[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1756251130321.jpeg (756.58 KB, 828x1178, IMG_2611.jpeg)

 

Going through historical records over what actually happened in most wars (both recent and ancient) is making me frustrated over how insultingly weak, passive aggressive, incompetent, and cowardly the vast majority of people and men in general are. Apparently something like 80%+ of all pre gunpowder age battles revolved entirely around intimidating the opponent and only attacking once the enemy was fleeing and had their backs exposed. If that shit wasn’t dishonourable enough, some armours including Persian helmets or Viking berserker armour were specifically designed to make Persians appear taller and Vikings more scrappy to deter opponents rather than anything rooted in battlefield function. The same could be said about most ornamented armour which only tells me that nearly every motherfucker in history have spent generations dicksucking themselves off with meaningless trophies and amateur displays of strength before running and freaking out the moment actual battles occur. In terms of actual fighting, if it wasn’t against already surrendering fleeing opponents, civilian casualties—especially against unarmed, weakened, and defensless civilians—were usually the most common targets of both conquerors and pre socialist revolutionaries effectively rendering any actual fights between warriors as almost nonexistent in preindustrial warfare.

If that cowardly and weak shit isn’t dishonourable enough, just look at the shit going on after the introduction of gunpowder.

Mass casualties among soldiers due to exposure to disease, self inflicted psychological trauma, and tripping related accidents from the napoleonic era to the world wars; reliance on the threat (not the use) of WMDs (of course against defensless civilians because who would approach their opponents up close) to win wars; military leaders somehow getting even weaker and more disconnected from their soldiers as military sophistication improved; the list of things you can make fun of just keep going on.

Vietnam against France was probably the only time where things improved a bit with how easy it was to respect soldiers. It was by this point where stress inoculation as a concept was introduced to military training which meant you had soldiers fighting the way you’d initially imagine against armed and readied opponents instead of picking fights with literal children and adults on the brink of starvation. Does this mean that all wars afterwards suddenly became way more honorable and not over glorified duck measuring contests for who could appear the most intimidating—hell no. Stress inoculation plus Mao and Vietnam’s popularization of guerrilla tactics created a platform for where that annoying shit would die.

>>2448065
>Mass casualties among soldiers due to exposure to disease
UNIT 731 figured this out and tried to solve it, their work was later promptly appropriated.

>>2448070
>tried to solve it
*And later instrumentalize it.

you just realized most pzople didn't want to get killed (and for the majority they didn't even want to kill another human being)
there is a reason why the one thing you shouldn't do is trap your opponents in a encirclement and then go fight them instead of waiting for their inevitable surrender,because people are actually fucking dangerous if it's do or die right this instant
you should check out how many people actually shot their muskets in the first place and how many actually aimed at the opponents back in the napoleonic era (yes,they either pretended to shoot or aimed away on purpose),the worst is multi man crew,because they have the luxury of "I can blame someone else if I get caught" mortars barely actually shot.
this isn't about muh honorabuu fighting,people that join the military either are forced into it (and thus don't wanna kill or risk their asses) or they're there for the money and would've immediatly left the country the instant a war started if they could(preferably with their gear so they can sell it)
I unironically think this is a good thing

>>2448079
Yeah don’t worry I already read gross man’s book and men against fire by that other guy. That’s why I specified stress inoculation was the turnaround. Also “ yes,they either pretended to shoot or aimed away on purpose),the worst is multi man crew,because they have the luxury of "I can blame someone else if I get caught" mortars barely actually shot.
this isn't about muh honorabuu fighting,people that join the military either are forced into it (and thus don't wanna kill or risk their asses) or they're there for the money and would've immediatly left the country the instant a war started if they could(preferably with their gear so they can sell it)”
Just clarified your point about nearly all people being bitch made and the men that get into wars voluntarily being especially the most loud mouthed and cowardly—also attacking civilians constantly throughout history just clarifies that it isn’t about fear of violence so much as it is about fear of fighting someone that fights back.

>Apparently something like 80%+ of all pre gunpowder age battles revolved entirely around intimidating the opponent and only attacking once the enemy was fleeing and had their backs exposed.
Source for this? Sounds interesting, I want to read about ancient military history now.

>>2448151
Grossman “on killing”, “men against fire”, a lot of other books detailing interviews on what actually went on in the first world wars and military history in general, and that’s just the most common irritating shit. There’s way more cartoonish examples of severe incompetence and idiocy act in military history.

>>2448079
>people that join the military either are forced into it (and thus don't wanna kill or risk their asses) or they're there for the money and would've immediatly left the country the instant a war started if they could(preferably with their gear so they can sell it)
This is why ideological volunteer units preform so well in combat.

>>2448065
This BS is all a defense of war. Oh, it's not that bad, they don't even try to kill each other. Fuck off millions died if it's so sanitary join up and march across the field the enemy will be too humane to shoot your face off.

>>2449923
Not really. OP is getting this from a book by a US military psycho who now trains police to kill. Soldiers not wanting to kill the enemy is the problem for Grossman.

