Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

thatbastardken posted:

no link or data but yeah, there are accounts of medieval PTSD - described as having trouble sleeping due to bad dreams or becoming unable to draw a sword, that sort of thing. A lot of knights and samurai later become monks. Industrial war just happens to coincide with the birth of psychology as an organized field of study so the picture we have is substantially clearer.

I think another component to think about is the recent work on literally-physical-blastwave-shock, and the role TBI might be playing for vets today and would have also been a thing for the soldiers who gave us the term 'shellshock.'

There's also the question of the types of war producing different types of stress; for a lot of history wars would have been long nasty campaigns marked by disease (a hazard to be sure) and a few hours -maybe just minutes- of frenetic trauma. Others have a more Charlie behind every tree, a shell on every breeze, IED in every pothole sense of constant dread and fear.

A lot of PTSD problems can also manifest as a problem reintegrating into civilian society, possibly something made worse by the way modern conflicts haven't always made an impression on the home front.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011
Hey Gal, question.

I've been poking at some of the weirder edge cases in the Atlantic world w/r/t military. Mostly European powers using maroons/free blacks/slaves to . You've mentioned before that certain ethnicities were picked out as good light cav, for instance. Do you know much about how they would have been recruited/organized/integrated into the 'regular' armies?

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Cyrano4747 posted:

It helps a LOT that Africa was the cleanest campaign from a public point of view. Yes, there was some lovely things with bedouins wanting to help the Nazis based on some mutual feelings re: Jews, but for the most part it was fought in a loving wasteland away from population centers over purely military objectives.

Wait the what now? Jews had lived in North Africa for basically ever, the enmity didn't really kick off until the whole post-war Israel issue, which was decidedly not a thing in the 1940's.

North African Jews were statistically worse off than the Jews in mainland Italy, which I've seen chalked up to:
1. Libyan Jews were brown.
2. The Italians who picked up and moved to Libya self-selected to be Fascist diehards, generally farther right, and already used to semi-casual warcrimes.
3. The Nazi's were more involved in Libya, relatively. I mean, the Germans also got involved in Italy proper but conditions at that point weren't particularly conducive to Jew hunting.

The swingy nature of the North African front also led to a few seesaws of retaliations against people/tribes who'd sided one way or the other, and of course the initial Italian pacification of Libya, especially Cyrenaica was made possibly through mustard gas attacks against civilians, concentration camps, and machine gunning tribal herds to force the locals to the table.

e: Not trying to be a dick, if you've got a source I'd love to see it.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

feedmegin posted:

That's not entirely true (assuming we're talking about Arab/Israeli issues in general). There was an Arab revolt in the 30s in Palestine, and Jews largely backed the British government against them. Check out

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bloody_Day_in_Jaffa

for example.

Was referring to North Africa in particular.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

OwlFancier posted:

I thought that was tested and a bullet does not have sufficient terminal velocity to kill someone?

Even a little angle and the bullet is going to still have a lot of lateral energy.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

MikeCrotch posted:

something something you shoot them because they have swords! something something

Thank you.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Boiled Water posted:

Despite the maths making it impossible, even if you could drop all the food how would you make sure the secret police didn't confiscate it?

At least partly, because the secret police can't be everywhere.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Fangz posted:

The specific argument I'm making is not that it's not a war crime because the British colonial powers were morally better than Japan, but that the situations are not comparable because the specific traffic that was being intercepted in the Atlantic was different from the traffic that was being intercepted in the Pacific. The latter constituted the proceeds of war crimes and thus can be claimed to be acting to hinder that sort of activity. If the KM was preventing the British from expropriating materials from India, say, that would be more similar.


This, I think, is problem people are having, since the British were 100% pulling a poo poo load from their colonies and what wasn't was poo poo they were paying for by way of second or third order by way of profits made off the colonies. It's not like the KM was trying to save India or anything (I mean, Japan made some lackadaisical efforts for rhetorical reasons) but nor were the allies doing this to save the poor Chinese. They had a chance to intervene before; instead they fell into the war when their own colonies came under attack.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

BattleMoose posted:

My views on WWII naval combat are influenced by my play throughs of this game, versus other humans and of course on what actually happened.

