Tuesday, 21 August 2012

Industrial relations practice in the Rainbow Nation

Most of us have been critical of the Rainbow Nation on just about every count. It's well on its way to becoming, well, African.    When a mob of blood-crazed savages, armed to the teeth, descends on the, ahem, forces of law and order, Africa has only one solution. And it's an area, in fact the only area, where the West can learn from the Dark Continent.

Yes, when things looked dodgy the cops applied an African Solution To An African Problem.  They opened up on the mob with lethal weapons. And then they opened up some more. Scores killed, but the measures  dramatically calmed things down and now it seems work will shortly be resumed.

Mind you, it didn't have to be like this. Chicken wings and a sack of shiney washers thrown into the crowd could have defused this ugly situation.  

76 comments:

Robert in Arabia said...

Another day in Arabia. Five days ago, I visited one of the largest shopping malls in the kingdom. It is a civilized place; where even the Starbucks has ashtrays. Well, I stopped off for a donut and coffee and a little reading at a Krispy Kreme. When I finished shopping at the hypermarket, I realized I had left an inexpensive pen at the Krispy Kreme. When I went back, I asked the counterman if anyone had found the pen. He checked and could not find it. He said that he would keep trying. I went back tonight, as I walked by the Krispy Kreme, the manager came out and handed me the pen. It is not like America here.

SAVANT said...

Robert....you surprise me. I have to say that my experience of Islamic countries generally was not one of honesty. Maybe the old cutting off the hands trick having an impact?

Bunkerbuster said...

Savant...funny you say that. I was talking to a Christian Iranian the other day and he said similar, that in Iran, Muslims liked doing business with Christians as they're not cheats.

I can picture the jew-Muslim sharp business practices, but have no muslim experience to draw on.

My suspicion is they're as corrupt as the jew.

Rob said...

Are you suggesting Shatter should put amputation on the statute books, Savant? You'd never get that past the European Court of Human Rights.

Anonymous said...

What Robert says is true. I was speaking to a Lebanese guy the other day.
The conversation went from onr thing to next and ended up on armed security in jewelry stores.

No need to post security of even lock the doors. If caught stealing, one is asked which hand did you use to steal?

If said thief denies the crime, both hands are removed by axe.
If thief admits to thievery, only the guilty hand is removed, all totally legal sanctioned by the state.

In Iraq, prior to the war, their were a number of Somali workers there. I asked an Iraqi fellow I know if they stirred up trouble while workingin Iraq.
Of course not, they would have been immediatly killed in the streets.
The Arabic word for a nigger translates into, "slave".
Say what you want about the towel heads, but they do know how to deal with negros.

Ian said...

Savant. Have you read Mike Smith's blog on this affair? It appears that the police were "doing the dirty work" of the mine's owners.

Anonymous said...

i beleive the gentleman with the spear arrangment in the photo is non other then the new Lord Mayor of Cork City,correct me if we are wrong oh great Savant,,,,,

Anonymous said...

I hate to be a killjoy. Would it have been so great if it was white farmers protesting about their high murder rate?

Lemmyhead

slavestar said...

Honestly. Thats the only language those animals understand. Anything else is taken as an invitation to walk all over us.

Lupus said...

Hmmm, they still allow smoking indoors...maybe Islamic Law isn't so bad after all! ;-)

Piet said...

Don't care why they shot 'em up. Just that they did it.

electric eddie said...

Rob 03.27, no, you have it bass ackwards. When amputation is brought in, we start with the European Court of Human Rights!

Anonymous said...

Life is cheap in South Africa.

Big bill said...

The picture is telling. A white girl, reporting on the police opening fire on the mob, explained that the men came out of the "brush" close to the police with "homemade knives". She has no idea. The "brush" was a kraal set up in advance. The "homemade knives" as you can tell from this picture are assegai, the famous war weapon invented by Shaka Zulu, which his well-ordered troops used to conquer the better part of South Africa. They knew they had to close with the police fast, for close combat to effectively use their assegai. So they lay in wait in their kraal until the police were close enough, then came swarming out with spears at the ready. No need for the traditional cowhide shields since they knew they were not facing spears and swords in the hands of the police. Other than that it was a traditional Zulu battle.

Anonymous said...

Would it have been so great if it was white farmers protesting about their high murder rate?

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again!

