|
Military History II - War. War never changes.
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Nthing A/T but jeez you guys are making much ado about nothing, D&D is a wordier old GBS and there's only two Stalin apologists who are balanced out by the one or two nazis there  !
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 00:07
|
|
|
Military History Thread 2: Tank Destroyers more like Thread Destroyers
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Nthing A/T but jeez you guys are making much ado about nothing, D&D is a wordier old GBS...
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
I calls 'em like I see 'em 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
IF you post the thread in DnD so help me god I will personally call up every forgotten lf superstar from their crummy offsites and fill the thread with so much stalinism you'll beg for tank-destroyer chat. I'll bring Grumblefish too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Nthing A/T but jeez you guys are making much ado about nothing, D&D is a wordier old GBS and there's only two Stalin apologists who are balanced out by the one or two nazis there At this point it's not so much "I support Stalin" as much as "Stalin was a bad guy, but (supports literally everything Stalin did)" so a little better but still unbearable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
Military History Thread 2: Bears at War
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 03:36
|
|
|
Definitely keep it in A\T, DnD is more for political and economic questions of history, for which they have their own threads which link to this one when people want to go deep into military discussion (usually about the nukes and their god-forsaken discussions). GBS would fill this tread with so much Wojtek that it would eventually turn Hegel and Rodrigo into grizly bears. I wonder what you guys think of this article. I never heard about the passive side of World War One and the silent agreemnts from both sides to lull the hostilities unless the leadership came down hard on the lines. Interesting read. http://libcom.org/history/why-blackadder-goes-forth%E2%80%99-could-have-been-lot-funnier OctaviusBeaver posted:At this point it's not so much "I support Stalin" as much as "Stalin was a bad guy, but (supports literally everything Stalin did)" so a little better but still unbearable. Other than SSJ Goku and Poidinger at times there's not much Stalinism going on in DnD. There's a lot of "But anyone else wouldn't do better!" which is both dumb and unprovable although i do admit i find it really unberiable when it shows up (i'm so sorry)
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
If you don't want me to bring the full power of the Soviets down on your heads you better shut up about Stalin right this instant  edit: I swear to god I'll buy babyfinland another account. Getfiscal too
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 04:43
|
|
|
Military History: Lionhearts, Hellcats, and Bears, Oh My!
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 04:49
|
|
|
Mans posted:Other than SSJ Goku and Poidinger at times there's not much Stalinism going on in DnD. There's a lot of "But anyone else wouldn't do better!" which is both dumb and unprovable although i do admit i find it really untrotskyable when it shows up Seriously, the wrong guy ended up in charge of the USSR.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 06:27
|
|
|
Yes Zombie Lenin forever 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 06:29
|
|
|
Hey don't hurry me, I'm not stallin' I'm russin'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 06:44
|
|
|
Rushin'? I'm so far past rushin' I'm Polish!
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 06:45
|
|
|
I'm so very sorry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 06:49
|
|
|
+1 to A/T. Is the new OP going to have a book recommendation list? People pop in pretty frequently to ask about that so an organized list might be helpful. I'll add a couple books I've read recently (mostly because y'all said they were good) if there is a list planned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 07:38
|
|
|
This is a bit of a stretch but is anyone here familiar with Hildegard von Bingen? I'm working on a script about feminism and the history of the movement and would like to work her in if it makes sense. She's one of the few women writers of medieval Europe so I kinda hope she can have a place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 08:10
|
|
|
I'd like the new thread to stay in Ask/Tell as well!
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 08:10
|
|
|
I also advocate keeping this thread in A/T. I have a question, this is more for Rodrigo Diaz but if anyone knows feel free. About the People's Crusade, were they real? I mean as in did they exist as the popular imagination goes. The whole "peasants so taken by Peter the Hermit preaching lets all go to the Holy Land etc." The way I understood peasants (are they the same as serfs?) was that they were tied to the land their lord owned. So how would they just pull up stakes and follow some charismatic preacher like described? In addition what about food and other sundries for the journey? I thought peasants were, well poor so did they just "forage" like knights the whole way to Constantinople?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
Military History: Nothing But The 20th Century Forever, As Far As The Eye Can See Edit: Grand Prize Winner posted:This is a bit of a stretch but is anyone here familiar with Hildegard von Bingen? I'm working on a script about feminism and the history of the movement and would like to work her in if it makes sense. She's one of the few women writers of medieval Europe so I kinda hope she can have a place. You may have meant to put this in the medieval history thread, but I can take a crack at helping you out if you want.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 10:19
|
|
|
Let's just have a PYF uniform thread and be done with it
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 10:24
|
|
|
Ghost of Mussolini posted:Let's just have a PYF uniform thread and be done with it
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 10:47
|
|
|
Military History Thread 2: The Kaiser strikes backa travelling HEGEL posted:I posted about my visit to Festung Dresden in poo poo, I completely forgot about your visit to the fortress. Somehow I have to make time for a visit someday. It's a travesty that I live only a few train hours from Dresden but never knew about it. And how exactly do you harness MRAs for the Left? Burning them as fuel? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 10:50
|
|
and it was quite well received.
