Ridiculous tv show

Sean

Mentor
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
670
I was watching a tv show on Spike (the only good thing on that channel is UFC) called Deadliest Warrior or something. Anyway, it supposedly scientifically (yeah right) matches warriors from different eras against each other. Today was the first episode; Apache vs Galdiator. Guess who won?

Despite the fact that the gladiators weapons and defenses were superior to the Apache's in every possible way (except bow and arrow), the Apache won. Seriously? A true match between gladiator and apache would not have been close. The weapons, the armour, the physical prowess, every advantage would have gone to the gladiator, who job was to fight one on one.

Next week is Viking vs Samurai. Care to guess who will win? This show is just another way to try and take away any pride whites may have in their history or ancestors. I will not watch this show again.

smiley18.gif
 

Westside

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
7,703
Location
So Cal
Yeah, and the following week will be A Knight of Templar vs a Zulu Warrior. We know the script, the Knight gets sand kicked in his eyes then the Zulu chokes him with a piece of Popeye's Chicken!
smiley36.gif
 

P-NutLane

Guru
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
454
Location
Texas
I just saw this nonsense. The Apache would not stand a chance. This is a blatant peice of propaganda. I mean my goodness, this is too much. Not to mention that they put the Gladiator in the Apaches homeland. Why not the arena?
 

j41181

Master
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
2,344
smiley36.gif
smiley36.gif
smiley36.gif
smiley36.gif
smiley36.gif

This is soooo stupid!!! Who is the moron behind this stupidity I wonder?

The whole thing just makes me laugh, why?

The Roman Gladiator is a trained killing machine, an Apache Brave is just a hunter-gatherer, hit 'n run warrior. If they fought in a "real" fighting arena, the Apache would get butchered.

Then we have a Knights Templar vs. a Zulu Warrior, wow, talk about mismatch. In a "real" arena, Zulu gets butchered many times over.

The Viking vs. The Samurai, I say this is evenly matched. Samurais are some of the mostly skilled swordsmen in history, I happen to admire Samurais. But Vikings are some of the deadliest warriors known to man, skilled with a sword or any weapon, with the fury of a raging bull.

This show is overall is historically inaccurate, and just plain stupid. Edited by: j41181
 

guest301

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
4,246
Location
Ohio
I watched the opening show too and the only way the apache wins this fight is long distance with the bow and arrow because the gladiators chest is often left unprotected. But this show had the apache winning close in with a knife after the gladiator had already put the apache to the ground and had mounted him and hit him several times in the face with those steel spiked gloves the gladiators wore. Nobody would have survived the ultimate "ground and pound" like that. The show had alot of respectable science to it but I guess they would have thought the computer simulated fight would have been boring if it was simply a sneak attack bow and arrow that would have killed the gladiator. One other thing bothered me about the show, the average gladiator is alot bigger than the average apache and that fact was very glossed over.Edited by: guest301
 

Sean

Mentor
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
670
I big a huge fan of ancient history my whole life, and really enjoy studying ancient Rome. I was pretty infuriated at this result.

In the end, its just another attempt to brainwash the unintellegent into thinking there are no tough white people. But again, in the end, we know who owned the entire known world, and we know who couldn't even keep control over Oklahoma! Utter nonsense.

One positive, it was cool to see Chuck Liddell do the strikes for the Gladiator.
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
462
Westside said:
Yeah, and the following week will be A Knight of Templar vs a Zulu Warrior. We know the script, the Knight gets sand kicked in his eyes then the Zulu chokes him with a piece of Popeye's Chicken!
smiley36.gif
The Zulu are so overrated. There may have been over 100 superior African armies. They just happen to be the group who had a couple movies made about them.

The Zulu would get crushed by probably any other group the show includes, whether that be Vikings, Mongols, Chuck Norris or whoever.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
538
Location
Wisconsin
Obviously Whites are the best warriors, since we conquered the brown mass. What else really needs to be said? Only in the jew-created fantasy land that is the talmudvision does a savage with a sharpened stick stand a chance.
 

Sean

Mentor
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
670
Run Stuffing LB said:
Obviously Whites are the best warriors, since we conquered the brown mass. What else really needs to be said? Only in the jew-created fantasy land that is the talmudvision does a savage with a sharpened stick stand a chance.

smiley32.gif
smiley32.gif


Nice RB, very nicely put. Gladiators 1 Apache 0.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
1,248
Location
Illinois
Now you know why I do not have cable. Apaches defeat a gladiator? How are they scoring this? The apache would have an advantage in stealth and archery- along with stealing hoses and woman and childre. In Hand to hand combat, where wars are won, the Gladiator wins
 

GiovaniMarcon

Mentor
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
1,231
Location
Westwood, California
Prediction: the ultimate warrior (as decided by the show, and not as in the insane 1980s-90s professional wrestler) will not be a white warrior of any kind, for obvious political reasons.

