|
Nebakenezzer posted:Thread, this is coming out soon: D E A T H T R A P S
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
spectralent posted:"My Tank is Fight"? This is actually a pretty good suggestion, imo. It's funny, it's got some interesting information, and it's not even age inappropriate (surprising for an SA product, I know). I got a decent kick out of it at his age, at least  edit: Nebakenezzer posted:Thread, this is coming out soon: quote:Christian DeJohn, a published historian completing a masters degree in military and American history, is a former United States cavalry tanker with hands-on experiences as a gunner in an M1 Abrams tank. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Y'know its a good question. I'd suggest maybe a year's subscription to AFV monthly? Finding a book on tanks that is general, factual, but not "You've most of your way through a history undergrad" weighty is difficult. I need to start rating this badly immediately.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
I'll second My Tank is Fight!, I know I got a lot of mileage out of it when I was that age (younger, even). It's a good book about some kooky poo poo, and a lot of fun. More importantly, every third paragraph in the German sections makes a point to mention how trash 98% of the ideas were, so any nascent Wehrabooism should hopefully be dampened. Sure, it's not exactly brimming over with primary sources and expert analyses, but your audience is a kid not a history undergrad so who cares - the most important thing is that whatever he gets is interesting enough to hook him. Plus, it's an SA product so, uh, brand loyalty? Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Fangz posted:To be quite honest I'm not sure how much I'd want kids to be interested in war, especially in this current political environment. I think a good history would do a kid well, just so they get the sheer mindboggling speed with which war can wipe large numbers of people out. So I guess what I'm saying is I'm seconding Ordinary Men  .Schwerpunkt might go well, it might go poorly. It's probably a decent pick for that sort of detail just because it's well broken up into battles and you can just read battles and get an idea of the texture of things. It's never too early for decent historiography either, but it doesn't make its narrative as clear as some books do, so not sure. I'd also recommend converting him to the dark side of naval warfare with some of Friedman's Illustrated Design History books, what 13 year old doesn't like a nice picture book?
xthetenth fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
quote:To be quite honest I'm not sure how much I'd want kids to be interested in war, especially in this current political environment. The more people know about war, the less jingoistic they seem to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
Fangz posted:To be quite honest I'm not sure how much I'd want kids to be interested in war, especially in this current political environment. get him a book about that african-american contributions in the war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
Spurred by the Moscow posts, any SE Asia military history visits to recommend?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I'd also recommend converting him to the dark side of naval warfare with some of Friedman's Illustrated Design History books, what 13 year old doesn't like a nice picture book? Join the
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 05:52
|
|
|
BattleMoose posted:The more people know about war, the less jingoistic they seem to be. I'd argue that something sorta like the inverse is true. People get more enamored of war the more they learn about it, up to a certain point where they know too much. A lot of people never get to that "too much" point, possibly because it varies or they stop studying. Source? What? I ain't even got anecdotes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
platzapS posted:I'm interested in different notions of honor and cowardice. What would bring shame to a soldier in the era you like to study? I'd like to offer you this amazing piece on shaming and societal nations of propriety in 1540s England: https://thesocialhistorian.wordpress.com/2016/07/21/the-foulest-place-of-mine-arse-is-fairer-than-thy-face/ My dudes are "vikings", and they had some real loving issues about shaming. A lot of shaming behaviours are tied to the breaking of inviolable taboos: Woman-slayer, kin-slayer, death-shy and (evil) sorceror, come to mind. However, you had better make sure a dude did the things you shame him for, or he will probably sue or kill you. Proper behaviour was enshrined in law, so if you kept doing wrong, you would become an outlaw, and everyone could kill you on sight. Calling someone womanish was generally reserved for the bitterest of violent feuds. This assumes we're talking a man shaming a man, though. The goading of women in iron age Scandinavia is culturally enshrined, and the main source of womens cultural and political power. If a man did not adhere to societal norms, his wife would flyte, shame, harangue and humiliate him till his balls caught on fire - as well as withhold cooking, sex and even treatment of his wounds, until he fell in line. A good example is found in Njal's Saga: quote:Then Hildigunna went back into the hall and unlocked her chest and then she took out the cloak, Flosi’s gift, and in it Hauskuld had been slain and there she had kept it, blood and all. Then she went back into the sitting-room with the Cloak; she went up silently to Flosi. E: Also, there is some debate on whether retreating in combat is shameful. While viking beliefs saw a death in battle as the most desirable outcome wrt a good afterlife, it was generally not bad to retreat when ordered to, or against a superiour foe. Someone who breaks and runs quick in a regular scrap would probably get a talking to, though. Tias fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 11:39
|
|
|
Missed the dogfight chat. How did they fix the "not shooting your own propeller off" bit?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Missed the dogfight chat. Interrupter gear connecting the prop and machine gun physically blocks the trigger from being pulled, prevented the gun from shooting and thus not breaking your own prop. 
Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
Also, it was first developed by the germans in WW1 and was a HUGE advantage over the allies because you werent constantly running the risk of shooting yourself down. Also also because the solution for those without the gear waa putting guns on top of the upper biplane wing to allow you to shoot over the propeller. Problem with that is youre forcing your pilot to stand, making the whole thing awkward amd its inaccurate as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Missed the dogfight chat. The original solution was steel plates on the propeller. Unfortunate side effects included bullets ricocheting back into the engine or between the pilot's eyes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Also, it was first developed by the germans in WW1 and was a HUGE advantage over the allies because you werent constantly running the risk of shooting yourself down. I thought the issue wasn't standing to shoot (it was possible connect a trigger while seated to an above wing machine gun) but that you had the swing the gun down to reload and it was a pain in the rear end? Also prior to proper synchronisation gear the French tried just armouring their propellers to brute force a solution to the problem
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Problem with that is youre forcing your pilot to stand, making the whole thing awkward amd its inaccurate as poo poo. what? no, the trigger was operated normally. The only situation where you'd need to stand up was if there was a jam (or if you had to reload a Lewis gun). Other approaches were to use a pusher plane like D.H.2 or, as some pilots did, reinforce the propeller with metal plating and just shoot through it, propeller damage be damned 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
That thing looks like it would faceplant from a full stop position.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:what? no, the trigger was operated normally. The only situation where you'd need to stand up was if there was a jam (or if you had to reload a Lewis gun). Yeah I'm most likely thinking of the wrong thing cause I'm way too tired. You did have to change mags manually and clear jams as well, both of which would suck.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:I'd argue that something sorta like the inverse is true. People get more enamored of war the more they learn about it, up to a certain point where they know too much. A lot of people never get to that "too much" point, possibly because it varies or they stop studying. Source? What? I ain't even got anecdotes. It's like the Dunning-Kreuger effect but with jingoism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Specifically I think there's an issue that most of the war-is-horrible stuff is hidden from 'family' audiences, where instead you get cool looking soldier's uniforms, arrows moving across maps, neato weapons and stirring tales of heroism... and not so much massive civilian casualties, widespread war crimes, dying slowly in your own feces etc etc
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Yeah, I think it's important to give war hungry teenagers as much military history as they can handle. The deeper they go the more things they'll encounter that make them go "Jesus Christ, this is awful". This thread is a great example of that effect. More education is always better, trying to hide stuff is what causes the bad poo poo. Battlefield 1 was ahistorical because ww1 wasn't fun, you have to know about military history to know it is awful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
You can't possibly stop youngsters from getting interested in war, sometimes they can be inexplicably drawn to it, and it's too important to ignore, so the best you can do is properly inform them accurately.Jobbo_Fett posted:Interrupter gear connecting the prop and machine gun physically blocks the trigger from being pulled, prevented the gun from shooting and thus not breaking your own prop. Here's a neat video showing one in action (or at least, a facsimile). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysB-SH19WRQ I can't imagine what it was like to try to reload a machine gun by yourself, in the air, while making sure your plane is flying. Sounds like a nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:You can't possibly stop youngsters from getting interested in war, sometimes they can be inexplicably drawn to it, and it's too important to ignore, so the best you can do is properly inform them accurately. Yeah, exactly. You can't stop them being interested, and you can't try and tell them war is bad, you just have to give them enough information that they realise themselves that war is actually awful and should be avoided at all costs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Give them a strong dose of war documentaries made just after the conflict, the more close to the bone interviews with the people that were there. The World At War is a good one. The intro is just a bunch of shocked, horrified or competely dead on the inside photographs of civilians and soldiers during the 2nd World War with a very sorrowful music backing. Down this road on a summer days in 1944 the soldiers came 
