If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   You may think you've heard of tough battles, but try 11 Victoria Crosses awarded to members of 150 man force. Oh, and a forgotten man of that force has now been found   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 137
    More: Hero, Zulu, Battle of Rorke's Drift, Characters of Halo, bravery, reenactments, Queen Victoria  
•       •       •

13064 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Apr 2013 at 9:11 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



137 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-05 10:43:45 AM  
"Private David Jenkins was among the 150 soldiers white usurpers who fought Zulus in their own land, in the imperialistic establishment of the small South African "missionary" (read: challenge to the Dutch) outpost in 1879..."

FTFT
 
2013-04-05 10:44:28 AM  
Come tell us how you slew
Those brave Arabs two by two
Like the Zulus they had spears and bows and arrows,
How you bravely slew each one
With your sixteen pounder gun
And you frightened them poor natives to their marrow.
 
2013-04-05 10:45:29 AM  
Shoot straight, you bastards!
 
2013-04-05 10:45:50 AM  

RichieLaw: Ah, the bravery of colonial imperialism. I miss those days.


Skirt? Ha! If only. When I joined up we were still fighting colonial wars. If you saw someone in a skirt you shot him and nicked his country.
 
2013-04-05 10:50:04 AM  

MCStymie: You'd turn it off when I was halfway across: Because we're here, lad. Nobody else. Just us

/... and a bayonet, sir, with some guts behind it.

Colour-Sergeant Bourne was just AWESOME.


In real life, he wasn't the mature, experienced soldier you see in the movie:  He was still a couple months shy of his 25th birthday.  He'd been in the army for about 5 or 6 years at that point.

He was, however, the youngest Colour Sergeant in the British Army at the time.
 
2013-04-05 10:50:13 AM  

JackieRabbit: "Private David Jenkins was among the 150 soldiers white usurpers who fought Zulus in their own land, in the imperialistic establishment of the small South African "missionary" (read: challenge to the Dutch) outpost in 1879..."


Well, the Zulu should have had a flag
 
2013-04-05 10:50:20 AM  

GoldDude: That was a truly brutal war.
My great-grandad lost a leg in that battle.
Some question as to whether it was from a mosquito or a tiger...

[i125.photobucket.com image 636x438]


A tiger?  In africa?
 
2013-04-05 10:52:35 AM  
On the "mad minute" using the Lee-Enfield rifle:

When WWI broke out, the small British Expeditionary Force was sent to France to assist the French and Belgians. The German Kaiser supposedly referred to the BEF as "a contemptible little army", so the cheeky soldiers adopted it as their own and called themselves "The Old Contemptibles". With both the French and Belgians in retreat early in the war, the Old Contemptibles were thrown into the breech to halt the German advance.

At Mons, eight batallions of German infantry crashed into two batallions of the BEF. The Mad Minute began. One German officer described it: "Well entrenched and completely hidden, the enemy opened a murderous fire...the casualties increased...the rushes became shorter, and finally the whole advance stopped...with bloody losses, the attack gradually came to an end."

Private Smiley of the Gordon Highlanders described the British end of things. "Poor devils! They advanced in companies of quite 150 men in files five deep, and our rifle has a flat trajectory up to 600 yards. Guess the result. We could steady our rifles on the trench and take deliberate aim. The first company was mown down by a volley at 700 yards, and in their insane formation every bullet was almost sure to find two billets. The other companies kept advancing very slowly, using their dead comrades as cover, but they had absolutely no chance."

At Mons and then again at the First Battle of Ypres, often against overwhelming odds, the Old Contemptibles ground the German advance down with their rifles. Near Oburg, a few companies of the BEF stopped an entire German regiment, and were froced to retire only when two additioin regiments attacked them. When the flanks (not held by British forces) caved in, 2nd Battalion of the Royal Munster Fusiliers covered the retreat. This single batallion, although nearly decimated itself, held the line against nine enemy batallions.

In an after-action report, one Prussian officer estimated that the British had at least 28 machine guns per batallion. In reality, they had only TWO machine guns per batallion. All that firepower came from bolt-action rifles in the hands of men well-trained in their use.
 
2013-04-05 10:57:05 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: Listen. For sheer bravery you cannot top air-conditioned B-29s flying low-level, facing virtually no effective anti-aircraft measures, dropping thousands upon thousands of incendiaries on civilians WHO LIVE IN WOODEN HOUSES.  Roasting 100,000 civilians in one night is a mighty brave and heroic deed.

Then LeMay got effiecient and started dropping one bomb at a time. Twice.

/amidoinitrite


I detect no inaccuracies in your post.  But you omitted the fact that he had to rush them into use before the war ended so he could see first hand what it did to a real city, and that the Japanese thought it was just another napalming.
 
2013-04-05 10:57:21 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: On the "mad minute" using the Lee-Enfield rifle:

When WWI broke out, the small British Expeditionary Force was sent to France to assist the French and Belgians. The German Kaiser supposedly referred to the BEF as "a contemptible little army", so the cheeky soldiers adopted it as their own and called themselves "The Old Contemptibles". With both the French and Belgians in retreat early in the war, the Old Contemptibles were thrown into the breech to halt the German advance.

At Mons, eight batallions of German infantry crashed into two batallions of the BEF. The Mad Minute began. One German officer described it: "Well entrenched and completely hidden, the enemy opened a murderous fire...the casualties increased...the rushes became shorter, and finally the whole advance stopped...with bloody losses, the attack gradually came to an end."

Private Smiley of the Gordon Highlanders described the British end of things. "Poor devils! They advanced in companies of quite 150 men in files five deep, and our rifle has a flat trajectory up to 600 yards. Guess the result. We could steady our rifles on the trench and take deliberate aim. The first company was mown down by a volley at 700 yards, and in their insane formation every bullet was almost sure to find two billets. The other companies kept advancing very slowly, using their dead comrades as cover, but they had absolutely no chance."

At Mons and then again at the First Battle of Ypres, often against overwhelming odds, the Old Contemptibles ground the German advance down with their rifles. Near Oburg, a few companies of the BEF stopped an entire German regiment, and were froced to retire only when two additioin regiments attacked them. When the flanks (not held by British forces) caved in, 2nd Battalion of the Royal Munster Fusiliers covered the retreat. This single batallion, although nearly decimated itself, held the line against nine enemy batallions.

In an after-action report, one Prussian officer estimated that the British had at least 28 machine guns per batallion. In reality, they had only TWO machine guns per batallion. All that firepower came from bolt-action rifles in the hands of men well-trained in their use.


This gleeful description of the deaths of thousands of individuals was chilling.
 
2013-04-05 10:59:26 AM  

dittybopper: MCStymie: You'd turn it off when I was halfway across: Because we're here, lad. Nobody else. Just us

/... and a bayonet, sir, with some guts behind it.

Colour-Sergeant Bourne was just AWESOME.

In real life, he wasn't the mature, experienced soldier you see in the movie:  He was still a couple months shy of his 25th birthday.  He'd been in the army for about 5 or 6 years at that point.

He was, however, the youngest Colour Sergeant in the British Army at the time.


He was also the last survivor, dying in 1946, I believe. The BBC had him on radio in the 1930s describing the battle but, like the old Dr. Who episodes, they destroyed it thinking nobody would ever want to listen to it.

Fun fact: Many of the men at Rorke's Drift had what we can now see as PTSD. Bromhead in particular never spoke about the battle, never wrote anything about it and even missed his visit to the Palace because, frankly, he didn't want to discuss it. One of the VC winners (or DSC) blew his head off in the 1890s. Another, William Jones I believe, would have episodes in the early 20th century where he would take his grandchildren and protect them from the Zulus he saw in his head.
 
2013-04-05 11:01:40 AM  

RichieLaw: This gleeful description of the deaths of thousands of individuals was chilling


Even more chilling is that senior commanders could see perfectly well that mass assaults on entrenched positions accomplished nothing more than killing lots and lots of their soldiers, and yet it still took them years to change tactics.  The governments at the time had to hide the casualty figures from the general public because they were so shocking.
 
