Made Man, post: 31939607, member: 1786 wrote::mjlol:
[USER=28792]@videogamestashbox.com[/USER] I don't feel like quoting all that but you basically said a lot without really saying anything at all . I'm the type of dude that welcomes enlightenment and education but nothing you said changes the facts that the Zulu would get wrecked due to them not having proper armor or a supporting Calvary. You can quote whomever you want and try to analyze everything i said, doesn't change anything. i'll address your 3 points.
1.) You are over thinking this to make it a viable discussion. I don't have any assumptions about the Zulu or the Spartans. It's simply about military equipment, tactics and resources available. And i don't have to assume what other posters biases are when it is clearly shown, without a lick of common sense. Guys are in here pretending Zulu warriors can outflank horses and trying to dismiss Calvary all together. That's almost equivalent to one nation now having Aircraft and Naval Superiority vs a nation that doesn't have any...... do i need to say more? That's not me with any pre-conceived political views, ideals or biases.
2.) This is one of those points where you really didn't say anything. Yes, historians have made comparisons. So what? Doesn't mean they are saying that the Zulus in the 1800s can put up a fight against the Spartans of 200 B.C.
3.) "Damn near all non-industrial societies essentially "transform farmers into warriors" I'm not even sure why you bring that up."- videogamestashbox.com
No, the Spartans specifically out of all Greek civilizations were professional warriors who trained since they were young. Spartans had slaves to do all of their farming and agriculture . The Zulu mainly changed to a warrior society when Shaka came to power.
Luckily you don't need to quote it just read and comprehend it, which you failed to do on that 2nd part which leads me to how you failed at that comprehension...
0. My point of contention has nothing to do with if the Zulus would win, their armor, or supporting Calvary. Those are your gripes not mine...
Not only are they not my gripes I've specifically said back on page 3.
videogamestashbox.com, post: 31936610, member: 28792 wrote: [CENTER](actually i'd be more interested in how Zulus manage Cavalry warfare on a massive scale)[/CENTER]
I.E. I've taken no position either way. I'm simply interested in the validity / suitability / integrity of this discussion, which is what I'm defending. But you are so wrapped up in your own B.S. you can't even see I'm discussing something different. Now lets get into those 3 points....videogamestashbox.com, post: 31936792, member: 28792 wrote: EDIT:
Also note I never gave a definitive position either way. I know enough to know that there are to many variable to take into consideration. The only reasonable inquires to be made is what tools, tactics, and precedents each has at their disposal.
1.
2. Goes right back to my starting point above. You are so far up your own ass that you don't see that I'm not arguing who could "win" or "put up a fight".
I'm arguing that the topic of discussion is normal and valid. These kinda comparisons are par for course to most people who's done a decent level of studying history.
From tv shows...
Episode list
Season 1
- Apache vs. Gladiator
- Viking vs. Samurai
- Spartan vs. Ninja
- Pirate vs. Knight
- Yakuza vs. Mafia
- Green Berets vs. Spetznaz
- Shaolin Monk vs. Maori Warrior
- William Wallace vs. Shaka Zulu
- Irish Republican Army vs. Taliban
YouTube videos
https://youtu.be/afqhBODc_8U
To online forums ....
https://historum.com/threads/rome-vs-as ... ans.95480/
https://historum.com/threads/mongols-vs ... hts.12066/
https://historum.com/threads/massed-mel ... try.98693/
https://historum.com/threads/romans-vs-aztecs.10374/
But instead simply having a normal discussion and calling it a day you over here on some....
[CENTER]"Zulus vs Spartans"
[/CENTER]Who cares if people aren't putting much attention into their arguments. Make yours and keep it pushing.
3. Since you want to quote, lets be clear that the quote you post of me, is me quoting you...
Made Man, post: 31937051, member: 1786 wrote:I’m just speaking on championing an African Military to fight the Cacs. Dudes letting that cloud their judgement. Shaka reforming fighting with a short spear in and shield is great for that civilization in Africa, but really insignificant in the grand scheme of things in the world and a few thousand years too late. I admire the fighting spirit and how he transformed farmers into warriors but He mainly dominated other African tribes. I know that’s hard to hear but it is what it is .
If the point of you bringing that up is to state that they were professional warriors then great state that as an attribute of the Spartans and ask for commentary on that aspect as pertains to the ZULUs. Which I've already posted if you actually read what I posted before.
Captain Allen Gardiner wrote:
'The whole kingdom may be considered as a camp, and every male belongs to one or other of the following orders:- "Umpakati", veterans; "Izimpohlo" and "Insizwa", younger soldiers; "Amabutu" lads who have not served in war. The two former are distinguished by rings on their heads; the others do not shave their hair. Throughout the country there are "Ekanda", or barrack-towns, in which a number of each class are formed into a regiment, from six hundred to a thousand strong, and where they are obliged to assemble during the half year. . . . In the whole country there are said to be sixteen large "ekandas" and several of a smaller size, and it is supposed that they can bring fifty thousand men into the field.'(12)