I just don't get it (maybe it's a female limitation)

[GloriousRuse]

Ah yes, prior to a post proving the bravery and virtue of it's originator, I had the mistaken misconception that sides in two of the largest struggles in human history, sides which enjoyed a dazzling series of tactical and operational successes before eventually being matched and then beaten in extended conflicts that became synonymous with major warfare for that era - perhaps even defined entire generations culturally, with media portraying those wars across the entire spectrum of human drama - might be of some interest. Foolishly, one might even imagine that there are campaigns, decisions, and personalities on those sides that are studied within professional militaries to this very day for lessons and examples, and perhaps were even tied to a series of Cold War weapons programs and doctrinal reforms.

Obviously, I was wrong. I hereby award you the Internet Medal of Virtue for illuminating the truth for us all.

Based on your keen insight and moral superiority, we shall henceforth strive to never be concerned with any who lose, for clearly they are of no consequence - this will no doubt save future history students many boring lessons on Athens, Napoleon, various time periods of the British Empire, chunks of the life of Ataturk and Churchill...and well the list just keeps going doesn't it? I assume you'll be telling Morgan Freeman personally that his role in the movie Glory really should have never been cast?

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse

Ah yes, prior to a post proving the bravery and virtue of it's originator, I had the mistaken misconception that sides in two of the largest struggles in human history, sides which enjoyed a dazzling series of tactical and operational successes before eventually being matched and then beaten in extended conflicts that became synonymous with major warfare for that era - perhaps even defined entire generations culturally, with media portraying those wars across the entire spectrum of human drama - might be of some interest. Foolishly, one might even imagine that there are campaigns, decisions, and personalities on those sides that are studied within professional militaries to this very day for lessons and examples, and perhaps were even tied to a series of Cold War weapons programs and doctrinal reforms.

Obviously, I was wrong. I hereby award you the Internet Medal of Virtue for illuminating the truth for us all.

Based on your keen insight and moral superiority, we shall henceforth strive to never be concerned with any who lose, for clearly they are of no consequence - this will no doubt save future history students many boring lessons on Athens, Napoleon, various time periods of the British Empire, chunks of the life of Ataturk and Churchill...and well the list just keeps going doesn't it? I assume you'll be telling Morgan Freeman personally that his role in the movie Glory really should have never been cast?

????

[poymando]

The Germans had nifty uniforms and an interesting visual design aesthetic which brings in the fanbois and the CSA had the Daughters of the Confederacy's successful propaganda campaign to deify the fiction of the Lost Cause.

[terje439]

As has been mentioned here several times allready, it is the underdog thing. Can I outdo history?

As to the German Big Cats, the sheer punshing power of the 88 on the Tiger is just mythical in some ways. And the JagdPanther...Oh my, never thought much of it untill I saw the "sawed through" JP they used to have on display in the Imperial War Museum in London. That thing just demands attention.

[MrsWargamer]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse

Ah yes, prior to a post proving the bravery and virtue of it's originator, I had the mistaken misconception that sides in two of the largest struggles in human history, sides which enjoyed a dazzling series of tactical and operational successes before eventually being matched and then beaten in extended conflicts that became synonymous with major warfare for that era - perhaps even defined entire generations culturally, with media portraying those wars across the entire spectrum of human drama - might be of some interest. Foolishly, one might even imagine that there are campaigns, decisions, and personalities on those sides that are studied within professional militaries to this very day for lessons and examples, and perhaps were even tied to a series of Cold War weapons programs and doctrinal reforms.

Obviously, I was wrong. I hereby award you the Internet Medal of Virtue for illuminating the truth for us all.

Based on your keen insight and moral superiority, we shall henceforth strive to never be concerned with any who lose, for clearly they are of no consequence - this will no doubt save future history students many boring lessons on Athens, Napoleon, various time periods of the British Empire, chunks of the life of Ataturk and Churchill...and well the list just keeps going doesn't it? I assume you'll be telling Morgan Freeman personally that his role in the movie Glory really should have never been cast?

????

Not sure he really read my post with the spirit or intent it was written Joe.

[RangerJoe]

Sometimes, you can learn more by studying the side that lost than the studying the side that won. Von Manstein studied how the Confederates used their artillery and then developed mobile field artillery.

