|
Squalid posted:Also French pride is a lot funnier when it’s negative aspects are directed towards Anglos than their helpless colonies. In 1958 De Gaulle put up the referendum on the new constitution for a vote in the colonies, expecting they would all approve it and join the French community. To his surprise Guinea rejected it, badly embarrassing De Gaulle and politically boxing him into acquiescing to Guinean independence. This is doubly shameful considering how many of the free “french” were african colonial soldiers.
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
Phanatic posted:And even then, it's tough. Even with biocidal copper-based paint, they corrode. Even with sacrificial anodes, they corrode. Yeah. I worked as a museum curator on a submarine museum in the late 90's. Fighting corrosion is 90%+ of the job. SeanBeansShako posted:This copper wire? she is France! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:This is doubly shameful considering how many of the free “french” were african colonial soldiers. Yeah, IIRC they also did alot of juggling around of units and such leading up to the liberation of Paris to ensure that there were no, or at least as few as possible, non-whites in the ensuing parades as possible. Also held true for post-war parades I believe. I also remember reading some about France leading up to WWII expecting to make heavy use of colonial soldiers for the most dangerous tasks in war, on the basis that France itself simply did not have the manpower pool you might expect of its population after the casualties of WWI and the low birth rate that had plagued France since the late 19th century. It should also be noted that French colonial troops were often noted for their vicious treatment of civilians, Italian, Arab, German, what have you. Like most colonial troops they were essentially mercenary lifers and often came from poor and sometimes even criminal backgrounds. They were subject to harsh discipline by their French officers, but often received spotty training and harsh discipline does not appear to have extended to punishment for transgressions against civilians, at least non-French/non-white civlians (which became readily apparent for the French forces in Vietnam which were also heavily made up of colonial forces as well as foreign legionaires with a large number of Germans formerly of the Wehrmacht and SS). Still some of them, notably the Senegalese and especially the Moroccan light infantry often seem to have been good soldiers, though the latter were especially noted for viciousness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:
They were pretty rough when they occupied my German grandmother's village, but did leave her particular family alone since they had a French surname.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
it also got kind of weird because the French had formations called tirailleurs Senegalais since at first they were recruited in Senegal, but they actually ended up being recruited from all of sub-saharan Francophone Africa. when people say that the Senegalese were good soldiers, it really means that they are saying that sub-saharan African soldiers were good soldiers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:mercenary lifers...came from poor and sometimes even criminal backgrounds [and were only kept in line by] harsh discipline HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Dec 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:They're painted. It sounds loving awesome I don't know what you're talking about. Siivola posted:Ships also have little sacrificial plates of metal that somehow hog all the corrosion so the actual hull doesn't wear through. Is this true or are you having a giggle (mate) Cessna posted:Yeah. I worked as a museum curator on a submarine museum in the late 90's. Fighting corrosion is 90%+ of the job. Which sub? If it was the Drum I imagine that was a losing battle given the local climate Milo and POTUS fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Dec 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Perfect timing to share a thing I found 6min ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jb2b9f9LAWw
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
And the small metal plates are called sacrificial anodes (in scandinavian languages at least)
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:i'd be interested in reading their muster rolls and legal documents to see whether these claims are true or not since they aren't for the 30yw saxon army This wasn't the 30yw Saxon Army. And the discipline is said to have been harsh, though this harshness does not seem to have extended to trying to prevent the troops from carrying out atrocities against civlians, in Vietnam at least the soldiers terrorizing the populace almost seems to have been the point. It doesn't really seem like harsh discipline meant to keep the soldiers in line but harsh discipline to brutalize them, not unlike the WW2 Japanese army for instance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:And the small metal plates are called sacrificial anodes (in scandinavian languages at least) That's what they're called in the upper midwest, as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:21
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:Perfect timing to share a thing I found 6min ago: Jesus that guy is good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
CMS posted:That's what they're called in the upper midwest, as well. Yes, like I said. Minnesota = Scandinavia