2013-04-05 11:02:08 AM  

RichieLaw: This gleeful description of the deaths of thousands of individuals was chilling.


Why?  I mean, if you *HAVE* to kill someone, shouldn't you be cheerful about it?  After all, you're ending their life.  In all likelihood, you're the last thing that person is going to see.  Why should they go out on a somber note?  Wouldn't you rather die bemused, or, in fact, even chuckling or guffawing, then in sadness, fear, or abject terror?  I know I would.
 
2013-04-05 11:03:56 AM  

JackieRabbit: "Private David Jenkins was among the 150 soldiers white usurpers who fought Zulus in their own land, in the imperialistic establishment of the small South African "missionary" (read: challenge to the Dutch) outpost in 1879..."

FTFT


Sounds very much like Texas and the Alamo.
 
2013-04-05 11:04:05 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: On the "mad minute" using the Lee-Enfield rifle:

When WWI broke out, the small British Expeditionary Force was sent to France to assist the French and Belgians. The German Kaiser supposedly referred to the BEF as "a contemptible little army", so the cheeky soldiers adopted it as their own and called themselves "The Old Contemptibles". With both the French and Belgians in retreat early in the war, the Old Contemptibles were thrown into the breech to halt the German advance.

At Mons, eight batallions of German infantry crashed into two batallions of the BEF. The Mad Minute began. One German officer described it: "Well entrenched and completely hidden, the enemy opened a murderous fire...the casualties increased...the rushes became shorter, and finally the whole advance stopped...with bloody losses, the attack gradually came to an end."

Private Smiley of the Gordon Highlanders described the British end of things. "Poor devils! They advanced in companies of quite 150 men in files five deep, and our rifle has a flat trajectory up to 600 yards. Guess the result. We could steady our rifles on the trench and take deliberate aim. The first company was mown down by a volley at 700 yards, and in their insane formation every bullet was almost sure to find two billets. The other companies kept advancing very slowly, using their dead comrades as cover, but they had absolutely no chance."

At Mons and then again at the First Battle of Ypres, often against overwhelming odds, the Old Contemptibles ground the German advance down with their rifles. Near Oburg, a few companies of the BEF stopped an entire German regiment, and were froced to retire only when two additioin regiments attacked them. When the flanks (not held by British forces) caved in, 2nd Battalion of the Royal Munster Fusiliers covered the retreat. This single batallion, although nearly decimated itself, held the line against nine enemy batallions.

In an after-action report, one Prussian officer estimated that the B ...


Musketry was emphasized in the pre-WWI British army to an extent that even most modern armies can only dream of. Reading the accounts of the defenders of Rorke's Drift puts this into perspective, and Isandlwana as well. The regular British troops were very steady, very good shots at ranges at 500 yards and beyond. This paid off at both battles, but only at Rorke's Drift did it help win the day. The Zulus had lots and lots of muzzleloaders but were generally poor shots. Except for the Commander at Rorke's Drift and his entourage. They had been taught to shoot by a British trader named John Dunn and were taking shots at small targets at extreme range and hitting. Most of the garrison was impressed by this.
 
2013-04-05 11:04:52 AM  

trotsky: He was also the last survivor, dying in 1946, I believe. The BBC had him on radio in the 1930s describing the battle but, like the old Dr. Who episodes, they destroyed it thinking nobody would ever want to listen to it.


Someone had the foresight to transcribe it, thankfully.
 
2013-04-05 11:07:59 AM  
Boering.
 
2013-04-05 11:09:45 AM  

vygramul: stuhayes2010: It's hard for me to use the word Hero for invading imperial forces killing native Zulus.

The funny thing is that most leadership of most nations/cultures/tribes/whathaveyou are a bunch of farkwads who did ugly things to their fellow people to become their leadership. I don't respect any of them.


That's why I live in an anarcho-syndicalist commune.  We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. All the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting, by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more serious matters.
 
2013-04-05 11:17:42 AM  
Just because a war was wrong doesn't mean the men fighting in it weren't heroic.