The dark horse winner might be a samurai for the "coolness" factor but otherwise the winner will not be asian for the reason that even brainwashed white males will not accept being mastered by Mongoloids.

The winner will be "scientifically decided" to be Egyptian or Persian so that both Middle Easterners or Blacks can claim some lineage, or will simply be black or South American (Mayan).

This will placate the Blacks and Hispanics who have delusions of grandeur, and will also placate whites who think it's good to worship anything that isn't white.

I personally believe the ultimate warriors would be people from the Germanic tribes that perennially resisted Roman conquest. Mongol horsemen also have an argument, though their superiority lies more in group combat rather than individual prowess. I believe Mongol horsemen might have stood a chance of conquering Europe, but that's not the argument. Single-combat is, and in single combat, even Marcus Aurelius in his Meditations commented on the huge size and ferocious nature of Germanic warriors.

"A whole head taller than our own troops. A race of blond savages, whose war cries made our marrow grow cold."

Edited to add: In the later Roman empire, whom did all the emperors choose to man the Praetorian guard? It certainly was no longer comprised of ethnic Italians. The Romans had their pick of specimens from all the known world, most of which they conquered -- even having black soldiers available from African conquests. Yet whom did the sovereigns choose?

Vandals. Goths.

The end.Edited by: GiovaniMarcon
 

P-NutLane

Guru
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
454
Location
Texas
And what about those captured in battle, that became Gladiators? This really burns me up because its SOOO CRAZY. Were talking one on one combat! The greatest Apache fighter wouldnt stand a chance vs a good Gladiator! The Zulu comes in last place! I might have to make a poll so we can pick a castefootball Ultimate Warrior.
 

Sean

Mentor
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
670
A little off topic, but I thought you guys might find it interesting. Have any of you ever heard of Gordon Scott? He played Hercules and Tarzan back in the 50's and 60's, and was good friends with Steve Reeves who many of you may remember for also playing Hercules.

You can read a little about him here:

http://briansdriveintheater.com/gordonscott.html

Anyway, whilst in Africa filming one of his Tarzan movies, Scott ended up in a spear throwing contest with a real life Zulu "warrior". Guess who won. Despite not being trained in it or anything, Scott out threw the Zulu, who had been doing it his whole life! His size and strength proved to be an advantage even over (probable) superior technique.

smiley36.gif
 

dwid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
4,254
Location
Louisiana
didnt Celtic tribes defeat the Romans a few times too?

( i dont know too much about history, even though im majoring in it haha)

