|
Fangz posted:People being burned at the stake is the tip of the iceberg. Henry VIII killed tens of thousands of people to make the reformation happen. I think we can agree Henry VIII was Not A Good Guy, but by the standards of his time he wasn't wildly unusual in that regard. When the King decides you're all Protestant (or Catholic) now and you rebel against that, yeah, you're gonna get hurt, because by the standards of this time period that is treason. quote:And the whole Catholicism thing was a key factor in triggering the civil war anyway. Sort of. Ish. There was concern by the more paranoid Protestants that Archbishop Laud, for example, was actually secretly a Catholic, and concerns about the Crown's habit of allying diplomatically with Catholics instead of Protestants (not that this sort of thing was unusual at the time, hell, France allies with the impious Turk!). To say that the ECW kicked off because a whole bunch of people genuinely believed the King was about to abandon Protestantism altogether and do a Bloody Mary would be distinctly over-egging the pudding, though.
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:07 |
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:and then there are no children born so both this generation and the next plummet in numbers I'm not an obstetrician but wouldn't chronic hunger lead to a bunch of problems with carrying to term anyway? Unless that's what you're getting at cuz I'm dense af today because I haven't eaten anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:I'm not an obstetrician but wouldn't chronic hunger lead to a bunch of problems with carrying to term anyway? Unless that's what you're getting at cuz I'm dense af today because I haven't eaten anything. Yep. Look at a Chinese population pyramid and the Great Leap Forward is the first thing you see. A lot of women never got pregnant in the first place though due to starvation induced amenorrhea and uterine prolapse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Also maybe worth considering, the war in the vendee, which went very bad and brutal with some big purges in the end, but it didn't last very long. Cultural similarity didn't prevent atrocities there, did it?bewbies posted:The ACW didn't really feature much of a cultural divide...the south especially loved (and...loves) to play up the "culture and heritage" thing, but in reality both sides were very homogenous WASPs, especially early on the war. This changed a bit as more immigrants and blacks fought for the north, but it was never a sectarian divide. Nearly all of their disagreements were purely political in nature. Sure it was a political divide, but it was a divide that had dominated national politics for decades by the time the war broke out. I don't think it's hard to imagine things going bad if the war had lasted for 10 years instead of 4. bewbies posted:There really was a commitment to honorable behavior, by both sides, which I'm not sure there is a good comparison to outside of 18th-19th centuries. Is "they tried really hard to not start up a big cultural divide so there wasn't one" not also a reason to consider in this sort of thing? Is it reasonable to make judgements as to how much effort societies made to prevent divides in various cases or conversely how much they lacked concern for forming divides? "Human intent guides the path of history" would certainly be a nice conclusion to draw from things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
Some of the nastiest fighting in the US Civil War in terms of atrocities was in Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Arkansas and was perpetrated by unorganized guerrilla bands against civilians who had or were suspected to have had enemy sympathies. This was people against their neighbors and neighboring communities. The fact that they shared the same culture, and sometimes even were linked by ties of family, religious observance, and social networks didn't stop them from being completely brutal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
On the other hand, those guerilla bands were often inspired as much by the chance to settle long-running grudges as they were by the larger war. I'm pretty sure that the same is true for some of the nastier bits of the War of Independence. Which only supports the overall point. Familiarity and ties can breed bloodshed as easily as restraint.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
I was gifted Guns, Germs, and Steel today, and I seem to recall this book being rather controversial. Is it the good kind of controversial, or should I politely donate it to a library a few months from now?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I was gifted Guns, Germs, and Steel today, and I seem to recall this book being rather controversial. Is it the good kind of controversial, or should I politely donate it to a library a few months from now? Thread consensus (or at least, my opinion..........) seems to be basically it has a point, but overstates it because it does the Grand Theory of History thing, ignoring that a lot of history is just random bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
13th KRRC War Diary, 24th 1918 posted:Further advances have been made during the day and we expect to move this evening towards BAPAUME.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I was gifted Guns, Germs, and Steel today, and I seem to recall this book being rather controversial. Is it the good kind of controversial, or should I politely donate it to a library a few months from now? It generalizes a lot but upping the granularity would result in a book you'd need a forklift to carry
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I was gifted Guns, Germs, and Steel today, and I seem to recall this book being rather controversial. Is it the good kind of controversial, or should I politely donate it to a library a few months from now? It’s broadly OKish if in the pop history and just so story end of things. The real problem is that a LOT of shitheads use it as a brick in some really awful arguments.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
Btw everyone go google “states rights gist” and you will have the best laugh you’re going to have today. RIP States Rights 11/20/1864 Full credit to McNally for dropping this on TFR
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 21:43
