AFRICAN vs NATIVE-AMERICAN warriors who wins?

AFRICAN vs NATIVE-AMERICAN warriors who wins?

1 v 1 and Tribe v Trive

Native Americans, better with bow and arrow and flanking enemies.

Africans.

Natives are physically inferior, that's why the colonists imported slaves from Africa rather than just using the people who were already there.

Niggers were easier to control, Natives fought back. Most of them, anyway.

weren't they just more disease resistant

Native Americans for sure, the term refers to natives in south america as well
The Africans would get destroyed once the Macuahuitl's start swinging
That is if they even get that close when all the bows whittle them down

natives, because they could build houses

natives were enslaved as well, just niggers made a big deal about it

They were, yes. Most Natives (atleast North American, I'm not sure elsewhere) died due to small pox and other diseases. However, a good majority of tribes fought tooth-and-nail against European settlers. They were unsuccessful, yes, but my money is still on them.

Native Americans contracted small pox from the colonials, and since the natives had never had contact with this disease so they had no immunity against it. It eradicated a good portion of their population. Whites weren't able to keep native american slaves because they died too easily. Africans on the other hand didn't seem to have the same problems the natives did. Most likely because they had an immunity to it.

God I love Andrew Jackson, he by far is the best President

natives, niggers cant do shit but build huts out of it

didn't the Africans do the same (hell they even won in Ethiopia). Africa also really didn't have viable bow making wood.

I don't know the the copper ikwala looks more menacing then that

Shaka Zulu, Sundiata Keita, Musa Keita, and many of the great leaders of the Ancient Empires of Africa. We have slavery is because it was the stronger African tribes capturing and selling their enemies into slave trade. Native Americans didn't have this issue which is why it seems like they were harder to control. Many of them suffered the same fate during colonialism, but if I had to put my money one it I would place my money on African Tribes easy hands down.

White People

Depends. Most of the native murrican tribes were not warrior tribes but agricultural tribes & trading tribes, & had no fighters. The ones that were warrior tribes though, were fucking ferocious and unstoppable all the way up until the 1920's when the US Army, after 40 years of trying to get them out of the mountains, finally brought in war machinery from WWI and it still took them 20 more years to get the last of them out if there.

If it were not for the delay in between when Europe got smallpox, and when European ships launched to come here and brought smallpox to the natives, Europe and North America would have been btfo simultaneously, recovered simultaneously, and this would be a completely different world we live in.

Natives. Took the West a more than 100 years to fully win against them, With niggers you just need to sit back and they kill themselves.

Most of the survivors were sold into slavery. There were actually more native slaves than African slaves. Trouble was, native slaves had plenty of knowledge to escape, since they were on home turf. The Africans not having any idea where to escape to helped keep them complacent. Unfortunately, everyone recognized this almost immediately, and the worth of native slaves plummeted (since you couldn't couldn't on them being around long), so only the educated ones were kept as labor slaves, often on farms that used to be theirs, while the "uneducated" (non-English speaking) tribes were either sold to their enemies under the expectation that they would be killed off, or if no takers, just executed and dumped.

It's all in the very proud history of the Spanish and British colonies texts. They didn't feel any reason to hold anything back. Oddly, the French took a completely different approach, as traders and pioneers, which is strange considering their very aggressive approach as conquerors elsewhere at that same time.

How much bigger are africans compared to natives?

>until the 1920's when the US Army, after 40 years of trying to get them out of the mountains, finally brought in war machinery from WWI and it still took them 20 more years to get the last of them

Wait wut, I thought this was ancient history

Yes, this has everything to do with it

Dan Carlin did an episode (actually two) of Hardcore History on the Apache raiders. He's convinced that they and the Scythians are the two most successful warrior cultures in the known history of the world.

Definitely a fascinating and terrifying episode.

Hm. Yeah, that's probably a fair comparison on a lot of levels. Before technological warfare, which actually is pretty recent, they pretty much perfected effective forward strategy. Your only hope was to not engage them. Once you did, you couldn't attack them and you couldn't flee from them without dying almost immediately. They probably would have destroyed each other and the entire continent in the process had they not been on opposite sides of a couple really big oceans.

