Skip to comments.
Zulus mark anniversary of victory over British force
Daily Telgegraph ^
| January 24, 2004
| Tim Butcher
Posted on 01/24/2004 5:49:47 AM PST by Land_of_Lincoln_John
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Men of Harlech stand ye steady,
can you see their spearpoints gleaming.....
You would think the Brits would have learned from Custer's debacle just three years before this happened.
To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
3
posted on
01/24/2004 5:59:58 AM PST
by
billorites
(freepo ergo sum)
To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Kinda like The Battle of the Little Bighorn on a larger scale. Panic and the lack of a defensible position led to it's outcome. I don't know how accurate the movie 'Zulu' was but I saw it when I was a kid. It bowled me over.
The strict discipline of the British soldier paid off at Rourke's Drift whereas the lack of discipline took a heavy toll at the Little Bighorn.
The mutilation of the dead in large quantity is a trademark of indiginous combat.
4
posted on
01/24/2004 6:11:13 AM PST
by
johnny7
(“C'mon! You sons 'o bitches wanna live forever!?”)
To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Isandlwana is the favorite example in the military to tweak the quartermaster types when they tighten up on their supplies and procedures too much. The Brits were doing well until the firing line started running out of ammunition. There was plenty of ammunition available behind the lines, but it was in crates controlled by each unit's supply sergeant. To prevent loss or pilfereing, the crate lids were screwed down tight and the supply guys would only open one at a time. Further, in the smoke and confusion, when a soldier from a different unit presented himself at the wrong supply wagon, he was turned away with no ammo.
As a result, the firing died down, the Zulus closed in and it was all over.
To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
I wonder if they also "celebrate" the fact that 80
! Welsh riflemen shot to hell 4,000 of these same Zulus the following day at Rorke's Drift, and that despite repeated attacks, these 4,000 Zulus were unable to overcome 80
! well-disciplined riflemen. Had Pulliene withdrawn his men into a laager, opened the ammo boxes, the Zulus would not have had anything to celebrate except 4,000 dead bodies.
This was confirmed a short time later at Ulundi, when 8,000 British, with cannon and Gatling guns, formed a scquare and invited the 20,000 ! Zulu to attack them as they had at Isandlwana. Not one Zulu got within 30 yards of the British square, and the attackers were decimated.
6
posted on
01/24/2004 6:19:11 AM PST
by
LS
(CNN is the Amtrack of news.)
To: vetvetdoug
Men of Harlech stand ye steady, can you see their spearpoints gleaming..... "..and the Welsh singers sang..." the movie, ZULU w/ actors, Stanley Baker & Micheal Caine (his 1st major film)...and a case in point in the book, Military Blunders , about underestimating your foes' resources...(like the GOP is doing w/ the 'RATS in '04 and Shrillary in '08 ). :|
7
posted on
01/24/2004 6:21:07 AM PST
by
skinkinthegrass
(Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
To: johnny7
I've seen it too. Zulu and Zulu Dawn are both great movies. I'm not sure how much of the one about the Zulu victory at Isandlwana is true, but the Brits definitely took it on the chin. They had a similar disaster in Afghanistan in the 1850's I believe. The name escapes me, but there is a famous painting in England of the only bedraggled survivor approaching a British outpost on a wounded horse.
I have trouble with the part about Zulu history being important. It is definitely important to them, as it is to any group, and I don't begrudge them that. In the overall perspective of the world, other than the two famous battles mentioned above, it's not. Sorry.
To: Land_of_Lincoln_John; snippy_about_it; SAMWolf; ALOHA RONNIE
Isandlwana was the British Army's Little Big Horn. Rorke's Drift, the next day, was it's LZ Xray.
Pinging some friends.
9
posted on
01/24/2004 6:24:43 AM PST
by
CholeraJoe
(Currahee! 3 miles up, 3 miles down. Hi Yo, Silver!)
To: LS
I believe the number of riflemen was slightly more than 100, but my memory isn't what it used to be. Either way a remarkable feat of arms.
Also, if you think about it, had the British been armed with Henry, Spencer, or Winchester repeating carbines, the outcome of either one of these battles would have been different (larger body count in the first, victory in the second).
To: Hardastarboard
..the part about Zulu history being important. It is definitely important to them, as it is to any group, and I don't begrudge them that. In the overall perspective of the world, other than the two famous battles mentioned above, it's not.All you say is true, it sure scared the $*** outta the Brits...and then, there were the Boer Wars...Breaker Morant...another good pic...and then there's the American blunders, be fair. :)
11
posted on
01/24/2004 6:31:11 AM PST
by
skinkinthegrass
(Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
To: CholeraJoe
Isandlwana was the British Army's Little Big Horn. Rorke's Drift, the next day, was it's LZ Xray.Good way to put it. :/
12
posted on
01/24/2004 6:33:03 AM PST
by
skinkinthegrass
(Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
To: LS
I have seen the movies, read a couple of books and visited both Isandlwana and the Drift. You are correct, the battle was lost only due to poor leadership on the part of the British.
13
posted on
01/24/2004 6:33:20 AM PST
by
HoustonCurmudgeon
(PEACE - Through Superior Firepower)
To: Hardastarboard; CholeraJoe; LS; johnny7; vetvetdoug
While reading the article I was curious to see if perhaps Rourke's Rift might be mentioned?
For an excellent account of Rourke's Rift and how culture largely influences the outcome of battles, and has for centuries, I highly recommend:
Carnage and Culture, Landmark Battles that Defined Western Power, by Victor Davis Hanson.
A very good book.
To: Cuttnhorse
Rorke's Drift, not Rift. Yes, I use C&C in my classes. But the essential book on Rorke's Drift and the Zulu Wars is "The Washing of the Spears," from which VDH took much of his research.
15
posted on
01/24/2004 6:38:35 AM PST
by
LS
(CNN is the Amtrack of news.)
To: Hardastarboard
The total number of soldiers inside RD was 124, but only 80 were capable riflemen. You had medics, wounded, quartermaster, cooks, etc. BTW, one reason NO army would arm its men with repeaters is the paranoid concern that soldiers would fire too rapidly and waste ammo. This remained a problem well until the 1960s, when the Amry debated this over the M-16!!
16
posted on
01/24/2004 6:41:03 AM PST
by
LS
(CNN is the Amtrack of news.)
To: LS
Rorke's Drift, not Rift.Ooops, right you are.
To: LS
I notice in thumbing through CC, the section, "For Further Reading", contains some fascinating titles about Britsh and Zulu battles.
To: VietnamOdyssey; CholeraJoe; VOA; Fred Mertz; 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
19
posted on
01/24/2004 6:54:36 AM PST
by
ALOHA RONNIE
(Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com.)
To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Zulu military brilliance at Isandlwana. From what I know of this battle, the "brilliance" consisted of outnumbering the British 2 or 3 to 1.
Foot soldiers were ... disembowelled by the Zulu warriors using their short, stabbing assegais in a ritual known as "the washing of the spears".
Sounds like the level of brutality inflicted on Custer's men at the Little Big Horn. But those nasty WHITE men were the aggressors ... Imagine "celebrating" Wounded Knee or the death of Nat Turner.
20
posted on
01/24/2004 7:04:49 AM PST
by
IronJack
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson