StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Afaik, Monte Cassino (WW2) was pretty bad as well. Must have been a terrifying sight to have that monestary looming waaaaay above you when you were an allied soldier, not to mention trying to conquer the damn thing

Adrian Laguna wrote:

That NOS Guy wrote:I'll take the Somme over Verdun. Petain at least didn't order the first wave to march through no-mans land thinking the enemy would be flattened by the pre-battle barriage.

Then again, war is never really a cakewalk no matter how you look at it.

You mean that in Verdun the soldiers marched across no man's land like they were in a fucking parade?.

It wasn't in Verdun they did that. IIRC, the Brits did it somewhere early in the war (1914) but can't remember the battle

I would say the worst is to be a ship sailor than an infantryman in any war.

A death in the icy waters being caught in an iron/wooden coffin... It's better to die from a bullet. At least that's fast. You'll have that option anyway, if you don't want to die from hunger.

I wouldn't have wanted to be a Russian soldier in the divisions that marched up Raate Road in Winter War. They lost two entire divisions with pretty negligible losses on the Finnish side.

Edi

Stas Bush wrote:I would say the worst is to be a ship sailor than an infantryman in any war.

A death in the icy waters being caught in an iron/wooden coffin...

Cold Water kills pretty fast. You don't want to get wounded in several battles on the east front.

I have to say the Battle of the Somme or any of the Ypres battles (all of which my great grandfather was in and lived through). Yes, ancient battles with warhammer or sword wielding barbarians gutting you is nasty, as is being stuck on a ship that is encircled by a wolfpack or finding Charlie is throwing SAMs in your part of space.

But none of that compares to the horrific shit in WWI that I cannot believe happened, both on the enemy's and our side. Gas (not nerve gas, but equally vicious chlorine or phosgene), Field Marshall Haig and the use of trench warfare and walking "charges" as the dawn of the Maxim comes about do not a survivable war make. In those battles, it was hard to tell who wanted you dead more; the Germans or your supposed leaders.

wautd wrote: It wasn't in Verdun they did that. IIRC, the Brits did it somewhere early in the war (1914) but can't remember the battle

The Somme and likely several others. This is what happens when technology, and thus, warfare changes dramatically over the lifetime of those that were used to standing in a line unloading single-shot Martini-Henries into uncultured people. Nothing would terrify me more than being a 14-year-old passed off as older, stuck in a trench and hearing a whistle circa 1 July, 1916.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
But none of that compares to the horrific shit in WWI that I cannot believe happened, both on the enemy's and our side. Nerve gas, Field Marshall Haig and the use of trench warfare and walking "charges" as the dawn of the Maxim comes about do not a survivable war make. In those battles, it was hard to tell who wanted you dead more; the Germans or your supposed leaders.

+ offcourse the constant bombardments, flametrowers, rats, lice... Which brings me to the following question. Last night in the docu about Verdun they showed footage of soldiers with bad case of shell-shock (non stop heavy shaking). Was it curable or permanent?

wautd wrote:
+ offcourse the constant bombardments. Which brings me to the following question. Last night in the docu about Verdun they showed footage of soldiers with bad case of shell-shock (non stop heavy shaking). Was it curable or permanent?

That can depend. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder can last for years to life if help to overcome such psychological problems isn't sought. Some people will just instantly crack and try to run from the trouble. One of the most disgusting thing my nation has ever done and always makes me sick, is the way officers were told to shoot anyone who wasn't marching in file towards the enemy. The thought that someone might just not be able to take this shit never occurred to them, so it was instant treason with justice exacted by a .38. There were whole hospitals in isolated parts of the country back then that lasted up to WWII even, that held those who survived the war and had so much trauma, they couldn't go back to society.

It's bad PR to have the public see kids come back from "victorious" battles as total mental wrecks, so stuff upper lip and keep giving us volunteers.

how about those poor horsemen charging those russian guns...

Stas Bush wrote:I would say the worst is to be a ship sailor than an infantryman in any war.

A death in the icy waters being caught in an iron/wooden coffin... It's better to die from a bullet. At least that's fast. You'll have that option anyway, if you don't want to die from hunger.

That assumes the bullet kills you outright, and you don’t get to slowly die over multiple hours or days or even weeks if infection sets into even a minor wound and it can’t be treated. I'd certainly take a quick death in icy water over being poisoned by my on feces because some shell fragments tore open by guts.

Sea Skimmer wrote:...I'd certainly take a quick death in icy water over being poisoned by my on feces because some shell fragments tore open by guts.

Heavy Armoured Brigade poetry for the masses, direct from The Great Leader.

The quality of medical care during the ACW has always made me shudder; consider practically any battle from it my candidate for this thread..."modern" weaponry and wounds, medieval style medicine (for all intents and purposes), horrifying shit.

A lungfull of phosgene at Ypres would've been lovely, too. Drowining in green foam produced by your own lungs.

Then again, the battles that weren't horrible are pretty few and far between.

