111
eugenics slopaganda (thelemmy.club)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/slop@hexbear.net
86 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 73 points 1 week ago (12 children)

we literaly live in the era of drones and gunpowder and chuds still think war is decided by physical strength (it hasnt since the invention of the crossbow)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 61 points 1 week ago* (4 children)

    ACTUALLY crossbows were tied to strength because your fire rate was tied to how many times you could load it in a multiple hours battle (precision was barely a factor they just shot as many as possible in the right direction) nerd

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 38 points 1 week ago

    :themysicra-shining: actually war is predominantly determined by logistics which is why women (who consume fewer calories per spear) make superior soldiers for state conflicts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    It hasn't since well before that. Strategy>having a bunch of really strong guys every time historically.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child)

    I don't think that's entirely correct, you can't win a war without having a bunch of fit people who can actually carry guns and walk around the territories you need to occupy. But in this case China has more than enough people with guns so it's indeed down to strategy (and we can see how the US strategy works in Iran...)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Depends on the objective of the war, occupying territory isnt always the goal, though it tends to be required to some extent usually. And while I will concede that having an army that is physically fit to be an army, I figured that was an assumed baseline. Like, of course well placed toddlers with perfect logistics in place would still lose to a real army. But running a smart war is always more important than greater overall force unless you get to a really extreme difference in force, like ine side having guns and the other side not etc

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    I suppose overall fitness (not necessarily raw strength) has always been important. You can't march for days with gear if you can't run 10m without getting winded.

    But you're right in the sense that bombs and guns equalize that somewhat, drones even more so because you have have your less fit soldiers just pilot them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent