wipers Times loving owns??? Now I'm getting irritated with myself for never following through on my intention to do bits from the 5th Glo'ster Gazette as well quote:Things We Want To Know Those boys really don't like trench mortars; they apparently do nothing but fire a load of duds, skedaddle, and then everyone else is left diving for cover before the enemy can send some rather more explosive Minnie bombs at where the mortars have just run away from. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Empress Theonora posted:So, who are some monarchs or rulers of countries who managed to get themselves captured in (or in the immediate aftermath of) battle? Off the top of my head there's Napoleon III, John II of France, and that poor fucker Emperor Valerian, but I'm sure there's more. Bayezid the First of the Ottoman Empire. By the Mongols, no less.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Would it be a dumb question to ask why Joffe thought it was impossible for the Germans to attack at Verdun? Because, were he in their position, it's the last thing he himself would have done; and despite having been thoroughly debagged in 1914 by this line of thinking, he still can't believe that the enemy might do something other than what he'd want to do in their place.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Mr Enderby posted:There was David II of Scotland, who was captured by the English. Also Richard I, who got imprisoned by the Holy Roman Empire on the way home from Crusades, for reasons of some dynastic squabble I don't understand, and had to be ransomed for an absurd amount of money. And Francis I of France, who managed to get captured by the forces of Charles V, because Charles is some sort of wizard or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:37
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Trin Tragula posted:Because, were he in their position, it's the last thing he himself would have done; and despite having been thoroughly debagged in 1914 by this line of thinking, he still can't believe that the enemy might do something other than what he'd want to do in their place. What other commanders in history have pinned their careers so heavily on winning a single critical battle and then nothing else? You can just imagine the French government keep looking at Joffre as the Battle of the Marne recedes in the distance and thinking, "Hmmm, maybe, just maybe, this guy is not very good at his job after all."
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:And Francis I of France, who managed to get captured by the forces of Charles V, because Charles is some sort of wizard or something. As far as I understand it, Charles V was the guy who won the game of history, and retired to a monastery because there was literally nothing left to achieve. Probably a wizard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:What other commanders in history have pinned their careers so heavily on winning a single critical battle and then nothing else? You can just imagine the French government keep looking at Joffre as the Battle of the Marne recedes in the distance and thinking, "Hmmm, maybe, just maybe, this guy is not very good at his job after all." At least Joffre has clearly won a battle. The same cannot be said of many of his contemporaries.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
Ground-Air liaison in the Soviet Army, 1940 According to a US manual So how exactly did ground forces communicate with aircraft for the purpose of army cooperation? Glad you asked! 1 - Army cooperation aircraft maintaining the link between unit and HQ will bear the following mark X X X 2 - Aircraft communicate with ground units with klaxon horns and lamps. Ground units communicate with smoke, white flags, or tin reflectors (15cms in diameter) 3 - Originally, ground units were supposed to be able to signal aircraft at any time but this was later changed to pre-determined time and location after the former method was discovered to be too difficult and impractical. 4 - As the cooperation aircraft approaches, the ground unit will unfurl a 7.75 by 9.25 meter dark blue cloth which bears the regimental number on it. If the unit is a battalion, it has the same number as well as the battalion number in smaller text bellow the former. 5 - When contact has been made between the plane and ground unit, communication begins with the use of a Popham panel. The popham panel is made of white strips on a dark blue square measuring 7.5 by 9 meters. The horizontal bar of the T is always placed towards the enemy.  