The first historical recorded encounter of a people displaying the
> cultural traits associated with the Celts comes from northern Italy
> around 400 BC, when a previously unkown group of barbarians came down
> from the Alps and displaced the Etruscans from the fertile Po valley, a
> displacment that helped to push the Etruscans from history's limelight.
>
> The next encounter with the Celts came with the still young Roman Empire,
> directly to the south of the Po. The Romans in fact had sent three envoys
> to the beseiged Etruscans to study this new force. We know from Livy's
> "The Early History of Rome" that this first encounter with Rome was quite
> civilized:
>
> [The Celts told the Roman envoys that] this was indeed the first time
> they had heard of them, but they assumed the Romans must be a courageous
> people because it was to them that the [Etruscans] had turned to in their
> hour of need. And since the Romans had tried to help with an embassy and
> not with arms, they themselves would not reject the offer of peace,
> provided the [Etruscans] ceded part of their seperfluous agricultural
> land; that was what they, the Celts, wanted ... If it were not given,
> they would launch an attack before the Romans' eyes, so that the Romans
> could report back how superior the Gauls were in battle to all others ...
> The Romans then asked whether it was right to demand land from its owners
> on pain of war,
> indeed what were the Celts doing in Etruria in the first place? The
> latter defiantly retorted that their right lay in their arms: To the
> brave belong all things.
>
> The Roman envoys then preceded to break their good faith and helped the
> Etruscans in their fight; in fact, one of the envoys, Quintas Fabius
> killed one of the Celtic tribal leaders. The Celts then sent their own
> envoys to Rome in protest and demand the Romans hand over all members of
> the Fabian family (to which all three of the original Roman envoys
> belonged) a move completely in line with current Roman protocol. This of
> course presented problems for the Roman senate, since the Fabian family
> was quite powerful in Rome. Indeed, Livy says:
>
> The party structure would allow no resolution to be made against such
> nobleman as justice would have required. The Senate... therefore passed
> examination of the Celts' request to the popular assembly, in which power
> and influence naturally counted for more. So it happened that those who
> ought to have been punished were instead appointed for the coming year
> military tribunes with consular powers (the highest that could be
> granted).
>
> The Celts saw this as a mortal insult and a host marched south to Rome.
> The Celts tore through the countryside and several battalions of Roman
> soilders to lay seige to the Capitol of the Roman Empire. Seven months of
> seige led to negotiations wherby the Celts promised to leave their seige
> for a tribute of one thousand pounds of gold, which the historian Pliny
> tells was very difficult for the entire city to muster. When the gold was
> being weighed, the Romans claimed the Celts were cheating with faulty
> weights. It was then that the Celts' leader, Brennus, threw his sword
> onto the balance and uttered the words "vae victis" "Woe to the
> Defeated". Rome never endured a more humiliating defeat and the Celts
> made an initial step of magnificent proportions into history.
>
> Other Roman historians tell us more of the Celts. Diodorus notes:
>
> Their aspect is terrifying ... They are very tall in stature, with
> ripling muscles under clear white skin. Their hair is blond, but not
> naturally so: they bleach it, to this day, artificially, washing it in
> lime and combing it back from their foreheaads. They look like
> wood-demons, their hair thick and shaggy like a horse's mane. Some of
> them are cleanshaven, but others - especially those of high rank, shave
> their cheeks but leave a moustache that covers the whole mouth and, when
> they eat and drink, acts like a sieve, trapping particles of food ... The
> way they dress is astonishing: they wear brightly coloured and
> embroidered shirts, with trousers called bracae and cloaks fastened at
> the shoulder with a brooch, heavy in winter, light in summer. These
> cloaks are striped or checkered in design, with the seperate checks close
> together and in various colours.
>
> [The Celts] wear bronze helmets with figures picked out on them, even
> horns, which made them look even taller than they already are...while
> others cover themselves with breast-armour made out of chains. But most
> content themselves with the weapons nature gave them: they go naked into
> battle ... Weird, discordant horns are sounded, [they shout in chorus
> with their deep and harsh voices], and they beat their swords rythmically
> against their shields.
>
> Diodorus also describes how the Celts cut off their enemies' heads and
> nailed them over the doors of their huts:
>
> In exactly the same way as hunters do with their skulls of the animals
> they have slain ... they preserved the heads of their most high-ranking
> victims in cedar oil, keeping them carefully in wooden boxes.
Edited by: dwid
 

Sean

Mentor
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
670
The Romans lost battles, but never lost a war in their prime. I'm a history major too (or working on it), and I've always been fascinated with Roman and Greek history.

Still, the Celts are much tougher than apache's anyway, and they didn't even get a mention on this stupid show.
 

dwid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
4,254
Location
Louisiana
well i just started on it, and so far only on world history after 1400 and American history after 1877. Lots of bs talked about.

"abt 150 - Ptolemy reported Brigantes Celts in Yorkshire up to Scotland, a fierce fighting people, their tribal center at Stanwick, North Riding. To their east were the Parisi Celts at Petuaria, coming from the plains of north east Gaul"

Im more interested in Celtic history since I am mostly Irish and French (Celts occupied France early on from what ive read). Too bad they dont have much written history.

From what ive read they were some tough people and the Romans beat them out because they had more disciplined and bigger armies. Could be wrong. But Celts are supposed to be a mixture of Alpine and Nordic, 2 of the 3 types of White people. Even though i think some Vikings have mixed in with the Irish. Edited by: dwid
 

Sean

Mentor
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
670
dwid said:
well i just started on it, and so far only on world history after 1400 and American history after 1877. Lots of bs talked about.

"abt 150 - Ptolemy reported Brigantes Celts in Yorkshire up to Scotland, a fierce fighting people, their tribal center at Stanwick, North Riding. To their east were the Parisi Celts at Petuaria, coming from the plains of north east Gaul"

Im more interested in Celtic history since I am mostly Irish and French (Celts occupied France early on from what ive read). Too bad they dont have much written history.