>Apparently something like 80%+ of all pre gunpowder age battles revolved entirely around intimidating the opponent and only attacking once the enemy was fleeing and had their backs exposed.
That's the point.

File: 1756378981512.png (1.14 MB, 1000x1115, tech-priest-ad-mech.png)

From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me. I craved the strength and certainty of steel. I aspired to the purity of the Blessed Machine. Your kind cling to your flesh, as though it will not decay and fail you. One day the crude biomass you call the temple will wither, and you will beg my kind to save you. But I am already saved, for the Machine is immortal… Even in death I serve the Omnissiah.

>>2450254
>the admech tard says this while ignoring that his precious steel eventually decays too. And in some cases decays faster because unlike the living flesh, steel or machines dont regenerate

>also ignores that the flesh can be made strong and eternal by modifying the regenerative properties of flesh. So while flesh divides and regenerates, the steel stagnates and decays

File: 1756379635709.jpg (761.65 KB, 1309x1080, stfu meatbag.jpg)

>>2450258
just rustproof it and perform regular maintenance
>implying modifying the flesh to make it less human is a good thing
the inquisition will hear about this

>>2450265
>just rustproof it and perform regular maintenance
shitty machine lover requires someone else to step in and do maintence. Meanwhile the chad human body does maintence on itself automatically
hue hue hue
>the inquisition will hear about this
space marines
custodes
lucifer black
etc etc.
The emperor supports genetic modification, lel.

>>2450272
instruct your cogitator to remove this comment post-haste!

>>2448065
> Going through historical records over what actually happened in most wars (both recent and ancient) is making me frustrated over how insultingly weak, passive aggressive, incompetent, and cowardly the vast majority of people and men in general are. Apparently something like 80%+ of all pre gunpowder age battles revolved entirely around intimidating the opponent and only attacking once the enemy was fleeing and had their backs exposed.
It’s almost like dramatic set piece battles aren’t the point of wars
It’s almost like minimizing casualties and material losses is the first task of basic logistics that even the earliest organized fighting forces had to contend with

It’s almost like tens of thousands of casualties get harder and harder to eat the further back you go
> Mass casualties among soldiers due to exposure to disease, self inflicted psychological trauma, and tripping related accidents from the napoleonic era to the world wars; reliance on the threat (not the use) of WMDs (of course against defensless civilians because who would approach their opponents up close) to win wars; military leaders somehow getting even weaker and more disconnected from their soldiers as military sophistication improved; the list of things you can make fun of just keep going on.
Please use your brain nigha
Of course shit tons of soldiers die of disease, war takes you through many different environments, exposes you to close contact with strangers, open wounds, dead bodies, exhausts physical endurance due to hunger, battle, and marching, and is psychologically traumatizing. And obviously commanders will get “weaker” or less involved in combat as logistics become more complex, the forces they command become larger thus increasing their importance, and the significance of a single individual’s prowess and courage become meaningless compared to the arsenals at hand

>>2448065
>making me frustrated over how insultingly weak, passive aggressive, incompetent, and cowardly the vast majority of people and men in general are
well, yeah, most people dont want to die, and rational outlook of war obviously lead you to try and avoid it or at least survive it

>revolved entirely around intimidating the opponent and only attacking once the enemy was fleeing and had their backs exposed

gross oversimplification to the point of simply being wrong. Ofc most of the casualties happened during rout, its a lot harder to kill someone actively fighting back and surrounded by his fellow soldier in a formation than stabbing a running guy in the back, but that does not mean there wasnt significant fighting and that morale was simply psychological tricks and not also a reflection of the actual fighting progress.

>dishonourable

you sound very spooked for someone interested in war. Sadly common, but very bad if you're actually interested in understanding shit

>anything rooted in battlefield function

but morale is a battlefield function

>effectively rendering any actual fights between warriors as almost nonexistent in preindustrial warfare.

well thats just plain wrong, even if you forget the big battles that were kinda uncommon, there was plenty of low scale local fighting. But you also seem under the impression raiding and looting is always easy against the defenseless, while the whole rise of chivalry and knights in medieval times was all about protecting your shit as much as raiding the shit of others, and they fought quite often in those circumstances. Ofc, as rational people, they would quickly recognize their common interests as a warrior class in these low scale local conflicts, and started ransoming each other rather killing each other, which would eventually give rise to the whole bullshit about honor and chivalry

>Mass casualties among soldiers due to exposure to disease

we had that before gunpowder, and it was more due to bigger armies due to bigger and more organized and centralized social entities

>Vietnam against France was probably the only time where things improved a bit with how easy it was to respect soldiers

wat. How the f is a colonial guerilla war giving you respect for the soldier. You really are very spooked

>which meant you had soldiers fighting the way you’d initially imagine against armed and readied opponents instead of picking fights with literal children

>soldiers fighting the way you’d initially imagine
newsflash, soldiers never fought the way they do in action movies, but even in ancient times you had various professional soldiers who had war as their main occupation and fought each other

sorry OP but what you're saying is mostly stupid bullshit, although theres a grain of truth : war is not cool, morale is important


Unique IPs: 13

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]