Admirable Losers

[Dachs]

War is Hell for everybody involved.

Not really. Some people can do very well out of war.

 

[innonimatu]

Except due to the socii, the Romans didn't just have to draw on central Italy. By contrast, the Greeks didn't have anything like that - the only Hellenistic state that admitted natives on a large scale was Baktria, but they obviously never fought Rome.

Rome's political stability was crap before that too. Massive social problems during the fifth and fourth centuries BC(E) ring a bell?

Most socii were from central and south Italy anyway. But Rome won even the socii war against some of those.

I wouldn't call its problems Rome had before the reforms of Marius massive, the senatorial class generally managed to hold on to its privileges. So what if they conceded veto power to representatives of the plebe, if they could bribe or even murder those when the issues got hot enough (controlling the army was a must for the last, of course)?
What I'd really like to know is if the walk-out on Rome by the plebeians really happened. It's just such a nice episode that I have difficulty believing it!

Try: Psychopathic.

We shouldn't judge past people using our standards... by the standards of their own time they were "insane" just on their unwillingness to concede a defeat.

And speaking of this, it seems that many or our admirable losers were just stubborn unlucky bastards or last-stand suicidal bastards.

 

[Dachs]

Most socii were from central and south Italy anyway. But Rome won even the socii war against some of those.

That's true, though you can lay that to leadership in large part, and the really terrible job of propaganda the Italics did on another, which enabled the Romans to co-opt a lot of their supposed enemies.

I wouldn't call its problems Rome had before the reforms of Marius massive, the senatorial class generally managed to hold on to its privileges. So what if they conceded veto power to representatives of the plebe, if they could bribe or even murder those when the issues got hot enough (controlling the army was a must for the last, of course)?

Oh, the overall end of the patrician/plebeian conflict was never really that much in doubt, because the patricians, as you said, could always employ bribery to get around the leges they passed giving the plebs more powers. And there were some like Clodius who were able to acquire the tribunate by somewhat questionable legal means anyway. The problem was instability in that issues kept popping up at inconvenient times.

What I'd really like to know is if the walk-out on Rome by the plebeians really happened. It's just such a nice episode that I have difficulty believing it!

Happened multiple times, actually. While the episode of Sicinius personally may not have been wholly truthful, the real argument about the secessio struggles was how many there actually were, not whether the plebs walked out at all.

 

[generalstaff]

Not really. Some people can do very well out of war.

You are right, I retract that statement

 

[Dachs]

You are right, I retract that statement

I was thinking more like the argyraspidai, actually. Political statements aren't my thing tbh.

 

[Camikaze]

The ANZACs would be the popular answer in this part of the world, but I personally see nothing particularly admirable about getting your arses handed to you by the locals when invading a sovereign nation, and largely through the stupidity of your own officers - not the British, as is the myth in this country. Kokoda was far more admirable, but we won that, albeit at one hell of a cost.

But we must perpetuate the myth that it was the fault of the British, or numerous schoolchildren will not be able to partake in the ritual Winston-Churchill-bashing sessions that have become such an ingrained part of our society. I've never understood why we celebrate the day we made a disastrous amphibious landing, invading another country, only to be forced to withdraw within nine months. I agree, Kokoda was far more admirable, and would fit well into the 'Admirable Losers' section, apart from the whole winning bit. How about Tobruk?

 

[Sharwood]

Well, the Okinawans may have partaken in war criimes (chances are good considering that they were part of the Imperial Japanese Army). However, it should be acknowledge that they were also victims of Japanese. The Okinawans were treated as second-class citizens, the best example I can think of right now is that they could not speak their native language. During the battle, Okinawan civilians suffered war crimes committed by soldiers of both sides; American Marines purposely shot civilians and the Japanese soldiers killed Okinawan civilians in caves to prevent them from being captured (this came from the Japanese soldiers who came from China and remembered how they treated the Chinese and expected the Americans to treat them the same way).

And considering the massacres and mass rapes that took place, I'd say those Japanese soldiers were about right. And I wouldn't consider the IJA's massacre of Okinawan civilians a war crime. After all, many Okinawan women committed suicide and killed their own children in advance of the American invasion, because Japanese propaganda had told them they would be raped and murdered. For probably the only time, Japanese propaganda was right. What the IJA did in Okinawa is more akin to mercy-killing, which, while not exactly pleasant, isn't in the same category.

As for the Okinawans being treated as second-class citizens: they still are. Japan is still a very racist country.

