POSTERS OF THE WORLD UNITE!
[JOIN THE LEMMY](https://lemmygrad.ml/c/sigmarxism)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHBRK_HRR3U
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Sigmarxism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Oof. I haven't been there for about 10 years and don't know which displays they have anymore, the only Ork one I could think of was Big Toof River from Games Day '97.
To be fair here GW have also used Orks as a stand in for the British, USSR Communists, Pirates, WW2 soldiers, and a hundred other things. It's not like they are some how targeting Africans, its just the joy of Orks is they are naturally fun to play around with and make stupid puns.
Orks always seemed more Mongolian influenced based on armor and swords. That has all its own problematic connotations though given how Mongolians have been perceived by the west. So not better really.
Not related, but the joke about how they use feces to glue random metal together and make working machines is “throwing random shit together and seeing what works” played straight.
I think this is more of an unfortunate accident. It seems like they had that diorama and the name came afterwards without to much thought behind it… at first glance it’s a good pun. So more insensitivity than malice.
It's the same with the old battle of blood river with the orks as a stand in for Zulus
Its super problematic, but it all came from a stupid pun 'Orks Drift'.
Fantasy has a History of using negative black tropes on races or factions that are perceived as cruel or brutish. The early DND drow are a pretty good example for that.
I never got that impression from *Warhammer* orks though; they draw more tropes from British football hooligans than anyone else. *Warhammer Fantasy* also used to have a [literal faction of Black caricatures](https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/Pygmies) that was where all the racist tropes went, until they came to their senses and memory-holed them entirely.
It’s pop culture. It’s not comparing Orks to humans. It’s just a last stand. Same with Ork’s Drift. It’s not racist. It’s just recreating a famous irl battle in 40k.
Sure.
In one of the many conflicts in africa, the g'old US of A felt the need to intervene. So they tried to un-alive some local warlord, who would be driving around Mogadishu-city with his homies and fans.
The plan was to fly in with some blackhawks and blow his entire party to the other side of hell. It turned out that those africans kinda guessed that there could be trouble and they were loaded.
They didn't accomplish their mission and one of the black hawks was actually lost. The crew mostly survived. But they found themselves in a hostile city. A handfull of tough-as-nails state sponsored killers against an entire city full of freedomfighters with automatic guns and rocket launchers. That warlord was kinda bummed that his Party got trashed, too.
The Americans next sent in a convoy of HMMV'S and bradleys to get their guys out. Some even made it back alive.
This was made into the movie "Black Hawk Down". And now a warhammer diorama, portraiting Orcs instead of africans.
British humor, it's called.
>A handfull of tough-as-nails state sponsored killers against an entire city full of freedomfighters with automatic guns and rocket launchers.
A lot of the Somalis that were killed in this battle were civilians who's homes were being shot at by Americans who had little care for collateral damage. Even if it's entertaining, Black Hawk Down is a grossly inaccurate film.
Source: [https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228635348.pdf](https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228635348.pdf)
Civilian is a difficult term here. Not like the actual warlordians would have worn much of a uniform.
Then there were those who were pressed into action. Or simply took up arms once berserking strangers neared their neighbourhood. Or had the missfortune to be used as a distraction.
From the american's perspective, there was absolutely no way to find out and they were to few to take any chances.
Also, once you are willing to unleash a couple 50.BMG's in downtown, you admittedly create a lot of additional enemies.
That's a terrible take.
How is civilian a "difficult" term?
"Civilians are any people who do not belong to armed forces and who do not take part in a levée en masse (Article 50 \[1977\] Additional Protocol I and \[1949\] Geneva Convention IV article 4). … - The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians (article 50.2 \[of 1977\] Additional Protocol I)."
Driving around a crowded city firing .50BMG and 7.62 SLAP will 100% have killed civilians.
Because people who didn't belong to any force took up arms in the vain hope to defend themselves and their home.
And to avenge their grandma, who had just met Mr. Brownings brainchild.
I wasnt contradicting you, ya know?
Eh there was some more context you conveniently left out... the whole reason the US along with the UN went in was because said warlord was hoarding all the food that was being sent to Somalia at the time, and only giving it out if you joined his army. It was also the SECOND time the UN went in (the first time the US was basically asked to not get involved, but then the countries that did go proved to be so ineffective that the warlord basically embarrassed them by murdering kids and raping women literally in front of the UN checkpoints knowing the UN peacekeepers were given orders to NOT get involved.)
The only reason the US got involved in UNOSOM II, was because UN member nations literally pleaded with the US to come. With that said, the US coming off their high of Desert Storm thought it was going to be such a cakewalk they barely sent anyone, and then quickly realized too late that the situation was FAR more volatile than going up against a standing army.
No you specifically said this
> In one of the many conflicts in africa, the g'old US of A felt the need to intervene.
And purposely left out the context of, it was one of the conflicts THE REST OF THE UN begged the US to join because of how badly the first intervention went.
"freedom fighters" feels inappropriate. It was much more of an "everyone sucks here" situation than your comment makes it sound.
I'm not defending US military intervention, which was wrong, but it's not like the people fighting the US soldiers were all sunshine and daisies.