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Give them a strong dose of war documentaries made just after the conflict, the more close to the bone interviews with the people that were there. The world at war is probably the finest documentary i have ever seen, competing with CNN's The Cold War. It provides a really good look not just at what and where but especially at the why of everything, why being the vital question because it tells you both why its important that war is fought but also why it is never to be taken lightly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Give them a strong dose of war documentaries made just after the conflict, the more close to the bone interviews with the people that were there. I've recommending the World At War to anybody who is interested in this sorta stuff but don't have much knowledge about World War 2. Weird fact: one of the many things that is great about the World At War is that they had the co-operation of the Soviets in making it. The Soviets didn't like the end result. (This is odd if you've seen the series, since if anybody comes off as heroic and bordering on the superhuman, it is the Soviets/Russians. I imagine the mild criticism the World At War cast the communist party's way might have had something to do with it - though they kinda get the short shift post-Stalingrad, with very little said about the Soviet victories after that.) So the Soviets commissioned their own documentary series about th eastern front, produced by a western company. They got Gregory Peck (!) to narrate it. Called appropriately enough "The Unknown War", the whole thing is now on youtube.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
I just started reading a book on the submarine war in WW1 and was slightly taken aback by this part of the first page.quote:Here — and nowhere else so clearly as here — the world has seen the death struggle between the two spirits now contending for the future of mankind. Between the old chivalry, and the new savagery, there can be no more truce; one of the two must go under, and the barbarians knew it when they cried Weltmacht oder Niedergang. Of the spirit of the German nation it is not necessary to say much. Everything that could be charged against them has been already proved, by their own words and actions. They have sunk without warning women and children, doctors and nurses, neutrals and wounded men, not by tens or hundreds but by thousands. They have publicly rejoiced over these murders with medals and flags, with songs and school holidays. They have not only broken the rules of international law; they have with unparalleled cruelty, after sinking even neutral ships, shot and drowned the crews in open boats, that they might leave no trace of their crimes. The men who have done — and are still doing — these things have courage of a kind. They face danger and hardship to a certain point, though, by their own account, in the last extreme they fail to show the dignity and sanity with which our own men meet death. But their peculiar defect is not one of nerve, but of spirit. They lack that instinct which, with all civilised races, intervenes, even in the most violent moment of conflict or desperation, and reminds the combatant that there are blows which it is not lawful to strike in any circumstances whatever. I looked back at the original publishing date and it was 1918 and suddenly it all made a great deal more sense, i can only imagine what French writers were saying at the time was significantly more vitriolic. Attitudes were certainly remarkably different then as they were now with the benefit of a long gap.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Post Treaty Of Versailles we're all kind a little weary about that kind of thinking now unless it is Nazi level evil.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
I think one awkward thing about war is that our ur-war, WW2, is also the archetypal anti-pacifist war. Like, I can see the conversation going: "War is bad, loads of civilians die and even the soldiers are sad" "So there shouldn't have been a war!" "Well if there wasn't then the holocaust would've gone to full completion." I feel like most kids probably aren't able to grapple with that properly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Yeah it's pretty ironic that that one of the most horrible wars mankind has ever fought is also one of the few that I think were completely justified.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Yeah it's pretty ironic that that one of the most horrible wars mankind has ever fought is also one of the few that I think were completely justified. Not really going to argue that it wasn't, but this really depends on who you are and where you were located. The eastern front solidified Stalins brutal dictatorship, and you could just as well say that it was well the Germans fought them - also, the civil war in China didn't really end non-horribly, but no one can argue it's not part of WW2. Tias fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I think one awkward thing about war is that our ur-war, WW2, is also the archetypal anti-pacifist war. Like, I can see the conversation going: Honestly a good one for broaching the subject of that complexity might be the ACW. You've got a supremely moral cause, and that's not really what the North's fighting over, it does a good job of subtly fracturing the good vs evil perspective. Or just do 30yw, where fighting more just makes everything worse for everyone outside transitory gains and they keep thinking more war will make it better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Get the kid Armoured Champion. Schwerpunkt is pretty dry for a teenager.