The real lesson from the Battle of Rorke's Drift is how important military technology is. It wasn't just that the British firearms were superior to the Zulu muskets and spears, but it was also the technology of the fortifications the British built. Shooting from a loophole seems obvious to us, but the Zulu didn't realize how devastating it would be.

Rorke's Drift was also very significant because of the propaganda it provided for the British after the defeat at Isandlwana.
 
2013-04-05 11:18:33 AM  
Zulus... Thousands of ' em...
 
2013-04-05 11:19:25 AM  
Permission to speak, Sir!

They don't like it up 'em...
 
2013-04-05 11:24:33 AM  
dittybopper:  bemused, or, in fact, even chuckling or guffawing, then in sadness, fear, or abject terror?  I know I would.

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-04-05 11:28:40 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: TheShavingofOccam123: Listen. For sheer bravery you cannot top air-conditioned B-29s flying low-level, facing virtually no effective anti-aircraft measures, dropping thousands upon thousands of incendiaries on civilians WHO LIVE IN WOODEN HOUSES.  Roasting 100,000 civilians in one night is a mighty brave and heroic deed.

Then LeMay got effiecient and started dropping one bomb at a time. Twice.

/amidoinitrite

I detect no inaccuracies in your post.  But you omitted the fact that he had to rush them into use before the war ended so he could see first hand what it did to a real city, and that the Japanese thought it was just another napalming.


The scariest thing I ever heard about LeMay was in The Fog of War DVD. Robert McNamara said during the Cuban missile crisis LeMay wanted to go first strike nuclear. Whether McNamara was confused about LeMay's position or not isn't clear but it's a little frightening to think about LeMay using nuclear weapons on the Cubans and the Soviets, especially since the Cubans had been issued permission to use their nuclear weapons.
 
2013-04-05 11:31:28 AM  
We're gonna need a bigger movie.
 
2013-04-05 11:32:42 AM  

another cultural observer: vygramul: stuhayes2010: It's hard for me to use the word Hero for invading imperial forces killing native Zulus.

The funny thing is that most leadership of most nations/cultures/tribes/whathaveyou are a bunch of farkwads who did ugly things to their fellow people to become their leadership. I don't respect any of them.

That's why I live in an anarcho-syndicalist commune.  We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. All the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting, by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more serious matters.


Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!
 
2013-04-05 11:38:07 AM  

rikdanger: Thudfark: Don't you. Point that bloody spear at me.

[hypervocal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 400x266] 

You're not doing it right - and you're not using the broken voice when he gets emotional. He gets very emotional indeed.

"She was only sixteen years old. SHE WAS ONLY SIXTEEN YEARS OLD! YOU WERE ONLY SUPPOSED TO BLOW THE BLOODY DOORS OFF!"

That's Michael Caine


This was one of his few calm moments.
 
2013-04-05 11:38:38 AM  
People who participate in wars of aggression in defense of empire are not heroes; they're no better than the Nazis who occupied France.
 
2013-04-05 11:40:39 AM  

Krieghund: Just because a war was wrong doesn't mean the men fighting in it weren't heroic.

The real lesson from the Battle of Rorke's Drift is how important military technology is. It wasn't just that the British firearms were superior to the Zulu muskets and spears, but it was also the technology of the fortifications the British built. Shooting from a loophole seems obvious to us, but the Zulu didn't realize how devastating it would be.

Rorke's Drift was also very significant because of the propaganda it provided for the British after the defeat at Isandlwana.


You are right, the Zulus were absolutely not used to fighting a full-fledged European Army. But also that the garrison, especially as night fell, were pushed back into a extremely small space, so small that the Zulus could not even bring their full force to bear. Knight opines that perhaps half of the Zulus attacking never even saw action because the frontage the British presented kept shrinking. The movie DOES show that decently with Chard's redoubt and how much concentrated firepower he could muster.

Also, the movie totally glosses over James Dalton, the retired Sergeant and Army Commissary agent who was instrumental in the initial stages of the battle. He was as badass as Chard, Bromhead or any of the other VC winners.
 
2013-04-05 11:41:59 AM  

trotsky: Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift essentially occurred at the same time. If it had not been for Bromhead, Chard and the men of B/2/24, it would have been an even worse day for Lord Chelmsford.

