Why are negros so bad at war?

Attached: gfnfgn.png (453x743, 46K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Ethiopia
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Because niggers

Attached: RPG_stupidNiggers.jpg (750x600, 100K)

>Ndabaningi Sithole

Attached: th.jpg (474x485, 32K)

Why do Latvians daughters get raped and their potatoes stolen?

They're bad at everything

>Joe Slovo
Who dat???

Attached: readImage.jpg (680x453, 37K)

ej nahuj melna dirsa

by who?

That's pretty low casualties inflicted by the Rhodesian side considering they were fighting against literal low-IQ niggers though.

The Germans had better stats against the Russians in WWII compared to this.

Attached: 1545837324222.jpg (479x466, 61K)

Attached: 1516085606139.png (496x868, 266K)

>The Germans had better stats against the Russians in WWII compared to this.
They did not.

Ndbaningi Sithole.

>close

Attached: 1422886.jpg (400x266, 25K)

>niggers
>low IQ
>no honor as a warrior
>no organization

They're still better than rhodesians at war. Rhodesia doesn't exist kek

Those are Africans, not negroes. We’ve never seen negroes fight wars except Haitians vs the French, where the French were btfo back to Europe and had to ruin Haiti economically because they couldn’t hack it man vs man.

That was mostly because of tropic diseases. And I guess Haiti slaves were quite motivated because they were treated very brutally.

But anyway you can't really expect Africans to have functioning institutions. Much of Africa was far behind the rest of world, and then colonialism only partially helped them reach some form of modernity.

Attached: during the bush war.png (1984x1576, 3.47M)

Attached: the pc priest.png (918x1360, 1.15M)

Not through war nigger. Economic sanctions. On the war front each white man had an average kdr of 184:1

Who rules that land now, the whites or the blacks? The blacks. Because like you and many other whites, Ian Smith tough "war" was about violence and battles, when it is in fact about politics.When whites start remembering that, they will start winning again. Until then, do not boast about our "victories", they were not victories, regardless of the kill ratio, there are WAY more non-whites, they can just trow bodies at us forever in a war of physical attrition. Start studying realpolitik, start studying infiltration, start studying manipulation, start studying finance and international relations.

It is LAUGHABLE to boast about victories while zimbabweans dance on the graves of the people that "defeated" them. Get your shit together, shut your mouth, and fight smart.

Because they've had experience with firearms for a little over a century and are already at an intellectual disadvantage, and in their modern state they have no regard for tactics. Even the Zulu were sound tacticians, or else they wouldn't have dominated the other Bantu tribes and win a couple over the British.

Attached: 1499217884308.png (1178x985, 136K)

Also this. War is an extension of politics. It doesn't matter how ''bravely'' or ''nobly'' you fought. No one gives a shit about that and never did. Those are just cool romantic tropes, but real life doesn't work like that.

>Not through war nigger.
>me big stick SMAH U OOGA BOOGA

WAR IS NOT ABOUT FIGHTING SOLELY ON THE BATTLEFIELD YOU STUPID FUCKING NIGGERS. SOME GERMAN BATTALIAONS HAD AN 14-1 KILL RATIO, DID THEY WIN THE WAR? NO, THEY WERE CRUSHED.

correct.

Shaka Zulu did a lot of great things in military sense. Problem is, he was late a few centuries.

Attached: IMG_20190228_234956.jpg (273x897, 61K)

I enjoyed the Netflix movie they made about this.

>people on Jow Forums remember the nation I could have grown up in but never got the chance :(

i wish i could go back.

Attached: pol family tree.png (1600x1000, 454K)

Because war is deception.
And you have to be smart to deceive.

Attached: whitey.png (316x586, 23K)

That makes sense

In the 19th and 20th centuries I would ascribe it to technology (eg warships), and having full-time professionals making up most of the armed forces. Everything to do with European nation-states and nothing to do with ethnicity. Japan created a fearsome war machine and defeated Russia in 1905 without having any whites.

There are always outliers to your stupid generalisations, so here's a good one:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Ethiopia

I feel you friend. Some of my family lived in Rhodesia and immigrated after the 1980 election.

Attached: gatling.jpg (799x754, 70K)

>Who rules that land now, the whites or the blacks? The blacks.
The blacks in Africa disagree. They claim that once the Colonialist Whites pulled out, no one was able to rule with stability. In Cape Verde they begged the White man to stay as government because blacks are too disorganised and corrupt.
Technically, most of Africa isn't ruled by anyone. If you run into a Chinese construction site next to a guerrilla complex surrounded by bribed government forces next to a tribe and a pirate's den, who rules? On whose jurisdiction are you?
There is no law in Africa except violence.

>Near 6,000 warriors, we stopped them on the run
The bravest of the brave couldn't match the maxim gun.

Attached: God's words.jpg (500x500, 124K)

Attached: Bonk.webm (490x360, 505K)