Who were the fiercest fighters of all time, and why was it the Zulu ibutho warriors?
First off, ibutho warriors were professional soldiers, unlike the Vikings who were just farmers who were so shit at their jobs that they had to supplement their income by attacking weak, unguarded targets like churches and villages. The ibutho warriors, on the other hand, did nothing but train for war. They were drilled constantly for speed, marching daily over thorns to toughen their feet so they could run barefoot into battle. They ran marathons every single day and were expected to be able to run 50 miles in a single day, then fight a battle at the end of it.
What's that, weebs, you say the samurai were better? Samurai rarely fought each other; they massacred helpless peasants while wearing thick armour which made them walking tanks. The ibutho warrior sprinted barefoot into battle almost naked, and in fact Shaka Zulu eventually replaced the traditional spears of the with war hammers because he felt it was cowardly to kill an enemy at a distance; hammers forced the ibutho warriors to go face to face with their enemies while killing them.
Then there's the fact that any ibutho warrior who returned without his weapon was executed on the spot, since it showed cowardice. Ibutho warriors were therefore fanatical, fast, deadly, and utterly fearless.
Name any warriors in history who were as fierce and ferocious as the Zulu ibutho warriors. Pro tip: you can't.
Roman soldiers were disciplined, but not fierce or especially good. The whole reason they were under such strict discipline is because without it they would get their asses kicked.
>so professional they haven't conquered anything other than dirt
Ok pal, no need to rattle your sticks and mud shields at us.
Mason White
>Spartans had to prove their fitness even as infants. >Spartan children were placed in a military-style education program. >Hazing and fighting were encouraged among Spartan children. >All Spartan men were expected to be lifelong soldiers. >Spartan youths were ritualistically beaten and flogged. >Food was intentionally kept scarce, and poor fitness was cause for ridicule. >Spartan men were not allowed to live with their wives until age 30. >Surrender in battle was the ultimate disgrace.
Joshua Cook
Just having better weapons doesn't make you more fierce. Mexican drug cartel thugs have AKs and could mow down every army in history prior to the 20th century. Does that make them great warriors? No.
The Spartans were arrogant, not good. They lost one battle because they left their shields at home out of contempt, just to show off.
Evan Thomas
Klingons
Aiden Sullivan
Ibutho warriors chewed fucking *poison* to build up a tolerance so that they could fill their mouths with it and spit it at their enemies in battle. That's fucking bad-ass. And every single ibutho warrior could run non-stop for 50 miles and then fight a battle at the end of the run. No Spartan could do that.
Sebastian Harris
>Can mow down every army in history
What fucking weeaboo channel are you watching son? They're allowed to exist because they provide a niche market to encourage bad politics. Them mowing down 3rd world shit rats in body armor and civilian taco mongers has no bearing on their ability to take on anything above nobody's.
Levi Fisher
Can you read? The entire point of what I wrote is that they AREN'T fierce. They're an example of how just having superior weaponry doesn't make you bad-ass.
David Howard
Mongols were fiercer.
Jace Robinson
Mongols were more ruthless, it's true, but as warriors they were just better-than-average horse archers. The reason Mongols were so feared is because of their tactics: they'd give a city one chance to surrender. If they didn't, the city would be utterly annihilated: every single man, woman, and child slaughtered, and the entire city razed to the ground.
Aiden Reyes
Literally any white people ever.
Reason: 100% of the world has been conquered by whites, vs not even all of South Africa by the Zulus. And the only people that can conquer a white army is-you guessed it-ANOTHER white army.
Jace Campbell
>What is the Battle of Isandlwana, Alex?
Aaron Cook
>WE WUZ KANGS N SHIET the thread
Luis Sanders
One battle. How'd the Zulus do in the rest of the war? Oh that's right-they got THEIR ASS HANDED TO THEM.
Adam Foster
Every ibutho warrior could run for 50 miles barefoot and then fight a battle at the end of it. Can you even roll your oily flab up the stairs to get your tendies?
Levi Green
Roman Mongol Ottoman Nazi Soviets United states
Logan Campbell
>no armor >close range >caveman-tier gear >can run for a long time barefoot >niggers
OP what are you trying to pull here
Dominic Nelson
...
Kayden Morales
Methed up Nazis for sure
Chase Thompson
>Every ibutho warrior could run for 50 miles barefoot and then fight a battle at the end of it
isent that a quote form a movie? how do you know its even true, if you have proof then have it at
Ryan Jones
Weak bait is weak.