Popham Panel in use 6 - The panel is numbered as follows: 1 - 2 - 3 - - - - - 4 - - - 5 - 6 - 7 - - - - - - - 8 - 9 - 7 - The code used before the one in the manual is said to have been compromised by deserters during the Polish campaign. The one that will follow was used during the Finnish campaign. 8 - Each sentence begins with I and ends with T. 9 - The Air Force observer records the various positions of the panel on special forms on which the T framework is printed. Messages are brought back to the HQ and decoded. code:code:Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:was he dead by that time or (here's how you know they really mean business) did they keep him alive He got released after 14 years, so I guess he was being kept alive.  There was some mentioning about him being crippled after sitting in a wooden cage for 14 years, though
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:And Francis I of France, who managed to get captured by the forces of Charles V, because Charles is some sort of wizard or something. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0szqSd0osoE
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Silly question maybe but is this available from the US site or do I need to get it from the .co.UK site?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
not my real name posted:Silly question maybe but is this available from the US site or do I need to get it from the .co.UK site? I managed to get it from the US site by changing the .co.uk to .com
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I managed to get it from the US site by changing the .co.uk to .com Thanks for this, and thanks all for the thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Vietnam was an unpopular war which America lost. Not much of a market for people to write their reminiscences in the immediate (call it a decade or two) aftermath, and I guess it's long enough ago now that guys who fought in it don't feel the need to write up their accounts of it decades later, especially as it's still a bit controversial. That's pretty much the reasoning my father used when I (with HEY GAL's help) begged him to write down his war stories for the benefit of future historians. But really, Fallout was right, war never changes -- I'm pretty sure dad and his fellow "advisers" would've got along fairly well with HEY GAL's guys. They even had silly clothes! Girl scout hats and boots with dress uniforms, tiger stripe camo in the field, basically the only regulation thing they had were the medals they couldn't avoid having pinned on 'em. Which, I mean, makes sense to wear "sanitized" outfits in the field when you're up to no good, but he was a white guy in southeast Asia in 1970, maybe at best he could be mistaken for a very confused Frenchman, who the NVA also hated. Though I guess the fact that they all wore the same (locally-made, all labels removed) outfits meant it'd be a war crime to shoot them as spies. Cyrano4747 posted:or just give very sanitized versions that are acceptable for telling the family - the sort of humorous old soldier's tales or sanitized versions of key moments and victories that leave out their buddy with his jaw shot off drowning in his own blood. ThisIsJohnWayne posted:e: And know I'm on a google memoir spree His favorite song of all time is "Bad Moon Rising". That's what they'd play when putting their war paint on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=424T65BTQTY Also them's some real unprofessional Huey drivers at 1:12 -- Dad's pilots never touched the ground in the LZ, because might be mined.If they liked him and they weren't being shot at, they might slow down a bit while truckin' along at three feet AGL. ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Eh, I'd vote for him. Yeah, they were the original boy band, got the job from replying to a newspaper ad, JcDent posted:So is it a richman-ish thing? How would an inheritanceless peasant get arms, armor and training? Other way 'round. If you're rich and don't have an inheritance, you buy your way into the clergy. If only mildly rich, you buy a commission in the military (or Pa buys you your sword and armor which is basically the same as buying a commission later). If second son of a poor dirt farmer, you abscond with your farming implenent and enlist ArchangeI posted:By showing up at his local lord, who may be in need of a warm body.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 04:14
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
Anyone read Burwell Puller Jr. memoirs? I don't care if its good, it's a memoir from a soldier in the Vietnam war titled 'Fortunate Son', wich is so. god. damned. perfect.
