Treebranch Posted August 1, 2003 Posted August 1, 2003 These two warriors meet for the first time and know nothing about their respective fighting styles. Which would win? "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Cybren Posted August 1, 2003 Posted August 1, 2003 The one that broutht the gun? You really can't say outright one would win against another. A fight is largely a random thing, and really isn't something you can say outright "this will happen", or "He will do this", or "This always win, so it will win again"
Treebranch Posted August 1, 2003 Author Posted August 1, 2003 Hmm. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
sansoouser Posted August 1, 2003 Posted August 1, 2003 hmmm, i'd say a samurai because they are a more rounded fighter, for the most part The amateur shoots his hands out ferociously, but lacks any true power. A master is not so flamboyant, but his touch is as heavy as a mountain.
Martial_Artist Posted August 1, 2003 Posted August 1, 2003 If we're talking more rounded my bet would be on the Filipino. A traditional filipino warrior of old was a very rounded, very aggressive, very formidable opponent(The spanish in 333 years of occupation could not subdue them. The American occupation couldn't conquer them. They still aren't conquered.) However, the katana is a far superior weapon to the bolo so that would change things. I would say it compeletely depends on the inclement weather. "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination.Imagination is more important than knowledge.Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Einstein
Tibby Posted August 1, 2003 Posted August 1, 2003 If we're talking more rounded my bet would be on the Filipino. A traditional filipino warrior of old was a very rounded, very aggressive, very formidable opponent(The spanish in 333 years of occupation could not subdue them. The American occupation couldn't conquer them. They still aren't conquered.) Well, that is a bad example, the Romans said the same things about the Franch when they first met in Gail. They spent more time and money trying to take over Gail, and they never did, by the time one part was down, another group was ready to fight.
Treebranch Posted August 2, 2003 Author Posted August 2, 2003 Martial Artist wrote: If we're talking more rounded my bet would be on the Filipino. A traditional filipino warrior of old was a very rounded, very aggressive, very formidable opponent(The spanish in 333 years of occupation could not subdue them. The American occupation couldn't conquer them. They still aren't conquered.) However, the katana is a far superior weapon to the bolo so that would change things. Is that why the Spanish were able to outlaw and forbid the practices of their MA's and rule them, the majority of them are Catholic, most of them have Spanish last names and their country is named after King Phillip. I'd say that's pretty conquered. However, the Spanish entertained the idea of invading Japan and were highly advised not to. The reason was that the warriors of Japan were to highly skilled and the Spanish feared they could not succeed in conquering Japan. So they scrapped the idea. Don't think the Samurai were only able to fight with a sword, they were also well rounded warriors. Samurai fighting arts are some of the most complete fighting arts out there. It's just that there aren't that many good teachers of it here in the states. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Martial_Artist Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 No, Treebranch, the Moros of Mindanao were not conquered, do not have spanish last names, do not speak spanish, are not Christians, and to this day still fight of the Phiippine government quite effectively. The Moros of Mindanao have never been conquered. It is the Moros of the Philippine Islands that give us Kali and the knife arts which are so popular in the West. The ban imposed was never effective in Mindanao, and the Spanish knew this. The Americans could not defeat the Moros of Mindanao with .38 cal bullets. (This is where the development of the .45ACP came into existence. Because it would take 5-6 rounds of .38special to drop a Moro warrior). The Americans eventually just left the Moros alone. The Moros have never been disarmed, either by their government or any other government. To this day they are armed, well armed. The last time I checked the Samurai were deprived of their swords and could not prevent it. The Moros killed Magellan. My bet would be on the Filipino Warrior of old. History speaks. The Moros, the Kali warriors, have fought and never been conquered. The Samurai are all but extinct. I think I know a bit more about the Philippines. I lived there for several years, studied history, I speak Tagalog and Ilocano fluently, I was involved in teaching martial arts and self-defense in the Philippines, I have family in the Philippines.(Though I am not Filipino) As foolish as it is to ask who would win--I mean, you could have a poor samurai fight a skilled Kali Warrior or a poor Kali warrior fight a skilled Samurari--I would still put my money on the Kali Warrior. So, I still say it depends on the weather. MA "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination.Imagination is more important than knowledge.Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Einstein
Cybren Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Martial_Artist, just like the US revolutionaries were never 'conquered' by the Brits? The thing with colonial warfare, is that colonies are had to make money. You lose money through a war so sometimes it's a better fiscal discision to just pack up and leave. Should Britain had wanted to, they would of anhilated the colonial Americans. This applies to basically all colonies.
Recommended Posts