|
|
Post by spoonyrumble on Feb 14, 2020 11:24:39 GMT
Momčilo Gavrić from Serbia was even younger he was only 7 years old when he became part of the Serbian army in 1914. The fuck.....
|
|
|
|
Post by spoonyrumble on Feb 14, 2020 11:28:30 GMT
Momčilo Gavrić from Serbia was even younger he was only 7 years old when he became part of the Serbian army in 1914. The fuck..... Was just reading his wiki, this would make one heck of a film if one aint been done already 😁👍
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Feb 14, 2020 12:10:48 GMT
Have you seen cinematic recreations or illustrations of how battles were fought in the centuries before WW2. Marching towards people shooting at you makes trench warfare look sensible by comparison. It doesn't really. Those weapons didn't have the fire rate or the accuracy of weapons of World War I. Part of the reason World War I ended in trench warfare was because firepower had increased significantly but mobility didn't. So initially they tried to employ those types of tactics which is why part of the reason why the British had 57k casuaties including 19k dead in the first day on the Somme. Imagine charging into an enemy that has machine guns and deadly artillery. I rather march against line infantry that will fire one shot and then spend a significant amount of time reloading.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Feb 14, 2020 12:13:48 GMT
Have you seen cinematic recreations or illustrations of how battles were fought in the centuries before WW2. Marching towards people shooting at you makes trench warfare look sensible by comparison. It doesn't really. Those weapons didn't have the fire rate or the accuracy of weapons of World War I. Part of the reason World War I ended in trench warfare was because firepower had increased significantly but mobility didn't. So initially they tried to employ those types of tactics which is why part of the reason why the British had 57k casuaties including 19k dead in the first day on the Somme. Imagine charging into an enemy that has machine guns and deadly artillery. I rather march against line infantry that will fire one shot and then spend a significant amount of time reloading. I still wouldn’t want to be in the first line when advancing though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Feb 14, 2020 12:20:23 GMT
It doesn't really. Those weapons didn't have the fire rate or the accuracy of weapons of World War I. Part of the reason World War I ended in trench warfare was because firepower had increased significantly but mobility didn't. So initially they tried to employ those types of tactics which is why part of the reason why the British had 57k casuaties including 19k dead in the first day on the Somme. Imagine charging into an enemy that has machine guns and deadly artillery. I rather march against line infantry that will fire one shot and then spend a significant amount of time reloading. I still wouldn’t want to be in the first line when advancing though. Well I agree. But World War 1 trench warfare was brutal. Human wave attacks worked when you fired unreliable weapons maybe once or twice and then had to fight hand to hand. When they started using Gatling guns and other rapid fire weapons, those sorts of attacks were almost suicidal.
|
|
|
|
Post by spoonyrumble on Feb 14, 2020 12:33:26 GMT
Have you seen cinematic recreations or illustrations of how battles were fought in the centuries before WW2. Marching towards people shooting at you makes trench warfare look sensible by comparison. It doesn't really. Those weapons didn't have the fire rate or the accuracy of weapons of World War I. Part of the reason World War I ended in trench warfare was because firepower had increased significantly but mobility didn't. So initially they tried to employ those types of tactics which is why part of the reason why the British had 57k casuaties including 19k dead in the first day on the Somme. Imagine charging into an enemy that has machine guns and deadly artillery. I rather march against line infantry that will fire one shot and then spend a significant amount of time reloading. You know that right to bear arms that so many Americans love? Yeah, that was written when guns were like how you just described them, 1 shot every few minutes. Going on a mass killing spree would have been very difficult. Nowadays you got guns that can fire 1,000 bullets in under 30 seconds....perhaps it it time to change the law.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Feb 14, 2020 12:52:31 GMT
I still wouldn’t want to be in the first line when advancing though. Well I agree. But World War 1 trench warfare was brutal. Human wave attacks worked when you fired unreliable weapons maybe once or twice and then had to fight hand to hand. When they started using Gatling guns and other rapid fire weapons, those sorts of attacks were almost suicidal. Yeah, the generals were slow at getting used to modern warfare. My maternal grandmother’s first husband died in WW1 and his family thought he was shot for refusing to fight because it went against his religious principles. The army demanded that she paid for his burial shroud (she refused).
|
|
|
|
Post by theravenking on Feb 14, 2020 12:55:06 GMT
If these "illuminati" really wanted to decrease population, it would've been easier to sterilise people by just putting some chemical into the drinking water, instead of sending them to war to die.
|
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Feb 15, 2020 7:34:40 GMT
History did not commence in 1945. War did not originate in 1914.
Please STFU & stop recency bias horseshit.
|
|
|
|
Post by spoonyrumble on Feb 15, 2020 7:54:19 GMT
If these "illuminati" really wanted to decrease population, it would've been easier to sterilise people by just putting some chemical into the drinking water, instead of sending them to war to die. But sooner or later people would have figured it out, an investigation would be launched. Nobody will question how millions died on the front lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Feb 15, 2020 8:13:48 GMT
Usually the theory that the "illuminati" wants to decrease population stems around who they want to decrease the population of--the strongest and most able-bodied male specimens of the enemy tribe--the ones who are sent to war. Whether that is true is up for debate but that is why sterilization wouldn't be effective for such a plan.
|
|