Not really. Some people can do very well out of war.

<Insert Halliburton reference here>

True enough. Several Japanese businessmen and politicians benefited massively from Japan's defeat. And that just an example from a losing nation. The victors often come out even better.

 

[Sharwood]

But we must perpetuate the myth that it was the fault of the British, or numerous schoolchildren will not be able to partake in the ritual Winston-Churchill-bashing sessions that have become such an ingrained part of our society. I've never understood why we celebrate the day we made a disastrous amphibious landing, invading another country, only to be forced to withdraw within nine months. I agree, Kokoda was far more admirable, and would fit well into the 'Admirable Losers' section, apart from the whole winning bit. How about Tobruk?

Tobruk ftw. Only problem there is that Rommel was an honourable enemy. Then again, so was Ataturk.

I too have never understood what's so great about screwing up an unnopposed amphibious landing, failing to take advantage of the abundant defensible terrain, and being defeated by the rightful owners of the land we'd invaded through our own stupidity. But since when has venerating stupidity been unusual in Australian society? It's practically a legal requirement to play professional sport nowadays.

 

[Dachs]

I too have never understood what's so great about screwing up an unnopposed amphibious landing, failing to take advantage of the abundant defensible terrain, and being defeated by the rightful owners of the land we'd invaded through our own stupidity.

The Greeks weren't at war yet, and when they did enter the war they were your allies.

 

[Sharwood]

The Greeks weren't at war yet, and when they did enter the war they were your allies.

The Greeks had been gone for centuries, you Near-East wh... Harlot.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Why do you keep mentioning how it was an invasion of a sovereign country inhabited by its rightful owners? They weren't trying to make Gallipoli part of the Empire, and the Turks had declared war, so what's the problem?

 

[Camikaze]

Why do you keep mentioning how it was an invasion of a sovereign country inhabited by its rightful owners? They weren't trying to make Gallipoli part of the Empire, and the Turks had declared war, so what's the problem?

In Australia we have a public holiday to commemorate it. So it seems a bit stupid to us. Yay! We failed! Therefore, we must make a mockery of it, whether it was right or wrong.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I know the whole idea behind it, but you weren't the one who mentioned like three times that the place being invaded belonged to someone else.

 

[Sharwood]

I know the whole idea behind it, but you weren't the one who mentioned like three times that the place being invaded belonged to someone else.

I'm mentioning it for the reason Camikaze mentioned. We got our butts whipped through our own stupidity, executing a plan that wasn't much brighter. The more that it can be mocked, the better, whether the reasons are legitimate or not.

 

[Dachs]

And speaking of this, it seems that many or our admirable losers were just stubborn unlucky bastards or last-stand suicidal bastards.

Yeah, being unlucky is a huge factor in my estimation. But I don't think poor Nikephoros Phokas was unlucky; he was very clearly the victim of a vile plot by the Empress and Ioann Tzimiskes that he had no real way of preventing.

The Greeks had been gone for centuries, you Near-East wh... Harlot.

lolwut

The more that it can be mocked, the better, whether the reasons are legitimate or not.

oic

 

[say1988]

The ANZACs would be the popular answer in this part of the world, but I personally see nothing particularly admirable about getting your arses handed to you by the locals when invading a sovereign nation, and largely through the stupidity of your own officers - not the British, as is the myth in this country. Kokoda was far more admirable, but we won that, albeit at one hell of a cost.

I watched Gallipoli in school when I was 13 or 14, and it was just a couple weeks ago that I learned the bad general is apparently and Aussie (and the good Generals weren't nearly as good).
You can't blame the men for the situation they were put into, that is the government and high commands fault.

 

[Camikaze]

I watched Gallipoli in school when I was 13 or 14, and it was just a couple weeks ago that I learned the bad general is apparently and Aussie (and the good Generals weren't nearly as good).
You can't blame the men for the situation they were put into, that is the government and high commands fault.

And this is probably why they are viewed as admirable losers. You can't blame the soldiers who fought there, but the whole idea of celebrating it is a bit mindless.

 

[civiijkw]

I don't remember seeing Jim Bowie, Davy Crocket and the rest of the Alamo defenders mentioned yet in this thread.

 

[Sharwood]

lolwut

oic

Did Greece own Gallipoli in 1915? Or since the fall of Byzantium? No? I stand by my point.

And oic means what?

 

[Camikaze]

OIC- Oh, I see?