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:That's probably not incorrect. While the initial foundations of a castle, walls, towers, simple keep, typically built on a hill or mound, were put up quickly, there was nothing stopping the owner from expanding upon it once he had the essentials up and had seized control of the countryside. Anyway the private castles of medieval nobles weren't really meant to be significant military fortifications. But they were difficult enough to take without a siege or if you had someone on the inside that warfare between nobles very rarely involved attacking each other in their castles, instead it consisted of raiding the lands of other nobles and killing their peasants and livestock, then riding back to your castle where you were safe from direct retaliation. To siege down a castle, even a simple one, you needed something like an army, and it was not easy to keep an army in the field for long periods of time in the Middle Ages, particularly early on. Of course when petty nobles wanted to make war on one another but couldn't afford the conduct a real siege, they could build counter-castles or siege castles. If you want to raid your enemies lands its much more convenient to throw up your own fort spitting distance from your enemy, it really cuts down on travel time.  The little castle on the right is a typical siege castle. Because they were built quickly they were definitely on the crummy side and were very often abandoned. Sometimes they were just there to protect trebuchets and the like from sallies but other times they were long-term bases from which to contest the countryside. If the feuds were particularly bitter they could get upgraded into permanent structures and the two garrisons might spend years giving each other the stink-eye. Also I find it amusing that the left structure in this image, Eltz castle, wasn't built by a single lord but was owned collectively by several families who couldn't afford castles of their own. I mean it makes sense for all the goofy little counts of the Holy Roman Empire with half a village to their name to go in on a joint venture, but still it must have been awkward to have all those gentry bumping elbows during sieges.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
what happens when someone is at war with a few of the half-village counts but not all how does that poo poo work
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Also I find it amusing that the left structure in this image, Eltz castle, wasn't built by a single lord but was owned collectively by several families who couldn't afford castles of their own. I mean it makes sense for all the goofy little counts of the Holy Roman Empire with half a village to their name to go in on a joint venture, but still it must have been awkward to have all those gentry bumping elbows during sieges. edit: system metternich has a map of a town that's owned by at least two feudal lords and they subdivided it down to the freaking house level edit 2: Holy Roman Empire: A Nobility Of One HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Dec 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:42
|
|
wdarkk posted:Jesus that guy is good. Seriously. I wish I could do that stuff 
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
imperial knights are probably my favorite HRE concept
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
Timeshare castles. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
Is the epic Last Lion bio trilogy on Churchill good? I’m weary because the first two volumes came out in the 80s so gently caress knows how critical they were.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
Richard J. Evans’ Third Reich Trilogy (an absolute must-read) has some stuff on the use of colonial troops to police the Ruhrland after WW1. Surprise: the German rightists made hay out of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
WW2 Data Part 1 of the A.A.F. Missiles, we get to see some more guided munitions. What does "VB" stand for? How are the VB-1 and VB-3 controlled? Which bomb requires 2 bombardiers? Which guided munition needs to be dropped in groups, rather than one at a time, and why? All that and more at the blog!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:what happens when someone is at war with a few of the half-village counts but not all If you are feuding with the von Landsigs, you may only besiege one of the 3 drawbridges, the western wing of the castle, half of the great hall, plus the 2nd den and its attached oubliette and garderobe. If you are feuding with the von Pfufflestugs, you may besiege the entire lower castle, but please do not disturb the guest room at the bottom of the staircase. If you are feuding with Count von Gastzimmer, you may besiege the guest room. Slim Jim Pickens fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Dec 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:If you are feuding with the von Landsigs, you may only besiege one of the 3 drawbridges, the western wing of the castle, half of the great hall, plus the 2nd den and its attached oubliette and garderobe. Please check in with the local Rathaus prior to commencing your siege as room allocations may change seasonally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:imperial knights are probably my favorite HRE concept i like the Reichskammergericht mostly because of the name but also because of its role in the HRE's crazy bureaucracy. i can't tell what all those bodies did or how they did it, but they seemed to be... around for centuries i dunno. i tried to read a ~1000pg history of the institutions of the holy roman empire at some point but i just couldn't make it. i am weak edit: modern things like this 12-block-ish rectangle of suburbia northwest of denver called Mountain View making up a law against hanging things from the rear view mirror and collecting fines from passers-by is still pretty HRE in its essence oystertoadfish fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Dec 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 03:12
