|
The Russian ship Kommuna was commissioned in 1912 as a submarine tender and is still in active service with the Russian Navy as a salvage/rescue ship. I don't know how ship-of-Theseus-y the criteria are, but it's still being used for something similar to its original purpose, and not a museum or blockship or floating barracks or something.
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 06:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:49 |
|
|
I was reading some half-thrashy fantasy and the common trope of slave soldiers that are treated like poo poo came up(think the unsullied in Game of thrones); which made me wonder, has there been a case in history where slave soldiers have been an institutional part of the army and at the same time treated like crap? The examples I can think of are Mamelukes, Ghilmans and Janissaries-- and in all those cases they were privileged with high offices , kingmakers, and the mamelukes even created a dynasty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 07:14
|
|
|
Spartan helots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 08:14
|
|
|
SubG posted:Yeah, something like the Egyptian copper spearhead makes more sense to me as an answer to the question than something like the concept of the spear in the abstract. Sorry, I must have been mistaken, I'm not an expert. I can't find any of the evidence I thought I remembered. I was certain I read about spear heads from burials just prior to the Hyksos 1500 BC, but from what I now read, those are actually notable for the absence of weaponry. Apparently the majority of copper atifacts found are those in burials. Not that there were no weapons in society, but those would not be a part of the burial rituals.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 08:28
|
|
|
Pump it up! Do it! posted:I was reading some half-thrashy fantasy and the common trope of slave soldiers that are treated like poo poo came up(think the unsullied in Game of thrones); which made me wonder, has there been a case in history where slave soldiers have been an institutional part of the army and at the same time treated like crap? The examples I can think of are Mamelukes, Ghilmans and Janissaries-- and in all those cases they were privileged with high offices , kingmakers, and the mamelukes even created a dynasty. conscripts?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 08:53
|
|
|
Galley slaves.zoux posted:The venerable "pointy stick" Bah, far too new fangled. I suggest the blunt stick. It's still issued by militarys today.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 09:54
|
|
|
Wasn't there an effortpost some while ago about Vienna being one of the food capitals of europe for a while? This is the only history thread I generally read/post in. It would probably be in a previous version?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 10:45
|
|
|
Pump it up! Do it! posted:I was reading some half-thrashy fantasy and the common trope of slave soldiers that are treated like poo poo came up(think the unsullied in Game of thrones); which made me wonder, has there been a case in history where slave soldiers have been an institutional part of the army and at the same time treated like crap? The examples I can think of are Mamelukes, Ghilmans and Janissaries-- and in all those cases they were privileged with high offices , kingmakers, and the mamelukes even created a dynasty. if you give the slaves an essential monopoly of force then surprise they become very powerful galley slaves are probably a classic example but of course they do not have direct control over their military power via end-to-end expertise so it's not quite the same Dance Officer posted:The Chauchat wasn't a bad gun. It wasn't a good gun, but it wasn't bad. It's primary features were that it was a portable automatic rifle that could be fired on the move, and that it was inexpensive. The gun itself is also pretty reliable. the clever feature of "there's a window so your assistant gunner can see when they need to swap mags" didn't help the mag situation but they were so poorly made that probably even if they had been solid the gun would have still had feeding problems. overall a good gun (especially in context!) just not well suited to its environment due to one major design and production flaw.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 14:20
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:the clever feature of "there's a window so your assistant gunner can see when they need to swap mags" didn't help the mag situation but they were so poorly made that probably even if they had been solid the gun would have still had feeding problems. overall a good gun (especially in context!) just not well suited to its environment due to one major design and production flaw. That wasn't even as bad as it got. 18000 of them were made in .30-06, and the manufacturer hosed up the chamber dimensions and the guns just didn't work at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 14:34
|
|
|
EggsAisle posted:No, there are a couple of internal changes. IIRC it's mostly optimizations for the shorter barrel (e.g. the gas system needs a few tweaks.) They're still very much alike, but different enough to warrant a new designation instead of M16A5 or whatever. Sure, but the core of the weapon is still the same and the parts are interchangeable except for the specific changed bits (gas tube, barrel, etc). You can slap an M4 lower on an M16A1 upper and it all works together fine. I’ve got a friend who had a job rebuilding and refurbing old military lowers ca 2008 or so and he said you’d get the most insane poo poo coming through on some of them. He saw one lower that had XM16E2 lined out to make it an A1, the 1 lined out for a 2, and maybe some other poo poo. Compare that to, say, something like the M1 and M14 where despite significant cosmetic similarities there is zero parts interchangeability and they operate fundamentally differently. The assorted flavors of stoner’s rifle that the US had used from 64 to today have a ton of different models but fundamentally they’re the same basic design. Edit: where that breaks down are the really radical redesigns that were more about using a familiar form factor. The Colt M231 port firing weapon designed for the Bradley, for example, basically just used the upper and lower receivers as a platform to build a totally different gun. Open bolt system, majorly different buffer system, totally different FCG, I think even the take down is different. That’s a good example of where the redesign is so fundamentally different that it’s arguably not the same gun any more. When you get into stuff like the 9mm AR carbines it’s even more extreme with no gas system etc. and you’re in a totally different gun that just had similar ergos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 15:00