"What advice do you, as the youngest American fighting man ever to win both the Navy Cross and the Silver Star, have for any young Marines on their way to Guadalcanal?"
Shaftoe doesn't have to think very long...
"Just kill the one with the sword first."
"Ah...Smarrrt—you target them because they're the officers, right?"
"No, fuckhead!" Shaftoe yells. "You kill 'em because they've got loving swords! You ever had anyone running at you waving a loving sword?"

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:

thanks for posting the loving dumbest quote of all time

And yet somehow relevant.

Kemper Boyd posted:

I think the Patton quote about fixed fortifications is even dumber considering he ended up breaking his dick over the fortifications at Metz.

Dumber quite possibly, but at least he was a real person.

Hargrimm posted:

There were even earlier diplomatic missions to America (1860) and Europe (1862). One guy who was a member of both (and generally a Renaissance-man type) wrote a pretty interesting autobiography. It's heavier on his experiences in Japan itself, but there are plenty of fun anecdotes. Here's Yukichi with a photographer's daughter in San Francisco, 1860:




My favorite part of that whole story is that the rest of the men on the expedition were all bragging about the American girls they'd met along the way, each tale getting more exaggerated, until partway through the journey home Yukichi (whose only real vice was alcohol, not womanizing) smugs his way up to them and says something along the lines of 'no one will ever believe your stories, but they'll believe me!' and slaps down the photo.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011
All I'm saying is the Kessel Run is a terrible metric to actually judge a war fighting starship.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011
I remember getting really shirty with some people in here who were convinced that Civilization was a great way to learn about history.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

JcDent posted:

How desperate must you be to go into WWII minefields in search of explosives?

When I was doing my undergrad research on post-WWII Libya I came across instances of folks scrounging for scrap metal by collecting shells, tossing them on campfires, and booking it.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

It's really not that bad. Sure, some teachers are going to be poo poo but the test itself is more or less accurate. That's the whole point; it's a standardized test that doesn't vary in quality despite the vagaries of the American education system.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

PittTheElder posted:

Fun fact: if you owned 20 slaves, you were exempt from the draft for some reason!

Ah, but you see, without someone there supervising, the slaves would get out of control!



(The North also let rich people buy out of the draft.)

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Slim Jim Pickens posted:

Rommel was always a complicit member of the party, and besides the inevitable sort of atrocities that in combat come up to, the Afrika Korps also turned a blind eye to Einsatzkommando activity and the destruction of the Libyan and Tunisian Jewish population.

Also, the 'partisans' and other troublesome locals in Libya and Vichy Algeria had been pre-atrocitied in the earlier, colonial phases so...

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Libluini posted:

This reminds me, while I heard about the destruction of Europe's Jews over and over again in school, the destruction of Libyan and Tunisian Jews was never mentioned, not even in passing. Is there anything I can read about what happened to them? They aren't even mentioned in the WWII-documentaries I watched.

(I wasn't even aware that there were enough Jews in North Africa to make sending Einsatzkommandos a worthwile activity for the Nazis.)

I'll try to see what I can dig up. Part of it is that the Blackshirts et.al. didn't really make anti-semitism a big part of their ideology until Hitler they started sucking up to Hitler. That said, Libyan Jews were more at risk than Jews in Italy, for a couple of reasons. I'll try to find the article about it, but the author there had it pegged to a combination of things: Italian settlers (broadly) self-selected for fascist dickhole-ism, Italian colonial infrastructure was already set up in a way to divide colonist/colonized, racism (Libyan Jews looked North African, Italian Jews didn't?), more direct and sustained German influence, and the swingy back and forth nature of the front lines led to a bit of retaliation against local populations that had helped/celebrated when the Allies had the upper hand.

Most of the surviving communities bailed for Israel once the whole Pan-Arab nationalism thing fired up.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Nebakenezzer posted:

OK, I've a Thirty Years War question.

I've gotten to the defenestration of Prague, and the first revolt of Palentine (or was it the Bavarians?) My take on this is that religious tensions, specifically, a belief that the apocalypse was nigh and that the Catholic church was evil among the protestant aristocrats ruling Palentine and made them ready for war. While the Holy Roman Empire was doing its whole "chill, dudes" via talking poo poo out and forming byzantine committee structures and such, people who thought "talk is pointless, let's get this poo poo started" threw some imperial dudes out a window.

