The ultimate warrior of all time

[Udet]

As i seem to recall, and in accordance with the words of a recently retired member of the U.S. Army, the training manual and procedures used in the U.S. Army Rangers is almost a literal copy of the S.S. manual. My response to him was "you got to be kidding me...", he simply replied: "no...no kidding here son...if we copied their manual is for something don´t you think?".


Look guys, i´d invite you all to drop the "who committed more crimes" mode in this discussion; it would be better to affirm victors do not commit war crimes.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not war crimes for the simple reason the action was carried out by the U.S.A., a member of the winning club. I mean, it could not be easier than this. I´ve read tons of paperwork regarding the allied considerations to explain or justify the atomic bombing...too much effort invested to in the end conclude the unavoidable conclusion: victors of a war do not commit war crimes. Winners of wars embody some sort of automatic moral high ground; it upholds justice and goodness.

I´ll mention one case i studied closely a few years ago, General der Flieger Alexander Löhr.

When the war ended the Yugoslav hyennas stepped forward claiming their share of the jackpot -Yugoslavs leaded by another interesting figure supported by Good Guy Churchill, Josip Broz Tito who is responsible for the murder of God knows how many dozens of thousands of Croats immediately after the end of the war; read about the massacre of Croat civilians in Bleiburg, Austria-.

General Löhr was handed over to these revengeful Yugoslavs to stand "trial". If that was a trial then i will be the future King of England, forget about Prince Charles. So bow down before me and pledge allegiance to my Royal Banner.

To make the long story short, Löhr was subjected to a circus trial, and was condemned to death by firing squad. The sentece was of course carried out.

Among several charges, there was this one that was perhaps the more substantial of all: the murder of 17,000 Yugoslav civilians during the German attack against Yugoslavia during 1941, a few months before the launching of Barbarossa.

Further research showed the figure of 17,000 to be an entirely made up fact, guess by who? Who else could have been but the Noble and Venerable Churchill who would more than rival Goebbels and Ilya Ehrenburg in terms of disseminating lies and distortions; everything is possible and valid when it comes to defeat your enemy.

The estimates of what could have been a more accurate figure indicate ~4,000 yugoslav civilians killed by Luftwaffe operations in Yugoslavia, mostly in the capital city of Belgrade, which by the way represented a fair prize since a garrison of the Yugoslav army was active within the city.

It was an invasion in course, therefore it was important to attack any places or areas where enemy soldiers were active, something that was happening inside Belgrade.

On the other hand we have another Noble and Honorable man, Sir Arthur "-Civilian- Bomber" Harris; under his command, direction and orders, RAF bombers killed and incinerated a number of German civilians that might surpass the A-Bombing of the two japanese cities.

Civilian Bomber Harris died a peaceful death.

[Watanbe]

The Samauri could be brutal yes, but they honoured the warrior code with total disciplined. They would isolate an opponent on the battle field and engage in a one on one duel with them, following the laws and ethics of their code.

Even by WW2 it must be said that the Japanese still did follow this code. Never surrendering and kamikazes. The abuse of prisoner of wars and attocities are also linked to this i believe.

Not saying that they acted in what we would class socially acceptable, honourable manner but they did follow their code and fight with total dedication.

btw spartan is still ultimate soldier.

[renrich]

TO, suffice to say that your post re dropping A bombs is right on and to equate that to war crimes is as ridiculous as to say that millions of civilians were killed by them or that the war was financed by oil companies. Does that mean that the oil companies precipitated and perpetuated the second world war or the current Iraq War.

[The Basket]

The Samurai were beaten by the Mongols...they had no flexibitlity or improvisation in combat so I wouldn't rate them highly as a combat force. They also kept the sword long after the musket had made it less important.

[Soren]

God point basket, but the Mongols beat many of their opponents mainly because of their highly mobile horse mounted archers. But I agree that the Samurai didn't feature much flexibility and would have a darn hard time against an opponent carriyng a shield.


Now people lets stick to the topic.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Udet

Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not war crimes for the simple reason the action was carried out by the U.S.A., a member of the winning club.

Sorry but thats rubbish. Your entitled to your opinion, so I will go ahead and tell you mine.

