Originally posted by: Poulsonator
World War II.
May sound cliche by now, but it's always fascinated me the most. What really got me into it was, as a kid, I LOVED the technology involved. The look of the vehicles, the different types from each country, the vast numbers of it all, etc. I still love all of that, but I also know so much more now as an adult.
Originally posted by: Poulsonator
It also helps that my maternal grandfather was a soldier in North Africa in 1942 and was captured by Erwin Rommel. My grandfather and the rest the captives were shipped across the Mediterranean Sea, then put on a train in South Italy that eventually took them to a camp just outside of Berlin. He stayed there until the war was over in 1945. He didn't talk much about it, but what he said was pretty terrible.
Anywho, those are the two biggest reasons. I find Erwin Rommel quite fascinating as well (because of the story above), as I've done numerous school reports on him in the past and have read all I can about him.
Originally posted by: sandorski
This, because the pig deserved it!! :|
War pigs are pigs said to have been used - at most rarely - in ancient warfare as a countermeasure to war elephants.
Pliny the Elder reported that "elephants are scared by the smallest squeal of the hog". The Romans would later use the squeals of pigs to frighten Pyrrhus' elephants. Procopius, in book VIII of his History of the Wars, records the defenders of Edessa using a pig suspended from the walls to frighten away Khosrau's siege elephants.
While the above use of pigs in war is plausible, another historical reference - incendiary pigs or fire pigs - is much less so. Aelian reported that Antipater's siege of Megara during the Wars of the Diadochi was broken when the Megarians poured oil on a herd of pigs, set them alight, and drove them towards the enemy's massed war elephants. The elephants bolted in terror from the flaming squealing pigs often killing great numbers of the army the elephant was part of.
Originally posted by: edro
WWII
My grandfather fought in it and it is the most romantic war for our country.
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
WW2.
I just bought a book on WW1 because I know almost zero about it. That might be a good subject for another Band of Brothers type thing.
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: Poulsonator
It also helps that my maternal grandfather was a soldier in North Africa in 1942 and was captured by Erwin Rommel. My grandfather and the rest the captives were shipped across the Mediterranean Sea, then put on a train in South Italy that eventually took them to a camp just outside of Berlin. He stayed there until the war was over in 1945. He didn't talk much about it, but what he said was pretty terrible.
Anywho, those are the two biggest reasons. I find Erwin Rommel quite fascinating as well (because of the story above), as I've done numerous school reports on him in the past and have read all I can about him.
From what I've read, Erwin Rommel was a genius and gentleman among the German military at that time, even though many of his peers were cruel and callous. I'm reading the Wikipedia article on him right now, really interesting read.
Originally posted by: irishScott
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
WW2.
I just bought a book on WW1 because I know almost zero about it. That might be a good subject for another Band of Brothers type thing.
Had to study WWI extensively for my intro to military history course. Aside from a few technological innovations, it was basically the war of stupid. Especially on the French side. Even Pershing was something of a moron.
Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: Poulsonator
It also helps that my maternal grandfather was a soldier in North Africa in 1942 and was captured by Erwin Rommel. My grandfather and the rest the captives were shipped across the Mediterranean Sea, then put on a train in South Italy that eventually took them to a camp just outside of Berlin. He stayed there until the war was over in 1945. He didn't talk much about it, but what he said was pretty terrible.
Anywho, those are the two biggest reasons. I find Erwin Rommel quite fascinating as well (because of the story above), as I've done numerous school reports on him in the past and have read all I can about him.
From what I've read, Erwin Rommel was a genius and gentleman among the German military at that time, even though many of his peers were cruel and callous. I'm reading the Wikipedia article on him right now, really interesting read.
Somehow Rommel has earned a cult-like following amongst Western historians. They forget and attempt to mitigate the fact that he was one of Hitler's most loyal commanders and, while he may not have been a big supporter of the Holocaust, he was still complicit in its execution. I, too, believe that he was not a fan of the final solution, but the truth is that he still fought for a country that executed it and, to his dying day, closely defend the man responsible for its implementation.
He was a tactically brilliant commander as exemplified in North Africa and may have even been able to save Germany from a two-front war if he had been given the freedom he needed during those first few weeks of June, 1944. That being said, his achievements are often discussed in a vacuum that leaves out the shoulders of the men he stood on, the other German, British, and French commanders he drew his inspiration from, and the tacticians who ultimately devised the strategies he so closely emulated.
Anyway, I can't really say I have a favorite war, but some of the most interesting, in my opinion, are:
A) The French and Indian War / Seven Years' War -- Prior to the F & I War, wars fought in the New World were simply extensions of wars fought in Europe. The French and Indian War started in America and ultimately spread across nearly the entire globe. The battles, though small, were fought across all terrains by armies with relatively little experience fighting and maneuvering in hilly / mountainous / densely wooded terrain. Small stories like the Battle of Ticonderoga or Roger's Rangers add a lot of depth and some amazing stories of heroism.
B) The Napoleonic Wars -- As someone interested in combat history, Napoleon is one of the most interesting characters. Most generals rise to prominence because of a piece of new technology. They understand how to implement that technology better than anyone else on the battlefield and they exploit that advantage to its fullest. Erwin Rommel is a great example: he took new technology and used it more effectively than his opponents. Anyway, Napoleon didn't do that. He had no new piece of battlefield equipment. Instead, he relied on astounding brilliant tactics and daring maneuvers to win. It's pretty awesome stuff.
C) The Great War -- The Great War is interesting because it was a two-phase war. The first phase was one typified by misunderstandings. There are many examples: everyone's belief that offense would carry the day, the belief that it was a matter of fighting spirit, not strategy, that won wars, and the belief that the war would be a series of short bloody battles which would end quickly (weeks) and declare an obvious winner. The second half was basically a showcase of things to come. Everything that we see in World War II hailed as a strategic innovation was already in place by the end of WW1. The only difference was that 20 years later the technology existed to make these strategies more viable and successful.
D) I'll cheat and throw in World War II and the Revolution as one item. Both are terribly interesting, though both are wars that draw their inspiration from previous conflicts, the French and Indian War for the Revolution and The Great War for World War II. Still, battles like Trenton, Saratoga, Kursk, D-Day, etc, etc are all inspiring and fascinating stories.
Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: irishScott
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
WW2.
I just bought a book on WW1 because I know almost zero about it. That might be a good subject for another Band of Brothers type thing.
Had to study WWI extensively for my intro to military history course. Aside from a few technological innovations, it was basically the war of stupid. Especially on the French side. Even Pershing was something of a moron.
110% disagree. It was an example of where technology and strategy were so far out of whack to begin with that it took two years to figure everything out. To call the men involved idiots is not only short-sighted but it precludes any attempt to explain why the war unfolded the way it did.