Armageddon???? - Part Eighty One Up

JN1 · Post by **JN1** » 2008-06-05 04:17pm

'Free Hell', I like that. It deserves to survive.
There must be quite a lot of deceased humans in Hell with military experience and of insurgencies and counter-insurgency warfare.

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2008-06-05 04:40pm

Yes. A very angry Winston Churchill. No, better yet, Stalin.

If democracy fails, you can always count on Stalin.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2008-06-05 04:57pm

Brain_Caster wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote: Considering Caesar currently commands an army which outnumbers all the humans currently fighting at Phlegthon, I'd say he's got reason to. Make no mistake, he'll spin the victory as partly his doing.
Does he? He claims to do, but how do we know he isn't inflating his numbers or simply lying through his teeth?

Caesar took very good notes in his lifetime, and the Romans themselves were a very meticulous, details-oriented people. If Julius Caesar says he has 2.5 million people, he probably actually does have at least that many.

Also considering the apparently rather unorganised, ineffective and decentralized nature of the human resistance

Their priority seems to be to survive and stay out of trouble. Throwing an army of humans (restricted to Bronze Age tech) against a baldrick army would lead to a very bloody battle that would go extremely well for the baldricks. The present layout of Caesar's legions lends itself nicely to preserving them from being wiped out in a retaliatory baldrick assault.

I'd be more than just surprised if all of those 2,5 million people, assuming they exist, are personally loyal to Caesar. Hell, I'd be surprised if more than half of them have even heard of him.

They don't have to be. They just have to be loyal to whichever of Caesar's lieutenants they're attached to. Caesar's lieutenants, however, have to be personally loyal to him. And Caesar's had over two millennia to perfect his screening process.

It's likely he is just one of countless smaller leaders and vastly overstating his own importance. Also the one thing he has two offer, manpower, is effectively worthless in a place where all you have to do to get new recruits is to dig them out of mud.

You have to then sort out the ones with the appropriate mindset for both military training, and who desire liberation and are willing to fight and die for it. For every useful recruit, there are probably tens or hundreds of thousands of other undead who would be unsuitable as fighters.

Frankly, I think giving him so much as a single bullet would be a grave error, especially considering his personal history (which is, after all, history). Hell has enough baldrick warlords already, no reason to add a human one.

It's not like Hell isn't going to devolve into a massive civil war anyway. The living are going to have to forge alliances with both human and 'friendly' baldrick warlords in order to keep the peace. Working with an undead organization that already has organization and numbers would make things go so much quicker and easier.

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2008-06-05 05:02pm

Hell may have toughened up Caesar even more, and given him plenty of time to reflect on mistakes. This is a guy who managed to escape from his tormentors, remember?

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2008-06-05 05:10pm

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Yes. A very angry Winston Churchill. No, better yet, Stalin.

If democracy fails, you can always count on Stalin.

I prefer Churchill, with the Pitt's perhaps? much more civilised. Heh, I can imagine Churchill being as happy as a sand boy setting up a war cabinet of the "All Talents" for the British and Commonwealth section of Hell.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2008-06-05 05:11pm

Guardsman Bass wrote:Hell may have toughened up Caesar even more, and given him plenty of time to reflect on mistakes. This is a guy who managed to escape from his tormentors, remember?

Not escaped. Caesar appears to have benefited from the non-interference clause The Powers That Be seem to have with each other. This has been mentioned in the reams of discussion surrounding the story.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2008-06-05 06:04pm

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:
Guardsman Bass wrote:Hell may have toughened up Caesar even more, and given him plenty of time to reflect on mistakes. This is a guy who managed to escape from his tormentors, remember?
Not escaped. Caesar appears to have benefited from the non-interference clause The Powers That Be seem to have with each other. This has been mentioned in the reams of discussion surrounding the story.

What do you mean? I don't follow.

john1761 · Post by **john1761** » 2008-06-05 06:10pm

I was just going to post that GrandMasterTerwynn, it seems that only those deemed special by those Powers will be exempt from Hell's torments . Possible those who worshiped the older Gods. So having modern personalities gaining the same exemption would be low.

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2008-06-05 09:37pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote: What do you mean? I don't follow.

IN HBO's Rome Titus Pullo and Lucious Vorenus are both, in their strange ways, quite devoted followers of the Roman gods. At one point they make a serious blunder that has disastrous effects (both short and long-term). They confess to Caesar, expecting to be executed, but he pardons them. Whan asked why he says.

"Those two have gone from the center of one disaster to another without ever being touched. They are protected by powerful gods and I will not trifle with [those gods]."

