|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Where is this and can I rent a truck to crash into it? You get one guess.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 14:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
zoux posted:You get one guess. Yeah no poo poo it's in our nation's infected rear end in a top hat but that's not what I was asking.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
Mobile
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 14:42
|
|
|
Of course it's in Alabama. Though admittedly I was torn between there and Mississippi.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 14:52
|
|
|
I want to put a statue up next to that one memorializing former slaves who fought for their independence. What a loving joke. SCV needs to go away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 14:59
|
|
|
I'm in Montgomery, Alabama for the next few days as it happens. Just went on a 10 minute walk to get some chicken biscuits for breakfast and in that time passed two civil rights museums and a slave depot. ~The South~
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
What would be the easiest Union iconography to spray paint I wonder?
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:What would be the easiest Union iconography to spray paint I wonder? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
Yeah but you can cover more surface and make it harder to clean with symbolism though. Make some templates too so you can save time. Though a Jackhammer would clearly do the best job. Both gun or tool.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Yeah but you can cover more surface and make it harder to clean with symbolism though. Make some templates too so you can save time. Hm... A stencil of "Battle Hymn of the Republic?" Or Sherman's glare, above? SeanBeansShako posted:Though a Jackhammer would clearly do the best job. Both gun or tool. Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
A good old TRAITORS would probably work, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 16:56
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:A good old TRAITORS would probably work, too. I like the way you think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
Cessna posted:I like the way you think. I grew up in the Deep South and this poo poo is deeply, deeply weird to me. All the oo-rah Civil War poo poo I heard was talking about how the area I grew up in was a hotbed of pro-MURICA, anti-Confederate rebellion because the Confederates were nothing but traitors to MURICA.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:If you're a fluent speaker, get thee stuck into the French Official History, which is available in its entirety for free on the internet and which will happily drone on for years in bollock-numbing detail about generals and dates and places and plans. JcDent posted:What is it with the Battle of the Frontiers interest? I'd never heard of it, but have been curious about how the early days went up to the trench digging competition, since I figured there had to be a few big battles beforehand. ilmucche fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Jun 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
ilmucche posted:I'd never heard of it, but have been curious about how the early days went up to the trench digging competition, since I figured there had to be a few big battles beforehand. It's very easy to overlook it between the STRONK RIGHT VING (another major failing of The Guns of August) and the Marne, but if nothing else it had France's deadliest single day of the war (22 August), and it was a massive ATTENTION GUILLAUME ROBIN that there were a lot of seriously faulty assumptions in people's thinking. Casualties for the semi-mobile battles at the start and end of the war usually absolutely dwarf those sustained during trench warfare. Like, 10 months grinding away at Verdun saw roughly 800,000 total casualties and ~300,000 dead (give or take 50,000 each way for both sides), which is only slightly more than what they got from one month in August and September 1914. Which is not including all the battles of the vast Marne/Grand Couronee counter-offensive, for which you can add another 600,000-odd combined casualties in about two and a half weeks. Give everyone four years to get so much better at war, invent all these new toys, make them semi-mobile again, and it means you're back to seeing 500,000 casualties a month, for four months.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
How does that compare to WW2?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:It's very easy to overlook it between the STRONK RIGHT VING (another major failing of The Guns of August) and the Marne, but if nothing else it had France's deadliest single day of the war (22 August), and it was a massive ATTENTION GUILLAUME ROBIN that there were a lot of seriously faulty assumptions in people's thinking. Casualties for the semi-mobile battles at the start and end of the war usually absolutely dwarf those sustained during trench warfare. Like, 10 months grinding away at Verdun saw roughly 800,000 total casualties and ~300,000 dead (give or take 50,000 each way for both sides), which is only slightly more than what they got from one month in August and September 1914. Which is not including all the battles of the vast Marne/Grand Couronee counter-offensive, for which you can add another 600,000-odd combined casualties in about two and a half weeks. Give everyone four years to get so much better at war, invent all these new toys, make them semi-mobile again, and it means you're back to