The ultimate warrior of all time

drgondog said:

I don't even know how to comment regarding how much time it would take to be a competent Knight or Legionnaire - but it seems like handling a Broadsword from horseback or foot or a shield and short sword is a couple of steps below using a bow competently from horseback, combined with the swordplay of a Samuari sword.

Click to expand...

I can tell you that it isn't though. The double edged broad-sword was preferred in Europe for a reason, it was simply a all-round better sword. Long before the katana was ever made the Europeans had been using almost identical types of swords for warfare (In terms of shape), these swords, like the katana, specialized at cutting and slashing, but against armor they were at a disadvantage as they couldn't be used for thrusting attacks. And then there's the fact that the katana is heavier than the broad-sword, it is infact nearly as heavy as a zwei-hander (Two-hand sword), and it only has one sharp very hard cutting edge which is very vulnerable to chipping if it strikes metal. Against soft targets the katana is a great sword no doubt, but against armor its edge is too brittle.

The double edged European sword also allows for more combination attacks, having two sharp edges to exploit. The sharpness of the katana compared to the European sword is also extremely small and completely irrelevant, while the European sword has a more durable blade capabe of striking armor without fear of chipping.

I don't know how to comment on relative 'toughness' or determination - but suspect that is where strength (physical and will) and adaptability and field craft come in. I'm not ready to buy into top Viking or Legionnaire or Spartan 'tougher' than top SEAL or SAS simply because I have zero idea what the training comparisons would be or the natural patterns of life are to shape the will - and is size a factor?

Click to expand...

You should really read into how warriors such as the Spartans grew up and were trained. Fact is their entire society focused only on military excellence, every Spartan having to be in excellent fitness condition, have excellent fighting skills, endurance strength.

Ever heard of the Agoge ?

I suspect that the average SpecWarrior is one hell of a lot stronger today - but could be wrong.

Click to expand...

I'm 100% confident that you're wrong. Think about it, the ancient warrior trained and fought with heavier equipment, often had to march for hundreds of kilometers, and the ancient warrior also absolutely prioritized physical strenght as fighting back then was very much about brute strenght - you had to physically hurt and bring down your opponent either by pushing, thrusting, bashing or wrestling him.

For example recovered skeletons of english longbowmen feature abnormally thick arm shoulder bones and clear indications of how huge their muscles were. From examining the bones it is calculated that a trained longbowman from of the medieval age could pull up to 180-200 lbs with his one arm !

I have yet to see a suit of armor built for a Knight (in England or France) that looked like the guy was taller than 5'-6".. I'm sure there were bigger guys but doubt stronger.

Click to expand...

Medieval suits of armor for European Knights are generally made for men of 6" or taller, while Samurai armored suits are generally for persons of 5.5" in height.

So, how do ya know? and any assumption can't be tested or proven - so we are sharing a lot of speculative air and ink. I think I'll go scratch a wolfhound ear and contemplate my navel

Click to expand...

To get an idea of the physical strenght of an ancient warrior you need only look at the many statues made of them.

I want a pet dragon....

Here's something to watch:

Chapter 1: View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaaWZrFNRME
Chapter 2: View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAZ3Cig3anE
Chapter 2: View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaaWZrFNRME

Battle of Thermopylae - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

300 vs 300,000

Very interesting discussion you have here Gentleman.

I will agree the world has seen so many great warriors in the long course of history, but i´ll add my thoughts to the table.

Credit should also be given to the Macedonian Army under the rule of King Filippos II Makedonon -or Phillip II-, who brought the macedonian army up to world class standards leaving any army fielded by any Greek City State behind in a cloud of dust; after a long period of time of being nothing but a weak spot on the map, ruled mostly by a long list of timid, irresolute and incompetent Argead kings, it was Filippos who turned Macedonia into a world power.

I have heard people affirming the first professional army in the history of arms was that of the Romans; this is incorrect. It was Macedonia who first did it. Ever heard of the "Hetairoi" and "Pezhetairoi"? Filippos also improved the "phalanx".