Now, in this storyline, the gods other than Yahweh and Satan have been crowded out of Earth and have no longer any interest there. However, as part of the deal they struck when they left, those whom they smiled upon were granted sanctuary from the torments of Hell; they lived in Hell but were free and unharmed there. Titus Pullo and Lucius Vorenus are two such persons and, because Caesar respected the Gods interest in them, he shares their protection. They're his bodyguards all right but in a much more profound sense than just a couple of heavies who get between him and trouble.

Fyrwulf · Post by **Fyrwulf** » 2008-06-05 09:47pm

You know who I want to see? Gustavus Adolphus. I want the God of War to lay the smack down on a Baldric legion. Won't happen, but I'd still like to see it. Or, perhaps better yet, William T. Sherman. If Gustavus is the God of War, Sherman is his Jesus.

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2008-06-05 10:58pm

Fyrwulf wrote:You know who I want to see? Gustavus Adolphus. I want the God of War to lay the smack down on a Baldric legion. Won't happen, but I'd still like to see it. Or, perhaps better yet, William T. Sherman. If Gustavus is the God of War, Sherman is his Jesus.

I don't know if it'd really work in the storyline, especially with what we're already discussed about finding one particular person amongst tens of billions, but I do admit the fangirlish part of me would go squee (points at sig).

Cool. There ARE other gods, as Marina and I have been speculating.

Fyrwulf · Post by **Fyrwulf** » 2008-06-05 11:45pm

Mayabird wrote:I don't know if it'd really work in the storyline, especially with what we're already discussed about finding one particular person amongst tens of billions, but I do admit the fangirlish part of me would go squee (points at sig).

You're a fellow fan of Sherman's BBQ as well? Probably the best pit action to ever take place in Atlanta, yes?

Speaking of Atlanta, is Kansas getting the 7th Artillery back as part of the USV?

Cool. There ARE other gods, as Marina and I have been speculating.

Yep. Being that my second middle name is Thor, I'm quite curious about the Norse gods. I mean, now that we've established that Yahweh is mortal, it seems curious that he could've forced his way into their religious domain without (to borrow a ghetto phrase) getting his shit stomped. I can't imagine that many an angel came out in good shape after encountering Thor or Loki. I mean, hell, Loki would give Satan a run for his money in the department of pure sadism and cunning. Thor, well... He's such a badass that "Face The Pain" plays whenever he steps into a room, whether there's a stereo system or not.

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-06-06 12:15am

Loki can be bad ass too. It's prophesied that during Ragnarok he will enter the battle leading an army of undead while riding a ship made from their nails.

Hawkwings · Post by **Hawkwings** » 2008-06-06 01:19am

Chalk me up as another fan of Sherman. I would definitely support an appearance by him, if only to have Mr. "War is Hell" wage war in Hell, on Hell!

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2008-06-06 01:20am

Despite being a traipsing effeminate crossdresser. Can't forget that part.

Re: Loki, of course.

JBG · Post by **JBG** » 2008-06-06 04:04am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Shroom Man 777 wrote:Yes. A very angry Winston Churchill. No, better yet, Stalin.

If democracy fails, you can always count on Stalin.
I prefer Churchill, with the Pitt's perhaps? much more civilised. Heh, I can imagine Churchill being as happy as a sand boy setting up a war cabinet of the "All Talents" for the British and Commonwealth section of Hell.

Or as happy as a pig in mud! I've just re-read Keegan's "Churchill" and there is a photo of he and others, as captives being paraded at some school, in South Africa. The others are despondent, depressed, embarrassed etc but Churchill stands apart with jutting chin and defiance in his eyes. People too often only think of the Churchill, cigar clamped between his lips, of WW2 but the young Churchill was rather "energised" by combat:

"There is nothing so exhilarating as being shot at and missed" or words to that effect. Bullets etc just didn't seem to able to find him, even when in the open. Perhaps the opposite in that regard to Freyberg (sic?), the classic fighting Kiwi General!

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2008-06-06 04:25am

JBG wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
Shroom Man 777 wrote:Yes. A very angry Winston Churchill. No, better yet, Stalin.