The Current emperor, Matthas, was old and useless, and his successor, Leopold may have been connected with the "FULL CATHOLICISM NOW" faction. So far war is 1) people raising troops and 2) burning a plundering poo poo for supplies. There has been a siege at (involved with beer, Pilsen?) which ended in victory for the rebels. Meanwhile, Cardinal Klesl (sp?) who up until this point has been acting as a hand of the king for Matthas, is fired for this failure of governance. (Or maybe "governance"; the political actions in the Holy Roman Empire are almost completely opaque to me.) Klsel finds out he is fired when all of his considerable, super-expensive poo poo is stolen from him by the Emperor to fund troops. [Later the Empire gives him a retirement package, which is decent of them.]

Anyway, my question is: do the rebels at this point have any sort of end-goal in mind? Independence? A Kingdom of God's true religion? FULL PROTESTANTISM NOW for the empire?

Mostly being angry and having their concerns heard. Wars, esp. in the HRE before (and after) this are as much about acquiring a negotiating position as enforcing your will. Raising your armies and kicking up a fuss was abit like serving legal papers. It'd be wrong to call the Holy Roman Empire a constitutional monarchy but there was a (ever shifting) code of w/r/t rights and duties of the princes and the emperor and who got to say what about who where etc. etc.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

ArchangeI posted:

Could you elaborate on this? My only knowledge of financial oddities in the US is the CSA's weird fetish for harbor fees as a source of national income.

The revolution largely ran on printing promissory notes and IOU's. Rampant inflation ensued. One of the first big Hamiltonian moments was his promise to actually make good on those bits of paper, which helped establish America's good credit in the world. On the other hand, all his buddies rather suspiciously bought up 'worthless' bits of paper at well before face value right before he did this.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

TropicalCoke posted:

Going to Japan in June. What should I check out around Tokyo Kyoto and Kobe? Himejji is already on my list but I don't know if any good museums are around.

Matsumoto is a pleasant little town with a really cool, mostly intact Tokugawa era castle. Kawagoe is outside of Tokyo sometimes called "little edo" cause they've got a bunch of old school buildings still there. The Edo Museum is great, as is the Hiroshima museum, in its own way. VERY sobering.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Phi230 posted:

My personal favorite is the disgraced Prussian communist Union General who essentially led a Prussian unit into battle (9th Ohio "Die Neuner" and later the "First German" 32nd Indiana)

A proponent of proto-motorized infantry even! Though his request for wagon-borne troops was denied.

I'm loosely related to a buddy of his (Hecker) and have a tobacco case of his with a bullet hole.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011
The effort of finding an image hosting site seemed like a lot to me but I did some googling and...

it's there.

Though, going by that citation it should be in a museum.

Ummm...

Maybe Granny had some lightfingers?



White stuff inside is some paper of his? Super crumbly and fragile, I don't want to gently caress with it until I can actually get a real archive to not gently caress it up?

the JJ fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Apr 21, 2017

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

MikeCrotch posted:

The key things to remember about the Haitain revolution compared to the situation in the Southern states was:

1. Haiti was 90% slave/10% free, compared to around 50/50 for the Southern states
2. Haiti had both a major slave population and a mixed race middle class with access to money and education, which didn't have an equivalent in the South
3. Haiti was an ocean away from its controlling country, meaning there was a major time delay between events getting worse in Haiti and reinforcements/new orders arriving
4. There was a mountainous border region between Haiti and the Dominican Republic where slave soldiers could hang out and evade detection

IIRC Haiti was the only successful slave revolt in history, so clearly a lot of things have be set up in order to allow one to succeed. Not that that makes slave revolutions much different from regular revolutions.

You also had a long confused period at the start while the revolution was going on in France and no one was quite sure how to interpret this whole 'fraternity' business and quite how far that extended. It was a complete mess, down to African/African descended folks aligning with the royalists, a separate uprising over attempts by the National Assembly to allow freed blacks the right to vote and subsequent refusal by the colonial governor to acquiesce, and further nonsense.

You did have plenty of slave revolts that ended in arms, plenty of Maroon communities existed where the terrain allowed it.

I think we are also underplaying quite a bit of how radical the period of "radical" reconstruction really was.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Phobophilia posted:

in summary, this is a silly question like who would win, samurai vs legionaries, when it comes down to a myriad of factors decided before and outside the battle

































(legionaries would win, just from the discipline and professionalism alone)

Samurai fight with pike and shot, as God intended.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Hazzard posted:

I've just remembered some navy people telling me that they practise holding the gun both ways, but they would only do it the right handed way when the Drill Sergeant watches, because that's the only one they're meant to practise.