When Alexandros III Makedonon -or Alexander III, or "The Great"- became King of Macedonia after the assassination of his father, he simply inherited a 100% professional, skilled and well equipped army. So the Macedonians under Filippos and Alexandros should also be mentioned.

Udet,

I agree we shouldn't forget the Macedonian army, but this is about the ultimate warrior of all time, and AFAIK the Macedonian army, while generally consisting of experienced men, didn't feature any out of the ordinary unit.

Now about the Roman Legionairy army and it being the first true proffesional army in the history of man, I disagree with this as-well, there were others before it. But the thing about the Roman Legion is it brought warfare to a new level, both in terms of unit deployment on the battlefield and unit training disciplin, it simply proved unbeatable for a very long period of time.

pbfoot said:

Flying an aircraft is no challenge but knowing what to do when the S*** hits the fan is the skill

Click to expand...

Ha - just hop in a helo and skillfully fly it while on goggles... then we'll talk a little.

How about the Rebels?

Soundbreaker Welch? said:

How about the Rebels?

Click to expand...

In this case, we could as well mention William Wallace and his Scottish militia...

mkloby said:

Ha - just hop in a helo and skillfully fly it while on goggles... then we'll talk a little.

Click to expand...

I didn't say helicopter and I did think of that prior to posting

pbfoot said:

I didn't say helicopter and I did think of that prior to posting

Click to expand...

Ok - I misunderstood when you aid "aircraft" to be including all types not just airplanes.

So does anybody know if the samurai ever engaged a foreign and much differently armed opponent?

Besides the mongols, not AFAIK.

Soren, hello!

I agree with you...i just wanted to add something to discussion since i noticed Spartans and Romans, warriors of the ancient world, were being mentioned though; that is why i thought the macedonian warriors under the rule of Argeads Phillip II and Alexander III deserved being included too.

The "Sarissa" made the Macedonian phalanx a true horror to the enemy hoplites.


It is a tough call anyway...to many types of great warriors, from different parts of the planet, different cultures and customs...

The Samurai could possibly be the very best; putting aside their individual combat skills, we must consider the mindset and cultural background of those warriors...never surrender, never stepping back, never, ever.

Also the Waffen-SS...possibly the very best warriors battlefields have seen in recent times; tough, superbly trained, amazing mobility and endurance...to this add the fact so many of these great soldiers who served their nation, spending days, weeks and months roaming across battlefields, who saw their brothers in arms getting killed, wounded and crippled, were forced in the best of the scenarios to lower their heads and be subjected to brutal spitting and defaming of all sorts.

Udet said:

Also the Waffen-SS...possibly the very best warriors battlefields have seen in recent times; tough, superbly trained, amazing mobility and endurance...

Click to expand...

SS

Think the 101st Screaming Eagles at Bastogne would not rate the SS as high as you; neither do I. They were tough, well trained soldiers, but I would take the American GI over them. What a soldier fights for makes him a most formidable foe, the SS fought for a twisted ideology, the American soldier fought for freedom.

TO

Udet said:

Soren, hello!

I agree with you...i just wanted to add something to discussion since i noticed Spartans and Romans, warriors of the ancient world, were being mentioned though; that is why i thought the macedonian warriors under the rule of Argeads Phillip II and Alexander III deserved being included too.

The "Sarissa" made the Macedonian phalanx a true horror to the enemy hoplites.


It is a tough call anyway...to many types of great warriors, from different parts of the planet, different cultures and customs...

The Samurai could possibly be the very best; putting aside their individual combat skills, we must consider the mindset and cultural background of those warriors...never surrender, never stepping back, never, ever.

Also the Waffen-SS...possibly the very best warriors battlefields have seen in recent times; tough, superbly trained, amazing mobility and endurance...to this add the fact so many of these great soldiers who served their nation, spending days, weeks and months roaming across battlefields, who saw their brothers in arms getting killed, wounded and crippled, were forced in the best of the scenarios to lower their heads and be subjected to brutal spitting and defaming of all sorts.