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Honestly a good one for broaching the subject of that complexity might be the ACW. You've got a supremely moral cause, and that's not really what the North's fighting over, it does a good job of subtly fracturing the good vs evil perspective. Or just do 30yw, where fighting more just makes everything worse for everyone outside transitory gains and they keep thinking more war will make it better. Yeah, but the thing is my little sister (and I'm sure a lot of other people's younger relatives) have already heard about the second world war; my grandma lived through the blitz, and her brother fought in africa and italy. She's aware that a thing called "world war two" happened, and there was a lot of fighting ("Even at my house!"). She's five. I doubt she really thinks about it, but she's passively aware of WW2 as A Thing to a degree I doubt is shared with the ACW or 30YW, or even current conflicts like Syria. The Battle of Britain, fighting on the beaches, the Blitzkrieg and El Alamein are just part of our cultural background of Notable Stuff That Happened. WW1 is probably closer and more of a "it was pointless and bad", but I feel like we're not going to be able to keep the nazis away from her forever. EDIT: It doesn't help that she really likes machinery, planes in particular, and model plane kits are dominated by warplanes (and all mine are). I mean, I haven't told her the stuka is a divebomber, but she thinks it looks cool. spectralent fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
The holocaust is a pretty great justification in hindsight, but it wasn't really used as a contemporary justification for the war. That's one of the horrifying parts of it, most people at the time didn't know about it, and those that did may not have really cared too much. You can see similar patterns with other crimes against humanity. It was still pretty justified from the perspective that the axis had started the thing in the name of conquest, but those you can put into slightly more cynical spins on. And then the whole thing was just a sequel to the most profoundly pointless war of all time that mainly happened because there hadn't been a big war for a while.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Fangz posted:To be quite honest I'm not sure how much I'd want kids to be interested in war, especially in this current political environment. A lot because some proper looking at it might give them an appropriately dim view of attempting to prosecute one? Jobbo_Fett posted:Also, it was first developed by the germans in WW1 and was a HUGE advantage over the allies because you werent constantly running the risk of shooting yourself down. WW1 biplanes with a lewis gun bolted on the top and a few extra magazines stuffed down the side of the seat are wonderful, and I refuse to let anyone tell me that standing up in the plane and steering with your knees while you try to stick a new drum on your machinegun is not the second best way to fight in an aircraft. The best way to fight in an aircraft is to shoot your service revolver out of the cockpit like some kind of aerial drive by. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Yeah, but the thing is my little sister (and I'm sure a lot of other people's younger relatives) have already heard about the second world war; my grandma lived through the blitz, and her brother fought in africa and italy. She's aware that a thing called "world war two" happened, and there was a lot of fighting ("Even at my house!"). She's five. I doubt she really thinks about it, but she's passively aware of WW2 as A Thing to a degree I doubt is shared with the ACW or 30YW, or even current conflicts like Syria. The Battle of Britain, fighting on the beaches, the Blitzkrieg and El Alamein are just part of our cultural background of Notable Stuff That Happened. WW1 is probably closer and more of a "it was pointless and bad", but I feel like we're not going to be able to keep the nazis away from her forever. If she likes machinery I would throw my heart and soul behind the David Macauley book "The Way Things Work" as the version I had as a child is absolutely crammed with hand illustrated cutaways of machines with little people crawling around in them, it's like a mix between a where's wally book and a set of blueprints, you can spend hours looking at the pictures. There's a number of versions as the one i had was written in the 90's, there's new ones that deal with smartphones and such, but I would think any of them will be a real treat.   http://www.amazon.in/New-Way-Things-Work/dp/0751356433
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Mammoth-based explanations for everything, too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
BattleMoose posted:The more people know about war, the less jingoistic they seem to be. No, not really. If anything, chickenhawk ratings go up fairly quickly with moderate levels of knowledge about war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:57
|
|
