NationStates Jolt Archive

Now, we all know that most people tend to side with the underdog. The romantisim around a weaker power going up against immense odds, a small band of people trying to free themselves from a cruel and mighty empire, and people doing the impossible all tend to entice people in their tales of honor and glory.

Seing how there have been so many underdogs in history, I would like to know who the NS community thinks was the greatest underdog.

The Dutch in the 17th century kicked everyone's asses.

Now, we all know that most people tend to side with the underdog. The romantisim around a weaker power going up against immense odds, a small band of people trying to free themselves from a cruel and mighty empire, and people doing the impossible all tend to entice people in their tales of honor and glory.

Seing how there have been so many underdogs in history, I would like to know who the NS community thinks was the greatest underdog.


Me

FNL, aka "Viet Cong".

Going by that list I have to choose Hannibal because Carthage is awesome.

Where's Ghandi? Jesus? Joan D'Arc for the chicks?

FNL, aka "Viet Cong".

Ugh.

Hannibal Kicks Ass. You know you've had an affect on the world when mothers in Rome told their children "Hannibal is at the Gates!" to frighten them for a few centuries after he died. Or when modern generals still study your campaigns…

I feel I have to post this: Finland vs Soviet Russia in 1939. Now, that certainly isn't the 'greatest' underdog situation... but went pretty well though.

http://espn.starwave.com/i/page2/photos/050119namath.jpg
Joe Namath and the Jets in Superbowl III

I feel I have to post this: Finland vs Soviet Russia in 1939. Now, that certainly isn't the 'greatest' underdog situation... but went pretty well though.

For the Finns! :p

Ugh.

Why the "ugh"? They most certainly fill the requirements.

Ghehe. You feel the Soviets were the underdogs? :)

Vietcong. "Inferior" militiamen, with outdated technology forced a bloody stalemate with a country labeling itself "the greatest".

Ghehe. You feel the Soviets were the underdogs? :)


In the snow they were!

Why the "ugh"? They most certainly fill the requirements.

That's just Roach-Busters being his old right-wing self: he will probably respond by claiming that not only were they leftists, but were also guilty of human rights abuses, whilst ignoring the fact that the US hardly fought a clean war against them.

Don't attack during the winter if you don't want to play in the snow! :D

Don't attack during the winter if you don't want to play in the snow! :D

"Finlands sak är vår!" :)

Don't attack during the winter if you don't want to play in the snow! :D

exactly

Why the "ugh"? They most certainly fill the requirements.

They were sick bastards. Read, for example, Deliver Us From Evil by Dr. Thomas Dooley; The Viet Cong Strategy of Terror by Douglas Pike; How We Lost the Vietnam War by Nguyen Cao Ky; Death by Government by Professor R.J. Rummel; American Opinion, February 1968; American Opinion, May 1968; American Opinion, January 1969; United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Internal Security, 92nd Congress, 2nd Session, The Human Cost of Communism in Vietnam (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972), p. 8; Newsweek, May 15, 1967; Time, December 15, 1967; Reader's Digest, November 1968.

The Irish in the Irish Revolution.

They were sick bastards.

Whereas the US fought an entirely clean war against them?

That's just Roach-Busters being his old right-wing self: he will probably respond by claiming that not only were they leftists, but were also guilty of human rights abuses, whilst ignoring the fact that the US hardly fought a clean war against them.

First of all, I don't like your flame-baiting. Second, never did I say that the U.S. never committed atrocities. Third of all, whereas U.S. soldiers who committed atrocities received court-martials, Vietcong who committed atrocities received promotions and medals. The tamest Vietcong atrocities dwarf even the most barbarous war crimes committed by U.S. troops.

I think the greeks in the second Greco-Persian war were the considerable underdogs, after Most of northern greece had already capitulated to Xerxes without any battle, the fioghting that occured along the Thermopolae/Artemisium line (thermopolae as every one knows was the pass were the Spartans and Thebans made a heroic stand almost to the last man and Artemisium being the Sea way were the greeks managed to considerably weaken the Persian fleet and reduce their numerical superiority to the point where the famous victory at Salamis became possible.

Cpl Monastyrsky, Ilya USMC
4th Force Service Support Group
6th Engineer Support Battalion
Headquarters & Service Company

They were sick bastards. Read, for example, Deliver Us From Evil by Dr. Thomas Dooley; The Viet Cong Strategy of Terror by Douglas Pike; How We Lost the Vietnam War by Nguyen Cao Ky; Death by Government by Professor R.J. Rummel; American Opinion, February 1968; American Opinion, May 1968; American Opinion, January 1969; United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Internal Security, 92nd Congress, 2nd Session, The Human Cost of Communism in Vietnam (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972), p. 8; Newsweek, May 15, 1967; Time, December 15, 1967; Reader's Digest, November 1968.

The US aren't exactly known for having been puppy dogs in that war, either. The Viet Cong were, if anything, effective at fighting the US in a way that the US had no chance of winning. You don't have to be nice to be an underdog.

Oh, and those were some dandy American sources.

I say Hannibal.

He lead an army of ragged mercenaries, Gaulish tribesmen, and Iberian Conscripts against what was then the most powerful nation in the world. He had a series of victories, and was in Italy for over Seventeen years. In fact, the only reason he didn't crush Rome was bickering and arguing over what should happen in his own nation.

The tamest Vietcong atrocities dwarf even the most barbarous war crimes committed by U.S. troops. And you are not exaggerating at all? :p

And you are not exaggerating at all? :p

Him, biased? Nooo....

Please, peoples, this isn't a "Which-party-in-the-vietnam-war-comitted-more-attrocities thread". It's a "Greatest Underdog in History" thread. Please stay on topic.