Suggested reading:

Zulu Rising by Ian Knight
Like Wolves in the Fold: The Defence of Rorke's Drift by Mike Snook
Washing of the Spears by Donald R. Morris
Brave Men's Blood: The Epic of the Zulu War, 1879 by Ian Knight
Great Zulu Battles: 1838-1906 by Ian Knight

The Zulus were anything BUT helpless Africans. The Army sent against Chelmsford's Center column was something like 20,000 strong. One of the most powerful and well-organized armies in South Africa.


I would also recommend Carnage & Culture by Victor Hanson. Only 1 Chapter dedicated to RD but makes for good reading & awesome insight.
 
2013-04-05 11:43:36 AM  

DrPainMD: People who participate in wars of aggression in defense of empire are not heroes; they're no better than the Nazis who occupied France.


Viewing heroism through the lense of moral absolutism would mean nobody, with the exception of firefighters who save orphans from infernos (and similar such people), could ever be considered a hero.

As far as military conflicts go, one side's hero is another's villain.  The Red Baron provides an appropriate example.  We didn't like him back then, but now I eat his French Bread Pizzas happily every night.
 
2013-04-05 11:48:00 AM  

stellarossa: trotsky: Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift essentially occurred at the same time. If it had not been for Bromhead, Chard and the men of B/2/24, it would have been an even worse day for Lord Chelmsford.

Suggested reading:

Zulu Rising by Ian Knight
Like Wolves in the Fold: The Defence of Rorke's Drift by Mike Snook
Washing of the Spears by Donald R. Morris
Brave Men's Blood: The Epic of the Zulu War, 1879 by Ian Knight
Great Zulu Battles: 1838-1906 by Ian Knight

The Zulus were anything BUT helpless Africans. The Army sent against Chelmsford's Center column was something like 20,000 strong. One of the most powerful and well-organized armies in South Africa.

I would also recommend Carnage & Culture by Victor Hanson. Only 1 Chapter dedicated to RD but makes for good reading & awesome insight.


I will check that out.

I should have added to this that the Zulu King, Cetshwayo, called Isandlwana a disaster because of the immense losses inflicted on the Zulu Impis. Many authors put Zulu losses in the range of 4000 to 5000 killed and wounded.
 
2013-04-05 11:50:47 AM  

another cultural observer: DrPainMD: People who participate in wars of aggression in defense of empire are not heroes; they're no better than the Nazis who occupied France.

Viewing heroism through the lense of moral absolutism would mean nobody, with the exception of firefighters who save orphans from infernos (and similar such people), could ever be considered a hero.

As far as military conflicts go, one side's hero is another's villain.  The Red Baron provides an appropriate example.  We didn't like him back then, but now I eat his French Bread Pizzas happily every night.


Actually, in 19th Century warfare you find both sides admiring the deeds of valor done by the other side. The Zulus were so vicious after Isandhlwana because they did not want to deal with the 24th in the afterlife. They immensely respected the men of 1/24th because they fought so damn hard. Likewise, the British could not help but admire the tenacity and skill of the Zulu warriors as they fought. It's never as black and white as many people think.
 
2013-04-05 11:59:25 AM  

chopit: GoldDude: That was a truly brutal war.
My great-grandad lost a leg in that battle.
Some question as to whether it was from a mosquito or a tiger...

[i125.photobucket.com image 636x438]

A tiger?  In africa?


It probably escaped from the zoo.
 
2013-04-05 12:09:59 PM  
 Was he Leroy's ancestor by any chance?

/Maybe they didn't put him on the list because all the survivors were still pissed at him?
 
2013-04-05 12:15:11 PM  

stellarossa: dittybopper: Great.  Now I've got "Men of Harlech" running through my brain.

Me too, despite knowing they didn't sing that at any point.

/english regiment


Not really. They moved their regimental home depot to Wales in 1873, six years before Rorke's Drift. A LOT of Welshmen were serving in the "Warwickshire" regiment by the time of the Zulu war. Two of the 11 Victoria crosses went to Welshmen. I don't know that they had a Welsh choir, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.
 