Would said escaped slaves have assimilated into the Native American communities? Joining Warrior Societies in the case of Plains Indians and the equivalent across the different nations?

Maroon communities sometimes mixed with native ones, yes.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011
It's pretty well attested to in contemporary letters home and the like, and survivors commentaries afterward. I think it's good to be suspicious of Lost Cause historiography, but generally that suits going to happen on the level of interpretation, not fabrication, if that makes sense.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/videos/category/history/what-did-the-rebel-yell-sound-like/

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Grenrow posted:

But I am talking about interpretation, not fabrication. Interpreting "soldiers doing a war cry to get hyped up and scare the enemy as they move forward" as some kind of distinctive Southern tradition is taking a common military thing and turning it into something so unique people are speculating about whether they got it from the Jacobites. Most of these sources I'm looking at about it are from people decades after the fact. It seems like any times Southern soldiers ever shouted, cheered, or whooped, it gets elevated and described as "The Rebel Yell," which is supposedly a singular tradition that was known and performed all across the disparate regions that made up the Confederacy. Again, I'm not trying to argue that there were no Southern war cries or that you can't find civil war accounts of Union troops saying "we were scared when the enemy was yelling at us." But these sources alleging that it's this completely unique thing are all looking like poo poo written or recorded decades after the fact. That video you posted is from the 1930s. Those guys are at least in their seventies by the time this video was made.

Looking at some of the guys on the wikipedia page about it is pretty hilarious. They have some dude named S. Waite Rawls from a Confederate museum talking about it, who has this to say about the Confederacy.



Who could have imagined that the Confederate south might be linked to racism? What a crazy recent phenomenon! This is definitely a guy to trust when talking about Confederate history.

I think it's less some historical southernism, more some thing the soldiers started doing? Like, marines say hoah or Oprah or whatever gently caress, Japanese martial arts guys go oss, hoplites had the paean. They weren't born with that but they could learn it in training or more likely when the regiment next on the line starts up. It's important to note that the civil war did see a fair few charges, especially early on. Well before you've got lost cause poo poo going you've got union soldiers making fun of that thing the rebs do.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Disinterested posted:

Very short version:

Marxism gave everyone in every social sciences materialism and they decided to turn that in to a hard orthodoxy that nobody does anything for ideological reasons.

Thank god some one dug up Gramsci and now there's a way to talk about that in a Marxist framework. A sort of Cultural Marxism if you will. It's a global phenomenon.

I think it's pretty great that the genius for that was Gramsci sitting in a jail cell going "... so what did we miss?"

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Gnoman posted:

I've read in multiple sources that the British did the exact same thing with 75mm ammunition in Africa.

Soon after the M3 showed up, the initial batch of US 75mm AP ammunition supplied with the tanks proved defective (breaking up on impact), but the British had a large quantity of captured German 75mm ammunition. Unfortunately, the drive bands on the German shells didn't fit the rifling on American guns (this is probably the same for the 105mm ammunition mentioned, rather than the implied conversion error), so they had to modify the shells on a lathe before mating them to an American case. This was considered safe because the lathe didn't turn fast enough to arm the fuse.

Even after properly working American rounds were provided, the remaining converted German shells were popular among crews. The American ammunition was solid core, while the German AP ammo had an explosive filler - since both types would penetrate a German tank easily, the explosive-filled shells were a straight boost in effectiveness.

When I was working on my thesis I came across tales of post war Libyans collecting scrap metal left over from the war. Once the easy stuff ran out they started chucking UXO onto fires, running away, and picking up the fragments.

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Alchenar posted:

Why arabs lose wars. Good read, makes generalisations but is self aware and cautionary when it does so, and from what I've heard from people closer to the issue pretty close to being on point.


e: you can't just say it's down to the internal politics of dictatorships, especially as we're talking about a failure to implement Soviet armed forces doctrine.

This article is pretty poo poo btw

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

the JJ
Mar 31, 2011

Vincent Van Goatse posted:

God forbid you elaborate on this.

Sorry. Phone posting but the article has come up before. It's Orientalist poo poo. The Egyptians were successful in using deception to cross the Suez because their culture is subtle and indirect. It's Jordan Peterson style faux academics wrapping a stupid package.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5