• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

The Ides of March

WATERWALKER

0311 SHELLBACK
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Apr 19, 2014
    1,104
    646
    Deep in the Lone Star
    Gents,

    On today’s date, 2067 years ago, the greatest warrior this world has ever known was murdered. He was murdered by traitors who’re jealous of his accomplishments in life.

    I’m drinking a few beers to celebrate the life & many accomplishments of Gaius Julius Caesar.
     
    Xerxes laughing in Persian…
    Alexander laughing in Macedonian…
    Gengis laughing in Mongol…
    I’d argue that Caesar was a far better tactician than G. Kahn. Kahn was a great warrior & ruthless, but not sure he was on par w/ Caesar as far as military intellect is concerned.

    The Spartans are still trashing Xerxes in the afterlife.

    Alexander? This guy accomplished a lot of great things. No doubt. However, I’m still standing w/ Caesar.

    I’m trading Alexander, but he would probably be an SJW in todays world.
     
    I’d argue that Caesar was a far better tactician than G. Kahn. Kahn was a great warrior & ruthless, but not sure he was on par w/ Caesar as far as military intellect is concerned.

    The Spartans are still trashing Xerxes in the afterlife.

    Alexander? This guy accomplished a lot of great things. No doubt. However, I’m still standing w/ Caesar.

    I’m trading Alexander, but he would probably be an SJW in todays world.
    They are still teaching Kahn’s tactics at the US War college…….
     
    Also Kahn controlled/conquered more territory than the others……

    Indeed.

    600full-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-screenshot.jpg
     
    Musashi.
    Not because he commanded some great army.
    It's because he was a great army by himself.
     
    Ya'll left out the greatest warrior of all:

    The Undertaker.



    Gey, its the Hide.
     
    • Haha
    Reactions: FWoo45
    Xerxes laughing in Persian…
    Alexander laughing in Macedonian…
    Gengis laughing in Mongol…
    Genghis Kahn absolutely had the best army I can think of historically(among peers of his time they completely outmatched everyone) simply by virtue of nearly all of them being mounted and some of the best riders out there. Traditional armies hardly ever fared well against masses of mounted archers.

    Same with Attila a bit earlier in history.

    After the advent of head-to-toe plate armor you had the Swiss mercenary pikemen's rise on the battlefield and shortly after the German landsknechts who copied them.. then along came firearms.

    But Rome was certainly an interesting time and place - big fan of Scipio Africanus(the man who defeated Hannibal). Pyrrhus of Epirus(the namesake for his "pyrrhic victories" against Rome... I believe his direct quote was: "One more victory, and we will be undone") is also a helluva character.



     
    • Love
    Reactions: JJMoody
    he might have had an ego problem but it was far from making him the greatest warrior in history I mean did he even fight before proclaiming himself emperor I thought mark Anthony was his general / the reason he had any power . or maybe it was a warning to men in the future of the enharent dangers of the evil honey do list which kills more men every year than all the wars , alcohol , and drugs combined . including 3 people in my neighborhood tonight alone one in a car accident , another fixing lights on a roof he lost his footing on , and anther a slip and fall off a curb that broke . all three were preventable by waiting till the next day and making the wife just wait but no to make them happy they put there lives in peril .
     
    Last edited:
    Roger that , and it’s a damn shame he never went toe to toe with Atilla the Hun
     
    Kahn was teaching gender studies and proper pronoun use back then?
    Yeah, was and fucking were as he reduced entire populations to ash.

    Genghis Kahn absolutely had the best army I can think of historically(among peers of his time they completely outmatched everyone) simply by virtue of nearly all of them being mounted and some of the best riders out there. Traditional armies hardly ever fared well against masses of mounted archers.
    Wait till they are locked down in winter and force them to fight to protect their fodder, horse archers are beaten on an operation level like the Byzantines did many times. Of course most folk didn't have the logistic capability to launch a full winter campaign but horse archers are too mobile to be forced into a fight otherwise.
     
    Imagine what Robert E. Lee could have done if he'd had more of an industrial base similar to the North. Although Gettysburg was a big mistake.
    The South never had a chance for the reason you mentioned, no industrial base and smaller population to draw soldiers from. Why Lee would make such a hairbrained decision to invade the north makes me wonder about him entirely. Yeah, I've read the reasoning, but invading the north with a army of 55,000. Insanity.
     