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I was gifted Guns, Germs, and Steel today, and I seem to recall this book being rather controversial. Is it the good kind of controversial, or should I politely donate it to a library a few months from now? It's not so much wrong as not detailed enough but there are some interesting things in it, just know that for any specific portion there is probably a better, more thorough, and more dry explanation so don't take it as gospel. I personally liked it. From the thread it also misses some important historical details.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Finnish civil war was brutal, the Reds especially were dehumanized by White propaganda and executed en masse for a while. The biggest cause of deaths though was poor conditions in the post war prison camps. Finns have not been good at interning a large number of POWs, the same issue came up in 1941. According to my Finnish buddy, his dad was one of the first members of a "red family" that was allowed into officer school in the Finnish army. Judging by his dad's age this must have been in the 60s or so. The Finnish civil war is relatively unknown (outside of Finland, obviously) and had consequences for decades.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
So, this is your field of expertise and all, but I've always had trouble grasping the concept of dehumanization. It seems like a very optimistic view of peoples' willingness to kill other people, like, uh the SLA Marshall thing on shooting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Btw everyone go google “states rights gist” and you will have the best laugh you’re going to have today. "i mean, sure, he fought in the war, but i think it's a little conceited to think it was all about him"
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:03
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Btw everyone go google “states rights gist” and you will have the best laugh you’re going to have today. Think of all the terrible names people could have had if this was a common thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
P-Mack posted:Yep. Look at a Chinese population pyramid and the Great Leap Forward is the first thing you see. A lot of women never got pregnant in the first place though due to starvation induced amenorrhea and uterine prolapse. Also infant mortality skyrockets
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Cessna posted:The Navy gets really, really nitpicky about what counts as a mutiny and what doesn't, so they can say "nope, no mutinies!" I can tell you the definition of 'economic depression' follows the same rules
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
Pornographic Memory posted:"i mean, sure, he fought in the war, but i think it's a little conceited to think it was all about him" The Confederates lost 14 generals in the battle where he died (although half were wounded). Makes me wonder, what’s the record for general-level casualties is one day of one battle?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 00:14
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I was gifted Guns, Germs, and Steel today, and I seem to recall this book being rather controversial. Is it the good kind of controversial, or should I politely donate it to a library a few months from now? It was really loving boring and repetitive and I much preferred carnage and culture, though I think that has its own issues.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 00:40
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Is "they tried really hard to not start up a big cultural divide so there wasn't one" not also a reason to consider in this sort of thing? Is it reasonable to make judgements as to how much effort societies made to prevent divides in various cases or conversely how much they lacked concern for forming divides? I think the ACW was somewhat unique in that it had a bunch of very long-sighted people in very senior positions (on both sides) that worked to ensure that the war actually ended when it was over. It certainly was a deliberate decision, but it was also relatively easy to implement...America just wasn't terribly partisan in the mid 19th century, apart from the slavery issue. Once that had been resolved, you just had a bunch of rich white guys shake hands and get right back to what they were all doing before the war, minus slaves. wdarkk posted:The Confederates lost 14 generals in the battle where he died (although half were wounded). Makes me wonder, what’s the record for general-level casualties is one day of one battle? In the ACW at least it was Gettysburg...at least 3 were killed during Pickett's Charge alone, and I think 9 were killed altogether on both sides. The CSA really had a thing for frontal attacks causing mass casualties among their senior officers... bewbies fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Aug 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 01:01
|
|
|
Well when your personal honor depends on valor
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 01:12
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I think the ACW was somewhat unique in that it had a bunch of very long-sighted people in very senior positions (on both sides) that worked to ensure that the war actually ended when it was over. It certainly was a deliberate decision, but it was also relatively easy to implement...America just wasn't terribly partisan in the mid 19th century, apart from the slavery issue. Once that had been resolved, you just had a bunch of rich white guys shake hands and get right back to what they were all doing before the war, minus slaves. So maybe I should watch that Steven Spielberg Lincoln movie, but is it true that abolishing slavery was made a political goal by Lincoln and others when massive crazy casualties on both sides needed a point and a cause to continue fighting? My ACW knowledge is pretty much this thread and that Ken Burns documentary Also, is it true that the black population was way ahead of the curve at understanding "this is what will doom slavery" even as pols were still all "but maybe we could compromise?!?" Because if so, it is mighty impressive. I know the story of slavery as a political issue is that the political class constantly sought compromise lllllloooonnnnngggg after to the average citizen it was clear there could be no compromise
