| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Famous mercenaries, adventurers...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Famous mercenaries, adventurers...

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 06 May 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1224
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Famous mercenaries, adventurers...
    Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 20:32

We had topics about armies, generals, commanders etc but I don't recall any subjest about most interesting historical figures i.e. see the topic. I mean here people like Cortez, Pizarro, Roger de Flor and others. Name Your favourite and his story. The less known the better. I will post mine in the future.

Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Byzantine Emperor View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Kastrophylax

Joined: 24 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2030
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Byzantine Emperor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 20:48
I see you mentioned Roger de Flor.  He commanded an entire army of mercenaries who reaked havoc in Byzantium for decades.  The Catalan Company was originally hired by emperor Andronikos II Palaiologos.  They gave a good scare to the marauding Turks as was planned but later rebelled over late payments and supplies.
In Christ, loyal emperor and autocrat of the Romans.
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Barcelona
Status: Offline
Points: 3227
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 21:06
There are so many Irish mercenaries that I'd loose count. Irish people have found a way into most conflicts 1600 ->
http://xkcd.com/15/



Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw
Back to Top
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 06 May 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1224
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 21:12
Originally posted by Byzantine Emperor Byzantine Emperor wrote:

I see you mentioned Roger de Flor.  He commanded an entire army of mercenaries who reaked havoc in Byzantium for decades.  The Catalan Company was originally hired by emperor Andronikos II Palaiologos.  They gave a good scare to the marauding Turks as was planned but later rebelled over late payments and supplies.
 
They got pissed when Roger de Flor was killed by Alans. Before it seemed they will get on with Emperor. Nevertheles it can't be neglected that Roger de Flor had his own plans other that helping Byzantium to beat the Turks. Probably he planned to organize his own state on Byzantium territories.
Back to Top
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 06 May 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1224
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 21:13
Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

There are so many Irish mercenaries that I'd loose count. Irish people have found a way into most conflicts 1600 ->
 
The same can be said about Swiss, Scots and Germans.
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Barcelona
Status: Offline
Points: 3227
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 21:18
Originally posted by Majkes Majkes wrote:

Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

There are so many Irish mercenaries that I'd loose count. Irish people have found a way into most conflicts 1600 ->
 
The same can be said about Swiss, Scots and Germans.


You're probably right. Especially about the Scots. But the Germans were a different kettle of fish really, considering they weren't exactly unified until Bismark came along. Soldiers from Saxony may have served abroad but that mightn't have been the case with soldiers from Bavaria etc.

The thing about the Irish is that they could fight effectively against any power so long as it was not in their own country or against the English!
http://xkcd.com/15/



Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 21:49
I could not but help note Parnell's little statement:
 
The thing about the Irish is that they could fight effectively against any power so long as it was not in their own country or against the English!
 
I can not help but muse that if such were so then the English certainly had to expend a lot of energy and manpower in periodic "reconquests". I can not but chuckle that only in Ireland could a descriptive such as "Old English" and the "New" ever make sense.
 
However, I do take issue in classifying expatriate Irishmen as "mercenaries". If such a label were correct then even the Duke of Berwick or the Chevalier de St. George, expatriate Scots, could be classified such. Now, if we try to close ranks here would not individuals behaving in the manner of the famed John Hawkwood and his famed White Company, with its lack of allegiance to anything but self interest--although the Florentines really liked him--, be representative of the ideal mercenary.


Edited by drgonzaga - 20 Jul 2009 at 21:49
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 22:15

Here are a couple of Swedish adventurous existences from the 17th century.

 

Fredrik Coyet (1615-1687) was a Swedish nobleman who went into dutch service. He was probably the first Swede that visited Japan where he worked 1647-1648 and 1651-1652. In the year 1656 he bacame the governor for the dutch colony Formosa. 1661 Ming loyalists under Zhen Chenggong (Koxinga) attacked Formosa and Coyet and his forces were forced to surrender 1662. As a punishment for losing Formosa the dutch exiled him and let him live on the Banda islands for twelve years.

