• Guns have taken away all the honor and nobility of war
    203 replies, posted
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;21913446]What do you mean exactly? If they lost, well everyone was a sore-loser. But [I]how much[/I] is what honor tells us.[/QUOTE] You don't know what a triumph is do you. A triumph is a big ceremony where the army honors either you (empire) or the general and the 2 consuls (republic). The victorious wars against Spartacus, and another one (I think it was greece, but I don't know) did not get a triumph because of the dishonor.
Custom-made guns ftw
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;21913684]I agree that skill of a warrior has really been downgraded, now anyone with 20 20 vision and steady hands can land lucky shots to a seasoned veteran who is really more of an up to now lucky veteran. Back in the times of melee fighting if someone wanted you dead they would need to get pretty close (atleast bow range) and you had a chance to stop it, now the 5 mile range snipers can pick off anyone.[/QUOTE]I'm sorry to inform you there is no sniper nor has there been that has a confirmed kill at 5 miles with a .50 cal. or any hand held rifle. The longest sniper kill was recorded at just under 2 miles. Or were you thinking of 5 mile kills with a 105mm howitzer? That's doable! LMAO!
[QUOTE=blah45;21913597]I'd rather die from a 7.62x39mm Russian to the chest rather than bleeding out from a steel arrow in my chest.[/QUOTE] You don't just immediately die from being shot, both will leave you bleeding out rapidly on the ground.
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;21913580][img]http://www.theaugeanstables.com/wp-content/images/david_goliath.jpg[/img] Modern David and Goliath.[/QUOTE] its just an m60 tank, that kid must be seriously underweight
There is nothing noble about taking another persons life over reasons you cannot control.
There was never honor in war.
This thread makes me [img]http://imgkk.com/i/13HcTm.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=PeanutTHENINJA;21914576]Custom-made guns ftw[/QUOTE] Replying to when he was like "what happened to the master blacksmiths working in shops" or something like that, if you make your weapon right you can have it be so unique that no one else knows how to use it.
Hand-to-hand combat is way more gruesome and brutal than modern warfare. These days you usually just get blown up or shot without even realizing what's happening. In the olden days you literally had to rip someone's body apart until they died.
How the fuck does war have romance?
ITT: Medieval fantasy nerds
Hell, there's nothing noble about taking another persons life at all, I don't care what they've done.
What honor? War has always been hell. Read the fucking Illiad: it's dudes getting disemboweled and dismembered in a violent and senseless way. Now remember that they wouldn't have died quickly after getting a spear shoved from one side to another.
War is horrible, the end. There really isn't any honor in it, no matter if you use a sword, a musket or an assault rifle.
Ancient and Medieval warfare is not The Lord of the Rings. Ancient and Medieval warfare is to go on a forced march and die from malnutrition, thirst, disease long before you meet the enemy. Then when you do meet the enemy, you're stabbed through the gut and left to die over the course of several days, maybe if you're lucky one of the surviving enemy soldiers will come along and end your suffering by stabbing you through the heart, granted they haven't left the field already. All this because some noble commander decided to take all the Knights as his personal bodyguard and regards you as less than a pawn in a chess set. That said, I'd kill for a Band of Brothers style of the Gallic War or the Illyrian Wars.
[QUOTE=Gubbinz96;21914680]This thread makes me [img]http://imgkk.com/i/13HcTm.gif[/img][/QUOTE] This thread made you a black doctor?
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;21913664]You realize that knights were a bunch of pillaging dickspurts who'd loot and rape their way to victory while riding on a bed of conscripted peasants like you?[/QUOTE] One of the most accurate models of knight/lord culture is Mount & Blade. Granted, it's still hilariously far off, but it is far more realistic than anything you've probably seen (except maybe Medieval: Total War). Knights and their lords were never honorable. They felt entitled to their position and levied high taxes on their peasantry, who often also were conscripted into the military, given some shitty equipment, and thrown into battle with no training. Later, mercenaries and "professional soldiers" started to take to the battlefield, but peasantry still made up the majority of forces. Knights followed the code of chivalry. The romanticized version we all hear about is knights fighting valiantly for god, king, and their love. The actual truth of the matter is knights were secretly encouraged to cheat on the wives of others while engaging in retarded court politics, all to stir up some drama and go fuck shit up so they can get an excuse to steal other people's shit. All of this done in the name of God. The church didn't give a shit, as long as they held power over the people and got their money... so it was, so it is: grease the right palms with the right amount of cash and you've got a free ride. War today is far more honorable: you are never allowed to pillage, loot, rape, burn, or otherwise cause collateral damage unless it is completely unavoidable. Wars are fought by professional soldiers with the equipment you would expect of such a role. Civilian casualties are kept to a minimum. Countries often cannot force people into military service. Long story short, most of the people showing up to a fight are there because they want to be there, and they all know what they're getting into. God help the poor dumb bastard who brings a sword to my gunfight. EDIT: Just to elaborate on what RR_Raptor65 said... in a medieval army, you were doing pretty good if you made it to the battlefield still standing. But battle on open fields was very rare. More often than not, battles were focused on points of interest, typically fortified areas. Once an army would set up camp outside the other's fortress, the siege was on. Sieges were terrible affairs, where both sides in the war suffered through malnutrition, disease, poor morale, desertion, etc.... a leader's ability was not judged only by his battlefield prowess and tactics, but also his ability to hold an army of underfed, underpaid soldiers - who didn't even want to be there - together. The most common scenario was that a siege ended with the attacking army leaving, either due to an inability to deal with siege conditions or because a fresh opposing army was coming to break the siege.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlov's_House[/url] Put your 100 dollar "Authentic" Katana down and learn yourself multiple books.
war war never changes [img]http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1239/1167987718_1aaa50e8ab.jpg[/img]
The only truly noble way to kill a man is with your bare hands! War is just as noble as it's always been (which is not very much) war is war, quit romanticising it.
war has lost all its bromance :(
Since when is there anything noble or honorable about institutionalized mass murder?
[QUOTE=B_oE_AN;21915147]Since when is there anything noble or honorable about institutionalized mass murder?[/QUOTE] I guess personal morals, like shooting medics or killing civilians.
[img]http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/253/eastwoods.jpg[/img]
this is why the japanese lost in world war 2 they were like, "hey, it's not stupid to charge at machine gun nests, right?"
OP is dumb
[QUOTE=Idi Amin;21914644]its just an m60 tank, that kid must be seriously underweight[/QUOTE] Your troops are still using m60 tanks, aren't they?
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;21915280]Your troops are still using m60 tanks, aren't they?[/QUOTE] The Israeli's Magach tanks (their M60 variants) are only used in reserve units. The frontline IDF armored force uses the Mk 3 and Mk 4 Merkava.
OP is a peasant that should fight in a war.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.