Ian Reed
Okay, now you're just quoting Zulu, which is admittedly an awesome movie, but it's hardly a reliable source.
Sebastian Sanchez
i smell a nigger
Zachary Robinson
>how do you know its even true Morris, Donald R. (1994) [1965]. The Washing of the Spears: A History of the Rise of the Zulu Nation Under Shaka and Its Fall in the Zulu War of 1879
European knights. Wealthy, possessed best equipment available in their times. Hard as fuck to kill.
Christian Reed
>Not fierce or especially good >Conquered half the world
0/10 for making me reply.
Anthony Lopez
Bureaucracy and technological advantage, m80.
Justin Bailey
I think in equal numbers, any of the following would defeat Zulu warriors: european knights or men at arms, samurai, vikings, the chinese imperial army, roman armies (republican or imperial), or basically any army > 1900AD.
I agree that Zulu warriors were notable, but you have to consider that the main reason they did so well was that they were using actual warfare tactics against opponents using tribal "dispute" tactics. The tribal african way of war before Shaka was a low casualty, low ferocity method in which the men of two tribes would meet at a prearranged spot and throw insults and spears at each other. Deaths from this were actually pretty rare, and that was accepted because in those days a human life was more valuable that land, because they had a metroc fuckton of land but not that many people. Certain especially valuable places would be fought over, but by and large, conflicts just weren't worth a war. Shaka changed that by actually pressing forward to kill his enemies and conquering their lands and people.
When the zulu were fighting undisciplined tribal warriors they did well, but after The Crushing their tactics spread, and their expansion greatly slowed as they were now fighting enemies using their own tactics against them, and every single time they fought a professional army they lost, save for one battle.
Also when lauding tbeir prowess as conquerers remember that they only conquered an area the size of New Jersey.
In other words,
C O L O N I Z E D O L O N I Z E D
Luke Brooks
Just being effective doesn't make you fierce. The Romans were very good at discipline. They were master tacticians, and they specialized in carefully-orchestrated battle plans. The individual soldiers were not great. The whole point of having such well-drilled and disciplined troops was so they didn't have to have fierce warriors. They could take Joe Slob, hand him a gladius, and slot him into a machine of conquest.
Lucas Jones
Yeah. Almost like ferocity means absolutely nothing when faced with superior technology, discipline, and organisation.
Xavier Long
>Implying bureaucracy is relevant during combat out in the middle of the woods, knee deep in shit and guts.
Wew lad.
Austin Gomez
And it worked out beautifully for them.
Dominic Reyes
A lot more could be added to that list. Ancient Egyptians and any Mesopotamian society would easily defeat them in equal numbers.
Caleb Kelly
/thread
Parker Nelson
The celts fought naked in battle up until the Roman era. They were famed as savage and fierce warriors, and Ireland such a barren shithole, that the Romans didn't even attempt to conquer it. Their mercenaries found use throughout the ancient world including the army of Alexander the Great. As late as the 19th century Irish regiments were famous for their bravery in battle.
There is a reason Afghanistan is known as the "Graveyard of Empires". Their tribes are fierce and divided, only united in their conflict against the outside. Innumerable times throughout history they have waged guerilla warfare against technologically and numerically superior foes. The only way to effectively control the area is full scorch & salt tactics. The peoples of the Khyber Pass in particular are known not only as fierce combatants, but fine craftsmen. The jezail was famed for its accuracy and elegance and even today their gunsmithing allows them to make reproductions, of varying degrees of quality, of a large number of guns.
The Aztecs of mesoamerica were undisputed rulers of the area, until the Europeans came with their guns, germs and promises of payback to all of the various peoples the Aztec had conquered and enslaved. Their armor was light and incredibly effective.
Easton Cook
>Roman Technology and bureaucratic advantage over every enemy they faced, individual legionnares were garbage
>Mongols Fantastic archers, demons on horses, average individual fighters
>US Bureaucracy, organization, technology. Smart and badass, dishonorable
>Ottoman, Nazi, Soviets >mfw
Chase Peterson
>Implying Nazis didn't almost take on the whole world and win
Dylan Ross
Afghans are a good one, I didn't think of them! That makes me think the Comanche, Apache, and Ghurkas might also be a good choice, though to be honest I don't know a lot about the Ghurka's way of war pre-foreign legion days, I just know that in their service in the 20th century they became known for insane bravery and ferocity.