1675 he obtained help from Sweden and regained his freedom. Coyet wrote a pamphlet where he accused  the Dutch East India Company for not having sent him any reinforcements when the Chinese attacked Formosa.

 

The first Swede who wrote an extensive travel account was Nils Mattson Kioping (1630-1667). He was a son of a priest and he enrolled into dutch service and left Holland in 1647 for a long journey to many countries. He visited Africa, Madagascar, East India (including Indonesia), China, Persia, Andaman Islands and other places and expreienced a lot of adventures.

Later he wrote a book about his journeys: Een reesa, som genom Asia, Africa och manga andra hedniska konungarijken sampt oeijar medh flijt ar forrattat aff Nils Matson Kjoeping (A Journey which through Asia, Africa and many other pagan kingdoms and islands is diligently conducted by Nils Mattson Kjoeping).

It is interesting to notice that he outside Formosa came in contact with Zhen Chenggong (Koxinga) who later would take Formosa from his countryman Fredrik Coyet.

After his experiences abroad he started to work for the Swedish Royal Navy in 1656 where he participated in a lot of naval action.

In the year 1667 he fell into a channel in Stockholm and drowned.

 

Otto Wilhelm Koenigsmark (1639-1688) was a Swedish-German military and nobleman. He bacame field-marshal 1676 and general governor over Pommern 1679. He led the Swedish defence of the Swedish lands in Germany during the Scanian war (1675-1679). Later he went into Venetian service and fought against the Turks. He became notorious for blowing up the Parthenon temple on Acropolis in Athens where the citys Ottoman defenders had their supply of gunpowder.

Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Barcelona
Status: Offline
Points: 3227
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 22:44
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

I could not but help note Parnell's little statement:
 
The thing about the Irish is that they could fight effectively against any power so long as it was not in their own country or against the English!
 
I can not help but muse that if such were so then the English certainly had to expend a lot of energy and manpower in periodic "reconquests". I can not but chuckle that only in Ireland could a descriptive such as "Old English" and the "New" ever make sense.
 
However, I do take issue in classifying expatriate Irishmen as "mercenaries". If such a label were correct then even the Duke of Berwick or the Chevalier de St. George, expatriate Scots, could be classified such. Now, if we try to close ranks here would not individuals behaving in the manner of the famed John Hawkwood and his famed White Company, with its lack of allegiance to anything but self interest--although the Florentines really liked him--, be representative of the ideal mercenary.


Any of our uprisings were of a weak nature really. The problem was that the English never really tried to make Ireland a natural extension of England, like they did with Wales. Basically they came along, spewed up a class of settlers who either morphed into the native population (Normans) or established themselves in supremacy (Which they did fantastically with the restrictions in land ownership on Catholics during the Penal years) Either way, the periodic 'Irish' (And I am loathe to use that term, since it doesn't effectively distinguish between Gaelic families, Norman families, Anglo families and mixed families...) rebellions were pathetic shows really. The only one of any real importance was O'Neills rebellion, and that ended with the flight of the Gaelic nobility and the destruction of any dream of a Gaelic state in Ireland ever again. The confederate wars were simply too confusing to be classed as a rebellion - were they a rebellion of loyalty or disloyalty? I certainly haven't a clue. Very confusing period of Irish history.

Effectively any reconquest the English organised was of an extremely haphazard and reluctant manner. The exception of course being Cromwells invasion - though even that was far from ever being a 'settlement of the Irish problem'. They relied too much on repressive laws and elevating a social class of anglo-Irish into political power.
http://xkcd.com/15/



Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jul 2009 at 23:16
Otto Wilhem Koenigsmark did not blow up the Parthenon, the hit was accomplished by a lieutenant of artillery from Lunenberg. Besides, the commander of Venetian forces was Francesco Morosini and not Koenigsmark:
 
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jul 2009 at 14:44
It seems that Morosini and Koenigsmark worked toghether on that one. Field Marshal Koenigsmark seems to have had the responsibility for the siege of Athens. He was also the commander of the Venetians army with the consent of the Swedish king Carl XI who had lent his (Koenigsmarks) services to the Venetians.

