my subscriptions
POPULAR-ALL-RANDOM | LOADING...MORE »
Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/history
Trauermarsch [M] 1 point

Hello, /u/shessorad. Thanks for contributing! Unfortunately your submission has been removed:

  • It breaks rule 5: Submissions are limited to events greater than 20 years ago

If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please don't hesitate to message the moderators.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/history
Trauermarsch [M] 1 point

Hello, /u/ReeReeRockette. Thanks for contributing! Unfortunately your submission has been removed:

  • It breaks rule 6: When submitting link posts, leave a description, in a comment, following your submission.
    We kindly request that you lead off the discussion with a small blurb about the submission. We strongly feel that if you find something interesting enough to share on /r/history it should be no problem to leave a short comment (50 or more words) about what you submitted. This may be anything from why you thought this is relevant for /r/history to what you found interesting about what you have submitted. This comment left by the OP can best be seen as a kickstarter for discussion. If there is already a comment present people will be more inclined to respond about the subject resulting in more and on-topic discussion.

When you've added in some personal contribution to the thread, message the moderators. and we'll see about getting your post back online. Thanks.

If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please don't hesitate to message the moderators.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/food
3.8k
SaintPoopyPants 164 points

More of a stew than a soup:

  • 2 garlic cloves, minced
  • 1 t anchovy paste
  • 1 T tomato paste
  • 2-4 lb chuck roast, pulled at seams and cut into 1-1.5 inch cubes
  • 1 large onion, halved and sliced 1/8 inch thick
  • 4 carrots, peeled and cut into 1 inch pieces
  • 1/4 cup all purpose flour
  • 2 cups red wine
  • 2 cups chicken broth
  • 1 cup beef stock
  • 4 oz salted pork, rinsed
  • 2 bay leaves
  • 4 sprigs thyme, stems discarded
  • 1 lb Yukon gold potatoes, cut in 1 inch pieces
  • 1.5 cups frozen pearl onions
  • 2 t unflavored gelatin
  • 1/2 cup water
  • 1 cup frozen peas

Heat oven to 300 degrees f. Mash garlic, anchovy, tomato and set aside. Brown beef in oil, working in batches. Add first batch of beef back to pot, reduce heat to medium, add the sliced onion(not the pearl onions yet) and carrots. Stir, loosening any brown bit at the bottom of the pot, until onion is softened. Add garlic mixture and cook until fragrant. Add flour and stir constantly until no dry flour remains.

Slowly add wine, still scraping the browned bits. Increase heat and allow wine to simmer until thickened and slightly reduced. Stir in broth, bay leaves, salt pork and thyme. Bring to simmer, cover, place in oven and cook for 1.5 hours.

Remove pot from oven and discard bay leaves and pork. Stir in potatoes, cover and return to oven. Cook until potatoes are tender. About 45 minutes.

Use a large spoon to skim excess fat from the surface. Stir in the pearl onions and cook over medium heat on stove top until onions are cooked through and meat offers little resistance when poked with fork, but not yet falling apart.

Sprinkle gelatin over water and let rest for 5 minutes. Add water to pot. Add frozen peas to the pot. Simmer for another 5 minutes until all the gelatin is incorporated. Salt and pepper to taste.

Trauermarsch 2 points

Mmm, I imagine it tastes like home

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/history
Trauermarsch [M] 1 point

Hello, /u/mrsamshin. Thanks for contributing! Unfortunately your submission has been removed:

  • It breaks rule 6: When submitting link posts, leave a description, in a comment, following your submission.
    We kindly request that you lead off the discussion with a small blurb about the submission. We strongly feel that if you find something interesting enough to share on /r/history it should be no problem to leave a short comment (50 or more words) about what you submitted. This may be anything from why you thought this is relevant for /r/history to what you found interesting about what you have submitted. This comment left by the OP can best be seen as a kickstarter for discussion. If there is already a comment present people will be more inclined to respond about the subject resulting in more and on-topic discussion.

When you've added in some personal contribution to the thread, message the moderators. and we'll see about getting your post back online. Thanks.

If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please don't hesitate to message the moderators.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/SubredditDrama
2.5k
riwtrz 62 points

Lexicanum and the the 40k wiki. IME Lexicanum tends to have shorter, denser, and better-written articles on a broader range of topics while the wiki tends to have much more detail and is more up-to-date.

Trauermarsch 31 points

1d4chan is also a fun-to-read source.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/40kLore
148
qY81nNu 25 points

As a spin-foff to this,
a pre-Dark Age (battle-)ship coming out of the warp meeting a M31 expedition fleet with Astartes and at full power, how would such a thing go ?