I heard that!! HH is a fucking awesome military history podcast.

The apache raiders are the stuff of horror movies, and nightmares of horror movies. Those guys did not fuck around, and were the only thing keeping the Mexicans south of their border from coming up into their territory. Then the US army fucked up and killed them, and the Mexicans have been streaming over their old territory ever since. Nice job idiots.

the natives have already won. they're not the ones living in africa.

Africans let themselves be enslaved, American Indians didn't.

Lest we forget indians' imported advantage.
This also depends on the time period from which the respective warriors are based.

Natives because tactics

Boy, am I wrong.
We also ought to consider the terrain of the battleground(s).

>implying they weren't already unstoppable killers before mastering cavalry in a single generation.

You don't just hand incompetent people the horse and get the most effective horsemen on the continent, or everyone with the horse would be the best horsemen. Those fuckers had no farms, had no animals to hunt. Their entire way of life was based on attacking Mexicans there to fight them. ...for centuries. What we know about their skills from the Europeans that wrote about having to face off against them in battle, they were frighteningly stealthy, attacked with maximum force, and were utterly ruthless, being described by the US generals as "The Tigers of the Human Species". If you wanted to create conditions for a culture of killers, you've got Sparta, and that.

Clearly none cause they both always get their asses kicked

>plains tribe
>wearing a sacred ceremonial headdress
>but on a horse
>alone
>and shooting an arrow

What 80yo lady painted this?

Circa when? If 1492 probably Africans because they had iron tools and the Native Americans didn't

You realize the African-American super niggers you see in the US are selectively bred? They don't resemble native Africans at all, who are actually about as small and weak as Asians.

All the tactics in the world will help you in a stand up fight against a foe with superior equipment. Incan empire was probably the most advanced pre-columbian american society and they had clubs, slings, and quilted armor. All of which is near useless against a foe using iron tools and agriculture

No. And like all stories in us history, it gets worse.
In WWII, the tribes were told anyone who enlisted to help go over and fight the jerries would come home a citizen with full rights, and they/their families would be taken care of as US citizens with property ownership & the whole bit. Of course, Uncle Sam didn't honor those promises in the end, and the fucked up situation was, some of those apaches holding their lands in positions the Army was there trying to machine gun out of those mountain valleys were WWII vets had just fought for the Army, and this battle went on into the 1950s.

The corvette existed, when this was going on.

native americans; mapuches

lol
Educated by tv.

Natives, they fought us all the way to the 1900's. Niggers sold themselves out in the 1400's.

No, but I've read Guns, Germs, and Steel, the sub-saharan africans managed to somewhat resist the europeans who colonized South Africa because the possessed iron tools, agriculture (good luck maintaining a standing army without it), and tropical diseases that europeans weren't resistant to (malaria, trypanosomes, yellow fever) and the only reason the europeans pushed as far as they did and kept the foothold is because that latitude doesn't support Bantu farming so it wasn't worth fighting over

Pre-viking age Inuits had daggers made from iron metorites. Meaning Native Americans were at least bronze age.

I honestly had no idea there was still fighting within living memory. Thanks for the knowledge.

Ah, yes, that's true today, but before, it was not so simple.
Each technological advancement also comes with a cost. And then there are other factors. Of the thousands of cultures wiped off the map by Roman expansion, Rome only occasionally made attempts at looting afterward, where it picked up most of its great innovations. Among the many societies they never even looked into, but just merely burned down or sacked and abandoned in some generals pursuit of glory, it's impossible that some of those didn't have superior weapons or culture, we know of many Greek cities who were known to, for sure. Ultimately, a superior weapon or fighting style won't save you when you're facing a bottomless well of Roman fighters.

When industrialization took warfare from the tacticians to the sluggers, technology became much more decisive, and warrior culture and strategy took a back seat.

The day the EMP detonates and none of our modern shit works, the Mongols may ride again.