Edited by Carcharodon - 21 Jul 2009 at 15:16
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jul 2009 at 15:03

How the hell did anyone forget to mention Wallentstein, the greatest mercenary of them all.

 

 Al-Jassas

Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
r�gh

Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 2898
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jul 2009 at 15:52
Gregor MacGregor, who captured an island off of Florida from the Spanish with only fifty-five men. Helped Bolivar and other revolutionaries. Also made up a fictional South American nation to extort money. Big smile
Pittsburgh, City of Champions
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Barcelona
Status: Offline
Points: 3227
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jul 2009 at 17:36
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

How the hell did anyone forget to mention Wallentstein, the greatest mercenary of them all.

 

 Al-Jassas



Was Wallenstein a mercenary? I always viewed him as more of an adventurer - a mercenary acts solely in the interests of financial reward.
http://xkcd.com/15/



Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw
Back to Top
Wulfstan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 15 Feb 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Wulfstan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jul 2009 at 19:48
Two Englishmen who found fame and fortune as mercenaries during the first half of the Hundred Years War were Hugh Calverley and Robert Knolles.
 
Calveley, a minor landowner from Cheshire, fought in the major campaigns of that war from 1348 onwards, mingled with princes, amassed a huge fortune and ended up marrying an Aragonese princess. A couple of decades earlier, it would hae been unheard off for such a minor knight to atain such a destiny.
 
He, however, was eclipsed by Robert Knolles who was a professional soldier also from Cheshire. He began his career as an archer, but eventually commanded his own "Great Company" which ravaged large parts of France. The most feared English captain of his generation, he died a very rich man. 
Back to Top
Craze_b0i View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 210
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Craze_b0i Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Aug 2009 at 21:40
It is interesting how we are seeing a resurgence in the West's use of mercenaries in today's conflicts. In Iraq for example 'private security' forces make up the 2nd largest military group, 2nd only to the US Army.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Aug 2009 at 01:24
An honourable mention also deserves to go to John Hawkwood, the English mercenary captain in Italy who proved himself to be a relatively honourable soldier of fortune by the standards of the day.
Back to Top
Praetor View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Praetor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Aug 2009 at 04:54
Well seeing as its not just strictly mercenaries but those one could reasonably call "adventurers" that we are mentioning here, the likes of Bohemund and Baldwin of the first crusade should count, then of course there are mercenary captains like Xanthippus the spartan leader widely credited for orchestrating Carthage's victory at Tunis and while we are on Greeks whose names start with X Xenophon and the ten thousand should be noted. I know I just mentioned Bohemund but I imagine one could reasonably call the whole first generation of the Hauteville family to enter Italy military adventurers, if thats too much of a stretch then William "iron arm" (he acquired this name by killing the emir of Syracuse in single combat) Hauteville was certainly a mercenary, serving with the Byzantines in Sicily under the command of George Maniaces, also serving in this campaign with him was the famed miltary adventurer Harald Hardraada who at this time headed the Varangian guard (as an aside I would hate to run into these three men in a dark alley).

Then there's figures like Francis Drake, Hayreddin Barbarossa and other prominent corsairs and privateers, not quite mercenaries nor just pirates but definitly military adventurers.

The case of Quintus Sertorius is an interesting one, after being expelled from his governorship in Iberia for the first time, he and the remnants of his forces wandered around the western edge of the mediterranean, getting involved in local disputes and allying themeselves with Pirates, before returning to Iberia on the request of the fierce Lusitanian tribesman to lead them in revolt against Sulla's regime, where he was eventually joined by more Roman opponents of said regime forming a very interesting coalition. His situation appears to have been rather unique for a Roman commander, He even nominally allied with Mithridates against his opponents in Rome, yet he was certainly no mercenary and always thought of himself as a patriotic Roman opposed to Sulla and his cronies rather than to the state itself. To me he is one of history's most fascinating military adventurers.