Trauermarsch 0 points

Are you familiar with the Speranza? I'd say the M31 expedition will be very sore in the nethers.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/history
Trauermarsch [M] 1 point

Hello, /u/Hydersiddiqui. Thanks for contributing! Unfortunately your submission has been removed:

  • It breaks rule 6: When submitting link posts, leave a description, in a comment, following your submission.
    We kindly request that you lead off the discussion with a small blurb about the submission. We strongly feel that if you find something interesting enough to share on /r/history it should be no problem to leave a short comment (50 or more words) about what you submitted. This may be anything from why you thought this is relevant for /r/history to what you found interesting about what you have submitted. This comment left by the OP can best be seen as a kickstarter for discussion. If there is already a comment present people will be more inclined to respond about the subject resulting in more and on-topic discussion.

When you've added in some personal contribution to the thread, message the moderators. and we'll see about getting your post back online. Thanks.

If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please don't hesitate to message the moderators.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/AskReddit
Poem_for_your_sprog 5,908 points

'I am the king of stealth,' he said,
'The creeping, peeping knave -
As silent as the sleeping dead -
As quiet as the grave!

'I am the prince of secret plays,
A skulking, slinking spy -
A sneaky sleuth, and in my ways,
A super snoop am I!

'I am the shadow man,' he cried,
'With hidden watcher wits!'
She shook her head and slowly sighed:

'... Quit staring at my tits.'

Trauermarsch 471 points

I sang this to the tune of "I wanna be like you" from Jungle Book in my mind

andreasbeer1981 0 points

video or it didn't happen

Trauermarsch 8 points

Yes, let me just use my Samsung iPhone Blackberry to record the inner workings of my mind.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/pics
the_television -1 points

Yet, instead of directly contacting the other driver via, say, a note, we find this photo on reddit where the driver of the white car will likely never see it.

Trauermarsch 15 points

A wider audience is achieved by posting on reddit, which may very well garner the appropriate attention from the right people. And who is to say that she did not contact the errant driver? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

the_television -1 points

Knowing reddit, we would have already seen a photo of the note left.

Trauermarsch 3 points

Possibly, though the poster may not be the victim seen in the picture herself, given the lack of interaction with the other commenters. The OP could lack the picture of the letter/note to produce them here.

In any case, to place the blame to the victim of the occasion is tantamount to, I think, "victim blaming". Bit of a Republican attitude, isn't it?

Load more comments
Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/history
tom_the_tanker 9 points

The Criteria

  1. Personal Leadership (Personal example, in the thick of the fighting, respect and love of the soldiers) - Julius Caesar, in multiple instances, fits this example.

  2. Tactical Ability (The ability to plan, act, react, and gain success on the battlefield - where metal meets metal) - Hannibal is an excellent example, since the Romans developed an entire strategy revolving around winning the war by not fighting him in battle.

  3. Operational Art (The art of campaign, gaining success in maneuver, and making the battles count on the broader scale) - Napoleon was a master of this. One only has to look at Italy, or Ulm, or Jena-Auerstadt, or Bavaria in 1809.

  4. Strategic Planning (The art of winning a war on a broad front - for ancient generals this translates to conquest, for more modern soldiers it translates to Grand Strategy) - Genghis Khan/Temujin is a great example from the pre-modern era. For the modern era, someone like Eisenhower, Zhukov or Von Moltke might be a better example.

  5. Logistics & Organization (Keeping the troops fed and supplied against all odds, the importance of guns and butter) - this one tends to be trickier, and far less flashier than the examples above, but no less vital. Some of the truly great commanders, like Caesar, succeeded in spite of the shoestring logistics they operated on, but since this is partly their fault it's not a point in their favor. Good examples for this criteria are the Duke of Wellington and Helmuth von Moltke.

  6. Innovation/Creativity in Tactics/Strategy (new ways of battle, new methods and counter-methods) - for those commanders that mastered the unexpected, or harnessed new tricks on the battlefield. Good examples would include, on land, Jan Zizka, or on the water Horatio Nelson. This doesn't necessarily mean they invented the tactic, but that certainly helps - it may just mean they put it to best use for the first time.

  7. Innovation/creativity in Organization/Theory (reorganizing the army, new ideas in war, the intellectual side) - compared to #6, this is for the great reorganizers, reformers, disciplinarians, and theorists. This alone is not enough to make someone great (probably why Sun Tzu is so low on this list), but coupled with success in the field it's impressive as hell. A good example would be Gaius Marius or Heinz Guderian.

  8. Difficulty of their Task (strength/skill of opponents, limitations on the home front/betrayal of allies, constraints on the commander's resources) - this shouldn't be understated. Many modern generals, like most Americans post-WWI, have had the full weight of resources, momentum, and planning on their side before the fight even started, only a little of which was their doing, while some have had to overcome enormous obstacles. Here's to the underdog, like Skanderbeg, or someone fighting with both hands tied behind his back, like Belisarius.