|
Delivery McGee posted:That's pretty much the reasoning my father used when I (with HEY GAL's help) begged him to write down his war stories for the benefit of future historians.  quote:But really, Fallout was right, war never changes -- I'm pretty sure dad and his fellow "advisers" would've got along fairly well with HEY GAL's guys. There's also a good treatment of the rest of the Spanish Army's Germans in that conflict in Barbara Stadler's biography of Pappenheim, since one of the regiments that was down there belonged to him. It's there I learned that Pappenheim sent a bunch of guys up the side of a mountain to surprise the French from the rear--imagine 17th century alpinism, no specialized equipment, everyone's wearing those ridiculous little shoes. He also used brigantines for river combat during that war. He's not just a dashing cavalryman, according to stadler he was a very imaginative fighter. (And he was flat on his back from malaria half the time he was directing operations!) There's a dude who would have loved your father, I bet. Edit: Not only did the Spanish Army of Milan's Germans not get payed either, the Duke of Feria attempted, with some blatantly terrible math, to convince Pappenheim that he actually owed Feria money at the end of that war. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:and did he? Nope. He did have a hearty chuckle re: your degree in military history, though. His too-young-for-Vietnam-draft brother has a daughter with a doctorate in English Lit., so at least I'm not the most useless among my cousins. (As opposed to Dad's older brother, who was an SF officer when Dad was a SGT, and that guy's son was the first Ranger into Panama in '89)
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 06:03
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Because, were he in their position, it's the last thing he himself would have done; and despite having been thoroughly debagged in 1914 by this line of thinking, he still can't believe that the enemy might do something other than what he'd want to do in their place.  quote:He did have a hearty chuckle re: your degree in military history, though. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:that's why wallenstein nearly got sucker-punched at luetzen--he thought it was too late in the season to do anything but go into winter quarters so of course gustavus adolphus must have been thinking exactly the same thing I'm imagining someone having to sit Wallenstein down and explain, very carefully and slowly, that sometimes, just maybe, people think differently to the way he does
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 13:16
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QlplayAjM4 100 Years Ago Rain stops play at the Battle of Verdun. Pitch inspection tomorrow morning. Meanwhile, in London, three familiar names from the Landships Committee pop up again, with a comic-book ridiculous scheme to seize for themselves control over this gigantic order for 100 tanks that's just come down the pipe (after a little lobbying) from the War Office. It literally went as far as being prepared to puncture David Lloyd-George's tyres if the Minister of Munitions had attempted to leave London. Anyway, it does mean that people who know what they're doing will be in charge of the Tank Supply Committee, and I guess we now have a rare example of the second clause of the phrase "All's fair in love and war". Elsewhere, fallout from Salaita Hill continues, er, falling out; the Russians continue making strong progress north of Erzrurum, Malcolm White has a poignant meeting with some old acquaintances in Rouen, and the Sunny Subaltern makes what is, for a gentleman of the period, an astoundingly good arse joke. (What's even better is the implication that his dear old mother at home in Canada is the kind of dear old mother who appreciates a good arse joke.) vvv The US military made what seems now to be almost no attempt to control the narrative or content of the journalism coming out of Vietnam. Plenty of people were paying attention to what followed, as this sequence of cartoons by Steve Bell during the Falklands War shows: http://www.belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/1982/0189-0-5-82_ASKTHEMAJOR http://www.belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/1982/0190-0-5-82_ASKTHEMAJOR http://www.belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/1982/0191-0-5-82_ASKTHEMAJOR http://www.belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/1982/0192-0-5-82_ASKTHEMAJOR http://www.belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/1982/0192-0-5-82_ASKTHEMAJOR http://www.belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/1982/0193-0-5-82_ASKTHEMAJOR http://www.belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/1982/0194-0-5-82_ASKTHEMAJOR (The obscured text in number 4 says something like "...and a degree of objectivity that the military can never provide!") Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 15:19
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Dad really likes that song as well, and CCR in general. Am I wrong or is there a lot more documentary footage from Vietnam than from Iraq and Afghanistan? It seems like the people with the cameras put out a lot more uncensored images from Vietnam and generally had more access to things going on in the field.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Am I wrong or is there a lot more documentary footage from Vietnam than from Iraq and Afghanistan? It seems like the people with the cameras put out a lot more uncensored images from Vietnam and generally had more access to things going on in the field. Vietnam and tv journalism was a new thing for the Army too. Theyre better at image management now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Yeah, they hadn't lost a war against media way back then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I'm imagining someone having to sit Wallenstein down and explain, very carefully and slowly, that sometimes, just maybe, people think differently to the way he does This doesn't just happen to generals. I can't tell you how often I've given that talk at work. Like, once a month at least. I don't think I've found the right words to make it sink in yet 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Am I wrong or is there a lot more documentary footage from Vietnam than from Iraq and Afghanistan? It seems like the people with the cameras put out a lot more uncensored images from Vietnam and generally had more access to things going on in the field.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Just don't read the comments. Funker350 (and all military stuff) draws awful racists like pond breeds scum. nuke mudslimes till they glowa than shoot them in the dark americah fug yea