As a bit of a nitpick, the Celts never fought naked, I believe you're confusing them with their pict ancestor/predecessors.
Leo Price
The Vikings never conquered any great empire, nor did the Japanese. We're not talking about the overall effectiveness of an army. As I mentioned, the Romans were great conquerors, but their troops were nothing special. The Zulus were not amazing strategists, but the ibutho warriors were absolutely terrifying. The only warriors who even come close to such personal ferocity are the Cossacks and the the Aztec Jaguars. Can you name any other military which trained to run 50 miles non-stop? Or which made their soldiers *eat poison* so they could build up immunity to allow them to literally spit poison at their enemies?
Xavier Jenkins
>Fiercest fighters > Ctrl+f Gurkha's 0 results
Slack-jawed faggots the thread.
Jaxon Fisher
>take on the whole world By which you mean 1/3rd of it
>almost win By which you mean certainly doom themselves to loss by attacking the soviet union.
Asher Hill
Listen famalam, in a 1v1 Germany would have decimated every single one of the allied countries. Your argument is invalid. The fact that they lost doesn't mean they weren't effective.
Gabriel Jackson
Spartans would kick there ass in a fight both in a group and one on one
Lincoln Clark
Genghis Khan and his men own this thread.
Mason Gomez
Look up the battle of blood river, literally less that 500 farmers killed thousends of these niggers.
Jackson Edwards
Underrated post is underrated.
Kayden Harris
Ask the American indians who the greatest warriors ever were. (protip:they were white)
Christopher Morales
This. Spartans.
Also.. Last I checked using your fucking brains made you a better soldier than ruthlessly punishing your body. The Zulu were spanked by the Romans because they lacked anything beyond rudimentary tactics. Their ranged weapons were non-existent, and they tried charging enemies predictably. This lack of learning because "muh tradition" cost them their nation when the British showed up in the 19th century. Pick a better warrior caste to bait with then some mud hutted half naked nignogs with various sticks.
Matthew Flores
The German special forces were chosen for political reasons. SS troops weren't especially well trained or fierce or brave, they were just easily brainwashed or had family connections. Not exactly "top warrior" material.
Ethan Ross
>the vikings nevet conquered I'll take normans for 1066, Alex.
>ibutho warriors were absolutely terrifying Right! Which is why redcoats with just the beyonets on their rifles could inflict greater casualties on them while resisting a charge, and why the Zulus never conquered an Area larger than New Jetsey, despite the fact that they were CONSTANTLY trying.
Also, this "disregarding actual prowess in favor of ferocity" thing is getting tired. One on one, a Zulu warrior is going to lose to a knight, samurai, roman soldier, viking, whoever, simply because they all had better armor, better weapons, better technology, and better training.
Being more ferocious just means you happen to look more angry thanscared when the knight is pulling his sword out of your gut.
Benjamin Reyes
so so true
Nathan Brown
I'd agree with that except for the soviets and the USA. The soviets would have given them a damn good run for their money, and there's no chance in hell they'd have been able to take the amerifats.
Elijah Morales
Correction: pre-zulu inhabitants. (not that much changes in Africa)
Colton Peterson
"In the Battle at the Ncome or Blood River about 3000 Zulu warriors died. The Voortrekkers, however, had - except for three lightly injured men - no losses. The deeply religious Boers ascribed the military victory not to their superior armament and tactics, but saw it as a miracle and sign from God." even God hated these niggers.
Connor Phillips
There were and are plenty of unconquered First Nations. The Haida, for example, were so fierce that the British said "fuck this" and let them keep their island since there was nothing on them worth kicking the hornet's nest. The Haida were so warlike that at one point, 2 out of every 3 people in the Haida nation was a slave. To this day the Haida have never signed any pacts with the white man.
Chase Peterson
Even when Shaka Zulu's died he warned the follow up king; "the white men will be the end of us"
Owen Campbell
> And to this day i am the second person to ever hear of them.
Adam Fisher
Key point: >since there was nothing on them worth kicking the hornet's nest As the british happily demonstrated with the Zulus and Chinese, it doesn't matter how fucking fierce you are, if you have something they want, they'd come to get it.
