tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5080248961176338496.post4702462233529600841..comments2024-03-11T06:48:32.094-05:00Comments on Alternate History Weekly Update: The Alphabet of Alternate History: AMitrohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12415640801753049329noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5080248961176338496.post-40309598826109632282021-10-21T08:19:36.130-05:002021-10-21T08:19:36.130-05:00I enjjoyed reading your postI enjjoyed reading your postLukas Carterhttps://www.lukascarter.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5080248961176338496.post-3061698688554972102016-06-16T17:29:08.306-05:002016-06-16T17:29:08.306-05:00your assessment of Italians is ingenerous, Ayssini...your assessment of Italians is ingenerous, Ayssinia was different from other entities and Italy was in her prime<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09865638399984357339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5080248961176338496.post-51674086713705470922016-06-09T17:28:25.964-05:002016-06-09T17:28:25.964-05:00Dale Cozort responding: I agree that against the f...Dale Cozort responding: I agree that against the full force of a major European power, most African states of the period 1850 to post-World War I were going to fold eventually. The technology and economic gap was simply too big. If the Ashanti were going to survive it would have to be by being enough bother that the Brits decided on a long-term strategy to bring them into the empire rather than a short term one. If they fought well enough, the Brits might even decide that they were a martial race along the lines of some groups in India and try to recruit rather than conquer them. France recruited a lot of West Africans into their forces, where they fought pretty well in World War I and World War II--though they faced tragic consequences if they were captured by the Nazis.<br /><br />At the same time, the lopsided British victory against Egyptian army rebels at Tel-el-Kebir wasn't a universal thing for European armies against African ones--and it came mainly via a dawn bayonet charge, which would have been interesting if the Egyptians had a few machine guns and resolute crews. In the Rif war, the Spanish and initially the French got very roughly handled by Moroccan Rif tribes and parts of French Morocco remained outside French control as late as 1934. The French committed 160,000 troops against the Rif tribes, while the Spanish sent 90,000. Warplanes, poison gas, amphibious landings--this was a major effort and the French thought that the Rif tribes were in the same category as Afghanistan's Pathans in terms of martial ability.<br /><br />Meanwhile the Somali Dervish movement gave the British fits for ten years and a Libyan rebellion against the Italians lasted through much of the 1920s.<br /><br />Africa was and is a huge place with a huge range of genetic, social/political and military diversity that makes valid generalizations about it tough. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5080248961176338496.post-30879154194847771892016-05-27T13:43:22.746-05:002016-05-27T13:43:22.746-05:00Tel-el-Kebir in 1882 is a pretty good example of w...Tel-el-Kebir in 1882 is a pretty good example of why the conquest of Africa was inevitable. The circumstances were uniquely favorable to the Egyptians; they had 15,000 men to the British 13,000, both sides had the same infantry weapons (single-shot black-powder breechloaders) and both had 60 reasonably modern guns. The Egyptian army had been 'modernized' for a long time -- since the early 19th century when Muhammad Ali Pasha hired French instructors and sent his cadets to French military schools, and later by more European advisors (and Confederate mercenaries). It used pretty much the same tactics as European armies of the period. The Egyptians were in strong modern field fortifications, and the British had to attack them frontally, without attempts at flanking or maneuver. Result: Egyptian army shattered, Egyptian losses about 1,400 dead, British losses about 60 dead, country conquered without further ado. That was a far more equal encounter than most during the Scramble, and required a much bigger commitment of white soldiers. Most of the fighting in sub-Saharan Africa was done by tiny scratch forces of African mercenaries under a few European officers, armed with second-rate castoffs.S.M. Stirlinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18091131550027851275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5080248961176338496.post-21450995963993543872016-05-27T13:31:25.584-05:002016-05-27T13:31:25.584-05:00The Scramble for Africa was one of those overdeter...The Scramble for Africa was one of those overdetermined things, with the outcome inevitable except for the details, unless you postulate asteroid impacts or something of that nature. There were African leaders like Samori who did their best at "self-strengthening" by buying modern weapons and copying European tactics (in Samori's case, he hired soldiers who'd fought in the French forces) and it didn't work. For that matter, when the British invaded Egypt in 1882, the Egyptian army had pretty much exactly the same weapons as they did -- Remington rolling-block rifles vs. Martini-Henrys, Krupp guns vs. Armstrongs -- and the British walloped the living snot out of them without even working up a sweat. The Europeans could lose the odd battle, like Isandlwana, mostly because of gross carelessness or some freak accident, but they were going to win the wars because the power differential was simply too great. There was Ethiopia, of course, but they were fighting the Italians -- and the Italians were willing to accept defeat after losing one battle, which neither the French nor the Germans nor the British nor (even) the Portuguese would. The powers with serious colonial empires -couldn't- accept a defeat; too much was riding on the prestige factor, which was what let them control vast territories on the cheap. They and the locals both knew they'd always win in the end, a clammy certainty which depressed the spirits of potential rebels.S.M. Stirlinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18091131550027851275noreply@blogger.com