  9. Success (winning!) - As great as all of the above is, it's irrelevant if it doesn't yield results. Did these folks win their battles, no matter how smart or clever they were? Did they win their war? If they weren't in control of the war effort, it won't count against them - but it's the main reason Napoleon is #3, and not #1, and the reason Cyrus the Great has edged over time into the top 20. The ultimate success of each commander's sum total is a major factor in determining their placement.

  10. Influence - Did their reforms and their innovations shake the world? Did they build a great empire? Do other generals centuries later cite their battles or speak their names in reverence? If so, this is the criteria for them. The admiration of latter-day Chinese for Han Xin, or Napoleon for Turenne and Eugene, or modern-day logisticians for Wallenstein, doesn't mean anything concrete - but it means these folks warrant a second, or third look.

Some notes:

  • I can only grade someone on the levels they commanded at. Of course Patton gets a score of 0 for grand strategy, but he never was a grand strategist so you can hardly hold that against him. Someone who did aspire to the level of grand strategy, and failed dramatically cough cough Hitler can certainly have that held against them.

  • For someone to be considered a commander, they need to have had tactical and operational freedom of some form or another. Their performance as a subordinate can be counted for or against them, but if they were only ever a great immediate subordinate that doesn't speak highly for them as a commander. Someone like James Longstreet was almost always a great subordinate, but as an independent commander did poorly or even badly.

  • On a similar note, for someone to be considered a commander, they must have had, if not a direct presence on the field or the campaign, operational and planning control during. Some people might notice the significant lack of (for instance) Qin Shi Huang, the first Chinese Emperor. From all I can learn, he was on the field of battle and campaign, but did not command, leaving the decisions up to his generals - a lot of Chinese emperors, even very good ones, did this. The exceptions, like Taizong and Kangxi, are included above. For contrast, even though Admiral Nimitz or General Eisenhower weren't present at the battlefields, technology enabled them to control their forces from miles away in real time.

  • On an even more similar note, great strategists in a civilian/political position, or even great administrators, are usually not included unless they were in direct military command. Lincoln, for instance, does not count; nor does Otto von Bismarck. During the Six-Day War, Moshe Dayan was Israel's Minister of Defense - a civilian position, but he had previous military service and exercised direct command and control over Israel's planning and conduct of that war, so he can be included.

  • Civilian administrators/organizers are not included. Louis XIV's Minister Louvois, though a great organizer and administrator of his armies, saw no combat and directly commanded no forces. People like Carnot are basically on the dividing line, and Trotsky is someone I may decide to include after I've done more research on his role in the Russian Civil War.

  • The previous four limitations are super arbitrary, I admit. But I have to draw the line somewhere, or it's chaos.

Trauermarsch 1 point

No Admiral Yi? Granted, he only partook in the Imjin War, but I'd have thought he'd be somewhat known in the West by now.

tom_the_tanker 3 points

Admiral Yi is in the #1 position on the Admirals list.

Trauermarsch 1 point

Ah, my bad! I was admittedly skimming the list while dealing with a report given to one of the comments posted in this thread. :P

Interesting to see Zheng He's inclusion as an admiral! I was under the impression that he was more of an administrator/logistical overseer than one to see naval battles.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/worldnews
baladeplata 25 points

In recent years, Reddit has been filled with pseudo-intelligent self conscious idiots who only care about appearing intelligent rather than doing any groundwork and actually learning anything. I grew up in a small rural town and once thought that the most ignorant myopic people I've met in life came from there, but more recently, I would say Reddit has stolen the number one spot.

I generally only visit this site for niche subs.

Trauermarsch 1 point

Recent years? Armchair tacticians talking about how grand the war against North Korea would be - nevermind the civilian casualties - have been a thing for years. Not a recent thing at all.

Trauermarsch commented on a post in r/itookapicture
14.5k
Xeptix 41 points

Ok but wait you didn't explain why you started talking about a glacier earlier.

Trauermarsch 5 points

He's actually a ghost of one of the guests before the inn closed under "mysterious circumstances". His only out is to post on reddit and grab a poster's soul in lieu of his own so that

view more:
next ›

Trauermarsch

24,247 Karma
3,755 Post Karma
20,492 Comment Karma

Mods some things

Following this user will show all the posts they make to their profile on your front page.

About trauermarsch

  • Reddit Birthday

    November 16, 2012

Other Interesting Profiles

    Want to make posts on your
    own profile?

    Sign up to test the Reddit post to profile beta.

    Sign up