|
NarcoPolo posted:The way I understood peasants (are they the same as serfs?) was that they were tied to the land their lord owned. So how would they just pull up stakes and follow some charismatic preacher like described? In addition what about food and other sundries for the journey? I thought peasants were, well poor so did they just "forage" like knights the whole way to Constantinople? The answer here is that you shouldn't think of medieval or early modern society in the same terms as modern society. A feudal lord would have little recourse in a situation like that, because say if you have something like 50 dudes who decide to gently caress off for some reason or another, what are you going to do about it? It's not like you can have the Medieval Police arrest them and if they leave your turf, good luck going after them unless whoever is in charge there allows you to do so. Unless the solution is applying a bunch of violence fast against a concentrated target, you're kind of hosed because you only have so many guys (your household retainers) around to do stuff, no central authority to back you up and so on. Revolts tended to get the lords on the same side but other stuff, not always. For instance, during famines, if a local lord didn't have grain to dole out to peasants (some did keep a stash for lean years), serfs would start leaving, despite not being legally allowed to so so. The post-Black Death period was in many regions, for instance England, characterized by serfs demanding better treatment and less duties and frequently they got those because there was a shortage of labor. And about poverty and such, it's worth remembering that not all serfs were poor. I've seen a few mentions of serfs being near equal in wealth to their lords.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 10:51
|
|
|
Libluini posted:poo poo, I completely forgot about your visit to the fortress. Somehow I have to make time for a visit someday. It's a travesty that I live only a few train hours from Dresden but never knew about it. quote:And how exactly do you harness MRAs for the Left? Burning them as fuel?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 10:59
|
|
|
The Kids Aren't All Reich
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 11:28
|
|
|
Military History Thread 2: Parrotroopers
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
Military History Thread 2: Lest We Wojtek
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 15:59
|
|
|
Lets talk logistics!  To me the concept seems simple enough. You have an standing army to defend your borders, and its deployed along various forts internally (strategic depth) or at the border somewhere (to deter raiders and provide early warning). So all these forts need food, the forts that are fortunate enough to be build in good farming country are probably there to get a head start as an 'armed settlement' anyways. So you, the 'state' or Crown or Merchant Lord Republic thingy pays the wheat/salt/salted fish/beef/etc brokers to buy that month's quota of food from the various food producers and gather them in some sort of state/crown owned depot; here the food is loaded onto wagons and then sent to whichever fort based on some sort of schedule. Should you need to gather up around 20,000 dudes to go cross the imaginary line that marks your border so you can move those border marking stones over a few dozen or hundred miles further in and they might be campaigning for an extended period of time? Then those aforementioned forts need *more* food to be stored and loaded up on wagons operating in a 'train' that follow along the army, probably under armed escort. The general idea is that wherever the army is, it should have a constant trickle of wagons to keep the army freshly supplied with healthy food, medicine, reinforcements, equipment etc. You could have the army forage in enemy territory, and no doubt the soldiers themselves will do this for fresh beef or fowl; but lets suppose your sufficiently civilized that you feel (like the British in the Sharpe novels) this infringes on discipline so you frown on it. So all of this implies at a minimum, a bureaucracy to manage the list of forts and the schedules for their replenishment. A developed enough economy with its own bourgeoisie who provides non-producers like "brokers" who can get stuff in bulk for the State. As well as a system of taxation with civil servants to collect, spend and invest the State's monies because standing armies from the beginning of time and particularly Warring States China are expensive. Why did I post this? Well I had an idea of a story where you had this "Republic" that's been constantly expanding while surrounded by oodles of land and people who hate the Republic's guts for their expansion and very strongly resemble Wildlings from ASOIAF (I thought of this before I read GOT) but are more "feudal" (Kings, Lord, etc) than the more classical/renaissance Roman-ish "Republic". The procedure that regularly happens is that some local military commander in a 'security zone' decides to take some land and settle it with his men after expelling the locals (who aren't citizens so...) this causes reprisals (wars, invasions, etc) so the Republic is forced to legitimize what the local commander illegally did, sends in the regular Army in force, annexes the land and sets up a new security zone legally administered by the local kingdom but aren't allowed to have troops in (This might sound familiar to some people, yes, that's deliberate). All of this involves the above logistics, the Republic regularly supplies its men and resembles a mixture of Rome and a Wellington model army. Though one dude I explained this too thought this was unrealistic (armies aren't large enough to need dedicated logistics network, would just forage off the land, etc), is it unrealistic or is it something that could've been plausibly developed in a fictional setting? I describe part of the background in case it provides context or something. To me though, it (logistics) doesn't sound dissimilar to how the Qin managed things or how Sun Tzu described how war worked in his time so I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
Any army that wishes to project force will need logistical networks to survive. You think the Romans built the roads for trade?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Look at the Persian satrapy system for another good example of military logistics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Any army that wishes to project force will need logistical networks to survive. I think the counter argument from the person in question, was that the state I described didn't seem large enough, nor its actual armies to justify that level of development/organization. The garrison state in question was about the size of Belarus surrounded by a rather hostile continent the size of Europe with it in the middle. Though I haven't gotten around yet to figure out good looking population numbers aside from "Republic is outnumbered so its policies are inherently unsustainable".