Calculus said...

It's time for the UN to express their 'deepest worries' about the state of democracy in Rainbow Nation and shouldn't Ms. Clinton show her commitment to avoid a new genocide?
Perhaps a 'Liberation Army' should be set to remove the dictator in place and install a democracy. Oh wait, this is a democracy.

Rob said...

How would the SA police deal with this guy?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2187755/20-year-old-man-caught-father-trying-rape-grandmother-girlfriend.html

Anonymous said...

OFF TOPIC
Naked pictures of Princ Harry published. His father must be very proud. James Hewitt must think he's a chip off the block.

kulak said...

"Boy is this great!" < /flounder>

Lupus said...

@ Calculus

Now don't be giving Hillary too much work, after all, any day now she'll be helping the heroic protestors in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia...er...ok, no she won't!

Anonymous said...

Chicken Wings are borderline "White Man's Food". True S.A. kaffir food is chicken Heads and Feet. Known by them as "Runaways"

onthefenceonthisone said...

The Zulus kicked Whitey's ass well and proper at Isandlwana. Fierce fuckers altogether. Gotta give em a just a little respect Savant. No?

Just cheap shots

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Isandlwana

SAVANT said...

onthefence... I'm aware of Isandlwana and other battles in the Zulu wars. But the British were very poorly lead, split their forces and were vastly outnumbered. Remember Blood River, about 2000 Zulu killed and not one Boer. They don't sound like the Waffen SS to me............

Anonymous said...

How would the SA police deal with this guy?

That dumb negro can't even get "motherfucker" right.

onthefenceonthisone said...

And the Zulus were excellently led by a tactician superior to the Brits commander and without the advantage of the maxim gun.

Respect where respect is due (or should I say Jew?) in my book.

Uncle Nasty said...

.
Rob said...

How would the SA police deal with this guy?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2187755/20-year-old-man-caught-father-trying-rape-grandmother-girlfriend.html


The Old SAP (South African Police) apart from not really giving a rat's arse about NON (Nog-on-Nog) crime would have tossed the fucker into the back of a Black Mariah** ... 50's, 60' 70's vintage big Dodge trucks with a solid steel canopy welded to the bed, and if he really pissed them off, they would have tossed the spare wheel in with him ... and gone over some really bad terrain.

The new SAPS are NNPCN (ninety nine percent nigger) and would have Muh Dicked the old coon as well -- one at a time or all together.

UN

** Oddly enough, never actually painted black.
.

Anonymous said...

How about using this quote from Albert Camus as a motto.

The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutly free that your very existance is an act of rebellion.

Lemmyhead

Anonymous said...

O/T-The Nothing Hell carnival takes place this weekend in London.I say,let the SAP,police the event.

Anonymous said...

if history truth be known the fall of Singapore to the japs was no Dunkirk,the brits out numbered the japs 8 to 1 led by Percival the guy who ordered Galway city i beleive to be torched in 1919 or 1920, the fault was not with the British tommy but with the officer corp,totally out of leauge and no reality of what to expect of the jap,the old time sgts knew and the older hands did but were ignored by the old school boys drinking at the Raffles bar and insulting their own men and the natives,it was the largest surrender of British arms in the history of England,in captivity the brit officers stll held sway with the class distiction so prevlent of that group that when red cross boxes were distributed by the jap officers had 1st pick of medicines,food,and anything that struck their fancy and gave what was left to their enlisted men,A full American colonel captured at Bataan was put in with this group of officers in Thialand and saw what was going on and said from now on your men come 1st and you get whats left to distribute, of course this caused a panic amongst His Majestys Officer corp but they could do nada as he was senior rank in the camp.the brit enlisted men loved this guy and hated their officers who they beleived sold them out to the japs and told the American they would be his body guard in the camp and asked how the yanks held out for 4 months against the japs at battan. maybe it had something to do with their officers,YOU THINK?????

Lupus said...

And the great victory at Isandlwana led to the destruction of the Zulu kingdom ;-)

The Zulus main problem was that despite having developed a tactical system that could overrun a thinly defended perimeter such as Isandlwana, the tactical system wasn't particularly flexible: see Kambula Hill, which was Isandlwana without Chelmsford's schoolboy errors.