[JWW]

Then why do so many women date losers? [;)]

[MrsWargamer]

ORIGINAL: jwarrenw13

Then why do so many women date losers? [;)]

Ugh, you reeeeeeally got me there

[Trugrit]

MrsWargamer,

You have a lot to learn.

Soldiers fight for each other, not for history. It is about love, not winning or losing.

If you stand and fight for your friends, country and what you personally believe to be right
that is what matters, not whether you win or lose the fight.

You said: “I have zero desire to champion losers”
If you look on a Vietnam veteran in a wheelchair as a loser….. the simple truth is
that he is not the loser…..you are.

It is not a female limitation, it is your limitation.

So, I’ll leave you with two quotes:

“Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.”
John 15:13

In the book The Killer Angels…...
Lee and Longstreet are discussing if they can go on fighting after losing the battle at Gettysburg:

"If the war goes on-and it will, it will…….what else can we do but go on?
It is the same question forever, what else can we do? If they fight, we will fight with them.

And does it matter after all who wins? Was that ever really the question?
Will God ask that question, in the end?"

General Robert E. Lee, Part IV, CH 5: Longsteet, p.360

[Don60420]

If it weren't for innate female generosity, more than a few of us men would go through lives with only our wargames to keep us company!

One reason why I like playing the losers in historical conflicts Mrs. Wargamer is the lure of alternate history, so Hannibal takes Rome, Charles I crushes the Puritans in the English Civil War, Washington surrenders to Howe, the Germans take Paris in 1914. In regard to the Civil War, William Faulkner captures well an outcome that could have happened:

For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it’s still not yet two o’clock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets and his hat in one hand probably and his sword in the other looking up the hill waiting for Longstreet to give the word and it’s all in the balance, it hasn’t happened yet, it hasn’t even begun yet, it not only hasn’t begun yet but there is still time for it not to begin against that position and those circumstances which made more men than Garnett and Kemper and Armistead and Wilcox look grave yet it’s going to begin, we all know that, we have come too far with too much at stake and that moment doesn’t need even a fourteen-year-old boy to think This time. Maybe this time with all this much to lose than all this much to gain: Pennsylvania, Maryland, the world, the golden dome of Washington itself to crown with desperate and unbelievable victory the desperate gamble, the cast made two years ago.

I think most wargamers love history, and in our games we are able to explore might have beens.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

MrsWargamer,

You have a lot to learn.

Soldiers fight for each other, not for history. It is about love, not winning or losing.

If you stand and fight for your friends, country and what you personally believe to be right
that is what matters, not whether you win or lose the fight.

You said: “I have zero desire to champion losers”
If you look on a Vietnam veteran in a wheelchair as a loser….. the simple truth is
that he is not the loser…..you are.

It is not a female limitation, it is your limitation.

So, I’ll leave you with two quotes:

“Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.”
John 15:13

In the book The Killer Angels…...
Lee and Longstreet are discussing if they can go on fighting after losing the battle at Gettysburg:

"If the war goes on-and it will, it will…….what else can we do but go on?
It is the same question forever, what else can we do? If they fight, we will fight with them.

And does it matter after all who wins? Was that ever really the question?
Will God ask that question, in the end?"

General Robert E. Lee, Part IV, CH 5: Longsteet, p.360

She was a Canadian soldier. She was stationed in Germany.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

ORIGINAL: jwarrenw13

Then why do so many women date losers? [;)]

Ugh, you reeeeeeally got me there

Does he speak from his own experience? [8|]

Or do you think that the women who date losers do it as a point of rebellion against their parents? [&:]

Do you think that it may be low self esteem?

But remember, unless you win at everything 100% of the time, then you are a loser. If you do win 100% of the time, either you are cheating and/or you have not been challenged.

[MrsWargamer]

I have not agreed or liked every reply necessarily so far, but, your replies have in some cases been very well stated.
It has been a good thread thus far, and I'm glad I started it.

I have learned a few things.
I have been reminded of a few things I had forgotten.

[Twotribes]

I like to play Germany because of the cool equipment and the fact you try to do better, I like both the South and the North in Civil war both had problems to overcome.

