|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jul 3, 2008 16:21:02 GMT 3
Oops! Do U know this movie about WWII During recent Russian Movie Awards the person who must give award as good movie -refused. He said "This movie is shame & lie, I can`t & will not give it ". ( 'Bastard' Well the film takes place during the WW2 somewhere around 1944-1945. Most cities a filled with children commiting crimes and Stalin orders boys cought in crimes above 14 years old to be placed in special facilities where they will be trained to kill and sabotage. Its a story of two boys who got into this camp and went through training. Then they were send on a suicide mission with a group of other boys to bomb a German base some where in the mountains. Very heavy movie for some people. Non-fiction
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jul 3, 2008 15:47:33 GMT 3
Stupid question. Every child examinig mongol expansion reads about the military law of Chingis Khan. If 10th will run 100 will be executed, if 100 runs 1000 will be executed, if 1000 runs 10 000 will be put to death. Every true admires of War art knows that. Now apply it in a battle field. What will happen if 100 will see 10 running away?
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jul 3, 2008 15:30:44 GMT 3
Nomad you have to study deeper into history and evaluate it by your present as well. Almost ALL historical sources are written by the conquered. You think they will want to admit getting their a**es owned so easily by nomadic warriors? They make excuses everywhere they turn. They even somehow mistranslated the Mongol word "camp" into horde to the point the English term for the Golden Khanate is the Golden Horde yet every soldier fought outnumbered and won. If you lose the best of your soldiers against just a few nomads you're going to be bitter as f**k. I never said I was reading history books to hard because I find it useless to just read it. I prefer other sciences as well. For instance you read about the lost civilazation in Finland. You are told that they had advance trade system, uniq language, advanced weapons and iron armor coved there soldies. Not forget to mention big settlements that were as big as ROME. Geographicaly their could not be big settlements in North part of the world as it was covered in Ice and thick woods. No sign that there was fields where you could grow grain. Economicaly their could not be advance trade at all because how will you are goint to ship it. And if you are willing to ship will it be competative?! The juice doesn't cost the squiz. Geologist will ask about the mines and ore deposits. It can continue without end. So maybe you should start reading other books?!
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jul 3, 2008 13:34:20 GMT 3
do you really believe Mongols were just brainless suicide bombers like Al-quaida? Not like Al-quaida (I don't admire the Al-quaida methods as they use wrong path of a warrior to die) but more like a Taliban now days. Taliban is much more than you think. Its a "Spartian" in a flesh. If you would like to talk about Taliban open a thread!!!
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 26, 2008 13:14:52 GMT 3
Wood-chipper and meat-slicer
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 24, 2008 7:17:58 GMT 3
Well the film was shoot and corrected so it will fit the goverment policies. I don't know what was done so far but we spend hell of a lot money to shoot it. But the goverment head idologist and thinker personally was watching over the making of the film.
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 20, 2008 13:02:55 GMT 3
Agree with you Rus and Russia is two different things.
Soviet Union was not Russian but Moscows.
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 20, 2008 8:43:26 GMT 3
If you saw a film you could probably remember the law read out by Chingis Khan
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 20, 2008 8:42:03 GMT 3
In historical books you some times bump into it but not everybody notice what was it! In WWII The bloodshed was mostly on the easten front. The harders front for Germans to fight was Russian front. Why, because they were fighting at the human limits. Why Stalingrad became the graveyard for Hitlers ambitions? It was Soviet soldier who shatted his plans. How did they made it? Firsh the was a famous Directiv that considered any soldier a traitor who will retread. Then it was a NKVD groups who were placed machin guns "Maksim" behind the armies and shoot on sight any soldier who was retreating. Then it was a detention armies who had to wash their disgrace with blood and they where at tne peak of human limits. THis detention armies where placed at the most difficult fronts.
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 20, 2008 8:18:02 GMT 3
The number 1 million is overly exaggarated by Greek historians. No empire could make up an army as huge as that.. Well in Chineese history "Three kingdom" period you time to time see same numbers. Persian kings used to collect vast numbers of people under their command. Julius Ceaser used to oppose half a million armies in Galia (France). Rome fought a millions people army under the king of Ponta. In second world war Russian army fought with millions and surrended in millions They stopped them for 6 days. I did not say they won the battle but that was something very intresting to read about.
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 19, 2008 16:53:10 GMT 3
I dont think China is an alkternative for this question(maybe for diplomacy) I must disagree! During Tan dynasty every soldier were able to take out 4 nomads on horse backs. They were highly trained. Spartians dedicated thier lives to arts of war. They never builded wall around their settlements because they belived in thier skills and enemies feared them. Its historical fact that 300 spartians with other greek armies stopped 1 000 000 persian armada. Well Germans as warriors showed themself on a high level. Fighting with Rome. Stopping muslin expansion in europe. Creating Holy Roman Empire. Fighting with whole europe under the Fredirick II The Great. Again fighting with whole europe in WW1 and WW2.
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 19, 2008 16:20:21 GMT 3
I wonder Polish Hassar cavalry men. Why did they had wings? Their should be logical use of it. Could it be to keep the balance during the ride. They were heavily equited and it would be death if they would have fall off the horse. And in battle its difficult not to fall of the horseback.
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 19, 2008 16:04:19 GMT 3
I agree with Bor Chono about hats. We should not go too far. Lets look a AMERICAN Indians. They had different hairstyle and headwear. In Greece(Acient Times) every City had its own uniq helmet and a picture on a shield. (Shield had even different shapes). Armour I think was the same. I kill Bor Chono and take his amour but Shield and helmet will be different. Sometimes shield is a family relic which is passed down the generation and helmet handmade by family so the spirits of the ancestors will protect its descendant. Thats more logical.
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 19, 2008 14:12:49 GMT 3
Ok lets discuse the mongol warfare! Many belives that mongols won the battles with a bow and arrows. Tactics such as attack and retread. I say its hardly possible to win the war with a bow and arrows. Its possible at the begining of the battle to cut the numbers of the enemy vanguard but its will not turn the point of war. Vanguard usually heavily armed and such things as arrows is not a big obsticle. There is also a big problem with the supply of arrows. A horseman can carry 5-10 arrows a 1-2 bows, 1 spear, 1-2 sword, 1 knife, shield and an armour. With all this he should easily change weapons and keep being mobile if he doesn't wish to be a dead meat. If he will be heavily equiped such tactics as hit and run will not do. Horse will move slower and eventualy it will be too exhausted even to run. (Everything has its limits). The idea of suicide groups that will scare the hell out of nomads is possible. (How is it possible) Nomads all over the worlds historically recorded as not a big fighters. As they were mobile whenever they felt the battle will turn messy they fled. (Why will I die. I wana live. I have childern and wife here and abroad. Save you live let others fight those monkeys.) Only though strick discipline that will be brought up with blood and sweat. Soldies who will not know the word turnback and retried. Fanatics and suiciders. Only with this peoples you can crumble the world and make it yours. I think in "Mongols" they pointed correct that suicide group. How else you will put fear in your enemies hearts. World feared mongols during Chingis Khan because they did not know how to turn away and only knew to move forward. (I would fear is kind of enemy)
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 19, 2008 13:32:45 GMT 3
How typical for Empires. As you get bigger you starting to think smaller. You will only engage battle if you number of troops a twice or three times as much as the enemy troops. Many big empires ceased to exist this way.
|
|