The Zulus made the same mistake against the Boers at Blood River, so it seems the charging an entrenched enemy position was a favourite tactic which got lucky once, at Isandlwana, largely due to extravagant British use of military incompetence.

Blood River is my favourite: 3,000 Zulus dead, 3 Boers wounded. Let's give ol' whitey some credit, the Zulus got lucky once, indeed almost twice at Hlobane; the British had an uncommon gift for making colonial fuck ups. Anyone think that a Prusso-Zulu War would have lasted more than half an hour? ;-)

Robert in Arabia said...

http://sojournerspassport.com/you-betta-recognize-part-2-white-male-dominated-law-enforcement-is-the-only-thing-standing-between-you-and-mass-rape-in-black-neighborhoods/

Kruger said...

As Lupus said the Zulu's were not super tacticians, they just charged, often with cattle in front of them, which I give you is a good idea. This of course only works in very specific situations and if you have clever white men against them they'll come unstuck. As they did just about everywhere else apart from Isandlwana.

Anonymous said...

Well they say the German army was the dream team. They had the standards of american officers and British enlisted men.

Anonymous said...

maybe it had something to do with their officers,YOU THINK?????

You mean the guy who got to do something because of who he is not on talent who takes after his mother in doing 60mph in 30 mph zones and whose pictures from Las Vegas led him being called back to Buck House migh not be a good leader?

Anonymous said...

Isandlwana WAS a great victory for the Zulus though helped greatly by British incompetence and a Quartermaster who refused to hand out ammo without the proper authorization.

Now I don't know if anon 11.00 is being ironic but the German army was everything that the British and Americans were absolutely not!.Except in terms of materiel and resources

Even with many second rate divisions,particularly in Normandy and on the Rhine, the Germans completely outfought the Allies almost up to the final collapse.

Arch Tory Max Hastings is very good and very fair on this superiority.

Read Overlord or Armageddon by yhis author to learn just how superior.

mr.a

paleface said...

Most fair commentators of whatever nationality will agree that the German WWII aremy was the best ever seen.

Iron Felix said...

Just following on here, at D-Day the German Divisions strung out along the critical fifty miles of so were all numbered from 700 upwards, except for the 314th Infantry Division, dug in behind Omaha.So what, say you; so this, that every division in the 700's consisted of conscripted Ukrainians, Russians, Poles and assorted odds and sods, many of whom were found packed and ready to go for England when the Allies encountered them. The 314th was the ONLY division anywhere consisting of Germans under German officers, and it was at less than half its paper strength. Nevertheless it was this unit that created what became known as "Bloody Omaha". Buchanan asks a good question; how might D-Day have panned out if the Allies had faced, not half a million ragtag press-ganged conscripts but three million battle-hardened fully equipped German troops?

George said...

Predictable that there is no moral outrage from the MSM a la Quadaffi, Mubarak, Assad et. al.

Anonymous said...

Brit officers in ww11 were arrogant twits whi didnt have the confidence as a whole of their men, most got their commissions through family connections and not experience, this proved fatal as seen in Singapore,after these men saw what the world was all about when they returned home its no wonder Churchill was voted out,

Anonymous said...

ahh Syria.the former head of the U N ,KOFFI ANNAN stated that he was surprised America did not intervene.this from a man whose nigger country lives on scraps that the west gives him,along with the bullshit title they let him have, america and britain carried the big ball to much, to long, let his nigger country send troops if hes so upset.

Uberdude said...

Felix is, of course, right.A detail often overlooked is that Germany fought WW2 with, in effect, two armies. There was the regular German Army, the Wehrmacht, and also the Waffen-SS. The latter related to the former in ways that are somewhat analogous to how the U.S. Marine Corps relates to the U.S. Army. A significant differance was that the Army's Loyalty Oath was to Germany, that of the Waffen-SS was to the person of Adolf Hitler. The Waffen-SS was, in effect, the Army of the NSDAP as such. For this reason it was denounced as a criminal organisation at Nuremburg, and all its members likewise, this regardless of the fact that they were the finest of the finest soldiers, immortalised as heroes if only they had fought on our side! Nor is it any surprise to hear that the Waffen-SS's military campaigns are closely studied today by the Israeli High Command---after all, who did it better?!

Lupus said...