Regards, Praetor.
Back to Top
Byzantine Emperor View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Kastrophylax

Joined: 24 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2030
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Byzantine Emperor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 02:25
Originally posted by Majkes Majkes wrote:

Originally posted by Byzantine Emperor Byzantine Emperor wrote:

I see you mentioned Roger de Flor.  He commanded an entire army of mercenaries who reaked havoc in Byzantium for decades.  The Catalan Company was originally hired by emperor Andronikos II Palaiologos.  They gave a good scare to the marauding Turks as was planned but later rebelled over late payments and supplies.
 
They got pissed when Roger de Flor was killed by Alans. Before it seemed they will get on with Emperor. Nevertheles it can't be neglected that Roger de Flor had his own plans other that helping Byzantium to beat the Turks. Probably he planned to organize his own state on Byzantium territories.
 
True, and there is some suspicion that Andronikos himself had a hand in having him killed.  Naturally, Roger de Flor did have other plans than just helping the Byzantine emperor with his "Turkish problem."  Don't all mercenaries keep an eye to personal ambitions beyond what they are hired to do?  I am sure it was quite apparent to Roger and other mercenary captains in the region that quite a nice living could be carved out in Greece upon seeing some of the Latin duchies left over from the "Latin Empire."  Some of them lasted well into the early modern period.
 
In Christ, loyal emperor and autocrat of the Romans.
Back to Top
Harburs View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Harburs Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 at 19:00
Sinbad-e-Bahri is a famous medieval Middle Eastern adventurer.< id="gwProxy" ="">< ="jsCall;" id="jsProxy" ="">
"Turn yourself not away from three best things: Good Thought, Good Word, and Good Deed" Zoroaster.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Mar 2012 at 22:42
Should we talk about the Elephant in the room? You know, the Gurkha. The British mercenaries from Nepal that in this day and age are hired by the British to do their fighting for them. Of course now that they have near financial parity with a Brit soldier, his days are numbered.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2012 at 14:04
Talk about them all you like, but at least try for some historical accuracy.
 
The Gurkhas are not a phenomenon of 'this day and age'. And they weren't and aren't hired by the British to 'do their fighting for them' but as specialists with their own complementary skills. The same is true of their use currently by the Indian Army, the Malaysian Army, and the US Navy. 
 
I assume when you mention 'near financial parity' you are getting confused with recent UK legislation making all Gurkhas entitled to pensions and UK citizenship on leaving, whereas before (as a consequence of the 1976 nationaity act) there were differing regulations for different groups.
 
But there's no real sign of the use of Gurkhas changing due to UK action. In fact nowadays even Gurkha women have a place in the Army (though not combat units).  However it isn't clear whether the new Communist regime in Nepal will continue to allow Nepalese to serve in other armies.  
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 21:21

Quote  
The Gurkhas are not a phenomenon of 'this day and age'. And they weren't and aren't hired by the British to 'do their fighting for them' but as specialists with their own complementary skills. The same is true of their use currently by the Indian Army, the Malaysian Army, and the US Navy. 
Awe get off it Graham. I don't care how long you have been hiring them. Yeah they are specialists alright. Like severing the heads of dead Afghans. They are with the Indian army because the Brits dumped them. Just like the lot you have left will also be dumped with the upcoming cuts of whats left of your military.
Quote  
I assume when you mention 'near financial parity' you are getting confused with recent UK legislation making all Gurkhas entitled to pensions and UK citizenship on leaving, whereas before (as a consequence of the 1976 nationaity act) there were differing regulations for different groups.
Yeah, and they can thank Mrs lumley for that much.
 
Quote
But there's no real sign of the use of Gurkhas changing due to UK action. In fact nowadays even Gurkha women have a place in the Army (though not combat units).  However it isn't clear whether the new Communist regime in Nepal will continue to allow Nepalese to serve in other armies.
Gurkhas changing? where are getting all these red herrings. They are nothing but hired mercenaries. Nothing more and nothing less.  If it walks like a Duck, and squawks like a Duck. Guess what?