Click to expand...

Agree all the points except the last - their fate in general was far better man for man than the soldiers and civilians that surrendered to them..

One of my uncles was a thompson carrying doctor that liberated Dachau as part of 5th Rangers.(think it was Dachau - in front of Patton on way to Czechoslovakia). He says in retrospect that they should have disarmed them, then closed the gates on them for a couple of hours and come back to clean up.

One of my other uncles was a 504PIR platoon commander who was hung up in a tree and set on fire by SS Troopers in Holland..

I respect them as skilled and non-discriminating murderers who also were skilled soldiers - but Warrior is too noble a name for SS (including Waffen).

I would say God was merciful in sparing the lives of any of them - hardly a proud tradition as warriors.

Udet - I gotta apologise about my emotional reaction to praise for the SS. My father and my Uncle were two of the kindest gentlemen post war that I have ever met.. but whenever that unit came into conversation in my presence the temperature of the room would drop 20 degrees... they never, never, never forgot and neither had any problem with German Wermacht or Luftwaffe.

Doctor, hello!

No need to apologize, at all. I understand you very very well. Both my father´s and mother´s families have or have had persons who fought in the war and i understand certain issues stir deep emotions. It is horrible to know one of your relatives perished at the hands of thugs during the war. Believe me.

You are simply confirming my ideas, the Waffen SS are unavoidably associated with evil regimes and lust for crime. That´s precisely where the tragedy of those soldiers lies.

They have no right to respect, they have no right to pride; in the end the fate of those soldiers was so much much better than they could have hoped for, since they were not all shot or hanged when the war ended. They should thank God for such favors.

I will not add more to this, since there are several persons here whose knowledge and records i admire and respect and will not want to make comments that might offend them. With this i mean you are one of those persons whose knowledge i do respect and can also learn from it.


Toughombre:

i will not debate further into the ideologies for which soldiers of the involved nations fought, even if there are so many things that could be argued on that specific part.

Following your logic then it would be more than reasonable to assume the Brits and Soviets can make fun on the combat capabilities and endurance of the S.S., since both also belong in the winning side. The ordinary Brit and Soviet soldier are then much better than their SS counterparts.

First of all - if you think never surrender, never step back, ever is the supreme virtue of a warrior - you live in some alternate universe. If you mean retreat or withdraw by "never step back," then that is truly just foolish and detrimental tactically speaking.

Regarding the samurai - if they never dissimilar troops, how can anyone be so quick to tout their superiority???

Right...as a clarification i should perhaps have mentioned that was one quality of the Samurai that i admire; not that i was referring to that as the epitome of virtue or as tactically wise.

I think that most soldiers mentioned was the ultimate warriors of their time...

The British.....otherwise they wouldn't have had the empire that they once had. The same goes for the Romans, Greeks, Samurai.... etc. Even the Vikings who came to North America almost 500 years before Columbus. They left a lasting impression in the history which we still see today. Doesn't the name Normandy come from Norseman, which the Vikings also were known as, after they settled there? I think that I read that somewhere.

Udet said:

Following your logic then it would be more than reasonable to assume the Brits and Soviets can make fun on the combat capabilities and endurance of the S.S., since both also belong in the winning side. The ordinary Brit and Soviet soldier are then much better than their SS counterparts.

Click to expand...

Think you might have misunderstood my post. I didn't say the American soldier was better than his SS counterpart because he was on the winning side. I'm saying that any warrior becomes more formidable when he believes in the cause he is fighting for. The example of American soldiers vs the SS in WW II is a stark comparison. In the American revolution the Continental Army and the civilian militia defeated a better trained and equipped British army and also defeated the Hessians who were mercenaries, fighting mostly for money.

Look what a handful of outnumbered Marines did at Wake Island. They were on the losing side but they kicked the Jap's ass in that fight.

TO