Isandlwana was a great victory, and most great victories rely on the enemy making mistakes. Lord Chelmsford split his force in two; the camp at Isandlwana was not fortified; the British were not defended the camp perimeter but were strung out over approx. a two mile front, with about 5-6 yards between each man, not the densely packed ranks often portrayed; the problem was not the ammunition being given outm but the fact that the rifles had a habit of jamming. Had the British force been compact even without entrenching it would have had sufficient firepower to break the Zulus: 600 trained infantry men supported by the various auxillaries (600-800 men) fighting in a concentrated formation would have shot the impis to pieces. The Zulus almost broke at Isandlwana, and took heavy casualties, but won a great victory through brilliant opportunism.

Unfortunately for the Zulus the British could recover from the disaster, the Zulus could not replace their losses as easily; after Kambula Hill the Zulus were broken militarily, perhaps over confidence cost them and the fact the British were ready to fight 'their' battle. The final battle at Ulundi was little more than a rout.

The Zulus had to follow up the defeat of Chelmsford's central column with another spectacular, they managed to bog down the souterhn column at Eshowe, Almost got lucky at Hlobane before throwing the hopes away against disciplined rifle fire of an entrenched modern army at Kambula Hill.

Anonymous said...

Of course MSM have no problem as that country is not led by a mad commie-marxist.

kulak said...

@Robert in Arabia

http://sojournerspassport.com/...

Interesting link.

I'm sorry to hear NOI is not likely to outlive Farrakhan. I like NOI.

Anonymous said...

Violence is innate and endemic to black culture as surely as barking and fighting is innate to dogs.

Unknown said...

Come back Apartheid all is forgiven or "They will always need us (the white man) to look after them." - Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother.

Kingoldby said...

From all the anti British carping here, you'd have thought that the Zulus had won.

They won one battle, the British promptly learnt the lesson, reorganised and won every other battle and the war.

And it's the British won are 'twits'? Some twits to build up the greatest empire the world has ever known.....

George said...

@ anon 18:45
Oh yes it is!

Anonymous said...

Kingoldby the point of the twits references is the "Lions led by Donkeys" phrase that was used in WWI.
Another example is the "Heroic" Charge of the Light Brigade which came about because two officers were not on speaking terms because of some matter which was more important than the battle ahead.

Anonymous said...

@kingolby.

No one is saying that.But,in fairness,one has to acknowledge the Zulu victory at Islandwana.

No lessons were learned by Britain either then,or later during the Boer War-right up to hostilities in 1914.Fuck it! nothing was learned up to 1939!.

White troops will nearly always slaughter blacks but,occasionally the reverse will occur.

mr.a

Uncle Nasty said...

.
Lupus said...

Isandlwana was a great victory, and most great victories rely on the enemy making mistakes.

One of the few advantages of living in ZA in the sixties and all, was that one could travel from Johannesburg at the beginning of a long weekend, take a leisurely tour of the famous Zulu War battlefields and landmarks, and be back in time for work on Tuesday.
Although, now that I come to think of it, exactly the same could be said of living in England ... Wat Tyler, the Wars of the Roses and all that.

Anyway, back to Isandlwana.

I heard that one factor that screwed up the defense, was that some military muppet had had reports of humidity damaging or destroying the old black powder ammunition (.455-577 Martini Henry) which by 1879, was still the old, delicate brass-foil case compared to the more robust modern drawn brass case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.577/450_Martini-Henry

So ... thinking that South Africa was as humid as the Raj (it wasn't) the War Department ordered all ammunition to be packed in tropical containers -- sheet metal boxes, sealed by being soldered shut. (say that three times fast)
Rather like very large canned hams ... These in turn were in wooden crates.**

The point of the whole story is that one of the reasons for the disastrous showing at Isandlwana, was that the troops had no way of opening the boxes quickly enough to replenish the men on the firing line.
Tales abounded of crates and cans being found later beaten into unrecognizability by the rifle butts of troops desperately trying to get to the ammunition within.

Frankly, I have never managed to verify this story or not, and to me, it has the sound of a neat manufactured legend to gloss over the incompetence of the guilty.

Any other opinions?

UN

Interestingly enough, bulk ComBloc ammo for the AKM and SKS, etc. is sold exactly this way today ... really big industrial strength SPAM cans

http://www.trademe.co.nz/sports/hunting-shooting/ammunition/auction-506556123.htm
.

Uncle Nasty said...

