There has ever been a population of pure warriors so brave, fearless and ruthless as the Huns?
There has ever been a population of pure warriors so brave, fearless and ruthless as the Huns?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
lol they ran away from the pope
Anyone who uses mounted range combat and hit-and run tactics is a craven by default.
The Vikings were way better then the Huns.
The Huns have cleaved their way through superior civilizations with ease,while the Vikings have lost almost every battle against semi-trained armies, do the math.
The Huns also got their shit kicked in by Germanic tribes as soon as Atilla died and the Hunnic empire collapsed right after.
>
So what? Huns were terrible at making a stable Empire, doesn't say anything about their quality as warriors.
But Mongols are pretty much better than Huns in every regard.
>Be Huns
>Lose to Proto-Viking forest niggers
>while the Vikings have lost almost every battle against semi-trained armies
This meme again
>The Huns also got their shit kicked in by Germanic tribes
Barely,even though they've outnumbered them 3:1.
Oh,it's a meme?Care to elaborate?
Well, the vikings didn't loes almost every battle against semi-trained armies, for one.
Germans to a degree.
Didn't wear shirts most of the time, didn't bother much with growing cereal crops etc etc. Stereotypical barbarian.
Allegedly the Suebi devastated a zone 500 kilometers wide around their border because they didn't want anyone living near it.
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
Congratulations,but that doesn't change the fact that they've lost most battles in which they've participated in.
The Romans, especially during the Punic Wars.
They were the Fascist Ideal
what about the rape of the sabines? the attacks on the veii, aequians and the eventual full scale war agains the Etruscans and other latins? I reckon they were always fascistic in that they though Rome was the best ever since they overthrew the Superbus.
I'd like to see a source. Anti-Vikingfags are just as bad as Vikingfags. Perhaps even worse.
Yes, but it was in the wake of Hannibal that they became the unstoppable force that defined them on the world stage.
Imagine how infuriated he must have been fighting a foe who was totally fine with losing almost a million men without ever capitulating.
It isn't even like Hannibal wanted to obliterate Rome or anything, they were just obstinate
I've just posted you the vast majority of battles in which they've participated?within traceable sources?
> Anti-Vikingfags
Anti-Vikingfags have good academic reason to be against them,mostly because they're not as nearly as impressive as they're made to be.
>punic romans
>facist ideal
Wew
HALT
Bait