What war you most interested in ?

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (rpc007 @ April 27 2002,22:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, ~55-60,000,  but if you consider we were in Vietnam for longer than WW2 lasted and the vietnemese lost an estimated 1,000,000 soldiers.....<span id='postcolor'>

Was never quite sure about this...but does that body count include the number of Vietnamese killed that were allied to the US? (South Vietnam). I always got the feeling they were just lumped with the number of NVA and VC killed.

Anyways my vote, WWII. So many different fronts, so many new technologies and tactics were developed...it's mind boggling really. WWII brought about jet fighters, programmable computers, cruise missiles, nukes, and even some primitive guided AA weapons. Funny how most of the groundbreaking stuff was developed by the loosing side...technology isn't always everything. For example did you know the Soviets used dogs with explosive vests as anti-tank weapons? They would train the dogs to sneak behind a tank and crawl under it. A dentonator would then set off the explosives. Aparently this was quite effective and the surviving dogs took part in the victory parade in Stalingrad.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ April 27 2002,23:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">. Funny how most of the groundbreaking stuff was developed by the loosing side...technology isn't always everything.<span id='postcolor'>

Well know, you must also be capable to produce it! And you shouldnt try to fight the whole world at once. Technologies isnt everything, but quantities

[foxer 0]

korea was almost a ww3,you had chinese soldiers,russia pilots(even though it was secret at the time).

Anyways,i think most interested in vietnam war.That war was a teaching lesson,paid with blood.But the war did make USA military alot better,and probably alot more countries military better.

[SKULLS_Viper 0]

I voted Gulf War, cause it gave the US the chance to try out all the modern stuff, which worked.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SKULLS_Viper @ April 28 2002,00:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I voted Gulf War, cause it gave the US the chance to try out all the modern stuff, which worked. <span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, that is true. But there isnt much film-material of the Gulf-War. I guess one reason was that it was over too fast. The great battles didnt take longer than a day or so (correct me if I am wrong)

[Bandit65 0]

I voted "other" for the American Civil War.

I am truly an Ugly American, with too little knowledge about wars, and conflicts that didn't have American involved. I wish I knew more.

The Civil War in the UNited States in the 1860's was a very important turning point for all warfare globally.

There were elements of Napoleanic tactics (The INfantry Square), what we now know as modern unconventional warfare (Rangers, Special Ops, etc), and Technological Weaponry was jumpstarted pretty far (From using Muskets to Rifles, etc, etc)

The US Civil war was not 'The' war, but it is a fairly easy war for me to study, so I study it, and use it as some kind of a starting point to learn about other things.

When I first learned that there was a battle using the Infantry Square, I researched the infantry square, and learned about it, and napoleonic warfare in general.

When I learned about Mini-balls, and rifled muskets, I wanted to elarn more about what was used before, and why, and how the rifle evolved...

What I eman to say is, the US Civil War is a great hub to span out from.

Its leaders used tactics and straegies that were revolutionary, The governments allied with Forigners, and learned from them. Another reason it is a good war for me to learn about is that the Battlefields are all in the US. It is hard for me to fly over to Calais (Sp?) France, and see what the Germans were looking for in an attack that never came. On the other hand, it is much easier for me to visit Gettysburg, and see the battlefield, and look at maps, and books, and imagine what the generals and colonels saw, and try to understand how they reacted, and why they did.

It is a War which features textbook tactics, and strategies, as well as a veritable "What not to do" book of how people screwed up.

The 'Modern Wars' that followed, WWI and WWI as well as Korea, and Vietnam, and The Gulf War are very very interesting. I feel that I can look at those wars, and examine them better with the knowledge I have of the US Civil War.

Basically, I beleive that many of our modern generals, and colonels that lead men in warfare today, not only have the military history education that prominantly features the battles and leaders of the US Civil War, but they were tought by Warfare Scholars who learned from warfare scholars, who learned from... etc etc, everyone was taught from the civil war, at least American Leadership.

It really was the birth of the American Army as it is today, even with all the modern differences.

In WWII we were 'liberating' the natives, and usually welcomed with open arms.

In The Gulf War, our enemy Gave up to us with white flags flying. But like in Vietnam, the Civil war Soldier had to deal with an increasingly angered enemy, and it was hard to tell who was on whos side. Much like a lot of modern warfare.

There are very thin threads connecting us back to that war, and they are old and frayed, but still worthy of following back to their source, if for nothing else, then to learn where we come from.

That's my $.02

[rpc007 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ April 28 2002,01:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah, that is true. But there isnt much film-material of the Gulf-War. I guess one reason was that it was over too fast. The great battles didnt take longer than a day or so (correct me if I am wrong)<span id='postcolor'>

well the entire ground war only lasted 100 hours

[rpc007 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ April 28 2002,01:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah, that is true. But there isnt much film-material of the Gulf-War.<span id='postcolor'>

Heres a good movie coming soon

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bandit65 @ April 28 2002,01:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am truly an Ugly American, with too little knowledge about wars, and conflicts that didn't have American involved.  I wish I knew more.<span id='postcolor'>

That is not truely american, that is truely international! I have no clue too, at least it seems less than everyone else, but I add my bullshit in every thread anyway! Just show off as if you have know everything better than a historiam and it will be fine. Anyway, you can always use google to find out!

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

The war that interests me most is the last and final war ever fought in history

Because then I will be able "thank goodness, now let's see if we can tidy up the mess"

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I voted Gulf War, cause it gave the US the chance to try out all the modern stuff, which worked.<span id='postcolor'>

True new equipment did get a debut in the Gulf War. Even though Gen. Schwartkopf openly admitted that his battle plan was derived from Rommel's tactics. So the strategy was an oldy but a goody. If you want to see good footage of Desert Storm watch the documentary called "The Kill Box." It is very in depth and has great combat action film. A panoramic view if burning Iraqi armor at night will make your jaw drop.

[Wobble 1]

oh yea Rommel was the shit, you would be a fool NOT to study him...

todays wars arent so intresting really...a lone jet in the sky bombing defenceless enemies...

well, its usually not a defencless enemy.. just defencless to stealty, cruise missles, advanced tanks... well shit your right