.
Speaking of military competence -- or perceptions, thereof -- I once read that a survey was taken back in the 1930's as to which nation fielded the most powerful and professional army ... in the opinion of those in the know.

Generals, intelligence agencies, military correspondents and analysts, et al.

Guess who won?
Who were the owners and masters of this fearsome Machine of War? This unstoppable juggernaut?

Yup. France.

Noshit.

UN
.

Anonymous said...

The Martini ammunition was held by hexagonal bolts but nobody bothered issuing enough hexagonal bolt openers because the old ones were not scheduled to be replaced?
Access to ammunition definetly was a problem there at that battle.

Uncle Nasty said...

.
Interesting developments in Germany ...

http://www.occidentaldissent.com/

Germany Bans Neo-Nazi Groups

Posted on August 23, 2012 by Hunter Wallace

Germany

The crackdown is on “enemies of the state” … racists, xenophobes, anti-Semites, and other enemies of liberal democracy in the Federal Republic of Germany, or as my old friend Dr. Brandt once called them, the “Bastardstate.”

Note: This ties into the previous discussion about Black Republicanism in the French Revolution and whether liberal democracy is a natural enemy of European peoples.

” (Reuters) – Nearly 1,000 police officers raided clubhouses and apartments of known neo-Nazis in western Germany on Thursday after a ban was placed on three violent far-right groups in the country’s most populous state.

Ralf Jaeger, interior minister of North-Rhine Westphalia, announced the ban as part of an intensified crackdown on neo-Nazis in the industrial state. Police searched 146 premises, confiscating weapons, computer hard drives and election posters of the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD).

“(The objects seized) expose the tight bonds within the far-right scene,” Jaeger said, referring to the relationship between the NPD and groups of violent militants known as “Kameradschaften”.

Jaeger called the groups affected by the ban “xenophobic, racist and anti-Semitic”, adding: “They employ fists and knives against their political opponents.”


Whattaya know ... 1921 all over again. And we all know what that brought about ... 1933.

Roll on, lads.

UN
.

Lupus said...

Isandlwana was able to happen because Lord Chelmsford forgot the old favourite 'never divide your forces in the face of the enemy'. Of course, he wasn't sure where the enemy were, which makes his division of strength even more shameful. The Zulus needed a quick war, the British could plod along to Ulundi in three heavily armed and supplied columns. In short, the Zulus would attack the British when opportunity presented itself: Chelmsford gave them the opportunity of a lifetime. Had he concentrated his infantry behind cavalry screens he would have drawn the Zulus onto too many guns; they almost broke at Isandlwana, so another 800-1000 rifles would have shot them to pieces. Even if the depleted camp at Isandlwana had been entrenched, the concentration of firepower would have carried the day; the British were busy fighting a running battle around a camp that was designed for a force twice as large. The British actually took the attack to the Zulus at Isandlwana, because they had no idea that they were up against the main Zulu army. Chelmsford made a mistake, but he certainly learned from it as the later campaign showed.

The Zulus fought the war as well as they could, after all they could magically transport their impis to the right place at the right time, although they almost caught a British force at Hlobane as the impis were marching towards Kambula Hill. The Zulus best hope would have been to have caught a British column strung out on the march, something they were unable to do; their alternative was to assault a British camp, and Kambula Hill was the clear demonstration of the results of such an action. The Zulu commanders probably couldn't believe their luck when Chelmsford split his force, they seized the moment briliantly. But it should be fairly obvious that the Zulu army was coming to fight the British Central Column regardless of what Chelmsford did; 25,000 men cannot live indefinitely and avoid the prying eyes of scouts for more than a few days, and the British showed themselves well aware of the danger of being caught on the march throughout the war. The Zulus were almost certainly going to risk all on a major battle on the day in question, certainly within a couple of days. So when Chelmsford set off with 2,500 men leaving 1,800 men to guard an unentrenched camp, he presented the Zulus with the best chance they were likely to get.

Piet said...

UN, I always grew up understanding that ammunition was a problem in that battle. Always assumed that they just didn't have enough but now you put a new spin on it.

Kingoldby said...

''No lessons were learned by Britain either then,or later during the Boer War-right up to hostilities in 1914.Fuck it! nothing was learned up to 1939!.''

Anonymous, if you really think that the British learnt no lessons up to 1939 then you must have a shockingly poor opinion of the Germans who, least we forget, were beaten by the British.....