seeing 500,000 casualties a month, for four months. There's just so much written about the race to the sea and trench warfare that it seems that the transition from rank and file into trench warfare gets overlooked, though I think some of the boer and american civil wars had some aspects of heavily defensive warfare. I've often wondered how the fights worked out once the trenches were broken through. Like say when the Canadians took vimy ridge it seems like they got fairly deep into the german lines, and had green grass and untouched land in front of them from what I read in Pierre Burton's book. How did they handle the fact they were now sitting in german communication and back line trenches with germans further down the line? Once battles shifted further into towns what was the fighting like, did they shell the place flat and dig more trenches?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
I've tried reenacting in the past. It's fun, but it's not really for me. Some people got really into it. If they had enough money they could come up with some pretty impressive stuff. Field kitchens, cannon, WWII halftracks, old T-34 tanks. That's cool, but I've found the Next Level. These folks reenact Carthage. Yes, that Carthage. They have their own ELEPHANT: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
That is some next level poo poo. I wonder, if the Punic Wars had gone the other way, would we all have some deep cultural reverence for Carthage now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
The Punic Wars were about States Rights
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
ilmucche posted:I've often wondered how the fights worked out once the trenches were broken through. Like say when the Canadians took vimy ridge it seems like they got fairly deep into the german lines, and had green grass and untouched land in front of them from what I read in Pierre Burton's book. How did they handle the fact they were now sitting in german communication and back line trenches with germans further down the line? Badly, for the most part. The further forward a battalion goes, the easier it is to become entirely cut off; you can't just keep going until you reach Berlin. At some point comes the terrifying moment when you look right and look left and realise there's nobody on either side of you, and no reliable way to communicate sideways or backwards except possibly by sending up a flare (and the trouble with a flare is that both sides can see it), and then it's a case of either holding on for (usually literal) grim death in the hope of getting relief, or trying to fall back a bit to a less precarious position, according to the personality of whoever was in charge. And then you get hosed hard because the counter-attack is pointing right at you; the enemy knows his own trench layout, his defensive plans include pinpoint registration of his own artillery on his own positions to be able to most effectively shell you out again, and everyone's trenches are deliberately built to be much less protective and defensible from the rear instead of from the front in case they get captured; there's nowhere to stand to see and fire over the top, the dugouts are all now cut at the best angle for a shell or bomb to fall down them, the barbed wire, sandbags, loopholes, and viewing points are on the wrong side, and so on and so forth. quote:Once battles shifted further into towns what was the fighting like, did they shell the place flat and dig more trenches? I'm not aware of any major Western Front battle having taken place inside any town big enough to be worth the name; the closest I can think of is the fighting in the outskirts of Lens at the Battle of Loos, and they never got far enough in to be proper urban fighting. On the defensive, towns and villages were treated with great caution like fortresses; a good place to hide your reserves and reinforcements, but also relatively easy to encircle and cut off, so wherever possible, trench systems were placed several hundred yards in front of and behind the settlement, and then if the front system got broken, the town would either be used as a staging post for a counter-attack or evacuated in a withdrawal to the rear system. On the offensive, exactly the same thing applies; you know that urban fighting is horrible and awful, so wherever possible your plans of attack are based around bypassing and encircling settlements to cut them off; when you occupy them you usually do so unopposed because they've already been given up, and you're then looking to push through and out the other side of the settlement so you don't get stuck inside and surrounded. When fighting in settlements does happen it's usually very unexpected and chaotic and ends in one side going "bugger this, we're off" and falling back. The process of reducing a small town or village to rubble usually needs about 6-18 months of sustained occupation while also being located within a few miles of the trenches; the enemy knows that's where you're hiding your reserves and your stores because that's where he puts his, so you shell each other's rear-area villages and gradually wear them down, which takes an amount of ordnance so vast that it's almost impossible to wrap your mind round, with diminishing returns after each hit because the targets themselves get harder to hit as they fall down. Once the settlement eventually becomes nothing but rubble, it loses its usefulness as a staging area and is then either abandoned or incorporated into trench lines. Even so, large piles of brick and stone are something you as a defender would rather have available than not, and