May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 1346
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 23:30
GCLE: Gurkhas in the U.S. Navy?  I believe you have erred. The Navy once had a program to recruit Filipino Mess Stewards, which I believe is no longer in existence. But Gurkhas? Any person admitted to the U.S. for purposes of immigration has the right to join the U.S. Armed Forces, and is subject to the Draft when such is in effect. You'll find a lot of foreigners wearing a U.S. uniform, though native born Americans outnumber them.

As for Parnell's Irish and Scots, I hesitate to qualify them as mercenaries. The O'Niell wars sent them to a Continent whose kingdoms had yet to forge an nationalist identity. The majority of French infantry of the period was foreign: Swiss (the oldest serving foreigners in French service), Scots (1 Regiment), Irish (3 Regiments, The Dillons, were later given to Spain), Germans (to include Bavarians, the 94th Infantry Regiment (Royal Bavaria) is an example), Poles, etc. Spain was a bit more careful. Their Tercios (later regiments) were either Spanish (to include Spanish from the Americas, such as Garcilaso de la Vega, "El Inca", or made up of subjects to Spanish Kings from outside Spain (Italians, Dutch, Germans, or Austrians). When the Irish lords arrived in Spain, their men were formed into two regiments, with the Dillon later making up the third. While these troops are often referred to as 'mercenary', the term is somewhat simplistic. The Irish in both Spain and France intended to fight the British in some future war. And their presence ensured an Irish option would always be considered when conflict came. Of course, as they intermarried with the locals, many drifted into the population as civilians leaving only an Irish family name as evidence of their presence. El Morro castle in San Juan, Puerto Rico, was largely built by Irish Engineer, Colonel Tomas O'Daly, whose son, Field Marshall Demetrio O'Daly de la Puente, served in Spain in the late 18th early 19th Century, and later lived in exile in nearby St. Thomas, VI. Irish descendants in Nantes, France became involved in the slave trade, and some Franco-Irish later showed up in Indochina. Among the first naval officers killed in Indochina in 1946 was Naval Lieutenant Dugue-MacCarthy, born in Bien Hoa, Vietnam.  

The real point is that the Irish, and many others in foreign service, were either serving causes of their own, or exiled and engaged in the only profession they could find employment in. They were neither mercenaries nor true adventurers.


Edited by lirelou - 08 Mar 2012 at 23:32
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 15:16
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

GCLE: Gurkhas in the U.S. Navy?  I believe you have erred. The Navy once had a program to recruit Filipino Mess Stewards, which I believe is no longer in existence. But Gurkhas? Any person admitted to the U.S. for purposes of immigration has the right to join the U.S. Armed Forces, and is subject to the Draft when such is in effect. You'll find a lot of foreigners wearing a U.S. uniform, though native born Americans outnumber them.
Hey, I was surprised to find it too. As I understand it they are/were employed to guard the naval bases at Bahrain.
and indeed passim on the web.
 
If they weren't employed in the US I don't know what effect that would have on immigration status.

Quote The real point is that the Irish, and many others in foreign service, were either serving causes of their own, or exiled and engaged in the only profession they could find employment in. They were neither mercenaries nor true adventurers.
 I don't see why it being a refuge from unemployment would stop them being called mercenaries. Anyway the point with the Gurkhas was largely that they had no decent prospects at home.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 15:26
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:


Quote  
The Gurkhas are not a phenomenon of 'this day and age'. And they weren't and aren't hired by the British to 'do their fighting for them' but as specialists with their own complementary skills. The same is true of their use currently by the Indian Army, the Malaysian Army, and the US Navy. 
Awe get off it Graham. I don't care how long you have been hiring them. Yeah they are specialists alright. Like severing the heads of dead Afghans. They are with the Indian army because the Brits dumped them. Just like the lot you have left will also be dumped with the upcoming cuts of whats left of your military.
At independence, the serving Gurkhas were asked whether they wanted to serve with the British army or the Indian army. The majority of them chose the Indian army and the rest stayed with Britain. Either the Indian army or the British army would happily have taken all of them. No-one 'dumped' anyone.
Quote  
Quote
I assume when you mention 'near financial parity' you are getting confused with recent UK legislation making all Gurkhas entitled to pensions and UK citizenship on leaving, whereas before (as a consequence of the 1976 nationaity act) there were differing regulations for different groups.
Yeah, and they can thank Mrs lumley for that much.
I assume you mean Mrs Barlow. I notice you accept you were confused about the 'financial parity' too, as well as the absolutely fabulous Joanna.
 