As it happens the British were fast learners. They learnt about Khaki camouflage (acknowledged by the Germans to be considerably superior to their own uniforms) and the power of rapid, concentrated, accurate rifle fire, such that Germans repeatedly were stopped by what they thought were British machine guns when they had only encountered groups of riflemen.

But then, I don't think you are actually interested in real military evaluation, you just want to insult the British. (who incidentally kept on winning all the wars they fought)

SAVANT said...

Hi girls. No infighting now between Whites. God knows we have enough joint enemies as it is. Europeans dominated the world for centuries due to better technology, organisation and courage. let's not fall into the trap which maybe some trolls are setting for us by getting into Germans v British v Americans etc.

Keep focus!

Lupus said...

I'm just doing my best to hack away the mythos surrounding the Zulus. They got lucky because of the incompetence of one British general. Most of the 'super powers' attributed to the Zulus come from the Welsh (Carry On film) 'Zulu', you know the old shit that they could run, RUN 70 miles and fight a battle. Black supermen they weren't, they had a decent system of warfare for Africans, but if Kambula Hill had been the first battle of the war then the Zulus would be just another forgotten tribe.

Kruger said...

Lupus, this thing about the zulu's was one of the early signs of the brainwashing, blacks are wonderful at everything. What you say is right. One British general made a bad mistake and the Zulu's took advantage of it. Big f*cking deal. They never won another battle.

Wolfhound said...

I have a lot of respect and admiration for the British military of days gone by (especially their navy, having dominated the seas for centuries), but to say the Brits beat the Germans in WW2 is absolutely delusional.

If the Germans fought a purely defensive war against Russia along with the Finns/Romanians, they could've easily held continental Europe and swept North Africa until a peace came about.

Anonymous said...

@Kingoldby.

I was neither denigrating Britain or the British.
On the contrary,the world was a far better place when dominated by Britain.
That's an Irishman saying that alright?.

What I am saying is that British military prowess was far,far removed from greatness.Anyone not reared on a diet of post-war comics-Commando,Action,Valiant,Captain Hurricane etc-and who read some serious history,would understand fact separated from National myth.

I repeat,I have nothing but admiration for Britain and the enormous achievements of it's people.

mr.a

Anonymous said...

There are a lot of similarities between the British Wars against the orcs in South Africa and the American Wars against the Indians in the Western US - Same time frame too.

When Custer confronted the Indians at the Little Bighorn, he divided his forces in the face of a superior number of enemy. He and the 200 or so troops in his command were all killed. Ironically, the American soldiers were using the obsolete Single shot Trapdoor Springfield single shot carbines - a very similar weapon to the Martini. Being the cheap bastards that they were, the ordinance department purchased ammunition that was loaded in copper cases that were notorious for sticking in the rifles chambers as the weapon and ammunition became dirty. There were accounts by Indians who were at the battle that many soldiers were picking at the chambers of their rifles with their knives in an attempt to free stuck cartridge cases from their inoperative weapons.

occasional said...

Was every British soldier killed at that battle or did some escape?

Uncle Nasty said...

.
occasional said...

Was every British soldier killed at that battle or did some escape?

There seems to be a bit of confusion about that ..

http://www.1879zuluwar.com/t4843-2-sailors-who-survived-isandlwana

It appears that two troopers made it ... their ultimate fate? Don't know.

UN
.

C H Ingoldby said...

Wolfhound, 'if' the Germans had done things differently......

If's and buts.....

They didn't. At the end of the day it was British troops marching through Berlin, not German troops marching through London. That's the only metric that matters at the end of the day.

Anonymous, I don't know why you are referring to comics, we are talking about actual history here. The history where the British won every war they fought.

I ask, why the urge to slander the British from so many who are supposed to be on the same side?

Uncle Nasty said...

.
Anonymous said...

There are a lot of similarities between the British Wars against the orcs in South Africa and the American Wars against the Indians in the Western US - Same time frame too.

Unwarranted optimism proved a killer there, too.

Custer was offered the use of two Gatling guns as well as two small field-pieces (cannon). For reasons known best to himself, he decided against taking them ... not that they would have been of much help, as he failed to scout out that he was being confronted by not only pretty much the whole Sioux nation, but quite a few Comanche as well.
Getting caught by surprise did not help either, as there would have been insufficient time to deploy the artillery -- or the Gatlings - even if Custer had them.
Don't believe what you see in the movies.

