Native Americans vs The Mongol Horde, Round 2

[pawpaw]

Originally posted by Xen
right. It would, IF they were all pueblo...

they wouldnt be.

after all D.Shaffers' points are compleatlly valid...

as far as i know, the indians only united to fight their invaders twice, in the ohio country in the early 1800's--they still lost-- and the custer campains---still lost in the end. so the idea that 10-20 tribes will all of sudden unite to fight the invaders is not happening--think aztec's, neighbors were more than willing to help against traditional enemies.

what would they do against the navaho and inca cities--the mongols stormed chinese cities with populations in the millions and the most modern defences--are you kidding me. plus the incas were not around in 1250--1300 yet ( i may be wrong on that, they may have just begun their rise)

mesoamerica--i've already stated that mesoamerica in 1250-1300 was between the fallen toltec's and yet to come aztec's---scattered , uncooperating city states.

ambushes by the natives--as i've said, the steppes tribes have been experts at ambush since the coming of the horse

 

[pawpaw]

Originally posted by stalin006
I KNOW WHERE ARIZONA AND NEW MEXICO IS! i live in tx u know?

i want details on the so called glorious battle, was it like wounded knee?

i quess i didn't or i wouldn't of posted such info for you

there was no glorious battle, the spanish were scattered across the countryside in little ranches. the priests had pissed off the pueblos to the point of no return. under a leader named pope ( no kidding, a regious war withe enemy named pope) several pueblo citiys rose up and slaughter the little settlements. the remaining fled to stanta fe( the nearest real town ) and then to the rio grande. in 1692 200 spanish soldiers returned and put as many people as they could caught to the sword.

basicly spanish power in the region was a giant bluff, so when it was called it collasped

 

[Xen]

civs have been around in meso america since about 300 BC according to a book entitled "Historical Atlas of the Classical world" (and it covers the ENTIRE world during the western classical era ) it has bese maps spanning from 500 bce- ce 600...

 

[pawpaw]

Originally posted by Xen
civs have been around in meso america since about 300 BC according to a book entitled "Historical Atlas of the Classical world" (and it covers the ENTIRE world during the western classical era ) it has bese maps spanning from 500 bce- ce 600...

never said there wasn't, i said the great toltec civ fell in 1200 and the aztec civ did not rise till about 1350, in between they were scattered city states-- i didn't say they went back to square one, just not one united power

 

[pawpaw]

lets face the facts, only time and distance would of stop them from conqueroring a large chuck of america. no matter where they landed they would of suceeded. but as in asia and europe the distance between the capital and the frontiers was to much and a local dynasty would of broke out in america. they would of not been able to conqueror from canada to argentina, but would of set up a dynasty that would of still been there when the europeans arrived

 

[Xen]

actually you would be surprised at how large some of the empires were between 1-600 CE...

buts its time to let out a secret...

I dont know much about Ntive American civilization, and while I still think that a good deal of tribes could force the mongols out, its all based on theory, and the over all results of N.American (not meso American) tribes against western powers...

 

[pawpaw]

Originally posted by Xen
actually you would be surprised at how large some of the empires were between 1-600 CE...

no not really, remember i looked up info on these guys for your bronze age mod. i know around 600ad teotihuacan had a population of 200,000 was the 6th largest city in the world, and their pyramid of the sun is the 3rd largest pyramid in the world. the aztec's were just the last in a line of civ's

 

[Sims2789]

the Mongols would have frozen their @sses off in Alaska or they would have burned alive in the American Southwest.

 

[Turner]

Originally posted by Djingis Khan


The small russian militia-expeditions to Alaska in the 1800's can't be compared to the mongol world-conquering warmachine

/DK M

You're failing to realize the situation: The Russians had a technological edge over the Tlingit, and yet they still lost. And they weren't militia expeditions. They were settlements in southeast alaska. Sitka, for example. . .

Now, the Mongols might have been able to fight in the cold. (In fact, Southeastern Alaska isn't much colder than Kansas in the winter.) The Tlingit, however, we only warriors when forced to be. They were traders, and hunters and fisherman. They were in contact with several tribes around them. It would not have been the huge mongol horde against the tiny Tlingit. Most, if not all, of the Athabascan tribes would have joined the fight.

I don't recall exact details over the wars in the early 1800's. It's on the web, not hard to find, I just don't recall them however. But the Alaskan tribes would have seen the threat for what it was, and responded accordingly.

But I do think they would have been 'burned alive' in the Southwest. . . .

 

[Sims2789]

But I do think they would have been 'burned alive' in the Southwest. . . .

i don't mean this literally. how would you like to send an army through Death Valley.

 

[Turner]

Dude. . . I grew up in Fremont, just south of you. I now live in Kansas. Yes, they would have had a hard time adapting to it. So while 'burned alive' wasn't meant literally, I do agree with your sentiment. It would have been tough for them to adapt to it, especially if they were moving down so quickly. . .

 

[Djingis Khan]

A: People give metal to much credit. Iron and steel are more durable then stone weapons would be, but a stone weapon is still hard enough to penetrate metal armor. Never mind sling bullets which dont really need to penetrate far anyways.

No, stones can't penetrate steel. There ARE a huge difference between stone and quality forged steel

/DK M

 

[Djingis Khan]

Originally posted by Xen
but he point is that eventually, over all, no matter what gains made, the Mogols would loose

In your dreams pal! You know nothing about the mongols, that's clear

/DK M

 

[Djingis Khan]

Originally posted by Xen
Mogolia is tepp land, if you want deserts, then look at the Gobi, i dont belive any permanent settlers form the mongols, or otherwise were situated there..., besides that, the Gobi, and southwest are very differnt deserts...

