Oh they did, one got a blaster and there were the two were piloting the AT-ST with Chewie[/quote]DVS BSTrD said:(For that matter, none of them had captured Imperial weapons)
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sJgAkLZ70VU/UN-lUYJrZ7I/AAAAAAAAIbw/STRxZHp84mE/s1600/theknightshift-ewokwithagunmotivationalposter.jpgthaluikhain said:(For that matter, none of them had captured Imperial weapons)
That comparison actually did come to mind, but not exactly in the way you've suggested. Rourke's Drift only happened because the Zulus massacred a much larger British force at the Battle of Isandlwana, where the numerically superior force of Zulus armed with spears and cowhide shields (and some old muskets and rifles they weren't trained to use) attacked and destroyed an entire British column.woundwart said:Comparing the Ewoks to Viet Cong is nonsense. The ewoks had stick and stones the empire had modern weapons. The battle of Endor should have looked like The Battle of Rorke's Drift.
Yeah, really the rebel commandos themselves were more comparable to the American revolutionaries, same basic capability and equipment but without the numbers, regular vs. irregular forces.Spygon said:Not sure how the comparison with the American revolution is comparable as the ewoks weren't being supplied by an enemy that was similar strength to the empire who were also fighting them at the same time.
Also, they have American accents, and they are fighting British people.Zykon TheLich said:Yeah, really the republic commandos themselves were more comparable to the American revolutionaries, same basic capability and equipment but without the numbers, regular vs. irregular forces.
Well, the British commander did get a number of things seriously wrong. The British could have won that one, and should have done better than they did, but they were up against a serious threat.Zykon TheLich said:In the Isandlwana example, the difference in equipment and capabilty wasn't that great, 15000+ guys with spears vs under 2000 guys with single shot breech loading rifles without magazines and no armour...yeah, not that surprising the Zulus won that one. The Reason Rorke's drift is remembered is because it's so fucking amazing.
You mean like American popular history is more interested in remembering the revolutionary war and forgets about the war of 1812. Who wants to remember that whole burning down of Washington, the virtual defection of New England and New York and the surrender of the federal army.Robert Rath said:Perhaps not surprisingly, British popular history is more interested in remembering the 150 soldiers that fought at Rourke's Drift and won, rather than the 1,300 who were wiped out the previous day.
Quoted out of context for amusement value. Tee hee.albino boo said:the revolting Americans
It was certainly possible, they fucked up, but as you said, it was going to be a proper fight whatever happened, it's not ZOMFG how on earth did the British lose that.thaluikhain said:Well, the British commander did get a number of things seriously wrong. The British could have won that one, and should have done better than they did, but they were up against a serious threat.
I would, at this juncture, like to point out that I am British and that any double meaning is entirely intentional.RhombusHatesYou said:Quoted out of context for amusement value. Tee hee.albino boo said:the revolting Americans