From what ive read they were some tough people and the Romans beat them out because they had more disciplined and bigger armies. Could be wrong. But Celts are supposed to be a mixture of Alpine and Nordic, 2 of the 3 types of White people. Even though i think some Vikings have mixed in with the Irish.

It's awesome that your interested in Celtic history. My mother is Scottish, so I too am interested in Celtic history. I actually have no Italian or Greek that I know of, but I just find there stuff so interesting!

And yes, Vikings did mix in with some of the locals. Check out Shetland, which is where a lot of my family came from, lots of Viking influence there. Good luck with your research
smiley32.gif


The more you learn, the more you can pick out the nonsense like this Deadliest Warrior tv show. Utter trash.
 

guest301

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
4,246
Location
Ohio
Fightingtowin said:
Don't forget these guys!

NECA0011%7E300-Posters.jpg


Good point. Maybe the Spartans will get their chance on this show later on. I loved that movie 300, I feel like watching it again.
 

Westside

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
7,703
Location
So Cal
I agree Guest301, is great movie and all time visual achievement. I have seen this movie a few times less than Gladiator.

Everytime I think of this movie a couple things come to my mind. 1st, is when the main character yells, "SPAARTAA", 2ND, when he kicks that black messager into the eternal hell hole and 3rd, his gorgeous wife!
 

Sean

Mentor
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
670
300 was an awesome movie, and one of the few modern films that wasn't afraid to show whites in a good light!
 

waterbed

Mentor
Joined
Apr 4, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Outside North America
GiovaniMarcon said:
Prediction: the ultimate warrior (as decided by the show, and not as in the insane 1980s-90s professional wrestler) will not be a white warrior of any kind, for obvious political reasons.

The dark horse winner might be a samurai for the "coolness" factor but otherwise the winner will not be asian for the reason that even brainwashed white males will not accept being mastered by Mongoloids.

The winner will be "scientifically decided" to be Egyptian or Persian so that both Middle Easterners or Blacks can claim some lineage, or will simply be black or South American (Mayan).

This will placate the Blacks and Hispanics who have delusions of grandeur, and will also placate whites who think it's good to worship anything that isn't white.

I personally believe the ultimate warriors would be people from the Germanic tribes that perennially resisted Roman conquest. Mongol horsemen also have an argument, though their superiority lies more in group combat rather than individual prowess. I believe Mongol horsemen might have stood a chance of conquering Europe, but that's not the argument. Single-combat is, and in single combat, even Marcus Aurelius in his Meditations commented on the huge size and ferocious nature of Germanic warriors.

"A whole head taller than our own troops. A race of blond savages, whose war cries made our marrow grow cold."

Edited to add: In the later Roman empire, whom did all the emperors choose to man the Praetorian guard? It certainly was no longer comprised of ethnic Italians. The Romans had their pick of specimens from all the known world, most of which they conquered -- even having black soldiers available from African conquests. Yet whom did the sovereigns choose?

Vandals. Goths.

The end.

i am from a germanic country(dutch gene chromosome dna test showed dutch to be mostly germanic(around 60% together haplotype I and saxon germanic r1bc9) what was expected with a bit Celt,iberian,roman latini and very small amount of Slavic (3.7%) the germanic had some great warriors but if they were the best i have no idea.romans could not realy conquered the germanic for a long time.also when the Mongol/huns were seen as great warriors and had some great wins it was over with them when they did face the germanics.althrough they came with a large group and fighted against the germanics who were not in big groups and had nearly no weapens still the germanics did owned the mongol Huns and after that it was over with the Mongols nomads ,Huns
smiley32.gif
 

j41181

Master
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
2,344
Great movie, 300! One of the few recent movies I enjoy watching very much. It gives white guys a strong a powerful image, not to mention they were very good looking (not in a gay way). It was a box office hit too!

Germanic Warriors were some of the best ever in history. They were more than a match for the treacherous Huns. The Vikings are in some ways their descendants.
 

Menelik

Mentor
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Messages
1,165
Location
Georgia
j41181 said:
It gives white guys a strong a powerful image, not to mention they were very good looking (not in a gay way).

smiley36.gif
smiley36.gif
smiley36.gif
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
No way a bush-wacking/ambushing, hit & run Apache beats a Gladiator 1-on-1. The show has a good premise, but obviously has a Marxist/PC agenda. Futhermore a Viking would obliterate a Samurai, & Anglo-Warrior Knight would dismantled the over-hyped Zulu.
 
American Freedom News
Top