World's best soldiers ??? - Page 6




 
--
Boots
 
March 10th, 2004  
diplomatic_means
 
Stack it up however you want. They were definitely successful but they killed almost as many of their own men in war as the enemy did. That's pathetic.
March 10th, 2004  
Redneck
 
 
Got anything to back that up?
March 10th, 2004  
Redleg
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by diplomatic_means
The Vikings were terrible soldiers. Ina skirmish it was not unusual for them to be in such a rage that they would kill many of their own just trying to get at the enemy.
Where are those Mushrooms??

I don't quite agree with you that the Vikings were terrible soldiers..
The ones you are refering to are the "Berserks", and there were actually few of them.
They were the front line fighters, and they would work themselves into a battle frenzy so intense it is said that they could ignore pain..
The name "Berserk" suggests that they wore Bearskin, to look even bigger and meaner, so their tactics was to scare the h**l out their enemies, so they would not fight.
And if the Berserk fought it was to death.
They could infact injure or kill their own, because they used large quantities of alcohol and/or eating hallucinogenic mushrooms to enter the "Berserk" state.
More info abou the Berserks here:
http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/CITE/v_berserker.htm

The "normal" vikings were mostly farmers and settlers, but they were also good fighters since they had learned to use weapons/bows almost from they were born.
Here's a very interesting article from BBC about the Vikings:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/vikings/

Mushroom party anyone?
--
Boots
March 10th, 2004  
SHERMAN
 
 

Topic: lol


I knew Redleg is going to use that smilie before i saw the post...
March 10th, 2004  
Redneck
 
 


How's that, sherman?



For pure daring and blind devotion to duty, I have to mention the Polish horse Cavalry who charged German tanks on 1 September 1939. Many people claim that this is a myth, and as I was not there, I cannot absolutely state whether this is true or not, but the romantic in me is inclined to believe the accounts that say it did happen.
March 10th, 2004  
SHERMAN
 
 

Topic: Its not


I heard this from a man who lived in Poland. Its no myth. The poles did charge with cavlary..I have a picture of them before the charge somewhere...
March 11th, 2004  
athomeinak
 

Topic: best soldiers


Quote:
The Scots however were never defeated to my knowledge, well at least by the Romans anyways.
Actually, the Scots were not only defeated at Culloden by the Brits, they were massacred... go to:

http://www.electricscotland.com/history/culloden/

to read more
March 12th, 2004  
No MERCY
 
 

Topic: allwrong


Genghis Khan is the best military leader of all time. his fighters were feirce and killed all who stood in the way. His strategy and tactics were at his best.
March 12th, 2004  
Lord Despenser
 
Hate to knit-pick, but how can US troops be the best when they have a habit of shooting up the Brits and themselves.

I refer in particular to this story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3518887.stm
in which a british armoured vehicle got destroyed by our 'trusty' allies, not only that, but they shot up the soldier when he rescued his comrade. The irony of it is, that he could only be awarded the George Cross, and not the Victoria Cross because his bravery was not in the face of the 'enemy' but in the face of the Americans.

I recognise in this particular case that it was in fact US planes that did the deed, but US troops also seem to be trigger happy in this department.

Sorry, but any soldier who has a lack of ability so as to shoot up their allies is not a good soldier. I'm not saying the British never do this, when it is it is very rare, but it seems that the Americans are trained to do it it happens so often.

Got to be the SAS, the SBS and Royal Marines. Why else would US command actually ask for the participation of these regiments? It certainly ain't to make up numbers.
March 12th, 2004  
Redneck
 
 
What about you Brits ramming your helicopters into each other? Was that the result of "good training?" For one thing, your article doesn't lay out the facts very well there buddy, so without knowing the circumstances, how about being a little less quick to judge. Aside from the fact that it makes NO mention of whom the "friendly" fire was coming from, for all YOU know it was another British unit.

Accidents, although terrible, are bound to happen in any combat situation, and it is entirely unfair, unreasonable, and irresponsible to make sweeping judgements based on them.
I refer in particular to CFS.