there's no point pulling down things you can usefully use just to build something else instead, so the place stays identifiable as "a village was here" unless there's subsequently a major offensive that spends months pummelling it over and over and over and over. The villages (and they're all villages) that famously were declared as having died for France are in a ring to the north and east of Verdun (but a fair distance behind the front as it was in January 1916). They would have had intermittent shelling all through 1915 and were then unfortunate enough that when the Battle of Verdun finally congealed and stopped moving more than 50 yards at a time, they got a heat-of-the-battle's worth of shells over and over for three months, or six months, nine months at a time. That's what it takes to remove all trace of a village entirely from the map; it did happen elsewhere on the front to similarly-unfortunate places like Passchendale and Gheluvelt and Pozieres and Thiepval, but it did need a significant dollop of bad luck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:On the defensive, towns and villages were treated with great caution like fortresses; a good place to hide your reserves and reinforcements, but also relatively easy to encircle and cut off, so wherever possible, trench systems were placed several hundred yards in front of and behind the settlement, and then if the front system got broken, the town would either be used as a staging post for a counter-attack or evacuated in a withdrawal to the rear system. This is quite a bit more sensible than I expected for World War I.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:This is quite a bit more sensible than I expected for World War I. Contrary to popular belief, people were generally not stupid during WW1. A lot of the war's problems came from technology and its battlefield implications advancing faster than military leadership could grasp and adjust to them, but officers were rarely completely clueless and out of touch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
Only a tangent, but I'm rereading Dean Koontz's Lightning, in which a Nazi time machine can only go forward and return (can't change your own past), so they go to the 1980s to steal the secrets of the A-bomb. They bring clothes and guns and such back from their future to equip subsequent forays, so if any of the SS spies get killed in the '80s, they're period-accurate John Does. They use Uzis. It's the only submachinegun mentioned in the book (he also has a boner for Colt compact pistols and revolvers, but that I can accept). I guess because those were in the news when the book was written in 1988, and because Koontz is a hack he maybe didn't know the MP5 was A Thing, but still, they would've sprung for MP5s. Because the Uzi is to Israel what the AK is to Soviet Russia or the M1911 is to the US, and designed by a German Jew who escaped just as the Nazis rose to power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 22:06
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Chillbro Baggins posted:Only a tangent, but I'm rereading Dean Koontz's Lightning, in which a Nazi time machine can only go forward and return (can't change your own past), so they go to the 1980s to steal the secrets of the A-bomb. They bring clothes and guns and such back from their future to equip subsequent forays, so if any of the SS spies get killed in the '80s, they're period-accurate John Does. West Germany actually used the Uzi! They manufactured it under license as the MP2 and I've seen lots of surplus magazine pouches for sale. Uzis were also made under license in Belgium, Rhodesia, South Africa, and Myanmar and an unlicensed copy was made in Croatia as the Ero and Mini Ero.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
Chillbro Baggins posted:Only a tangent, but I'm rereading Dean Koontz's Lightning, in which a Nazi time machine can only go forward and return (can't change your own past), so they go to the 1980s to steal the secrets of the A-bomb. They bring clothes and guns and such back from their future to equip subsequent forays, so if any of the SS spies get killed in the '80s, they're period-accurate John Does. Lol I read that when I was a kid. I remember the SS Colonel or whoever getting super mad at all the 80s women not wearing bras
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
I hope the ending is them getting plans only to find out they have no actual resources to set up the refineries/sabotaged by resistance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Enemy lines and urban combat Okay, so it was a lot like other battles, take their lines and hold off hoping the rest catch up. Obviously that didn't happen all along the trench line at once, so I'm guessing there were a lot of salients? Is that the word? The trench lines would just kind of fall back and redig so the opposing armies weren't sharing trenches kind of thing. I heard they put bends in the trenches quite a bit to avoid propogation of blasts, would that have helped cut lines off when the enemy took them? Has urban combat become more common over time? I know wwii has significant examples, Stalingrad, ortona, caen etc, but has there traditionally been an avoidance of fighting in towns? Is it more about the approach and the ease of defending a town that prevented urban warfare? Bronze/Iron age seem more like they'd be siege oriented like the Gauls had done and whatnot rather than wading straight in to attack, or just trying to catch and ambush armies in the open.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Chillbro Baggins posted:Only a tangent, but I'm rereading Dean Koontz's Lightning, in which a Nazi time machine can only go forward and return (can't change your own past), so they go to the 1980s to steal the secrets of the A-bomb. They bring clothes and guns and such back from their future to equip subsequent forays, so if any of the SS spies get killed in the '80s, they're period-accurate John Does. I'm no Nazi time traveller, but wouldn't it make more sense for them to buy histories of WWII and biographies of Allied leaders, and then use those to plan future actions?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