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Which sub? If it was the Drum I imagine that was a losing battle given the local climate Pampanito, in San Francisco.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:imperial knights are probably my favorite HRE concept Eh. I give it 7/10. Squalid posted:As punishment De Gaulle immediately pulled all French assistance and withdrew all personnel without notice. The departing French administration even pulled up Guinea’s phone lines as they left the country. I've read that their treatment of Guinea they later used as an example during their other decolonization programs to intimidate prospective former colonies to pay massive debts as a thank you for the benefits of colonization or the french get to take back their infrastructure. Haven't really verified it though. The french empire was really terrible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
What empire wasn't? Sure some were worse than others but it's like being asked where you'd like to be stabbed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 05:44
|
|
|
Thanks to everyone who posted info about castles, that is amazing stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
GotLag posted:What empire wasn't? Empire of Brazil :cryingpedroii:
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 05:54
|
|
|
GotLag posted:What empire wasn't? Emperor Norton of San Francisco never hurt anybody. . . vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv except Acebuckeye13. Epicurius fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Dec 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 05:55
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:Emperor Norton of San Francisco never hurt anybody. He got me trapped in a cemetery <  >
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:The interesting missing link between these posts is that the idea of ‘wilderness’ as anything other than terrifying, disgusting, wasteful uselessness is, in western thought, mostly developed in response to encountering American landscapes. John Muir and Daniel Boone and the Hudson School basically invented the whole ennobling-encounters-with-forces-beyond-man’s-control, what-immortal-hand-or-eye angle, before that the idea that places where people didn’t control the landscape and impose order could be beautiful or desirable would have been seen as pretty out there. This is a subject near and dear to my heart. This romantic notion of the wilderness can be described in the language of sociology as a "ecological imaginary," and it was one of the most important innovations in the development of an American conservation ethic. Unfortunately it has some practical weaknesses for many purposes. Wilderness is conceptualized as somehow apart from the world of man, isolated and distant, ideally with no trace even of a footprint. The presence of highways, power lines, windmills, and other human disturbances on a landscape almost by definition render it something other than wilderness. This is a problem, because very little of America's biodiversity wealth can actually be found in wilderness. Don't get me wrong, the great Western Parks like Yellowstone are a treasure of inestimable value, nowhere else in America can we find those kinds of macrofaunal ecological relationships still intact. Nowhere else does the wolf still chase the elk from the willow thickets, nowhere else do the bison still roam. However important though these big systems, much of America's most threatened biodiversity isn't found here. As impressive as a Kodiak Grizzly is, places like Alaska are not particularly biodiverse, probably a byproduct of the harsh climate and recent glaciation. In terms of trees, fish, frogs, salamanders, bats, rodents, and wildflowers, most of America's biodiversity is concentrated in places with little to no wilderness. Especially rich is the US southeast:  Though wilderness is scarce here, there is still a major conservation ethic. However it is the ethic of use: the woodland and glen of the southeast is first and foremost a product resource. It exists to produce timber, deer, quail. There is still a sense of ennoblement through engagement in nature, but it is much more grounded in the use value of the land than in the wilderness ethic. These landscapes were chopped up and parceled out to families many generations ago, the wilderness is long gone, and yet we must still find ways to protect that abundance of nature. Unfortunately and increasingly, we keep intensifying our exploitation of these places. 