2013-04-05 12:16:57 PM  

mbillips: stellarossa: dittybopper: Great.  Now I've got "Men of Harlech" running through my brain.

Me too, despite knowing they didn't sing that at any point.

/english regiment

Not really. They moved their regimental home depot to Wales in 1873, six years before Rorke's Drift. A LOT of Welshmen were serving in the "Warwickshire" regiment by the time of the Zulu war. Two of the 11 Victoria crosses went to Welshmen. I don't know that they had a Welsh choir, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.


And Jenkins was Welsh, too.
 
2013-04-05 12:29:57 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: Listen. For sheer bravery you cannot top air-conditioned B-29s flying low-level, facing virtually no effective anti-aircraft measures, dropping thousands upon thousands of incendiaries on civilians WHO LIVE IN WOODEN HOUSES.  Roasting 100,000 civilians in one night is a mighty brave and heroic deed.

Then LeMay got effiecient and started dropping one bomb at a time. Twice.

/amidoinitrite


Getting close.  You should have added "innocent" right before "civilians".  You gotta make them seem like they had absolutely nothing to do with the war and therefore are more innocent than the victims at Nanking.

Keep your chin up, buckaroo.  You'll get it eventually.
 
2013-04-05 12:32:10 PM  
Forget why they were there in the first place, the men themselves didn't have much choice anyway. Once the position came under attack it took a damn good bit of soldiering to hold it and years later it made a damn good bit of cinema.
 
2013-04-05 12:53:11 PM  

trotsky: another cultural observer: DrPainMD: People who participate in wars of aggression in defense of empire are not heroes; they're no better than the Nazis who occupied France.

Viewing heroism through the lense of moral absolutism would mean nobody, with the exception of firefighters who save orphans from infernos (and similar such people), could ever be considered a hero.

As far as military conflicts go, one side's hero is another's villain.  The Red Baron provides an appropriate example.  We didn't like him back then, but now I eat his French Bread Pizzas happily every night.

Actually, in 19th Century warfare you find both sides admiring the deeds of valor done by the other side. The Zulus were so vicious after Isandhlwana because they did not want to deal with the 24th in the afterlife. They immensely respected the men of 1/24th because they fought so damn hard. Likewise, the British could not help but admire the tenacity and skill of the Zulu warriors as they fought. It's never as black and white as many people think.



iseewhatyoudidthere.jpeg
 
2013-04-05 12:55:37 PM  

mbillips: And Jenkins was Welsh, too.


Well, his first name was Lleroy.
 
2013-04-05 12:57:27 PM  

stuhayes2010: It's hard for me to use the word Hero for invading imperial forces killing native Zulus.


Exactly. How the fark is this heroic? Oh, nice job, guys, you invaded another continent and slaughtered a whole bunch of its inhabitants. You managed to do this using rifles against their spears and arrows. Pretty goddamn heroic. Next, why don't you go and stomp on some puppies?
 
2013-04-05 01:07:25 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: On the "mad minute" using the Lee-Enfield rifle:

When WWI broke out, the small British Expeditionary Force was sent to France to assist the French and Belgians. The German Kaiser supposedly referred to the BEF as "a contemptible little army", so the cheeky soldiers adopted it as their own and called themselves "The Old Contemptibles". With both the French and Belgians in retreat early in the war, the Old Contemptibles were thrown into the breech to halt the German advance.

At Mons, eight batallions of German infantry crashed into two batallions of the BEF. The Mad Minute began. One German officer described it: "Well entrenched and completely hidden, the enemy opened a murderous fire...the casualties increased...the rushes became shorter, and finally the whole advance stopped...with bloody losses, the attack gradually came to an end."

Private Smiley of the Gordon Highlanders described the British end of things. "Poor devils! They advanced in companies of quite 150 men in files five deep, and our rifle has a flat trajectory up to 600 yards. Guess the result. We could steady our rifles on the trench and take deliberate aim. The first company was mown down by a volley at 700 yards, and in their insane formation every bullet was almost sure to find two billets. The other companies kept advancing very slowly, using their dead comrades as cover, but they had absolutely no chance."