Quote
Quote
But there's no real sign of the use of Gurkhas changing due to UK action. In fact nowadays even Gurkha women have a place in the Army (though not combat units).  However it isn't clear whether the new Communist regime in Nepal will continue to allow Nepalese to serve in other armies.
Gurkhas changing? where are getting all these red herrings. They are nothing but hired mercenaries. Nothing more and nothing less.  If it walks like a Duck, and squawks like a Duck. Guess what?
You didn't read the post you're replying too. I said there was no sign of the use of Gurkhas changing because of the UK, not no sign of the Gurkhas changing. You were the one that said the UK was getting ready to dump them.
Of course they're hired. No-one disputes that. It's everything else you said that was woefully wrong.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 17:46
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

GCLE: Gurkhas in the U.S. Navy?  I believe you have erred. The Navy once had a program to recruit Filipino Mess Stewards, which I believe is no longer in existence. But Gurkhas? Any person admitted to the U.S. for purposes of immigration has the right to join the U.S. Armed Forces, and is subject to the Draft when such is in effect. You'll find a lot of foreigners wearing a U.S. uniform, though native born Americans outnumber them.

Hey, I was surprised to find it too. As I understand it they are/were employed to guard the naval bases at Bahrain.
and indeed passim on the web.


Can you believe this guy. We even hire civilians to guard our bases here in CONUS. Are you calling them Mercenaries. You hire the little bad assed Nepalese to do your fighting for you because they are good, and cheap.
 
Quote
If they weren't employed in the US I don't know what effect that would have on immigration status.

None, they are not eligible.

Quote The real point is that the Irish, and many others in foreign service, were either serving causes of their own, or exiled and engaged in the only profession they could find employment in. They were neither mercenaries nor true adventurers.
 I don't see why it being a refuge from unemployment would stop them being called mercenaries. Anyway the point with the Gurkhas was largely that they had no decent prospects at home.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 18:02
Quote
I assume when you mention 'near financial parity' you are getting confused with recent UK legislation making all Gurkhas entitled to pensions and UK citizenship on leaving, whereas before (as a consequence of the 1976 nationaity act) there were differing regulations for different groups.

Yeah, and they can thank Mrs lumley for that much.
Quote
I assume you mean Mrs Barlow. I notice you accept you were confused about the 'financial parity' too, as well as the absolutely fabulous Joanna.
That's right Graham, I'm so confused. What the heck does pensions have to do with finance. Silly me. It's fortunate I have you around to keep me right.
"The actress, and daughter of Gurkha corps major James Lumley, Joanna Lumley, who had highlighted the treatment of the Gurkhas and campaigned for their rights, commented: "This is the welcome we have always longed to give".[56]

A charity, the Gurkha Welfare Trust, provides aid to alleviate hardship and distress among Gurkha ex-servicemen.[57]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurkha



Quote
Gurkhas changing? where are getting all these red herrings. They are nothing but hired mercenaries. Nothing more and nothing less.  If it walks like a Duck, and squawks like a Duck. Guess what?

You didn't read the post you're replying too. I said there was no sign of the use of Gurkhas changing because of the UK, not no sign of the Gurkhas changing. You were the one that said the UK was getting ready to dump them.
Of course they're hired. No-one disputes that. It's everything else you said that was woefully wrong.

Gurkhas to bear brunt of military spending cuts again
The Gurkhas are once again expected to suffer the most when the latest round of Armed Forces redundancies are announced next week. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/defence/9011595/Gurkhas-to-bear-brunt-of-military-spending-cuts-again.html

Do you ever get anything correct.