Custer set out believing that he would be confronted with (at worst) a village of mainly women, children and old men.

I do not know if Custer's excessive sense of savoire-faire was shared by his officers.

UN
.

Anonymous said...

UncleN.

Not wishing to be pedantic,but I think it was the Cheyenne not Comanche who fought with the Sioux.

Tribal cousins,I remember reading that Crazy Horse was partly raised by the Cheyenne.

The Comanches,who were in a category all of their own,were in Texas and Oklahoma.

@C H Ingoldby.

You are seeing insults where absolutely none are intended.
However,if offense was given then I apologise most strongly.

mr.a

Lupus said...

Compared to the Romans, British imperial military disasters are somewhat on the mild side.

Look at the casualties inflicted by Hannibal in his first two years in Italy: approx. 100,000 killed alone up to including Cannae (and a few days later a Roman army of 20-25,000 under Albinus was wiped out by the Gauls in northern Italy).

The Romans lost approx. 120,000 men fighting the Cimbri and Teutones in two battles.

All this while Rome was just a Mediterranean power!

Of course, Teutoburgerwald was still to come.

Imperial powers suffer defeats, sometimes staggering defeats, 'greatness' comes from how they recover. The British defeat at Isandlwana was certainly a low point, but that is all the Zulu kingdom is remembered for. What have the Zulus ever given to the world? What achievements are Zulus famed for?

Look at the Boer War, the Boers made the British look like bumbling amateurs, relying on the 'Aldershot set-piece' to fight a disciplined and highly mobile 'guerilla' force, but once the British put their serious imperial head on the Boers were doomed. The British 'blockhouse' strategy was ruthlessly brilliant; an imperial masterstroke, an Alesia on a grand-scale. Look at the reconquest of Sudan, the suppression of the Indian Mutiny. The British could be incompetent enough to lose a battle, but they knew how to win wars, whatever you make of that. If only they hadn't sided with the Jew-Bolsheviks and helped in the rape of Germany.

Anyway, shall we move back onto to bashing the enemies of us all?

ps - R.I.P. Neil Armstrong

Lupus said...

"You go down there!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWGAdzn5_KU

onthefence said...

Jeez, I set off one there by bringing up Islandwanla!

I brought it up merely to highlight that Zulu's had/have some commendable points.

I find it a shame that sheer anger/hatred leads many here to bang on about only negative attributes of non-whites. personally I see both negative and positive attributes in Blacks/Jews/Arabs etc but that doesn't blind me to the fact that that I want the White world, especially Europe to remain White.

Anonymous said...

The history where the British won every war they fought.

Yes George Washington was a British subject but not William of Orange.

Lupus said...

No "anger/hatred" involved (you could have just used 'racist'), just pointing out the fact that British fucked up and the Zulus were good enough to take advantage of that fuck up; however, they weren't capable of defeating the British Empire.

Keeping the white race in existence is far more important to me than looking for good points in the non-white world. I don't hate them, I hate what some of them have done. Africa for Africans, Arabia for Arabs, Palestine for...er...Jews.

Isandlwana was a great victory for the Zulus, but that is essentially the sum total of what the Zulus achieved.

I'd rather spend time praising the white race than denigrating the black race. If you want to use Isandlwana to highlight Zulu martial prowess then mention it alongside Blood River; commendable balanced by condemnable.

Heraclitus said...

onthefence. A commendable attitude and also a practical one. You say when one totally demonises an adversary and one is unable to see any merit one of necessity gets a distorted picture. And that can under no circumstances be helpful or practical.

Uncle Nasty said...

Mr a said:-

Not wishing to be pedantic,but I think it was the Cheyenne not Comanche who fought with the Sioux.

Tribal cousins,I remember reading that Crazy Horse was partly raised by the Cheyenne.


You're quite right Mr a. Couldn't figure out how I got that so wrong, until I looked again at the pile of begged, borrowed and stolen yet-to-be-watched DVD's on my desk ... and sitting on top?

John Wayne's The Comancheros

Damn.

UN
.

Anonymous said...

That industrial relations approach seems to have worked all right. seems they're going to head back to work. Minus the stiffs.