|
I'm pretty sure the Mongols were best at cav.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 17:22 |
|
|
# ? May 13, 2024 01:41 |
|
I think the slowness of the Atlanta campaign also would come down to Johnston, who did a decent job of keeping the army in play in front of Sherman and between him and the city. Unfortunately they decided to bring in Hood, to replace Johnston. Hood proceeded to march into Tennesee in the dead of winter and Sherman decided to just march to Savannah. It wasn't just Forrest behind him- it was a significant chunk of the Confederate Army.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 17:34 |
|
Also, the best part of the ACW was William Seward trying to woo over Garibaldi.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 17:46 |
bewbies posted:Forrest was....a really complex character. Pre-war he was about as ugly southerner as it got; his wartime career was of course spectacular but tinted by the Fort Pillow thing that he may or may not be responsible for. As for the KKK, as far as I've been able to tell, it started as a big group of guys who wanted to resist Reconstruction, they needed a figurehead/leader/icon, they found Forrest, he agreed. The early Klan was not anything like what it would become...it was more of an old boys club that tried to do things through legitimate political channels. Things broke bad pretty quickly what with the lynchings and everything and Forrest was horrified, so he promptly left the group, ratted them out to the republican government, and spent much of the rest of his life trying to undermine them. He eventually became about as progressive as an antebellum southern white aristocrat could be with regard to race, which caused the good old boys to turn on him big time (in the same way they did with Longstreet) and so he was at odds with much of the southern elites for the last years of his life. His friendship with Sherman didn't help things, of course. The speech Forrest made not long before his death shows a pretty different picture from "founder of the KKK". quote:Ladies and Gentlemen I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God's earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. (Immense applause and laughter.) This day is a day that is proud to me, having occupied the position that I did for the past twelve years, and been misunderstood by your race. This is the first opportunity I have had during that time to say that I am your friend. I am here a representative of the southern people, one more slandered and maligned than any man in the nation. The man's past as a racist rebel is hardly gleaming with purity, but I'd argue that he doesn't quite deserve things like tearing down his statues or outright vilifying his memory. It's pretty plain to me that he regretted some of the things he did and said and would have probably worked more to rectify it had he not died two years after this.
|
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 17:54 |
|
Tearing down his statues is fine if the reason why they were put up was racist.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 17:59 |
|
BattleMoose posted:Were there any instances of a modern army forcing across a major river against an entrenched and prepared enemy? Obviously during WWII many major rivers were crossed but seems to be mostly done during rapid advances when the enemy wasn't able to entrench properly? There was the crossing of the Meuse in 1940 that particularly comes to mind and while there were French there, hardly in sufficient numbers or prepared? Operation Badr during the Yom Kippur War. The Egyptians successfully crossed the heavily-fortified Suez Canal with mostly-manned defenses, and defeated the Israeli counterattack with heavy losses. (IIRC they destroyed like half of Israel's armor in the Sinai)
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 18:23 |
|
chitoryu12 posted:The speech Forrest made not long before his death shows a pretty different picture from "founder of the KKK". To be honest, that speech sounds like the epitome of "poo poo, I was on the losing side, time to start dropping platitudes and explain how I was actually one of the good ones"
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 18:42 |
|
my dad posted:To be honest, that speech sounds like the epitome of "poo poo, I was on the losing side, time to start dropping platitudes and explain how I was actually one of the good ones" Which puts him well ahead of his time, unfortunately. That side didn't really lose until the 1960s in a lot of respects.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 18:44 |
|
my dad posted:To be honest, that speech sounds like the epitome of "poo poo, I was on the losing side, time to start dropping platitudes and explain how I was actually one of the good ones" how do you tell the difference between that and an actual conciliatory speech?
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 18:45 |
|
Does any goon have any information on the Polish Home Army, and specifically their part in the Warsaw Uprising? According to Wikipedia their number was approx 40,000 during 1944. How does a resistance movement organise and maintain such a level and size while under the thumb of the Nazi Germany? I can mentally picture small groups of partisans obtaining supplies by raiding etc, but how did they manage this on such a scale? Similar questions for the Uprising itself, it's a bit mind blowing how they managed to co ordinate it.I'm currently reading Wikipedia for information but would love to hear someone else chime in, this thread is great for information that's easy to digest. E; apparently they managed to capture a pair of Panthers, bloody hell.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 18:53 |
|
Well for one, Poland has had centuries of practice.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 18:58 |
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:how do you tell the difference between that and an actual conciliatory speech? Whether it pisses off the neo-confederates enough to stop worshipping at his feet.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:10 |
|
Quinntan posted:The Chally 2 uses two-piece ammunition for reasons unknown to mankind. Everyone else using modern stuff uses unitary ammunition. Challenger 2s use the old type because the British had a shitload of ammo for their older rifled barrel designs, including that weird "explosive silly putty to induce terminal spall on the enemy tank. " Then have since consumed most of that, and refitted *some* of their tanks with the standard 120mm smoothbore that the Abrams and the Leo 2 uses But then they ran out of money, and so now they have two ammo systems and a bunch of tanks that may in fact run out of ammo in the next conflict (The factory that made British rifled tank ammo been closed and gone for decades etc) Still less bad than the Royal Navy's surface missiles expiring with no replacement
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:36 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Challenger 2s use the old type because the British had a shitload of ammo for their older rifled barrel designs, including that weird "explosive silly putty to induce terminal spall on the enemy tank. " High Explosive Squash Head (HESH)?