Hell, why come back when you can just pack up some Nazi gold and set up shop in the future. Maybe start running for office.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:I'm no Nazi time traveller, but wouldn't it make more sense for them to buy histories of WWII and biographies of Allied leaders, and then use those to plan future actions? While I doubt Koontz thought of this, it wouldn't work anyway. The Third Reich just didn't have the manpower or the industrial base to win the war after BARBAROSSA failed to knock the Soviet Union out in 1941. At that point, the best possible outcome for the Reich would be a negotiated peace under favorable terms, and even status quo ante bellum would be essentially impossible to sell at that point. Up-time A-bomb information would be unlikely to matter in reality (although there is a slim possibility that they might have pulled it off if they got all the research by 1943, they would have almost no chance of actually delivering it), but Koontz was probably working on the "Germany was six months away from the A-bomb when Berlin fell" notion that was extremely widespread in late 80s and early 90s pop-history. Given the basic "Nazis with time machines" premise, the "flee with Nazi gold into the future" option is probably the best.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Ned_Donovan/status/1004685638443159552 https://twitter.com/Ned_Donovan/status/1004686120926482432
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 03:47
|
|
|
To be fair to William Windsor I, while he had been demoted, he was later restored in rank.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 03:51
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:To be fair to William Windsor I, while he had been demoted, he was later restored in rank. GOOD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:While I doubt Koontz thought of this, it wouldn't work anyway. The Third Reich just didn't have the manpower or the industrial base to win the war after BARBAROSSA failed to knock the Soviet Union out in 1941. At that point, the best possible outcome for the Reich would be a negotiated peace under favorable terms, and even status quo ante bellum would be essentially impossible to sell at that point. A time travel novel where the Nazis keep using a time travel machine to try and figure out future knowledge to win the war only to lose again and again and again before despairingly concluding that the only way to win the war is to stop being Nazis and not actually fight the war to begin with would be pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:Given the basic "Nazis with time machines" premise, the "flee with Nazi gold into the future" option is probably the best. Flee with Nazi gold into the future, begin funding Werwolf and agitprop operations in the countries that defeated them... 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Flee with Nazi gold into the future, begin funding Werwolf and agitprop operations in the countries that defeated them... (looks at last few years) oh poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
VK 30.01(P)/Typ 100/Leopard Queue:VK 36.01(H), Luchs, Leopard, and other recon tanks, PzIII Ausf. G trials in the USSR, SU-203, 105 mm howitzer M2A1, Mosin, Baranov's pocket mortar, Pz.Sfl.IVc, Jagdpanzer 38(t) "Hetzer", Soviet tank winter camo, Semovente L40 da 47/32, Semovente da 75/18, Semovente da 105/25, 7.92 mm wz. 35 anti-tank rifle, 76.2 mm wz. 1902 and 75 mm wz. 1902/26, IM-1 squeezebore cannon, 45 mm M-6 gun, 25-pounder, 25-pounder "Baby", 37 mm Anti-Tank Gun M3, 36 inch Little David mortar, 105 mm howitzer M3, 15 cm sIG 33, 10.5 cm leFH 18, 7.5 cm LG 40, 10.5 cm LG 42, 17 cm K i. Mrs. Laf., 47 mm wz.25 infantry gun, Ferdinand, Tiger (P), Scorpion, SKS, Australian Centurions in Vietnam, PzIII Ausf. E and F, PzIII Ausf. G and H, Trials of the PzIII Ausf. H in the USSR, PzIII Ausf.J-N, Russian Renault, Nashorn/Hornisse, Medium Tank M4A2E8, P.1000 and other work by Grotte, KV-100 and KV-122, Cruiser Tank Mk.I, Cruiser Tank Mk.II, Valentine III and V, Valentine IX, Valentine X and XI, 7TP and Vickers Mk.E trials in the USSR, Modern Polish tank projects, SD-100 (Czech SU-100 clone), TACAM R-2, kpúv vz. 34, kpúv vz. 37, kpúv vz. 38, IS-1 (IS-85), IS-2 (object 240), Production of the IS-2, IS-2 modernization projects, GMC M8, First Soviet assault rifles, Stahlhelm in WWI, Stahlhelm in WWII Available for request:  Schmeisser's work in the USSR Object 237 (IS-1 prototype) SU-85 T-29-5 KV-85 Tank sleds T-80 (the light tank) Proposed Soviet heavy tank destroyers DS-39 tank machinegun MS-1/T-18 Kalashnikov's debut works SU-152 combat debut MS-1 production Kalashnikov-Petrov self-loading carbine SU-76M (SU-15M) production  Archer NEW  Medium Tank M3 use in the USSR HMC T82 57 mm gun M1  Jagdpanzer IV Panther trials in the USSR Grosstraktor  Hotchkiss H 35 and H 39  FIAT 3000 Ensign Expendable fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Jun 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 05:21
|
|