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
ilmucche posted:It was really loving boring and repetitive and I much preferred carnage and culture, though I think that has its own issues. That's putting it lightly
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So maybe I should watch that Steven Spielberg Lincoln movie, but is it true that abolishing slavery was made a political goal by Lincoln and others when massive crazy casualties on both sides needed a point and a cause to continue fighting? Not really. Plenty of Northerners started hearing about what actually happened to southern slaves as the Union armies advanced into the south and they were genuinely outraged at it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So maybe I should watch that Steven Spielberg Lincoln movie, but is it true that abolishing slavery was made a political goal by Lincoln and others when massive crazy casualties on both sides needed a point and a cause to continue fighting? It was being used as leverage to try to force the confederacy to throw in the towel. THe emancipation proclamation freed slaves in all states still rebelling against the union. Because of this it didn't actually affect people in Maryland and a couple slave-owning states that had already thrown in the towel and started re-integrating (Kentucky, Missouri, a couple others I"m forgetting). The kicker, though, is that it basically freed slaves as federal troops advanced, which meant by wars end the bulk of the slave population had been freed as a punitive war measure and the 14th was really, really necessary to tidy everything up. If the CSA had just said "gently caress it" and quit before it came into effect it's not impossible to imagine a situation where you end up status quo ante bellum re: slavery. It was a pretty clever move, actually. On its face it was a hail mary attempt to end the war, but it also created a framework to finally kill the slavery issue.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
I'm always blown away by the lyrics to "Battle Cry of Freedom" which was a very popular contemporary song and should make it crystal clear how northerners felt about the war and reasons they were fighting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO1G6ZacPmE
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:48
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So maybe I should watch that Steven Spielberg Lincoln movie, but is it true that abolishing slavery was made a political goal by Lincoln and others when massive crazy casualties on both sides needed a point and a cause to continue fighting? It certainly would have been awkward to get tens of thousands killed and let the slaveholding planters who started it go back to business as usual. Black people were part of this and yes they realized the situation before most white people. They fled toward Union lines almost at the beginning of the war. The very first batch was actually sent back to their owners then the Union general (Butler maybe?) realized this was absurd and deftly evaded the political issue by declaring them "contraband of war". If slaves were property, then confiscating property contributing to the enemy war effort was well within his rights. So before long you have tens of thousands of effectively free blacks working for the Union army, with it being practically and politically impossible to send them back to slavery as part of reunification. Emancipation formalized this process and provided encouragement for more slaves to abandon the plantations at the first opportunity. (On top of its propaganda value both at home and with the European powers.) So I don't think its just that emancipation became an issue that abolitionists rallied the north with but also that victory without emancipation became absurd. "Breaking the slave power" wasn't just a rhetorical flourish, but part of the practical prosecution of the war and pretty quickly reached a point where it couldn't be rolled back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 02:56
|
|
|
This history professor at university of north texas is trying to set a world record for longest lecture... on Texas History. He's 9 hours in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvjVKiToab4
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So maybe I should watch that Steven Spielberg Lincoln movie, but is it true that abolishing slavery was made a political goal by Lincoln and others when massive crazy casualties on both sides needed a point and a cause to continue fighting? The push for the amendment wasn't really done so much due to casualties or war weariness, it was a pretty direct response to the CSA attempting to negotiate a peace that allowed slavery to survive. Even as late as the 1864 election, most northerners preferred an end to the war over total abolition of slavery, and some savvy southern politicans knew this. They started sending out peace feelers shortly after losing Atlanta (this was really the point at which it was clear the southern cause was done for), culminating in sending a peace commission north in early 1865. Lincoln almost certainly knew this was happening, and wanted nothing to do with a negotiated peace that included slavery. The problem was, a lot of northerners, particularly those in congress, were all about ending the war early even if it allowed slavery to survive. The Emancipation Proclamation was a wartime measure, and Lincoln knew that it wouldn't hold up to post-war legal challenges. So, he needed an amendment in place. This was really the only thing that could effectively undercut a southern attempt at a negotiated peace - if they knew slavery was done for, they really had no other reason to negotiate. When it was clear that the south wanted to hold serious talks, that's when Lincoln went into a super-high corruption gear and started having his fixers pay and bribe and threaten and cajole Democrat holdouts who were still opposed to passing an anti-slavery amendment (this is most of what the Lincoln movie covers). He got the votes right around the time a formal peace delegation made contact with Grant, and so was able to attend a HIGHLY SECRET peace conference with the knowledge that the south now had nothing whatsoever to gain from negotiation. The timing of this was probably coincidental, but