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:38 |
|
Fangz posted:Whether it pisses off the neo-confederates enough to stop worshipping at his feet. Ah, so you're a Longstreet fan!
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:39 |
Fangz posted:Whether it pisses off the neo-confederates enough to stop worshipping at his feet. I'd imagine a lot of people don't even know about that. When I first heard the news of Forrest getting his statues taken down and remains moved, my initial reaction was "Good". I didn't know him any deeper than being a major figure in the KKK (I had often heard that he was the founder himself), which obviously makes him seem rather irredeemable at first. For years, I had never even bothered researching him further and only ever heard him referenced as a joke about how racist someone or something is (like a shorthand for "racist southerners" in a comedy could be having them attend Nathan Bedford Forrest High School). Now that I've actually read more about him, the truth seems a lot more complicated. There's a good chance that just like me, a lot of pro-Confederacy people today just know him for the things they love him for and not that he renounced his former beliefs.
|
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:42 |
|
Shaking things up who would be considered the best American general since WWII? I mean you mostly just hear about how poo poo they were during Vietnam and pretty much nothing in regards to the Gulf War I & II. I guess to further it more who would be the "best" general in the world either as a tactician, strategist etc. in the last fifty years or so?
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:55 |
|
Jack2142 posted:Shaking things up who would be considered the best American general since WWII? I mean you mostly just hear about how poo poo they were during Vietnam and pretty much nothing in regards to the Gulf War I & II. I guess to further it more who would be the "best" general in the world either as a tactician, strategist etc. in the last fifty years or so? The problem is that generals need wars to prove themselves in, and the wars we've fought since WW2 don't really lend themselves to that. Westmoreland might have been an excellent field commander in the Fulda Gap, but it turns out he was kind of poo poo managing a counter insurgency operation.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:56 |
|
90's kids know it's Stormin' Normin' Schwartzkopf.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 19:59 |
|
Cyrano4747 posted:The problem is that generals need wars to prove themselves in, and the wars we've fought since WW2 don't really lend themselves to that. Westmoreland might have been an excellent field commander in the Fulda Gap, but it turns out he was kind of poo poo managing a counter insurgency operation. Eh, from everything I've read he would've been poo poo at that too. The man was just not very bright and on the whole was a pretty poo poo leader. Really, the US has suffered from a dearth of good command-level military leadership I'm general since the end of World War II, for a variety of reasons.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:03 |
|
Cyrano4747 posted:The problem is that generals need wars to prove themselves in, and the wars we've fought since WW2 don't really lend themselves to that. Westmoreland might have been an excellent field commander in the Fulda Gap, but it turns out he was kind of poo poo managing a counter insurgency operation. It's true. If you look at the way American presidents are judged, then the ones that are considered the best are the ones that did well in terrible situations, like Lincoln and FDR. Generals are similar.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:05 |
|
my dad posted:To be honest, that speech sounds like the epitome of "poo poo, I was on the losing side, time to start dropping platitudes and explain how I was actually one of the good ones" I don't necessarily disagree but the mere fact that he said anything at all puts him miles ahead of most of his peers, north and south. Race relations in the US were...really bad, for a really long time. Semi-related issue: for years now every year on May 22 I send a nasty email to the mayor of Brooksville, Florida, reminding him or her that his or her asspimple of a Florida town is named after Preston Brooks. I encourage the rest of the thread to join me this activity this year.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:06 |
|
Zamboni Apocalypse posted:High Explosive Squash Head (HESH)? That be it.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:06 |
|
bewbies posted:I don't necessarily disagree but the mere fact that he said anything at all puts him miles ahead of most of his peers, north and south. Race relations in the US were...really bad, for a really long time. Doing research on African American soldiers in World War II has been quite the experience.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:16 |
|
bewbies posted:I don't necessarily disagree but the mere fact that he said anything at all puts him miles ahead of most of his peers, north and south. Race relations in the US were...really bad, for a really long time. On the plus side I learned about Brooks getting humiliated by Anson Burlingame who seems to be a refreshingly semi-decent person for the period. quote:Congressman Anson Burlingame publicly humiliated Brooks in retaliation by goading Brooks into challenging him to a duel, accepting, then watching Brooks back out. Brooks challenged Burlingame to duel, stating he would gladly face him "in any Yankee mudsill of his choosing". Burlingame, a well-known marksman, eagerly accepted, choosing rifles as the weapons and the Navy Yards in the border town of Niagara Falls, Canada, as the location (in order to circumvent the U.S. ban on dueling). Brooks, reportedly dismayed by both Burlingame's unexpectedly enthusiastic acceptance and his reputation as a crack shot, refused to show up, instead citing unspecified risks to his safety if he was to cross "hostile country" (the Northern states) in order to reach Canada. Hunt11 posted:Doing research on African American soldiers in World War II has been quite the experience. Share.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:22 |
|
Anson Burlingame sounds ridiculously made up for a crack shot badass congressman.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:44 |
Tias posted:I dunno man, I've been to GWAR shows and I get the feeling WW1 didn't have you completely covered in blood and gore and for the entire duration. That you don't is neither here nor there, but a lot of the imagery we use to describe things as organised is military.