At Mons and then again at the First Battle of Ypres, often against overwhelming odds, the Old Contemptibles ground the German advance down with their rifles. Near Oburg, a few companies of the BEF stopped an entire German regiment, and were froced to retire only when two additioin regiments attacked them. When the flanks (not held by British forces) caved in, 2nd Battalion of the Royal Munster Fusiliers covered the retreat. This single batallion, although nearly decimated itself, held the line against nine enemy batallions.

In an after-action report, one Prussian officer estimated that the B ...


For a tonic, read up on Gallipoli.
 
2013-04-05 01:10:35 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: Listen. For sheer bravery you cannot top air-conditioned B-29s flying low-level, facing virtually no effective anti-aircraft measures, dropping thousands upon thousands of incendiaries on civilians WHO LIVE IN WOODEN HOUSES.  Roasting 100,000 civilians in one night is a mighty brave and heroic deed.

Then LeMay got effiecient and started dropping one bomb at a time. Twice.

/amidoinitrite


Civilians who were propping up a murderous government that killed 250,000 unarmed Chinese civilians after the Doolittle raid?  In a war they started?

My sympathy is limited.
 
2013-04-05 01:12:30 PM  

RichieLaw: Ah, the bravery of colonial imperialism. I miss those days.


No matter what happens
We have got
The Maxim gun
And they have not
 
2013-04-05 01:16:01 PM  

peasants_are_revolting: stuhayes2010: It's hard for me to use the word Hero for invading imperial forces killing native Zulus.

Exactly. How the fark is this heroic? Oh, nice job, guys, you invaded another continent and slaughtered a whole bunch of its inhabitants. You managed to do this using rifles against their spears and arrows. Pretty goddamn heroic. Next, why don't you go and stomp on some puppies?


On the flip side, without colonialism, sub-Saharan Africa would've been free of those modern scourges:  writing, medicine, and the wheel...
 
2013-04-05 01:17:55 PM  

peasants_are_revolting: stuhayes2010: It's hard for me to use the word Hero for invading imperial forces killing native Zulus.

Exactly. How the fark is this heroic? Oh, nice job, guys, you invaded another continent and slaughtered a whole bunch of its inhabitants. You managed to do this using rifles against their spears and arrows. Pretty goddamn heroic. Next, why don't you go and stomp on some puppies?


The Zulus had some rifles, too, but they weren't trained with them and thus inflicted few casualties. The Zulus, like the Aztecs, were one of the most expansionist, warlike colonizing civilizations in history. The Brits just had better tech. No tears shed for the Zulu empire.
 
2013-04-05 01:20:15 PM  
Purple_Jack
 He faced  ten thousand Zulu warriors armed to the teeth with kiwi fruit and dry guava halves.He even saved the life of Douglas Haig when he was nearly killed by a pygmy woman with a sharpened mango.


Yes, that was at a time when the prerequisite for any battle was that the enemy should under no circumstances carry guns.
 
2013-04-05 01:24:17 PM  

spentmiles: Ah, the Victoria Cross, like a Diet Purple Heart.


People, this is how you troll.
 
2013-04-05 01:25:20 PM  
I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal.

--Curtis LeMay
 
2013-04-05 01:27:47 PM  

PunGent: TheShavingofOccam123: Listen. For sheer bravery you cannot top air-conditioned B-29s flying low-level, facing virtually no effective anti-aircraft measures, dropping thousands upon thousands of incendiaries on civilians WHO LIVE IN WOODEN HOUSES.  Roasting 100,000 civilians in one night is a mighty brave and heroic deed.

Then LeMay got effiecient and started dropping one bomb at a time. Twice.

/amidoinitrite

Civilians who were propping up a murderous government that killed 250,000 unarmed Chinese civilians after the Doolittle raid?  In a war they started?

My sympathy is limited.


In a war THEY started? Lrn2history. We cut off their oil, and "No blood for oil" only applies to the U.S.

/iamdoinitrite
 
Displayed 50 of 137 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report