>Do something that is apparently against the rules >Leaders

>>1871843

>Why the fuck would you stay with a military that fucking flogged you?

You probably didn't have a choice.

>Hell, why the fuck would you join up with a military that flogged?

You probably didn't have a choice.


Back then, it was common for the Navy to essentially kidnap people. If they needed more crew, they'd go into bars and find some who was passed out from being drunk. They'd grab him, drag him on board, and then boom when he wakes up he's a sailor whether he likes it or not. Same thing might happen to a homeless guy sleeping in a part or something. It was seen as a public service. Bums and drunks were removed from society and forced to do something productive with their lives.

>>1871843
Did the whole "never beat your children" really create a whole generation that finds any kind of physical punishment unfathomable like this?

>>1871879
>Back then, it was common for the Navy to essentially kidnap people. If they needed more crew, they'd go into bars and find some who was passed out from being drunk. They'd grab him, drag him on board, and then boom when he wakes up he's a sailor whether he likes it or not. Same thing might happen to a homeless guy sleeping in a part or something. It was seen as a public service. Bums and drunks were removed from society and forced to do something productive with their lives.

That's more an urban legend than reality. Such practices were criminal and if they hsppened, they were uncommon enough to gather much outcry. It would be also very ineffective. Navy wanted trained seamen, no land rats who didn't know how to set sails.

Press Gang usually worked in other way. Captains of navy ships stopped seagoing merchantmen and took some of the crew with them.

>>1871843
corporal punishment had a different meaning in those days. also faggotry was not something to be proud of.

>The law of Moses prescribes forty stripes save one, but this number has often been exceeded in our camp.

>In aggravated cases, and with old offenders, the culprit is sentenced to receive one hundred lashes, or more. It is always the duty of the drummers and fifers to inflict the chastisement, and the drum major must attend and see that the duty is faithfully performed. The culprit being securely tied to a tree, or post, receives on his naked back the number of lashes assigned him, by a whip formed of several small knotted cords, which sometimes cut through the skin at every stroke.

>However strange it may appear, a soldier will often receive the severest stripes without uttering a groan, or once shrinking form [from] the lash, even while the blood flows freely from his lacerated wounds. This must be ascribed to stubbornness or pride. They have however, adopted a method which they say mitigates the anguish in some measure, it is by putting between the teeth a leaden bullet, on which they chew while under the lash, till it is made quite flat and jagged.

>In some instances of incorrigible villains, it is adju[d]ged by the court that the culprit receive his punishment at several different times, a certain number of stripes repeated at intervals of two or three days, in which case the wounds are in a state of inflammation, and the skin rendered more sensibly tender; and the terror of the punishment is greatly aggravated.

How many of you think you could take it without crying out?

>>1872106
I would definitely cry out, i could maybe take one the lashings but not all 100

Because even today you cant just decide to quit the navy.
Also consider that most people arent going to get flogged, because theyve seen other people get flogged and so they dont do stupid things.

>>1871843
>20th Century soldiers DO NOT GET TO LOOT.
>KEKS HAVE TO RELY ON THEIR SALARIES
No son. Modern soldiers are cucks.

>>1872307

>Can't rape
>Can't loot
>Can't pillage

Why the fuck do soliders even sign up anymore?

File: Cicatrices_de_flagellation_sur_un_esclave.jpg (685KB, 1558x2581px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 1558x2581px

What kind of scarring can flogging leave? Is it similar to slave scars?

>>1872224

Just jump ship next time you're back in port

>>1873157
Exactly the same.

Why the fuck do you think piracy was so fucking common at the time?
Why do you think sailors immediatly muttinied after they were out of the reach of the empire?
You fuckers saying
>duhh it was another time
>fucking millenials
Even people back then didn't take this shit and they had to tone it down after a while

>>1872307
How does that even work in the modern age?
>Modern soldiers go medieval
>CNN reports shit like: US TROOPS SACK BAGHDAD.
>Soldiers kick down doors.
>Emerge with TVs, Stereos, random middle eastern food, and wallets.
>Pawnshops at home filled with middle eastern goods.

>>1871843
The modern man is sensitive to pain while at the same time secretly neurotic and delighting in inflicting pain on others. You assume flogging was out of petty spite and it was the most horrible thing anyone can endure, but in the past attitudes were different, receiving a few lashes in front of the crew wasn't a big deal and being absolved from their crimes was welcome. They would rather be flogged and go back to drinking with the men below deck than be imprisoned for weeks.

Imagine you worked hard for a year for some coin and were eager to get back to home port to invest it in your family who depend on you and it is stolen. You could easily kill whoever was responsible, flogging is a better cathartic alternative to restore peace on a ship.

>>1871879
most men press ganged were already sailors

File: Afghan Cannabis Field.jpg (102KB, 990x601px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 990x601px

>>1874319
>Afghanistan, 2000s.
>In an alternate world, modern soldiers can still loot.
>US servicemen ransack poppy & marijuana fields.
>???
>When I smonk da kush, I let the flames burn like George bush.

>>1874263
Not exactly

That type of scarring you see in the picture is know. As keloid scarring and its unique to negros.

>>1875024
Sounds pretty similar to Vietnam

File: holohoax-torture.jpg (88KB, 472x600px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 472x600px

>>1873157

yes. Brits were called "lobster backs" by the americans in the revolutionary war because their backs were so torn up and rough from flogging

>>1875045
Wrong

boston1775.blogspot.com/2007/11/british-soldiers-werent-called.html?m=1

>>1871843
No, because back then you were considered lucky that you weren't rather put to death instead.

>>1871843
>Do something that is apparently against the rules
>wife fucks other men behind your back
>STAY WITH THE WOMAN THAT CHEATED ON YOU

Are the 21st century men the biggest cucks of all?

Why the fuck would you stay with a wife that fucking cucked you?

Hell, why the fuck would you marry anyone?

>>1875034

Court martial rates were at their highest during Vietnam

>>1872106
>How many of you think you could take it without crying out?

Between zero and nothing t b h

>>1871843
>Why the fuck would you stay with a military that fucking flogged you?

You either:

A - Didn't have a choice in the matter

B - Figured it was better than living a life of extreme poverty struggling to simply exist in a time when there was absolutely zero assistance from the government.

>>1875751

I went to catholic school in Venezula, I could take it senpai

>>1871879
They didn't kidnap landsmen. What happens is that naval captains were legally empowered to press sailors from merchant ships or men with sailing experience into service to fill out their crew.

>>1875024
>>1875034
>>1875388
We need to write a book now set in an alternate world where raping, looting, and pillaging are still seen as socially acceptable and a common part of war.

>>1876024

>implying they aren't

Look to the Ukraine

Look to Syria

War is already hell

>>1871843
>Hell, why the fuck would you join up with a military that flogged?
because generally speaking the job wasnt badly paid or more dangerous than other work (accident rates in most industries and farming were quite high, casualties in battles often that bad)

>Why the fuck would you stay with a military that fucking flogged you?

in most cases because you knew the risk of getting flogged before you did whatever it was you were being punished for and a sense of loyalty to your unit and mates out weighed any anger at being flogged, again punishment and discipline were harsher than civilian life but not by all that much, generally even the floggee recognised the need to maintain discipline in a unit.

only unusually harsh officers tended to be resented for floggings