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:That wasn't even as bad as it got. 18000 of them were made in .30-06, and the manufacturer hosed up the chamber dimensions and the guns just didn't work at all. Hardly a fault of the gun or the original design. Yes the .30-06 one was poo poo but that's kind of like arguing that the Hispano-Suiza Hs.404 20mm was bad because the US hosed up the M1.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 15:06
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Wasn't there an effortpost some while ago about Vienna being one of the food capitals of europe for a while? This is the only history thread I generally read/post in. It would probably be in a previous version? If you don't have any luck here, that sounds to me like something that System Metternich might have posted in the politically-loaded maps thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Hardly a fault of the gun or the original design. Oh, definitely true, I'm just saying it probably goes a way towards explaining the reputation. Give a bunch of guns to AEF guys and then when they go to shoot them don't work and they throw them away and pick up anything to replace them, it's going to cement a "that gun sucks" notion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 16:19
|
|
|
Pump it up! Do it! posted:I was reading some half-thrashy fantasy and the common trope of slave soldiers that are treated like poo poo came up(think the unsullied in Game of thrones); which made me wonder, has there been a case in history where slave soldiers have been an institutional part of the army and at the same time treated like crap? The examples I can think of are Mamelukes, Ghilmans and Janissaries-- and in all those cases they were privileged with high offices , kingmakers, and the mamelukes even created a dynasty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 17:13
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I imagine your problem is that if your plan is to have trained soldiers who are also slaves of a sort that you can still beat and curse, you have just created a really bad situation for your personal long term health. Slaves were probably part of the rear echelon in a lot of cases, possibly beyond mention; they certainly were in the Confederate army, although I imagine there was, ah, attrition. It also depends a lot on how you define "soldier" and "slave." Penal battalions can be notoriously rough and the people there usually aren't doing that poo poo by choice. Meanwhile plenty of armies have used slave labor to do things like build earthworks, sometimes alongside labor battalion soldiers that themselves might get into some interesting definition of labor and their relationship to the people telling them what to do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 17:26
|
|
|
Somewhat related, how does the US square the draft with the 13th Amendment?The 13th Amendment posted:Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 17:32
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Somewhat related, how does the US square the draft with the 13th Amendment? I did a quick search and found that the Supreme Court has ruled on this: quote:There has also been some question raised about the draft in regards to the 13th Amendment. Surely the draft, for at least some, constitutes involuntary servitude, prohibited by the 13th. The only exception the 13th contemplates for slavery or involuntary servitude is as a punishment for a duly convicted crime. However, the courts have ruled that the intent of the 13th was never to abolish the draft, and that serving in the military, even against your will, is not involuntary servitude. These "duties owed to the government" are exempted from 13th Amendment protection. In Butler v Perry (240 US 328 [1916]), the Supreme Court wrote:
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 17:37
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Somewhat related, how does the US square the draft with the 13th Amendment? Robertson v. Baldwin settled that about 40 years after the amendment. That ruling held that contracts of seamen could be enforced as they involved the temporary surrender of personal liberty. It was subsequently extended via a rubric where jobs/situations/etc that traditionally treated as exceptional and outside of normal labor relations. There were a couple of cases in the 1910s that specifically also laid out that duties owned to the government (e.g. jury duty) were also exempt, and a batch of rulings in 1917-18 that very specifically noted the military draft as an exemption. SCOTUS posted:Finally, as we are unable to conceive upon what theory This was reiterated in 1968 by a couple of cases about draft avoidance that were either decided against the plaintiffs or denied cert.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 17:46
|
|
|
I always thought it was really strange the 13A specifically calls out prison labor for protection but not conscription. The authors lived in the middle of a war where widespread conscription was absolutely critical to their side's victory...was that just an oversight, or was there some specific reason it was excluded?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 19:20
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I always thought it was really strange the 13A specifically calls out prison labor for protection but not conscription. The authors lived in the middle of a war where widespread conscription was absolutely critical to their side's victory...was that just an oversight, or was there some specific reason it was excluded? Presumably, back then there were not as many prisoners as in the modern US archipelago Supermax, and of the ones there were how many would be of a suitable age and fitness? Then you get to issues with subordination, and giving guns to known criminals is, well... I think offering pardon or clemency to volunteers would work better anyway. I have no idea if anything like that was done, though. But I recall something like that was done in WW2, as seen in documentary film Dirty Dozen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 19:42
|
|
|
Kinda funny how the Supreme Court decided that the 1st and 13th Amendments didn't apply when the US entered WW1. It seems like a huge chunk of the country really really wanted to go to war, to heck with the Consequence. My Great Grandfather was drafted in like February of 2018 and was discharged in December. I don't know if he even went to basic, though we have a picture of him in his uniform. He did have to stop speaking German though, at least in public.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:
gently caress man, that's rough. I know recruitment and retention's been hard, but jesus. Hopefully he got out without going to Afghanistan? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Kinda funny how the Supreme Court decided that the 1st and 13th Amendments didn't apply when the US entered WW1. We likewise ignored the 3rd Amendment when the US entered WWII. http://volokh.com/2011/10/18/a-historical-violation-of-the-third-amendment/
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 20:08
|
|
|
I was directed via a curated email to this rather trenchant review of The Changing of the Guard: The British Army since 9/11 by Simon Akam and I haven't read it myself so I'll be cautious here, but it does rather seem on the facts that the UK has militarily gotten rather...poo poo. And into the old war crimes stuff. And given the reaction to the book's publication (a generally mild book according to the reviewer), all this will be made to go away and memory-holed within a short time. It's all rather depressing. The reviewer has an argument to bang on about which I won't push here, but I was wondering if anyone has read the book and can comment?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Kinda funny how the Supreme Court decided that the 1st and 13th Amendments didn't apply when the US entered WW1. And how we did internment simply for being the incorrect race in WW2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 21:47
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:gently caress man, that's rough. I know recruitment and retention's been hard, but jesus. Hopefully he got out without going to Afghanistan? Shoot, meant 1918, heh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 22:26
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I always thought it was really strange the 13A specifically calls out prison labor for protection but not conscription. The authors lived in the middle of a war where widespread conscription was absolutely critical to their side's victory...was that just an oversight, or was there some specific reason it was excluded? "Involuntary servitude" is something like a condition of moral submission to a master. It's not the same thing as "involuntary service". Prison labor is degrading in a way that honorable (albeit compulsory) service by a free citizen isn't. That's the theory, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I always thought it was really strange the 13A specifically calls out prison labor for protection but not conscription. The authors lived in the middle of a war where widespread conscription was absolutely critical to their side's victory...was that just an oversight, or was there some specific reason it was excluded? It ended up being a really big deal. https://www.amazon.com/Slavery-Another-Name-Re-Enslavement-Americans/dp/1531885330 A big part of Jim Crow laws was sticking black americans in the south with bullshit crimes so they would be in the prison labour system and then immune to the 13A. All it took was a small infraction such as vagrancy (real or imagined) and they could imprison you and make you 'work of your debt', while charging you for your confinement and food and trial (so you'd never work it off and would die in slavery). In some cases it was worse than chattel slavery, since they could work you to death and then just go out hunting for more guys to arrest for bullshit crimes. I'm not sure if they thought that far ahead when it was it was signed though, or if southern states simply took advantage of the loophole.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
The British reputation for COIN understanding was gained from successfully navigating the Malaysia Emergency and has dogged the US military ever since.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
A Festivus Miracle posted:The British reputation for COIN understanding was gained from successfully navigating the Malaysia Emergency and has dogged the US military ever since. which had some ah, unique aspects for sure. but i think they further that reputation during the Mau-Mau uprising where they ran a lot of the same play book to reasonable success.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2021 00:00
|
|
|
SerCypher posted:It ended up being a really big deal. Note that this is still going on today with the private prison industry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2021 12:29
|
|
|
Anyone heard of stateless displaced people from WW2 working for the Western Allies into the 1980s ? My Dad who was a soldier in the British army in the 1980s said the British Army camps in Germany still had stateless civilian employees who were getting on in years. Described them as tired grey old men which always struck me as quite sad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2021 21:24
|
|
|
What colors did WW1 German Zeppelins come in? Also: blimping is a man's job 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2021 01:04
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:If you don't have any luck here, that sounds to me like something that System Metternich might have posted in the politically-loaded maps thread. God drat good luck finding it all this dude does is talk about vienna
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2021 01:59
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Also: blimping is a man's job Blimpin’ ain’t easy
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2021 02:22
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:God drat good luck finding it all this dude does is talk about vienna Try this post.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2021 03:44
|
|
|
Awwww yeah thank you. Nothing wrong with posting about vienna but man you try sifting through every post that contains it. The pictures are timged!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2021 06:46
|
|
|
You know what, gently caress you! *Aerosans your tank*  
Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Jul 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 03:14
|
|
|
US Air Force to send dozens of F-22 fighter jets to the Pacific amid tensions with China]US Air Force to send dozens of F-22 fighter jets to the Pacific amid tensions with China With the full unfair benefit of hindsight, what would the rough costs have been for keeping the F-22 going and using differing airframes for the various other roles vs what they've actually spent on the F-35 and the like?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:49 |
|
|
Arbite posted:US Air Force to send dozens of F-22 fighter jets to the Pacific amid tensions with China]US Air Force to send dozens of F-22 fighter jets to the Pacific amid tensions with China Not sure this is really the best thread for that discussion, since it's more current events than history. You'd probably be better off asking in the Cold War/Airpower thread in TFR, or the Aeronautical Insanity thread in AI.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 19:16
|
|