[JWW]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

ORIGINAL: jwarrenw13

Then why do so many women date losers? [;)]

Ugh, you reeeeeeally got me there

Does he speak from his own experience? [8|]

Or do you think that the women who date losers do it as a point of rebellion against their parents? [&:]

Do you think that it may be low self esteem?

But remember, unless you win at everything 100% of the time, then you are a loser. If you do win 100% of the time, either you are cheating and/or you have not been challenged.

Heh. Speaking seriously for a moment, in my present life as a teacher (past life was a military career) I know many single or divorced mature female teachers who talk about all the loser men in their lives. Good ones are apparently very hard to find. And I teach high school and get to see every year some of the best and brightest young ladies dating some of the worst of the young men, the 'bad boy' types, sometimes precisely in rebellion against parents. The 'bad boy' syndrome is still a big thing in high school. The smart kids -- male and female -- who are going to be successful 20 years down the road, are usually not the most popular kids, though there are exceptions.

As for my own wife of 46 years, she sometimes tells me she is not totally unhappy with her choice, even though it included moving from place to place in the US and around the world for half our marriage, including five years in (West) Germany, though other times she tells me men are only good for three things, two of which are lifting heavy objects and reaching things in high places.

In gaming I find I have an affinity for certain factions in certain situations, but I tend to play a mix of losers and winners. For example, I always play the Germans against the Soviets in WWII East Front games. But I always play the US against the Germans, except in full war in Europe strategic games where I will play either side. I always play the US against the Japanese. And so on.

Edit -- We loved our five years in Germany. It was beautiful. We still keep in contact with the family we rented two rooms from in our first stay in Germany right after we got married, 1974-75. They treated us so nice. And we got to travel through much of Europe, that is, the parts that were not part of the Warsaw Pact at the time.

[gamer78]

I may not have an older history of yours but in 90's during Yugoslav Civil War I was in Egypt. Serb, Croat and Bosnian students in there all about hatred between each other. For Germany -unfortunately not about his music and culture maybe hospitality as you mention- but ideology in WW'2 still seem favourable in under developed or maybe some civilized nations.

Anyway for a pbem game I prefer to be in a stronger side. I'm not creative in offensive so I pick US over Confederate and Allies over Axis in the past. I'm not a good player just enjoy games. [:)]]

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

I mean, that's like asking men why they make models. Aren't those meant for kids?

Not all of them. [;)]

[Simulacra53]

ORIGINAL: jwarrenw13
In gaming I find I have an affinity for certain factions in certain situations, but I tend to play a mix of losers and winners. For example, I always play the Germans against the Soviets in WWII East Front games. But I always play the US against the Germans, except in full war in Europe strategic games where I will play either side. I always play the US against the Japanese. And so on.

I think that’s also a cold war indoctrination element.
The fight on the eastern front is the fight against the common cold war enemy the Soviet Union.
Anti-communism was the main theme (same reason why not a few non Germans joined the Waffen SS).

So it was only natural for you to fight the Germans in the west, but the Soviets in the east.

Having no access to Soviet archives also made sure that history was not only biased, but limited to the German side of that conflict - including the super soldiers and weapons. In the nineties and 00s we achieved a kind of balance in WW2 history, today however it is a more toxic environment dominated by political correctness, narrative driven revisionism (versus fact driven revisionism, which is something else) and even a new cold war mentality.

Back to losers.
Look at how Wernher von Braun has gone through several transformations and how popular history treats him today.
At best one could say this is inconsistent and hypocritical.

“from winner to loser to winner to loser”

Today he’s slowly being pushed into the memory hole.
In a couple of decades project paperclip is a side note.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53
toxic environment dominated by political correctness, narrative driven revisionism (versus fact driven revisionism, which is something else) and even a new cold war mentality.

Hit the nail on the head.

[MrRoadrunner]

ORIGINAL: Gilmer

ORIGINAL: Rodwonder

Since when did George Washington become a loser... [&:] [X(]

Maybe they're thinking about right up until Late Fall/Winter of 77/78 when he started pulling rabbits out of a hat. I dunno.

Precisely.
Lost more than he won. Was fortunate to win the last.

RR