Edi wrote:I wouldn't have wanted to be a Russian soldier in the divisions that marched up Raate Road in Winter War. They lost two entire divisions with pretty negligible losses on the Finnish side.

Edi

...or the soviet divisions that were detailed to knock out the coastal defence guns around some place I can't remember the name of. Pushing 10,000 men+tanks into 6, 10 (which are equipped with shrapnel shells) and 12 inch naval rifles and a couple dozen maxim guns over Baltic seaice. Literally platoons of tanks and companies of infantry killed per salvo.

Frank Hipper wrote:
The quality of medical care during the ACW has always made me shudder; consider practically any battle from it my candidate for this thread..."modern" weaponry and wounds, medieval style medicine (for all intents and purposes), horrifying shit.

A point that the late Shelby Foote made: Getting hit in any bone by low-velocity, .58 caliber soft lead bullets will blow a goodly portion of said bone out the exit wound and pulverize whats left. Missing 3-4 inches of radius or tibia leaves little posibility for anything but amputation.

Jalinth wrote:Of course no one took him seriously. After all, what could a damn rebellious ex-colonial hack from a mickey mouse military teach the European powers?

It isn't just Buford, Europe in general ignored the American Civil War. I'm not sure if the Americans themselves failed to learn the lessons of the CW, American tactics during WWI is not a subject I'm familiar with.

Cold Harbour - Confederates in trenches inside a forest anahilate charging Union forces.

Checellorsville (or was it Fredricksburg?) - Confederates take cover behind a stone wall and cut the advancing Federals to ribbons.

Gettysburng - Union forces are dug-in, fortified, have plenty of artillery support, and a mile-long shooting gallery in front of them. One hour of constant artillery barrage does jack-shit to them. Rebels advance, Yankees kill them and rape the corpse.

How is it that nobody noticed that charging a prepared position was a great way to get your men killed and do a shitload of nothing? And that was with soldiers armed with fucking rifled muskets, a few single-shot rifles, and even fewer repeater rifles. They say hindsight is 20-20, but consider that the trench warfare the happened in the Great War could have been extrapolated to a certain degree from the ACW.

Adrian Laguna wrote: You mean that in Verdun the soldiers marched across no man's land like they were in a fucking parade?

I said Petain didn't order it done, Haig did. It was a quick way to illistrate my point of taking the Somme over Verdun.

I'd probably have to vote Stalingrad. I seem to recall reading that there were points during the battle where the average life expectancy of a new soldier sent to the front was approximately 24 hours.

Civil War Man wrote:4. Often have to carry massive amounts of gear (the rifles alone weighed 20 pounds) for 25+ miles every day. During the hottest days, one could follow in the wake of a formation and gather up discarded coats, backpacks, knives, and even firearms off the side of the road.

Twenty pound rifles? Which one? The Whitworth was 7.5 pounds, the Brunswick was 9.1 pounds, the "short" Enfield 8.7, the Spencer 9, Springfield Model 1866 (modified Civil War Springfield) only 8.3 pounds....not one of them breaks into double digit weights, let alone reaching twenty pounds.

That NOS Guy wrote:

Adrian Laguna wrote: You mean that in Verdun the soldiers marched across no man's land like they were in a fucking parade?

I said Petain didn't order it done, Haig did. It was a quick way to illistrate my point of taking the Somme over Verdun.

I thought you were taking Somme over Verdun as a battle you would rather be in. What you really meant is Somme was worse than Verdun. Is this correct?

Admiral Valdemar wrote: That can depend. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder can last for years to life if help to overcome such psychological problems isn't sought.

PTSD is permanent, you can only learn methods to deal with it through treatment and try to live a half-way normal life. The precursors to PTSD such as Combat Stress Reaction (CSR) can be cured provided they are caught quickly and treated. Treatment for CSR involves removing the subject from the trench lines to a more secure rear area, like the rest area for the trench line and getting the subject to rest and relax, get a hot meal into him. And get the medics to go over him, the idea is to get him to calm down and get him back with his buddies on the line as quick as possible. Typically the guys you see that *snap* are experiancing CSR, not PTSD. PTSD symptoms rarely manifest themselves in a danger zone but rather when the subject is safe, like in a Wal-Mart or at home.

I'm not saying it's the worst, and Adrian already mentioned it, but Chancellorsville had to suck for the Union. There were points when the Confederate soldiers were cheering for the Union bravery by charging up the hill into enemy fire again and again.

Adrian Laguna wrote:

Jalinth wrote:Of course no one took him seriously. After all, what could a damn rebellious ex-colonial hack from a mickey mouse military teach the European powers?

It isn't just Buford, Europe in general ignored the American Civil War. I'm not sure if the Americans themselves failed to learn the lessons of the CW, American tactics during WWI is not a subject I'm familiar with.

Cold Harbour - Confederates in trenches inside a forest anahilate charging Union forces.

Checellorsville (or was it Fredricksburg?) - Confederates take cover behind a stone wall and cut the advancing Federals to ribbons.

