Why are the Spaniards so mouse?

Baldewin   Sun May 02, 2010 1:40 pm GMT
I have to admit I don't no much about it. In school I was taught as if Flanders was allied with the Spanish and that the Dutch were our enemies (patriotic history lessons are everywhere). No that common people really liked any of the soldiers that could terrorize them.
According to Wiki there were many Walloons in the Spanish army in the Netherlands and also German Landsknecht mercenaries.

I also know that my town of Antwerp in 1585 was sacked by Spanish and Walloon troops and that the German ones tried to maintain order. Anyway, mutiny was a problem in warfare of that time and soldiers often had to plunder villages in order to get around. In that regard the Dutch rebels were actually less disciplined.
The sack of Antwerp likely wasn't even a mutiny but an order, because the leadership saw that the soldiers were getting less loyal.
Franco   Sun May 02, 2010 1:41 pm GMT
Romance people are so cruel. They even killed 6 millions of Jews .
Baldewin   Sun May 02, 2010 1:43 pm GMT
Antwerp wasn't even sacked in 1585 by 7 years earlier, it just fell.
Franco   Sun May 02, 2010 1:44 pm GMT
<<I also know that my town of Antwerp in 1585 was sacked by Spanish and Walloon troops
>>

It was the German mercenaries who were prone to sacking cities. Infamous Sack of Rome was due to German mercenaries. There are graffitti in German in Roman buildings that attest it.
**   Sun May 02, 2010 1:51 pm GMT
Odoacer   Sun May 02, 2010 1:55 pm GMT
If you're referring to the Sack of Rome by the Germanic tribes like the Visigoths, are you saying there is still leftover graffiti from that time?

It's funny how things changed from Germans being the wild savage uncivilized ones and Romans and Greeks were the disciplined organized ones with culture and science and all that, and how Northern and Southern Europe today are perceived almost the opposite, with Germans being more calculated and disciplined while Italians are perceived as disorganized, rowdy, and even lazy at times. Not that this is actually true, it's just what people tend to think.
Franco   Sun May 02, 2010 2:25 pm GMT
I refer to the Sack of Rome when Charles V was king of Spain.
Anthropologist   Sun May 02, 2010 2:27 pm GMT
One of the many reasons why Romance people from Wallonia to Sicily excel in a culture of laziness, is that they have short stumpy hirsute legs and savage body parts, so it takes ten times the energy and time to walk and do other functions like pick olives, fix broken things, create wealth, fight wars, and cleaning grease and dirt off themselves.
French sophistication   Sun May 02, 2010 2:32 pm GMT
Romance people are lazy because we have our Germanic slaves that work for us.
Flemish woman   Sun May 02, 2010 2:37 pm GMT
get a job you lazy dirty Walloon benefit scrounger.
Walloon   Sun May 02, 2010 2:44 pm GMT
Romance people aren't made for working hard, but more for creating fine art
, philosophizing , and imagining new concepts never conceived before . These are more noble activities than working hard where the Germanics excel at, but also a donkey can work even harder.
Matematik   Sun May 02, 2010 3:37 pm GMT
Romance types aren't as tough as the British, I recall the Italians actually running away from the British in WW2. The Romance nations, while a few tough guys among them aren't natural fighters.
Matematik   Sun May 02, 2010 3:49 pm GMT
I would say the Americans are some of the worst fighters ever too, and this is not merely anti-Americanism, their military record is not good.

Despite the military taking up 20% of the US's total GDP, the huge amounts of technology they have at their disposal, presumably the high quality of training they receieve they still struggle in wars that other smaller, less well-funded nations do no better in.

The Americans should have trounced Vietnam, yet a load of poor, backward gooks with limited training trounced them and kicked them out of their country. The French did as well as the Americans, and the French don't have nearly the spending and technology the Americans have.

Also, in Japan the only reason the US won is because they had the atom bomb at their disposal, prior to that the Japanese were slaughtering the Yanks. If the US had have never got the atom bomb, it would have been a Japanese victory.

The US don't really have any true military victories, admittedly, they have a much shorter history than most countries, and the miltiary world has changed, but in WW2, despite their constant boasting about "saving everyone's ass", they did a very limited amount compared to the Russians.

Even in Iraq and Afghanistan, for the size of the military and the funding, and the fact that they aren't the only powers actually in those two countries, they are doing suprisingly shit. The Taliban and Al-Queda are certainly giving them a run for their money.

US soliders are individual very weak, their saving grace is the sheer amount of money and technology they have at their disposal. If it was head to head with no special technology they would get slaughtered.
Franco   Sun May 02, 2010 4:04 pm GMT
I guess that the Arabics are the most fierce fighters, they would not doubt about putting a bomb in the ass of their women and explode them in a Western supermarket.
La Guerra   Sun May 02, 2010 4:06 pm GMT
Lol, Italians lost to the Ethiopians in 1896 when they tried to invade and make them a colony because they lagged behind the rest of the European colonizers. It was only later in 1935 that they tried again and beat them under Mussolini after having broken the agreements of the League of Nations that both countries were a part of, and no one else came to help Ethiopia and the emperor Haile Selassie, ruler of all Rastafarians.