If not for the A Bombs, the war would have lasted longer and the more US Soldiers and Japanese Soldiers and Civilians would have been killed.

Simple fact...

Originally Posted by Udet

Who else could have been but the Noble and Venerable Churchill who would more than rival Goebbels

You dont actually believe this do you? Goebbels was a rat and nothing more...

Originally Posted by Udet

On the other hand we have another Noble and Honorable man, Sir Arthur "-Civilian- Bomber" Harris; under his command, direction and orders, RAF bombers killed and incinerated a number of German civilians that might surpass the A-Bombing of the two japanese cities.

Civilian Bomber Harris died a peaceful death.

So it was okay for the Luftwaffe to bomb London, Warsaw, Antwerp, Amsterdam, Stalingrad, etc...

Just to name a few.

I think your views are bit skewed if you ask me.

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by The Basket

The Samurai were beaten by the Mongols...they had no flexibitlity or improvisation in combat so I wouldn't rate them highly as a combat force. They also kept the sword long after the musket had made it less important.

I agree that samurai do not rate up there with the likes of Romans or Spartans.

Largely untested against dissimilar troops; I was not aware they were defeated by mongols.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by The Basket

The Samurai were beaten by the Mongols...they had no flexibitlity or improvisation in combat so I wouldn't rate them highly as a combat force. They also kept the sword long after the musket had made it less important.

In 1281, a Yuan army of 140,000 men with 4,400 ships was mustered for another invasion of Japan. Northern Kyūshū was defended by a Japanese army of 40,000 men. The Mongol army was still on its ships preparing for the landing operation when a typhoon hit north Kyūshū island. The casualties and damage inflicted by the typhoon, followed by the Japanese defense of the Hakata Bay barrier, resulted in the Mongols again recalling their armies.


Samurai and defensive wall at Hakata. Moko Shurai Ekotoba, (蒙古襲来絵詞) c.1293.The thunderstorms of 1274 and the typhoon of 1281 helped the samurai defenders of Japan repel the Mongol invaders despite being vastly outnumbered. These winds became known as kami-no-kaze, which literally translates as "wind of the gods." This is often given a simplified translation as "divine wind." The kami-no-kaze lent credence to the Japanese belief that their lands were indeed divine and under supernatural protection.

Basket - I believe the Mongols failed both times they tried to invade Japan but the Japanese were defeated twice by the Koreans in the late 1500's.

[Soren]

Remember the Katana wasn't used by the Samurai in the 1300's and did not see service until the 1500's.

[Soren]

Adler,

Although its OT, about the A-bombs, well they could've been dropped elsewhere. Dropping them on major civilian cities wasn't a very bright idea.

[ToughOmbre]

Originally Posted by Soren

Adler,

Although its OT, about the A-bombs, well they could've been dropped elsewhere. Dropping them on major civilian cities wasn't a very bright idea.

Opinions are opinions, but you are just wrong.

Elsewhere? Where?

Dropping the A-bombs 1) ended the war, 2) saved AMERICAN lives (most important reason) and 3) saved Japanese lives.

Sounded like a good idea to me.

TO

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I agree TO.

[The Basket]

The first Mongol invasion was too small and the second was prepared for. Weather was a major factor in the failure of both.

The Samurai were certainly beaten in battles of both wars...even with home advantage.

[renrich]

An unintended consequence of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was that the damage was so horrific that any further thought by any nation of all out war has become to horrible to contemplate there fore the Cold War was COLD. No telling how many lives were saved by those two bombs in the long run. A harmless demonstration would never have had the impact those two attacks on those cities had.

[ToughOmbre]

Originally Posted by renrich

An unintended consequence of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was that the damage was so horrific that any further thought by any nation of all out war has become to horrible to contemplate there fore the Cold War was COLD. No telling how many lives were saved by those two bombs in the long run. A harmless demonstration would never have had the impact those two attacks on those cities had.

Very true renrich. And if Japan would not surrender after the attack on Hiroshima (and obviously they didn't), there is NO way they would surrender after a detonation on some uninhabited Japanese island as some clueless historians have advocated for.

TO