Hey, once again you prove to be completely ignorant of the mongols and their life and warfare. There were many mongol clans living in the frigid Gobi area, and the mongols were very used to deserts. For example, in the war against Khwarizm 1219 Chinggis Khan crossed the dry Kizil-Kum desert for hundreds of miles with 30 000 men to make a surprice attack on the city of Bukhara, which was taken. The inhabitans of the city didn't believe their eyes when the mongols appeared out of the desert which was thought to be uncrossable

/DK M

 

[Djingis Khan]

Originally posted by sims2789
the Mongols would have frozen their @sses off in Alaska or they would have burned alive in the American Southwest.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Please you must be joking!!!!?
Do you have any idea whatsoever of the temperetures in Mongolia and southern Siberia??? Mongolia and southern Siberia has the most extreme and varied climate in the world. In the winter, the temperature can climnbe down to -60 C with icestorms and blizzards, and in the summer it can get as hot as +50 C with devastating draught. No son, the mongols would have thrived and felt home in alaska and Arizaona!

/DK M

I understand your frustration with dealing with these, but pls keep it civil and be more polite. Thanks - XIII

 

[Djingis Khan]

Originally posted by Xen


not the ones in heavey forests or mountains

The mongols defeated the northern Russian principalities in the taiga forrested area and they were experts in mountain warfare, completely subduing the Afghan tribes for instance

/DK M

 

[Djingis Khan]

I think the hardest Natives for the Mongols to subdue would be the desert Indians in the southwest, like the Apache. These were some of the toughest fighters in the world. They could run across desert for days and nights without rest or water. They fought to the death, rarely surrendering. It was a saying that an Apache with a bow and arrows was feared more than ten men with guns.

The apache guerilla fighters with breech-loading rifles and horses may have been a peril for some settlers in the 19th century, but they would be no match at all for the mongol horsemen with thousands of horsearchers and thousands of armoured heavy cavalry.

/DK M

 

[Djingis Khan]

This discussion is so worthless, obvioulsy everyone have heard of the "romantic, titanic feats" by the "native braves" but very few have any knowledge at all on the mongols and their empire. They defeated the great empires of their day - China, Persia, Tukestan and the Caliphate. In addition to that they military defeated the other steppe nomads of the immense eurasian steppes and desert areas, they defeated the mountain tribes of Afghanistan, they subdued the inhabitans of the caucasus, Pamir, Hindukush and Iranian mountains. They also conquered the russian states and defeated the best that western Europe could counter with. They were nomads of the frigid steppes, forest and desert areas of the harsch mongolian and siberian inviroment, they grew up in the saddles as warriors and handled their bows and lances as experts. From Korea to Hungary, From Siberia to Syria they defeated enemies, and even though they sprung from a nomad population of a mere million they would carve out the greatest empire in world history, containing most of the world population back then. Only twice were they seriously defeated - by the vietnamese in the djungle (their army was then mostly Chinese and local militia) and in Syria against the numerical superior mamlukes (which they defeated later in some minor battles). You may have seen some western movies featuring the romantic, heroic native warriors of america. But what did they aclompish compared to the mongols? Nothing, they occasionally overcame some european detachements but in the end they were crushed, subdued and in some cases wiped out.

/DK M

 

[Xen]

@Djingis Khan-hey, think we can lay of the slander? I like a good thread as good as anyone but NOT when someone is reduced to ridculing other people to try to proove thire point. I will not hesitate to ask super mod Leftys' opinion on the matter if such activity continues.


A)your new here, so i wont balme you for not knowing that I have admited many a time that I know little of the far east, my specialty is Rome, Greece, and the other states of the mediteeraean sea during the classical, and pre-classical era.

B) yes, stone CAN penitrate steel, the spanish said it often enough about Aztec obsidian swoards, the only reason that you dont here more about it becase- A. no is particuarlaey interested in it, and B. the spanish werent the ones doing the real fighting then.

C)Russia, and Afganastan are a world of differnce from the American hinterlands,m with no trails to cover, only those to forge, and IIRC, the mongols never steped foot where othe conqourers had not steped before, and the trails of civilization were open to them

D)you try fielding heavey armoured cavalry in the southwest, and then then tell me how successful this would have been, becase i assure you, I dont care how long your buddies have spent in the Gobi, they are going top have difficulty at best deploying them there.

C)I also earge to you to learn about such tribes as the Commanche, and the Soux, the real warrior tribes of the area, the ones who were giving the US milatary all that trouble, and fending off FAR more then mere "detachments", and farmore along the lines of a full, fully trained army expedition.

D)I would also like to inform you that Chian was NOT as hard as you may have thought it was to defeat, it was split up into three kingdoms, all of which were comparitivlly weak to the united empre that they had once been under the Han (I know some chinese history, via interest induced by our Mod XIII), the Caliphate in the middle east was NEVER a united empire, only united by Religion, and I think its quite clear that that is hardely somthing the nations of old, nor today will compleatlly unite for.

E)the Mongols are hardley the best empire in history, thet would not even make the top 100 IMNSHO

 

[Djingis Khan]

China was not weak when the mongols invaded, actually the three chinese states were strong, especially the Khitan-Chin. All of the three states managed to field hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of men against the mongols during 1211-1260.
To suppose that small native tribes without horses and metal could beat the imperial mongol warmachine is stupidity, and I won't vaste my time proving this since you already have made up your mind about it in advance.
And stone penetrating steel - I believe that first when pigs fly and hell freezes

/DK M