Edited by Buckskins - 09 Mar 2012 at 18:09
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 20:30
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

GCLE: Gurkhas in the U.S. Navy?  I believe you have erred. The Navy once had a program to recruit Filipino Mess Stewards, which I believe is no longer in existence. But Gurkhas? Any person admitted to the U.S. for purposes of immigration has the right to join the U.S. Armed Forces, and is subject to the Draft when such is in effect. You'll find a lot of foreigners wearing a U.S. uniform, though native born Americans outnumber them.

Hey, I was surprised to find it too. As I understand it they are/were employed to guard the naval bases at Bahrain.
and indeed passim on the web.


Can you believe this guy.
If you can't, show me some evidence that what I said wasn't true.
Quote
We even hire civilians to guard our bases here in CONUS. Are you calling them Mercenaries. You hire the little bad assed Nepalese to do your fighting for you because they are good, and cheap.
I'd call them mercenaries if (a) they carry arms and (b) they are aliens, or at least not 'US persons' as the IRS calls them.
 
The Nepales are hired (as I poionted out by several armies, not just the UK) because they are good, certainly. However they don't come cheap. Compared to UK soldiers anyway - US troops are paid so much more than anyone else that I wouldn't be surprised if Gurkhas weren't cheap compared to them.  
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 20:47
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Quote
I assume when you mention 'near financial parity' you are getting confused with recent UK legislation making all Gurkhas entitled to pensions and UK citizenship on leaving, whereas before (as a consequence of the 1976 nationaity act) there were differing regulations for different groups.

Yeah, and they can thank Mrs lumley for that much.
Quote
I assume you mean Mrs Barlow. I notice you accept you were confused about the 'financial parity' too, as well as the absolutely fabulous Joanna.
That's right Graham, I'm so confused. What the heck does pensions have to do with finance. Silly me. It's fortunate I have you around to keep me right.
What you had wrong was not realising the problem arose because of changes in the terms of service over the years, nothing to do with difference between UK soldiers and Gurkhas. It's the word 'parity' that was wrongly used.
Quote
"The actress, and daughter of Gurkha corps major James Lumley, Joanna Lumley, who had highlighted the treatment of the Gurkhas and campaigned for their rights, commented: "This is the welcome we have always longed to give".[56]
 
So what? She is still Mrs Barlow, not Mrs Lumley, which is what you called her. As I said you were confused again. It now looks as though you didn't have any idea of who she even is.
Quote
A charity, the Gurkha Welfare Trust, provides aid to alleviate hardship and distress among Gurkha ex-servicemen.[57]

And plenty of charities help all sorts of unfortunate people. Are you arguing that poor people shouldn't be looked after? Surely even in Texas you have charities for the people whocan't even getjobs at Walmart?

Quote
Gurkhas changing? where are getting all these red herrings. They are nothing but hired mercenaries. Nothing more and nothing less.  If it walks like a Duck, and squawks like a Duck. Guess what?

You didn't read the post you're replying too. I said there was no sign of the use of Gurkhas changing because of the UK, not no sign of the Gurkhas changing. You were the one that said the UK was getting ready to dump them.
Of course they're hired. No-one disputes that. It's everything else you said that was woefully wrong.
Quote

Gurkhas to bear brunt of military spending cuts again
The Gurkhas are once again expected to suffer the most when the latest round of Armed Forces redundancies are announced next week. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/defence/9011595/Gurkhas-to-bear-brunt-of-military-spending-cuts-again.html

Do you ever get anything correct.

But they're cutting the whole army, not just the Gurkhas. I assume they have their own strategic/tactical reasons for deciding who is declared redundant, but there's nothing except speculationo in thatarticle about the Gurkas being cut more than other parts of the army.
 
The speculation I like in that article is that defence officials are trying to embarrass the government into fewer cuts by playing on popular support for the Gurkhas.  


Edited by gcle2003 - 09 Mar 2012 at 20:50
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.