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
There's orders of magnitude more uncensored and professional footage of Iraq and Afghanistan , it just isn't that big of a deal anymore. The frontline episode that covered first cav and the restrepo documentary by themselves probably have as much realistic footage of modern combat as everything from Vietnam put together
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
Which is probably why theres more footage these days. I remember the original invasion of Iraq being way more managed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Just don't read the comments. Funker350 (and all military stuff) draws awful racists like pond breeds scum. Racism? In YouTube comments!?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I'm imagining someone having to sit Wallenstein down and explain, very carefully and slowly, that sometimes, just maybe, people think differently to the way he does meanwhile, in reality, the reason i like the Gustavus Adolphus / Wallenstein sparring match is how different they are as generals. GA is a proactive attacker, willing to try new things out, energetic as hell, but somewhat thoughtless, while Wallenstein fights as defensively as possible but when he's on top of poo poo is more than capable of outmaneuvering GA on the level of strategy/grand tactics. Wallenstein gets surprised that GA thinks differently to the way he does (Luetzen); GA gets surprised that Wallenstein moves fast enough to end up in exactly the wrong place for him (Alte Veste) HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:no, that would be against (as he put it) "die ragione des krieges" ("the reason of war" = established military doctrine), which is extremely bad. his opinions are self evident truth, you see To be entirely fair, everyone would assume that they have found the best possible way of dealing with a situation in their area of expertise. Which means that any other option is worse, and anyone who came up with it is dumber than you. Which is a bad position for any general to take. Always assume that other guy is as smart as you are, and if he is, he obviously came to the same conclusions you did.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Always assume that other guy is as smart as you are, and if he is, he obviously came to the same conclusions you did. edit: the problem with this from a historiographical perspective is that to my knowledge no other crazy general gets second-guessed this often by posterity. nobody wonders what patton does and answers that question with his reincarnation thing, but "what did wallenstein think was going on right before luetzen" can be answered with "lol" edit 2: possibly jackson, but davis didn't have jackson assassinated in conjunction with a bunch of extremely murky questions about his loyalty that historians still can't answer, which does tend to cast a cloud over one's legacy. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I'm imagining someone having to sit Wallenstein down and explain, very carefully and slowly, that sometimes, just maybe, people think differently to the way he does Wallenstein knows people think differently than him, but it's worse than that. The problem is convincing Wallenstein and those like him that although people might think differently they might also be correct sometimes. Or - even more challenging - Wallenstein might be incorrect. edit: probably should've reloaded the page after lunch before replying. Ithle01 fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Ithle01 posted:Wallenstein knows people think differently than him, but it's worse than that. The problem is convincing Wallenstein and those like him that although people might think differently they might also be correct sometimes. Or - even more challenging - Wallenstein might be incorrect. he may have had legit problems in that area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally%E2%80%93Anne_test which would go along with his sudden inexplicable rages, lack of friends, weirdness in social situations, ability to drive himself very hard in areas that matter to him, attention to small details, toxic working environment, random obsessions (the occultism is not actually what I'm thinking of, that's every early 17th century Central European), good memory, logistical talent, and frenetic energy whenever he's not sick (which was: a lot) on the other hand, it's possible that he's doing the same thing all rear end in a top hat generals before or since have done, mind problems or not: "a massive ego and unwillingness to compromise have brought me this far! what do you mean i have to change my approach to life and listen to my staff!" i think bewbies said some things on how meritocratic systems select for a certain kind of jerk from the perspective of almost everyone in the world, all of these guys--like mountain climbers or surgeons--are sure of themselves to an unhealthy degree edit: Incidentally, astrology had told him before Luetzen that the King of Sweden's fortunes would change suddenly in mid-November. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 23:19 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
HEY GAL posted:he may have had legit problems in that area I follow this thread regularly so I've seen a number of your posts on Wallenstein and from how you've described him, yeah that's exactly what I was getting at. From the limited amount that I've read on my own, sources describe Wallenstein as a highly organized eccentric with absolutely no regard for the well-being of others. So, six-of-one, half-a-dozen. I imagine Wallenstein gets questioned more because his own side was the one that got rid of him (twice) and at the end just about everyone had a vested interest in pointing out as many of his flaws as possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 23:29
|
|