|
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 20:54 |
|
Burlingame was also very decent about China. It does bring me some satisfaction that evidently Brooks died in incredible agony, according to his Wikipedia page anyway.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:03 |
|
The idea what a senator would walk in, beat the living poo poo out of a political opponent while another senator prevented anyone from interfering by brandishing a pistol, and then walk out is possibly one of the most ridiculous things to imagine even with the present day's nasty partisanship. It's like Paul Ryan beating the poo poo out of Nancy Pelosi while Marco Rubio threatens to shoot anyone trying to stop it. Although those are US Reps so it's not quite the same. Okay, imagine the scene if you will: Mitch McConnell is beating the poo poo out of Bernie Sanders with an umbrella (canes aren't really a thing in today's Senate I don't think) and John McCain is there with a 1911 threatening to kill anyone from stopping it. Senators chosen randomly outside of picking opposing parties I'm sorry I'm having trouble not laughing imagining these scenes and the fallout afterwards.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:07 |
|
Needs to be Marco with the Sword of Chang.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:12 |
|
What's the ~official milhist opinion~ on Mosby, while we're on ACW cavalry generals
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:14 |
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Burlingame was also very decent about China. Also Burlingame had some magnificent facial hair, going by the portrait on his wikipedia page. And he got two towns named after him. Burlingame, California sounds like a much better place to live than Brooksville.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:21 |
|
bewbies posted:
quote:He is primarily remembered for his May 22, 1856 assault upon abolitionist and Republican Senator Charles Sumner; Brooks beat Sumner with a cane on the floor of the United States Senate in retaliation for an anti-slavery speech in which Sumner verbally attacked Brooks' second cousin,[1][2] Senator Andrew Butler. Brooks' action was applauded by many Southerners and abhorred in the North.[3] I feel like we're maybe a year away tops from something like this being plausible again
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:23 |
|
Ice Fist posted:The idea what a senator would walk in, beat the living poo poo out of a political opponent while another senator prevented anyone from interfering by brandishing a pistol, and then walk out is possibly one of the most ridiculous things to imagine even with the present day's nasty partisanship. https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/throwback-thursday-weightgate-edition-were-paul-ryans-workout-photos-the-real-deal
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:22 |
|
StashAugustine posted:What's the ~official milhist opinion~ on Mosby, while we're on ACW cavalry generals Mosby was cool as hell
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:23 |
|
StashAugustine posted:What's the ~official milhist opinion~ on Mosby, while we're on ACW cavalry generals He was good at what he did. Also he pissed off Lost Causers after the war and always said the war was about slavery.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 21:25 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:If you want to see some juicy jugs on the internet The other films would be of interest to the thread as well. One of them in the "Why We Fight" series is on Japan. It is so racist that Gen. MacArthur actually refused to release it to his troops. (How to "deal" with Japan in the Why We Fight series was controversial even then; the government man overseeing the program was worried they'd go too far stirring up racial hatreds.) Another is a film about the psychological scars of war, made by John Huston, called "Let there be Light". It was seized by the government once it was finished and remained unseen until 1981.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 22:22 |
|
StashAugustine posted:What's the ~official milhist opinion~ on Mosby, while we're on ACW cavalry generals I grew up on a highway named after him, less then a mile's walk away from one of his battlefields.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2017 23:27 |
|
HEY GAIL posted:p sure pelosi could take that candyass ryan, he does skip leg day you know That's a hilarious article I enjoyed it. gently caress that guy.
|
# ? Apr 22, 2017 00:19 |
|
|
# ? May 13, 2024 01:41 |
|
celewign posted:That's a hilarious article I enjoyed it. gently caress that guy.
|
# ? Apr 22, 2017 00:41 |