    The South never had a chance for the reason you mentioned, no industrial base and smaller population to draw soldiers from. Why Lee would make such a hairbrained decision to invade the north makes me wonder about him entirely. Yeah, I've read the reasoning, but invading the north with a army of 55,000. Insanity.
    Agreed.
    On a side note, my Dad took me to Gettysburg when I was maybe 10 or 11, it was a very eerie experience as it was late afternoon and twilight and misty kind of fog was rolling in as we had climbed one of the observation towers. I don't know if those are still there but I will never forget going up to Devil's Den and feeling the spooky goosebumps that there were spirits there.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Maggot
    Agreed.
    On a side note, my Dad took me to Gettysburg when I was maybe 10 or 11, it was a very eerie experience as it was late afternoon and twilight and misty kind of fog was rolling in as we had climbed one of the observation towers. I don't know if those are still there but I will never forget going up to Devil's Den and feeling the spooky goosebumps that there were spirits there.
    There probably were...spirits there. I've sensed them a few times. Once in the middle of the night when I was no more than 5 there was a bad car wreck outside our house. I woke up and looked out the window and I swear I saw dark, unhappy, souls floating over the wreck. I think when youre young you are more open, as we age we become locked into a physical world view and lose our ability to sense many things around us.
     
    I mean he knocked up Cleopatra so there is that besides the salad being named after him.
     
    Last edited:
    Gents,

    On today’s date, 2067 years ago, the greatest warrior this world has ever known was murdered. He was murdered by traitors who’re jealous of his accomplishments in life.

    I’m drinking a few beers to celebrate the life & many accomplishments of Gaius Julius Caesar.
    he was a cocksucker and he wrote his own history books. his armies had more Gauls fighting with them than against them. he benefitted from an organized supply system which had no equal until Napoleonic times. The numbers he quotes for opposing forces are so ridiculous that no modern historians take them seriously.

    and he still managed to get his ass kicked and nearly had his army destroyed by a far smaller Celtic force at Gergovia. And he could not hold Britain after a brief, failed invasion.

    Hannibal would have eaten his lunch.
     
    Imagine what Robert E. Lee could have done if he'd had more of an industrial base similar to the North. Although Gettysburg was a big mistake.
    Stonewall Jackson would have had a better chance at winning the war for the South.

    Lee was set in his Napoleonic tactics, learned during the Mexican war. whenever he became flustered, he reverted to costly frontal assaults which caused losses the south could not replace; he repeatedly lost sight of the fact that rifled muskets greatly outranged the smoothbores he learned his tactics on, and artillery had vastly improved as well.

    Jackson on the other hand was a student of technology and continually pleaded with Lee to allow him to put his new ideas into use. the one time Lee allowed it was at Chancellorsville, which was Jackson's final battle. However, his plan of imposing a confederate force directly in the path that the union army must take, condensing that force with secured flanks, and then allowing the federals to throw themselves against it while blasting them apart with massed firepower would have created a series of "bunker hills" that would have caused the north to waver and rethink a peace.
     
    he was a cocksucker and he wrote his own history books. his armies had more Gauls fighting with them than against them. he benefitted from an organized supply system which had no equal until Napoleonic times. The numbers he quotes for opposing forces are so ridiculous that no modern historians take them seriously.

    and he still managed to get his ass kicked and nearly had his army destroyed by a far smaller Celtic force at Gergovia. And he could not hold Britain after a brief, failed invasion.

    Hannibal would have eaten his lunch.
    Well, Hannibal didn’t fare so well w/ Scipio so let’s leave that conquered loser for another time.
     
    Well, Hannibal didn’t fare so well w/ Scipio so let’s leave that conquered loser for another time.

    Hannibal, with a small force of Carthaginian and Celt-Iberian infantry, and a handful of Celtic mercenaries, demonstrated tactical superiority that would have left Alexander stunned. He invaded the center of the Roman world - the powerhouse that left everybody shaking in their sandles - and utterly destroyed the legions in one battle after another. At Cannae, they encircled and annihilated a well supplied, professional Roman army many times their size, and inflicted a defeat so decisive that the very word 'Cannae' has become a textbook military term for a one-sided battle of encirclement and annihilation. Anywhere from 50-80,000 Romans were exterminated in one day. It is a showpiece of professionalism that has arguably never been surpassed.

    Caesar on the other hand invaded a divided tribal patchwork of Iron Age villages and rural tribes. They had no central authority and were always at war with each other. Caesar's Celtic auxiliaries outnumbered his Celtic enemies. All Caesar had to do was march from one oppidum to the next, put on a show of force, and have them open their doors and sign over more troops for Caesar. Despite his claims, few large battles were fought. Vercingetorix still kicked his ass until the entire massive Roman army ran him down.

    Caesar is more of a US Grant leader - a guy who knew he had overwhelming force and was simply able to use it and not fuck things up. Hannibal was in a class by himself.
     
    he might have had an ego problem but it was far from making him the greatest warrior in history I mean did he even fight before proclaiming himself emperor I thought mark Anthony was his general / the reason he had any power . or maybe it was a warning to men in the future of the enharent dangers of the evil honey do list which kills more men every year than all the wars , alcohol , and drugs combined . including 3 people in my neighborhood tonight alone one in a car accident , another fixing lights on a roof he lost his footing on , and anther a slip and fall off a curb that broke . all three were preventable by waiting till the next day and making the wife just wait but no to make them happy they put there lives in peril .
    Caesar was an excellent General.
    Never heard of the Gallic King Versingetorix I take it..?

     
    • Like
    Reactions: acudaowner
    Stonewall Jackson would have had a better chance at winning the war for the South.

    Lee was set in his Napoleonic tactics, learned during the Mexican war. whenever he became flustered, he reverted to costly frontal assaults which caused losses the south could not replace; he repeatedly lost sight of the fact that rifled muskets greatly outranged the smoothbores he learned his tactics on, and artillery had vastly improved as well.

    Jackson on the other hand was a student of technology and continually pleaded with Lee to allow him to put his new ideas into use. the one time Lee allowed it was at Chancellorsville, which was Jackson's final battle. However, his plan of imposing a confederate force directly in the path that the union army must take, condensing that force with secured flanks, and then allowing the federals to throw themselves against it while blasting them apart with massed firepower would have created a series of "bunker hills" that would have caused the north to waver and rethink a peace.
    All I know is.. "You couldn’t ride with Jo Shelby, 50 miles a day, fighting at every crook of the road, living on what you could pick up by the wayside and doing without sleep for the length of time that raid took, and ever amount to much of anything afterwards!"

    The Confederate who never surrendered, and instead sunk his battle flag in the Rio Grande and took his troops to go be a mercenary army for Emperor Maximilian.

    "Lee made it easy on the winners in the end; he yielded gracefully and the whole bloody mess could be treated as an exercise in tactical skill. North could get as emotional over Marse Bob as South. But Shelby didn’t soldier by rules that modern warriors made up to save their reputation in case they lost. He meant what he said. So now he neared the border with what was left of his division."

    Heres a good bit of his story intermixed with the tale of when he testified in defense of Frank James, Jesse's brother - both former troops under his command who went on to carry the lost cause long after the war was over:

    JEB Stuart was very impressive in his own right.. but being a very belligerent individual myself, theres a lot to be said and at least with me it carries a lot of weight to not fold when everyone else has.
     
    Stonewall Jackson would have had a better chance at winning the war for the South.

    Lee was set in his Napoleonic tactics, learned during the Mexican war. whenever he became flustered, he reverted to costly frontal assaults which caused losses the south could not replace; he repeatedly lost sight of the fact that rifled muskets greatly outranged the smoothbores he learned his tactics on, and artillery had vastly improved as well.

    Jackson on the other hand was a student of technology and continually pleaded with Lee to allow him to put his new ideas into use. the one time Lee allowed it was at Chancellorsville, which was Jackson's final battle. However, his plan of imposing a confederate force directly in the path that the union army must take, condensing that force with secured flanks, and then allowing the federals to throw themselves against it while blasting them apart with massed firepower would have created a series of "bunker hills" that would have caused the north to waver and rethink a peace.
    Longstreet was Lee's defensive Master.... Was unmatched at using terrain to maximum advantage as they were typically out manned by the north. He was genius at that. Probably why he begged Lee not to continue at Gettysburg. Horrible terrain disadvantage.
     
    Toured the battlefield at Gettysburg in 2020 with my wife and son. It's mind boggling just how much area it covered.
    20200817_175944.jpg
    20200817_181541.jpg
    20200817_181217.jpg
    20200817_165029.jpg