99% of the noble cypress tree and their knobbly knees were cut by the 1970s. The swamps were drained and leveed. Wildfires once opened the canopy and brought forth an abundance of bright green growth were suppressed. The old un-managed timber forests are converted to dark and impenetrable stands as regular and evenly planted as rows of corn. A deer can starve in such a tree plantation. This all might sound incidental to military history. However! The US military has, through no fault of its own, become one of the most important and powerful forces for conservation in the United States. See almost all of the big military bases of the US southeast were created in the early 20th century in locations that were already sparsely inhabited and only marginally disturbed. As a result, these places preserve much of the natural system as it was before human disturbance. I can't hardly express the thrill of jumping knee deep into a creek and hauling out fat mussels as big as my palm. Freshwater mussels are very delicate and sensitive creatures, downstream of any normal farm or suburb would be drowned in the mud and toxins washed off fields or pavement. Yet somehow the tanks rutting across the landscape have little effect. Without conservation on military lands, many rare and threatened species would probably cease to exist. Thanks to the Endangered Species Act, the military has to take the preservation of these organisms seriously too. Anyway, I can see I'm rambling a bit, so here's a picture of me in a longleaf pine savanna, one of the most biologically diverse ecosystems of North America. The army likes these because they are open enough to drive a tank through, and also because its actually good for the forest when they accidentally set it on fire with artillery. These trees can only reproduce and grow into adulthood after a blaze, which also kills their competitors. They're home to many endangered species like the Red Cockaded Woodpecker (hated by timber managers and Army Colonels alike), Gopher Tortoise, and held below, the Louisiana Pine Snake. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 07:40
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:And the small metal plates are called sacrificial anodes (in scandinavian languages at least) Can confirm, I learned about these in my chemistry class (in Denmark) last semester. Fun fact: sacrificial anodes were invented all the way back in 1824 and an iron anode was implemented the same year, by this rather sharp fellow. Initially they discarded the system again, since just letting the copper corrode releases free copper ions which keeps away biological fouling of the hull, and preventing it gunked up the hulls more than was considered acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 08:13
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:
Was? While they're not as active as they used to be in this regard, Françafrique was a great excuse the French used to dick around in their former colonies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 10:40
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Of course when petty nobles wanted to make war on one another but couldn't afford the conduct a real siege, they could build counter-castles or siege castles. If you want to raid your enemies lands its much more convenient to throw up your own fort spitting distance from your enemy, it really cuts down on travel time. How did they defend the construction site? I assume that it takes a long time to build a castle, and that whole time the other castle can just sally out and gently caress with your builders. If you're defending the under construction castle for that long can't you just besiege the other castle? what am I missing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 11:12
|
|
|
Splode posted:How did they defend the construction site? I assume that it takes a long time to build a castle, and that whole time the other castle can just sally out and gently caress with your builders. If you're defending the under construction castle for that long can't you just besiege the other castle? what am I missing? Most of the time, the siege castle is something you build quick and dirty, that's why there aren't that many around. Even the stone ones are built in a manner that cuts all sorts of corners to make the work as fast as possible. Remember, the main point of a siege castle is to fortify your siege stuff like trebuchets to make them less vulnerable, so you're not really exposing yourself to any danger. If the besieged are in a position to sally to wreck your under construction castle, they're also in a position to gently caress up your expensive siege weapons. And for a well placed and well provisioned castle, a siege could take a hell of a long time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 11:33
|
|
|
Splode posted:How did they defend the construction site? I assume that it takes a long time to build a castle, and that whole time the other castle can just sally out and gently caress with your builders. If you're defending the under construction castle for that long can't you just besiege the other castle? what am I missing? You *are* besieging the other castle. In this one's case, the siege took two years and ended with a peace treaty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trutzeltz_Castle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eltz_Castle Fangz fucked around with this message at 11:40 on Dec 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 11:35
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:edit: system metternich has a map of a town that's owned by at least two feudal lords and they subdivided it down to the freaking house level Baarle-Hertog/Baarle-Nassau? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baarle-Hertog
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 11:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
very interesting post, thank you!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 12:23
|
|