it literally couldn't have been any better. As for the black population having a better understanding of the slavery issue...that's something that came out of Ken Burns' documentary that I'm not sure I agree with. For blacks in the south, especially the deep south, abolition wasn't even a thing they considered. Their great hope was for liberation, at the behest of Union armies as they took southern territory. This legally freed them, which was good enough when you're a plantation slave. For northern freemen, they were generally so politically marginalized, poor, and ill-thought of that their primary concern was surviving, and to a lesser extent, not getting taken by slavers or southern armies and put back into bondage. This was especially true for the gazillion black refugees that inundated the DC region throughout the war. Basically, I don't think there was much of a unified political consciousness there. There were, however, a handful of intellectuals - the ones we've all heard of - that postured the war as one of ending slavery, even before the war started. They correctly identified that the war was ultimately about breaking the political dominance of the southern planter class, and then figured out that class had chosen to die on the slavery sword. That dynamic really wasn't a big part of the public consciousness of the north however, outside of the hardline abolitionist groups that had been fighting against slavery for the past century-plus. They've taken kind of an outsized role in our modern understanding of the war, in my opinion at least, but the big thing they did accomplish was building the Radical Republican body in congress that eventually took the ball across the goal line.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:french people were perfectly capable of doing revolting things to one another if one of them was a catholic and one wasn't Don’t kink-shame please
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
Cessna posted:In 1970 a group of sailors tried to seize the ship Columbia Eagle to keep it from delivering a cargo of napalm to Vietnam. The steamed for Cambodia when, whoops, there was a coup. One sailor escaped back to the States and was court-martialed, the rest were never heard from again. The Navy says this doesn't count because no, it wasn't a US Navy ship, just a civilian ship with Navy crewmen. They weren’t even Navy crewmen, they were merchant mariners.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:I'm always blown away by the lyrics to "Battle Cry of Freedom" which was a very popular contemporary song and should make it crystal clear how northerners felt about the war and reasons they were fighting. John Brown's Body being a popular marching tune for Union soldiers says a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Sure it was a political divide, but it was a divide that had dominated national politics for decades by the time the war broke out. I don't think it's hard to imagine things going bad if the war had lasted for 10 years instead of 4. bewbies posted:I think the ACW was somewhat unique in that it had a bunch of very long-sighted people in very senior positions (on both sides) that worked to ensure that the war actually ended when it was over. It certainly was a deliberate decision, but it was also relatively easy to implement...America just wasn't terribly partisan in the mid 19th century, apart from the slavery issue. Once that had been resolved, you just had a bunch of rich white guys shake hands and get right back to what they were all doing before the war, minus slaves. I think it goes a bit deeper than this, the north/south divide was a thing even during the revolution. But I do agree, it was in the best interests of everyone at the top of the social order to sweep what they could under the rug and go back to being rich. There was a push for the CSA to send their soldiers into the wilderness to wage a guerilla war that Lee and others nipped in the bud - I think we'd look at the ACW a lot differently if it was followed by 10 years of bushwhackers and roving bands of militia, and the actrocities on both sides would have piled up. It might have made reconciliation impossible or at least severely retarded the US's massive growth from 1865 into the 1900s. The main reason the ACW is viewed as a 'gentlmanly' thing is because no one learns about the Western theater and nearly all the fighting of note elsewhere was organized dudes in uniform lining up to shoot each other, not because of common links from language, culture, or religion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
I mean, if you were black then the 'gentlemanly' resolution to the ACW was pretty terrible and set you up for another hundred years of full blown legal discrimination to keep you firmly at the bottom of the civic ladder. And yeah, the Western theatre got really nasty at points (mainly when the Confederate cavalry decided to go on a raid).
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 18:58
|
|
|
There were also things you don't hear a lot about, like the Nueces Massacre, where a Confederate cavalry force killed a bunch of pro-Unionist Texans who were trying to flee to Mexico to avoid conscription.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:There were also things you don't hear a lot about, like the Nueces Massacre, where a Confederate cavalry force killed a bunch of pro-Unionist Texans who were trying to flee to Mexico to avoid conscription. Like I said, most people don't learn about all the stuff that happened out west. Kansas was terrible too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:07 |
|
|
Semovente da 75/18 Queue: , 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, SU-76 with big guns, Panther trials in the USSR, Western spherical tanks, S35 in German service 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 S-51 SU-76I T-34 applique armour projects T-26 with mine detection equipment  Archer  Medium Tank M3 use in the USSR HMC T82 57 mm gun M1 Medium Tank M4A4  Jagdpanzer IV Grosstraktor Gebirgskanone M 15 Maus development in 1943-44 German anti-tank rifles Panzer IV/70 Czech anti-tank rifles in German service NEW  Hotchkiss H 35 and H 39  FIAT 3000 FIAT L6-40 Ensign Expendable fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Aug 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 21:12
|
|