Vietcong. "Inferior" militiamen, with outdated technology forced a bloody stalemate with a country labeling itself "the greatest".

I take it you've never heard of the Rules of Engagement. A few good sources are How We Lost the Vietnam War by Nguyen Cao Ky; Science & Mechanics, March 1968, p. 40; Congressional Record – Senate, March 6, 14, and 18, 1985, p. S2632; The Hanoi Commitment by James Mulligan; Wings of the Eagle by W.T. Grant; In Their Defense: U.S. Soldiers in the Vietnam War by Dr. Pham Kim Vinh; Thud Ridge by Colonel Jack Broughton; and Story of Ray Davis, General of Marines by Major General Raymond G. Davis, with Colonel William J. Davis.

Him, biased? Nooo....

At least I named sources. Until you can do the same, why not do us all a favor and shut up.

At least I named sources. Until you can do the same, why not do us all a favor and shut up.

I wasn't aware I had mentioned anything that required sources. The US weren't angels and the Viet Cong were underdogs.

Your sources were American.

Why don't you post those passages from them books (or tell us what's in them) here Roach-Busters..? It's not that I don't believe you, I just want to know what you mean... and I sure as hell won't go and read those books. Again... I so believe Viet-Cong was nasty at times...

I wasn't aware I had mentioned anything that required sources. The US weren't angels and the Viet Cong were underdogs.

Your sources were American.

He has a point, RB.

Although I DO agree with ye; The Viet Cong were a bunch of Genocidal Mass-murderes, but they DID beat us, and they WERE the underdogs.

I wouldn't really call the majority of those underdogs. Especially Hannibal. A military Genius with a massively large army. Perception is way too decieving.

I wouldn't really call the majority of those underdogs. Especially Hannibal. A military Genius with a massively large army. Perception is way too decieving.

Whattaya mean?

Hannibal lead a rag-tag army against the most powerful military power in the world. He was outnumbered a gillion to 1, yet STILL managed to whoop the Romans arse time and time again.

I wouldn't really call the majority of those underdogs. Especially Hannibal. A military Genius with a massively large army. Perception is way too decieving.
Most underdogs are military geniuses. I agree that the Second Punic War was more evenly matched than most would think, Hannibal's career does not just involve his invasion of Italy. After he was defeated at Zama he fled to Asia Minor where he led various uprisings against Roman authority. He served as an admiral for the Seleucids and fought campaigns for other minor princes, always with Rome's destruction in his mind. Here is this one man, with a vow to oppose Rome, being hounded by the Roman Republic and its vast resources across the Greece and Anatolia. his life was indeed a tragic and romantic adventure.

Most underdogs are military geniuses. I agree that the Second Punic War was more evenly matched than most would think, Hannibal's career does not just involve his invasion of Italy. After he was defeated at Zama he fled to Asia Minor where he led various uprisings against Roman authority. He served as an admiral for the Seleucids and fought campaigns for other minor princes, always with Rome's destruction in his mind. Here is this one man, with a vow to oppose Rome, being hounded by the Roman Republic and its vast resources across the Greece and Anatolia. his life was indeed a tragic and romantic adventure.

I agree.

They should make a movie about him.

I mean, they made one for Alexander, Spartacus, and other generals, so why not Hannibal?

And I mean one of those multi-million dollar epics. Not those cheesy '50's movies.

Never mind, they ARE making a Hannibal Movie.

But it's staring Vin Diesel! *shudders*

Never mind, they ARE making a Hannibal Movie.

But it's staring Vin Diesel! *shudders*
OH SHI

I wish Mr. Diesel's role is as the elephant of Hannibal. If not, heaven help us.

OH SHI

My thoughts exactly!

For those looking for female underdogs (underbitches?):
Boudicca vs. Rome
Tomyris vs. Cyrus the Great (my favorite)
Zenobia vs. Rome
Trung Trac and Trung Nhi vs. China
Lakshmi Bai vs. the British Empire

Never mind, they ARE making a Hannibal Movie.

But it's staring Vin Diesel! *shudders*

Ugh.

I wish Mr. Diesel's role is as the elephant of Hannibal. If not, heaven help us.

Or the elephant dung-shoveler.

First of all, I don't like your flame-baiting.

Nothing there was intended as flame-baiting: if you felt baited, then apologies.

Second, never did I say that the U.S. never committed atrocities.

Indeed, but IIRC in the past you have made several comments regarding the Viet Cong and their human rights abuses, without conceding that the US also had a less than clean record.

Third of all, whereas U.S. soldiers who committed atrocities received court-martials, Vietcong who committed atrocities received promotions and medals. The tamest Vietcong atrocities dwarf even the most barbarous war crimes committed by U.S. troops.

It is certainly true that court martials were held with regard to those such a Lieutenant Calley and other relatively low ranking soldiers, but there remain questions hanging over the legitimacy of acts carried out by those in charge, such as the bombings carried out in Cambodia which lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths. At the same time, the US saw fit to turn a blind eye to abuses carried out by its Southern Vietnamese allies.

Cliky cliky! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8070142#post8070142)

bumpz0rz

Good ol' Abe. He was a loser of almost every office he ran for and then he became the US President. Most historians say he is the greatest president ever.

bump

Come on people, Steven Bradbury is the greatest underdog in history!
The Australian Speed-Skater who won Australia's first ever Winter Olympic Gold Medal, when he got into the final when the guy who beat him was disqualified, and went from dead last to first when all the other competitors crashed fifteen meters from the line on the final lap :p

Even now, sometimes, people still say if you win from an impossible position by an impossible occurance, you've 'pulled a bradbury'.