Kayden Young
admittedly a huge mistake that cost them the war. if they had just kept friends with the soviets till the end of the war its very possible that they would control all of Europe
Parker Bailey
I don't know about the US. We saw what happened in France and Russia, with the Soviets only securing victory with the support of the Lend Lease program and ever increasing pressure from the Allies. The US' main arm was the Garand, although the Springfield remained in use in significant numbers, where as the Germans were using bolt-action rifles were the primary weapon well into the war. I'm not too familiar with the tanks or planes, so I can't really comment on that, but I am fairly certain the American navy was significantly better than the Kreigsmarine.
>The German special forces were chosen for political reasons.
The SS were the elite, that does not mean they were the best soldiers in the German army. In the case of WWII Germany that would have likely been the Fallschirmjager.
Easton Lewis
you uh don't know what prussia is?
Logan Torres
>Mexican Cartel enforcer >not badass pick one
Parker Thomas
I'll take chicken with extra cheese on my taco, Juan, now get back to work.
Ryan Peterson
...
Ian Hall
wait which do you want? extra cheese on taco or get back to work?
Jeremiah Price
GOD DAMN IT JUAN DON'T TRY THIS BULLSHIT, WHEN YOU WERE HITTING ON AMBER EARLIER YOUR ENGLISH WAS FINE, YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, JUST GET ME MY DAMN TACO BEFORE I HAVE TRUMP DEPORT YOU.
Ryan Fisher
...
Elijah Ward
the Nazis weren't very friendly. They were constantly one upping their allies and betrayed them if it suited their needs. I'm not passing judgement, but I doubt they would have been able to keep any 'friends'.
The vikings sailed to america, india, iceland and alaska, settled all over including GB. What's this ferocity shit you wanna build so much upon, nigras are good at running because they were too retarded to figure out other ways of catching prey. Who cares about them conquering the mud huts and deserts of other tribes?
Jacob Rodriguez
>food was intentionally kept scarce
>poor fitness was cause for ridicule
Your heroes just sound like idiots.
Asher Cook
It was to prevent the hedonistic habits of the Romans and Greeks.
Jaxson Peterson
So the Vikings went to places who were inhabited by peoples several hundreds of years behind them technologically and killed them and stole their stuff.
Why does this make them fierce warriors?
Jaxon Walker
>Vikings >Technologically advanced
Pick one and only one my friend.
Andrew Campbell
u want sum? fucking zulu shitskin cunt
Alexander Russell
And what does that have to do with my comment?
They can have primitive technology and still be more advanced than others.
Michael Miller
The Vikings got their nads kicked by the Beothuk and sailed away from Newfoundland whimpering with their tails between their legs, never to be seen there again. Not exactly the indomitable warrior-kings you spergs would have people believe.
Brayden Johnson
They were basically on par with the rest of Europe at the time.
Tyler Diaz
The "hedonistic" Thebans crushed Sparta. So much for proto-fascism, eh Gunther?
Isaiah Lopez
itt: google history
Jayden Nguyen
>They can have primitive technology and still be more advanced than others lol define 'advanced'
Kayden Garcia
polish hussary beat that
Carter Fisher
or winged hussars is another name
Mason Lewis
Literally anyone with a sail on their back. Or, like, a stiff wind.
Ethan Anderson
The macedonians
Carter Morgan
Wow, you're thick. I'd say dragging their boats for miles from river to river, and spending months on the open sea in tiny boats to steal your finest women makes them pretty fierce
Brody Perry
you get it man they were so badass that enemies were runnin away coz they were scared of wings and exotic furrs they have been wearin maybe not best warriors on earth ever coz they were heacly armored like 50kg of armor
Ryan Clark
Qwit it with the negro's is da most awesomist _____ shit.
Seriously. Better to shut up and be though a fool, then open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Even the smart black guys are like "Bro, enough of that shit. You think it's funny, but I gotta go to work tomorrow and deal with what people think of that shit."
Kayden Wright
My nigga.
What about the Jaffa, though?
Levi Allen
>Mongols were fiercer.
Definitely.
Klingons were patterned after Mongols - one of the smartest things Roddenberry ever did.
Jaxon Thompson
What about Sup Forums
Jonathan Green
>united states army >has the most advanced weapons and equipment. >gets raped by a bunch of chink farmers with makeshift weapons. >gets raped by camel fuckers living in caves with shit weapons. LoL
Kevin Brown
Shaka-Boohoo shitposting.
Isaac Cook
>United states gets raped by chink farmers with makeshift weapons and camel fuckers in caves with shit weapons
Neither of these ever happened. Fuck are you on about?