Gettysburng - Union forces are dug-in, fortified, have plenty of artillery support, and a mile-long shooting gallery in front of them. One hour of constant artillery barrage does jack-shit to them. Rebels advance, Yankees kill them and rape the corpse.

How is it that nobody noticed that charging a prepared position was a great way to get your men killed and do a shitload of nothing? And that was with soldiers armed with fucking rifled muskets, a few single-shot rifles, and even fewer repeater rifles. They say hindsight is 20-20, but consider that the trench warfare the happened in the Great War could have been extrapolated to a certain degree from the ACW.

Because of snobbish European superiority of the period. I can't remember who said it anymore but the ACW was "... a battle between 2 armed mobs from which nothing can be learned."

And IIRC, there were trenches in ACW fighting, at least by the end. I remember another quote along the lines "almost without instruction, Union (or Condederate) soldiers would start digging fighting positions on stops." You also saw a few battles with massive movements of troops by train and the fundamentals of total war, government censorship, total gearing the economy towards war, drafting. Truely, from which nothing can be learned. You know what they say about not learning from history...

In the ACW, there was even an episode of using explosives to undermine and blow up a Confederate defensive position outside of Petersburg.

Kegs of blackpowder was packed into the mine, and set off from about 500ft away. The crater is still there, part of a museum dedicated to the battle.

The battle of Isandlawana, January 1879, South Africa.
An invading British camp was wiped out by nearly 24,000 Zulu natives.
Though armed with cannon and rifles, the roughly 600 Brits were disposed of with spears.
I try to imagine what it must have felt like to see Zulu as far as the horizon, and knowing that within the hour your guts would be stabbed clean through with a spear.
That battle gets my vote. (Reference: the movie 'Zulu Dawn')

That assumes the bullet kills you outright, and you don’t get to slowly die over multiple hours or days or even weeks if infection sets into even a minor wound and it can’t be treated.

Well, that's assuming the same can't happen to you on a ship. But it can happen there also. And the quality of medicine on a ship is not superior in any way to that of the land front.

Equinox2003

An invading British camp was wiped out by nearly 24,000 Zulu natives.

Uh... I was waiting for someone to bring up the Zulu

The Dark wrote:Twenty pound rifles? Which one? The Whitworth was 7.5 pounds, the Brunswick was 9.1 pounds, the "short" Enfield 8.7, the Spencer 9, Springfield Model 1866 (modified Civil War Springfield) only 8.3 pounds....not one of them breaks into double digit weights, let alone reaching twenty pounds.

Combination brain fart and typo. Meant to say 10 pounds.

It's just after marching for a while having to carry that fucker with one arm...

By the way, Adrian, Qwerty, the battle was Fredericksburg. I should know since the battle is considered to be one of the defining moments of the regiment I reenact (28th Massachusetts, one of the regiments of the Irish Brigade). Basically, they took massive casualties, but made it further than pretty much any other unit involved in the charge.

And I should probably add, while much of Europe turned up their noses at the Americans, especially after the Civil War ended, European observers who followed the Union or Confederate armies were fucking dumbfounded by both what American troops were willing to go through and by how viciously the two sides fought when they met in battle.

Equinox2003 wrote:The battle of Isandlawana, January 1879, South Africa.
An invading British camp was wiped out by nearly 24,000 Zulu natives.
Though armed with cannon and rifles, the roughly 600 Brits were disposed of with spears.
I try to imagine what it must have felt like to see Zulu as far as the horizon, and knowing that within the hour your guts would be stabbed clean through with a spear.
That battle gets my vote. (Reference: the movie 'Zulu Dawn')

I suppose it's made up for by the many battles where the British killed thousands and thousands of charging Africans and taking only double digit casualities, thanks to machine guns.

There is a Sub-Saharan African hymn that includes:
"...How you spread your quiet gospel with the gattling gun."

Adrian Laguna wrote:

That NOS Guy wrote:I'll take the Somme over Verdun. Petain at least didn't order the first wave to march through no-mans land thinking the enemy would be flattened by the pre-battle barriage.

Then again, war is never really a cakewalk no matter how you look at it.

You mean that in Verdun the soldiers marched across no man's land like they were in a fucking parade? It might have worked by incapacitating the German machine-gunners with fits of laughter. Unfortunately, the preceding artillery barrage pounded the sense of humour out of them.

What I find to be so stupid about WWI is that half a century previous, General Longstreet had forseen that charging trenches was all shades of stupid, and had been proven right in Gettysburg when Pickett's charge was cut to ribbons, suffering approx. 60% casualties. For comparison, the Light Brigade of the famous poem, suffered 45% casualties.

On top of that, nobody outside the United States seemed to pay attention when General Buford rewrote the book on cavalry tactics. Cavalry still had its uses in WWI, due to lack of motorization, but those uses did not include charging the enemy.

Or how about the 04-05 Russo-Japanese war were ww1 conditions existed?