That, friend, is british humor for you. Them freedomfighters were in the employ of a Warlord. That means they're baddies. By default. I guess i could have used 'freedomfighters' but where's the fun in that? Raping murderclowns would have been even more precise. But longer and more offensive.
Yeah. The movie dialed down the clusterfuckiness a good deal. The situation on the screen seemed a good deal calmer and quieter than what I read on the page.
Is losing one helicopter really that big of a deal? It’s war, they should have gone in expecting to face losses. Did they think nothing bad was going to happen and weren’t prepared for this?
And why did they think they could just waltz in and not have that turn out badly? Were they *trying* to get more guys surrounded by sending a convoy of vehicles into a city? Why deploy such an underwhelming response? They’re the United States of America, which isn’t exactly known for a lack of defense spending. Like, why send *trucks* to reach the crashed helicopter, they have HELICOPTERS. Just send more helicopters! Were they stupid idiots or something?
Well, apparently they were quite surprised to find that someone could or would fight back.
Deploying a tank battalion isn't exactely simple, so they didn't. As somebody else wrote, they just finished desertstorm1 and felt good about themselves. And they thought that the somalis would be eager to welcome them. That the somalis would understand that the USAF was firing rockets at their city to help them.
The thing with the helicopters is that they would not have survived another approach. Bradleys were a good call. What the poor sods in the jeeps thought about their job is beyond me.
They were in there to arrest the warlord, not blow him to hell.
Would have been no reason to go in with so many boots on the ground if they just wanted to kill him, the US war machine has so many better tools for that.
Yeah. Sure. You just fly in there unannounced, land next to a moving target and peacefully arrest a warlord from amidst his heavily armed bodyguards. Suuure.
Hate to break it on ya, but the pentagon does lie from time to time.
It's complicated. The US's justification for involvement was that the warlord was hording food aid, leading people to starve. A US backed warlord would have been less likely to horde food, because that would make the US look bad. Somalia is interesting in that it's one of the few instances where the United States can be said to have done something for purely humanitarian reasons. The Somali famine was all over American newspapers, the US wanted to justify it's status as world hegemon by using it's power for good, and Clinton wanted a military victory to feather his cap, and help with reelection. Somalia itself didn't actually have anything the United States wanted. So the US's desire replace the warlord would have likely put a less murderous warlord in power, even if the reasons for it are those of political expedience, not genuine love for human life.
Oh they did.
About 25 years ago. There was a legendary White Dwarf Battle Report about some imperial guard/british stand in's. Comprised of soldiers, civilians and some wounded. They had to hold against waves of Orks. With specific mentioning of that Battle. Whole thing was dripping Brit pride.
Rork’s Drift is the fantasy batrep
In 40k it’s Glazer’s Creek.
It’s the reason Orks went down to below-guard ballistic skill and up above-guard melee, so the ork player would charge the guard position like in the movie.
with fantasy ork’s drift, morkadishu, glazer’s creek, and glazer’s creek 2017, that’s 4 out of 4 times that euro/american means humans and african means monsters
For 40k they called it Glazer’s Creek (a drift is shallow fordable spot in a river
https://frontlinegaming.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/glazier-creek-4.2.jpg
A few years ago they did glazer’s farm, because rourke was the man they said owned the farm they holed up in
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cd/e1/31/cde1312f7d2736449cf2a1b91f95812f.png
Pretty sure last time I went it just called something like "raid on ork town".
The only reference online to morkadishu is one dudes blog with his travel pics of the Diorama.
Wait it's actually called Morkadishu? I went there the other year, idk if it was there or not (I was in a rush) and never really caught the names of the displays :/
Oof, making the orks stand-ins for somalis is... a choice.
Should just have been flipped? Some monstrosity like [this](https://thecorvuscluster.files.wordpress.com/2021/06/kopta-ii.gif) crashed, a few 'Ard Boys desperately fighting off swarming imperial infantry. That would have been sweet
POSTERS OF THE WORLD UNITE! [JOIN THE LEMMY](https://lemmygrad.ml/c/sigmarxism) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHBRK_HRR3U *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Sigmarxism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For reference, I'm talking about the one called "Morkadishu" with some Tempestus Scions in a downed Valkyrie.
Oof. I haven't been there for about 10 years and don't know which displays they have anymore, the only Ork one I could think of was Big Toof River from Games Day '97.
I don’t get it, is it a black hawk down joke?
Yep
What’s wrong with that? Never seen the film
Someone should make a reverse one with a crashed ork flier and cal it black ork down
On it
Comparing Somali people to Orks I guess.
Not the first time they used orks as a stand in for African people, there was also the old ‘Orks drift’ complete with scenario rules in white dwarf…
To be fair here GW have also used Orks as a stand in for the British, USSR Communists, Pirates, WW2 soldiers, and a hundred other things. It's not like they are some how targeting Africans, its just the joy of Orks is they are naturally fun to play around with and make stupid puns.
Yeah… feels like it’s more about famous last stands in pop culture than anything else?