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I think the counter argument from the person in question, was that the state I described didn't seem large enough, nor its actual armies to justify that level of development/organization. The garrison state in question was about the size of Belarus surrounded by a rather hostile continent the size of Europe with it in the middle. Make it a breadbasket land, very fertile, with reliable glacier-melt in the summers for fresh water. Surround it by mountains, but have the gaps be easy to cross in the summer. Now it can feed buttloads of people reliably and you've given them a good reason to project force: the land they live on is some of the best around. If they didn't push out, everyone else would push in. Add in a long history of proto-nationalism among the ruling elite, now on the decline due to a long period without an outside threat, and you're golden. VanSandman fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Nov 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Also, prepare lots of spices and salt. And don't live off the land if you can help it.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
There is really only so much you can forage. If you are sieging fortified places - and in the setting you describe, most larger settlements would have at least some fortifications, if only to keep the cattle from wandering around at night - you need regular resupply. However, if you think
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
For a Feudal power, if a local lord thinks he can go off and declare war and gain lands and power for himself, this is a gigantic loving threat to the state. It is a threat too to all the local neighbours of that lord. A state would have to be spectacularly weak to legitimise such a move, and the nation would itself break itself up pretty fast. Historically with colonial powers this took place because the lands gained were very far away, but still that tension existed. In Roman times this led more or less directly to the end of the Republic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:Come with me, we could make it a day trip and try to find a restaurant in the Altstadt that isn't a tourist nightmare. There are none. You know what, that's actually a good idea! I send you an email, but please don't laugh too hard about how geographically impaired I turned out to be. quote:You cater to their white male rage and tenderly discuss their opinions as though they were worthy of anything but derision, since feminism has already won and we live in a matriarchy now. Now this is something I simply couldn't do. I could try to be nice, but for someone who once in their childhood was send out of the classroom because of his "demoralizing comments" I can only see it end badly. Luckily I tend to be a lot nicer on the internet then in real life, so at least I won't throw books at them! (Because I can't.) Back to content: Fangz posted:For a Feudal power, if a local lord thinks he can go off and declare war and gain lands and power for himself, this is a gigantic loving threat to the state. It is a threat too to all the local neighbours of that lord. A state would have to be spectacularly weak to legitimise such a move, and the nation would itself break itself up pretty fast. Historically with colonial powers this took place because the lands gained were very far away, but still that tension existed. In Roman times this led more or less directly to the end of the Republic. I think this is the reason why the old emperors/kings of the Holy Roman Empire had no set capital and instead moved around to give every part of their realm equal attention. Also it explains the old "Landfrieden" which explicitly forbid German lords from waging war against each other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
Military History Thread 2: Hitler liked big tanks and I cannot lie. Also America dropped a bear named Wojtek on Hiroshima.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Fangz posted:For a Feudal power, if a local lord thinks he can go off and declare war and gain lands and power for himself, this is a gigantic loving threat to the state. It is a threat too to all the local neighbours of that lord. A state would have to be spectacularly weak to legitimise such a move, and the nation would itself break itself up pretty fast. Historically with colonial powers this took place because the lands gained were very far away, but still that tension existed. In Roman times this led more or less directly to the end of the Republic. I wanted this to be analogous to some combination of the Mukden Incident and that period of time that had Caesar and iirc other Generals doing their thing in Gaul and elsewhere, if by end of the republic you mean the civil wars where Augustus took over yes, that's a deliberate parallel. It's probably a superficial comparison but it is what I got.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 19:29
|
|