If democracy fails, you can always count on Stalin.
I prefer Churchill, with the Pitt's perhaps? much more civilised. Heh, I can imagine Churchill being as happy as a sand boy setting up a war cabinet of the "All Talents" for the British and Commonwealth section of Hell.
Or as happy as a pig in mud! I've just re-read Keegan's "Churchill" and there is a photo of he and others, as captives being paraded at some school, in South Africa. The others are despondent, depressed, embarrassed etc but Churchill stands apart with jutting chin and defiance in his eyes. People too often only think of the Churchill, cigar clamped between his lips, of WW2 but the young Churchill was rather "energised" by combat:

Indeed, nice to see someone who remembers that he was a POW..who promptly escaped to fight, and write about it, another day. And there was that incident at Omdurman when he was in the last horse cavalry charge of the British army. Commanded a Scottish Battalion on the western front, led a large number of recce missions personally into no-man's land as well(wanted a brigade but didn't have the experience for it). He wanted to be as near as possible to the first wave on D-day, with the King 'to lead the army as in the olden time', the King almost had to have him restrained from doing it as well. Very brave man

"There is nothing so exhilarating as being shot at and missed" or words to that effect. Bullets etc just didn't seem to able to find him, even when in the open. Perhaps the opposite in that regard to Freyberg (sic?), the classic fighting Kiwi General!

I know, bullet magnet was Tiny, even copped a fragment in the neck at Minqar Qiam. It was complications from one of his WW1 wounds that finally did for him.

JN1 · Post by **JN1** » 2008-06-06 06:03am

And there was that incident at Omdurman when he was in the last horse cavalry charge of the British army.

The last mounted charge by a British unit actually took place in the early '20s in Turkey, not at Omdurman. However the claimant of large charge by British Empire and Commonwealth troops is less clear, but is possibly held by an Indian mounted unit that charged IJA troops in Burma when it was cut-off.

The last French mounted charge took place in Algeria.

Shermpotter · Post by **Shermpotter** » 2008-06-06 09:27am

Jan, Jan, Jan, always with the details, man!

Perhaps he means, "really meaniingful" charge. Churchill was one brave guy. He seemed to be a true 'renaissance man' in the modern era. More, Stuart!!!!!

JN1 · Post by **JN1** » 2008-06-06 09:37am

Tom, there were plenty of meaningfull charges (WW1 has quite a few, yeomanry at Huj and Aussie Light Horse at Bersheeba for example) after that and to hold the honour of last mounted charge is a highly valued honour among cavalry and yeomanry regiments.

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2008-06-06 09:42am

JN1 wrote:Tom, there were plenty of meaningfull charges (WW1 has quite a few, yeomanry at Huj and Aussie Light Horse at Bersheeba for example) after that and to hold the honour of last mounted charge is a highly valued honour among cavalry and yeomanry regiments.

Well, since various US Special Forces teams made quite a few cavalry charges in Afghanistan, doesn't that rather mean the honor is theirs? (Afghan ponies were trained to duck their heads when their rider fired an RPG-7 from the saddle).

By the way the combination of charging cavalry supported by helicopter gunships worked very well.

Shermpotter · Post by **Shermpotter** » 2008-06-06 09:53am

Does anyone have a video of that?!?!?! That would be pricelss- cavalry of both the horse and aerial kind, that's just too much!! There's a possilbe story bit, somewhere...

PainRack · Post by **PainRack** » 2008-06-06 09:56am

How low do Harpies fly? If they fly in close enough and low enough, won't they actually become vulnerable to blasts from artillery shells exploding on the ground?

JN1 · Post by **JN1** » 2008-06-06 10:22am

Stuart wrote:
JN1 wrote:Tom, there were plenty of meaningfull charges (WW1 has quite a few, yeomanry at Huj and Aussie Light Horse at Bersheeba for example) after that and to hold the honour of last mounted charge is a highly valued honour among cavalry and yeomanry regiments.
Well, since various US Special Forces teams made quite a few cavalry charges in Afghanistan, doesn't that rather mean the honor is theirs? (Afghan ponies were trained to duck their heads when their rider fired an RPG-7 from the saddle).

By the way the combination of charging cavalry supported by helicopter gunships worked very well.

In the American Army certainly, though I have seen a British Royal Marine on horseback. So who knows if they maybe charged something, I guess it's also possible SAS/SBS teams might have done the same.

JN1 · Post by **JN1** » 2008-06-06 11:48am

To expand what I said earlier (I was at work so away from my sources) the last charge made by a complete British regular cavalry regiment was by the 20th Hussars in the Izmid Peninsula, Turkey, on 12th July 1920 during the Chanak Crisis. During the Arab Rebellion of 1920-21 in Iraq the Indian 35th Scinde Horse made several charges against the Arabs.

On 19th March 1942 in Burma a party of 50 mounted Sikhs of the Burma Frontier Force, led by a Captain of the Central Indian Horse were ambushed and charged the IJA troops, most being killed. Another charge took place in 1944 in the Arakan by a squadron of the Gwalior Lancers, an Indian State force. However the last charge made by forces under British command was probably made by the Northern Frontier Tribal Police in Kenya while on anti- Mau-Mau operations.

I've been waiting for a while to post the pic below of a Horse Marine (yes I know they're mules) in the 'Stan.