Warp Spider Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Without stepping too much into a minefield, (I suspect there are a lot of Americans here) Cybren is right. The British did not particularly value the west at that time and were not interested in spending any more money to continue attacking. As for the topic, there isn't really enough information. If we're talking full-out armed combat with armor and the works, I'd say the samurai. Hand to Hand, "dojo style" fighting I'd have to say the Filipinos would have a slight advantage because although both arts have armed and unarmed portions, I think that the Samurai's training was definately more focused toward weapons. BTW, whether or not someone has been conquered doesn't mean much as to how good of fighters they are. Last I checked the Vatican has never been conquered. That doesn't make the people there extraordinary combatants. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
granmasterchen Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 if miyamoto musashi was the samurai, then it would be the samurai, again it all depends on the individual That which does not destroy me will only make me stronger
sansoouser Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 i think samurai and ninja's were the best sword handlers. 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 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Then again the Vatican isn't constantly attacked, is it? Nor has it fended off physical violent attacks for well over a century. But, then again, that might have nothing to do with it. The Kali still fight and win. And about the US revolutionary war. That isn't the topic of discussion here and is quite irrelevant. I'll explain why. About the Moros, to Cybren, it wasn't just the US who tried to subdue the Moros, the Spanish tried and failed to, as well as several other groups from the Indonesian area, It wasn't about colonization, they already had the rest of the islands, it was about subjugation, at which they failed. If Britain had truly wanted to conquer the rebellious yanks, who knows what could have happened--history has already been written. No use getting bitter over it. However, several peoples have tried to conquer the Moros of the Philippines. Not colonize them--they're already part of a nation. But conquer, subdue, and subjugate. Every single attempt has failed. The Moro-Islamic Liberation Front to this day is unconquered. The Abu Sayyaf are unconquered. The peoples of Basilan, Cotabato, etc. are unconquered. The people of that area know how to fight, they've been doing it for a long time and they're good at it. They're fierce and relentless. The US had to develop a new type of ammunition just to fight them. That's all there is to it. That being said, the Samurai carried a far more effective weapon: the katana. Like I said in my first post, the katana is a far superior weapon to the bolo that the Kali warrior is used to carrying. In open field combat the samurai would easily win. But that condition wasn't clarified in the question. One on one, well my bet would be on the Filipino--if he could get past the katana. If so, the Samurai would be, by token of instrument alone, be underclassed compared to the CQB of the Kali Warrior. No doubt the Samurai was a good warrior, but a different type of warrior. One who would most likely not know how to deal with a wild jungle boy from the Philippines. (Note: the Japanese did not even mess with Mindanao during their occupation during WWII--it was not worth the risk) Now, if armies met armies on an open field, the Kali probably wouldn't win. That's not the type of war they fight. They fight the close, intimate, and surprise fight. That's their strength. So, I think it depends on the weather. But, 1 vs 1, I'd still bet on the Kali--they're still around--the samurai...well, we already know what happened to them. MA. P.s. The Moros of Mindanao can't even be defeated by modern US troops today. They had a six month try at it two years ago and could not take out the Abu Sayyaf. They even worked in conjunction with the Philippine National Army. P.S.S. What people see of Kali in the West is not like the fighting of the Kali in Mindanao. The Kali being taught in the US/other countries is a very westernized version designed to be more readily consumable by the Western consumer. Kali in Mindanao is much more brutal and dangerous than what is being displayed in the US. P.S.S.S. In the Philippines it is much more commonly known as Arnis. Kali is a word very few know. In fact, mention it and you'll draw many blank stares. Say, Arnis, and you'll be understood. "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
sansoouser Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 I still say the samurai, even in unarmed combat. They studied jujitsu. And some of them practiced the art of 2 swords ( forgot the name ) so they would have an advantage in weapons. The Kali might win, if he bonked the samurai on the head and made him do seppeku 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.
Warp Spider Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 I'm sticking to my guns, so to speak. I'd wager I could conquer these "moros" if I had command of any developed country. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
Tibby Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Um, Britain DID try to Conquer America again, there was that little mess around the year of 1812. No money in losing, is there? No the Moro are not Christian, they don’t have Spanish last names, and they were not Technically Conquered. But, Muslims only make up about 5% of the country. So lets face it, they did a piss-poor job at fighting back the Spanish! Meanwhile, Japan has always been its own country, and it still follows many Philosophies and Religions it has for centuries. If the state of the Countries are any indication, the Samurai are better. The only reason the Samurai are not around now is because of the Peace Japan had for that long stretch of time during end and after the Tokugawa period. So, you could say the Samurai did such a good job, Japan didn’t need them anymore... They had no reason to fight anymore, they where not conquered, they where at peace with everyone. Meanwhile, from what I can tell of the Kali’s, they did a pretty bad job of fighting off the would-be conquerors, because you can clearly see the signs of Spanish colonization in the Philippines. All of the Westernization in Japan was taken willingly after the Emperor came back into power.
Cybren Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 During the War of 1812, britain never tried to 'conquer' america. What happened, was that British Admirals were stealing american sailors, because they didn't recognize us as a country. The War ot 1812 was a three way, between the US, the French, and the British. The british even got some good hits in, inclduing Burning down the Presidents house, though modern Canadians take credit for this, that would be like saying US soldiers stationed in Italy are italian troops
Treebranch Posted August 2, 2003 Author Posted August 2, 2003 Wow these are great points everyone is making, thanks for the education. I want to learn more about the Moros. What is the origin of the name Moros, did the Spanish give them this name. "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"
Recommended Posts