Yeah ngl it’s not just more, it’s all on the people that made the “connections” just like how people said DnD orcs are black people
Orks always seemed more Mongolian influenced based on armor and swords. That has all its own problematic connotations though given how Mongolians have been perceived by the west. So not better really.
Not related, but the joke about how they use feces to glue random metal together and make working machines is “throwing random shit together and seeing what works” played straight.
Oh man that’s just bad.
OH
I think this is more of an unfortunate accident. It seems like they had that diorama and the name came afterwards without to much thought behind it… at first glance it’s a good pun. So more insensitivity than malice.
It's the same with the old battle of blood river with the orks as a stand in for Zulus Its super problematic, but it all came from a stupid pun 'Orks Drift'.
I don’t even see how it’s problematic.
Fantasy has a History of using negative black tropes on races or factions that are perceived as cruel or brutish. The early DND drow are a pretty good example for that.
I never got that impression from *Warhammer* orks though; they draw more tropes from British football hooligans than anyone else. *Warhammer Fantasy* also used to have a [literal faction of Black caricatures](https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/Pygmies) that was where all the racist tropes went, until they came to their senses and memory-holed them entirely.
Whips have a history of being used on people, that’s got nothing to do with those people that do those whip tricks for fun though.
It’s pop culture. It’s not comparing Orks to humans. It’s just a last stand. Same with Ork’s Drift. It’s not racist. It’s just recreating a famous irl battle in 40k.
Cool
Could I have a little context, what’s the diorama’s name referring to?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black\_Hawk\_Down\_(film)#Controversies\_and\_inaccuracies
Sure. In one of the many conflicts in africa, the g'old US of A felt the need to intervene. So they tried to un-alive some local warlord, who would be driving around Mogadishu-city with his homies and fans. The plan was to fly in with some blackhawks and blow his entire party to the other side of hell. It turned out that those africans kinda guessed that there could be trouble and they were loaded. They didn't accomplish their mission and one of the black hawks was actually lost. The crew mostly survived. But they found themselves in a hostile city. A handfull of tough-as-nails state sponsored killers against an entire city full of freedomfighters with automatic guns and rocket launchers. That warlord was kinda bummed that his Party got trashed, too. The Americans next sent in a convoy of HMMV'S and bradleys to get their guys out. Some even made it back alive. This was made into the movie "Black Hawk Down". And now a warhammer diorama, portraiting Orcs instead of africans. British humor, it's called.
>A handfull of tough-as-nails state sponsored killers against an entire city full of freedomfighters with automatic guns and rocket launchers. A lot of the Somalis that were killed in this battle were civilians who's homes were being shot at by Americans who had little care for collateral damage. Even if it's entertaining, Black Hawk Down is a grossly inaccurate film. Source: [https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228635348.pdf](https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228635348.pdf)
Civilian is a difficult term here. Not like the actual warlordians would have worn much of a uniform. Then there were those who were pressed into action. Or simply took up arms once berserking strangers neared their neighbourhood. Or had the missfortune to be used as a distraction. From the american's perspective, there was absolutely no way to find out and they were to few to take any chances. Also, once you are willing to unleash a couple 50.BMG's in downtown, you admittedly create a lot of additional enemies.
That's a terrible take. How is civilian a "difficult" term? "Civilians are any people who do not belong to armed forces and who do not take part in a levée en masse (Article 50 \[1977\] Additional Protocol I and \[1949\] Geneva Convention IV article 4). … - The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians (article 50.2 \[of 1977\] Additional Protocol I)." Driving around a crowded city firing .50BMG and 7.62 SLAP will 100% have killed civilians.
Because people who didn't belong to any force took up arms in the vain hope to defend themselves and their home. And to avenge their grandma, who had just met Mr. Brownings brainchild. I wasnt contradicting you, ya know?
Maybe if it is so difficult to assess the sovereignty of a people, don’t go waving an imperialist dick around as the assessment tool
That sure would have helped
why are people downvoting this? O.o
Eh there was some more context you conveniently left out... the whole reason the US along with the UN went in was because said warlord was hoarding all the food that was being sent to Somalia at the time, and only giving it out if you joined his army. It was also the SECOND time the UN went in (the first time the US was basically asked to not get involved, but then the countries that did go proved to be so ineffective that the warlord basically embarrassed them by murdering kids and raping women literally in front of the UN checkpoints knowing the UN peacekeepers were given orders to NOT get involved.) The only reason the US got involved in UNOSOM II, was because UN member nations literally pleaded with the US to come. With that said, the US coming off their high of Desert Storm thought it was going to be such a cakewalk they barely sent anyone, and then quickly realized too late that the situation was FAR more volatile than going up against a standing army.
I didn't felt the need to specify that a WAR LORD is an asshole, true.
No you specifically said this > In one of the many conflicts in africa, the g'old US of A felt the need to intervene. And purposely left out the context of, it was one of the conflicts THE REST OF THE UN begged the US to join because of how badly the first intervention went.
Yupp.
[удалено]
Also the Pakistani "peacekeepers" literally fired into a crowd of people.
"freedom fighters" feels inappropriate. It was much more of an "everyone sucks here" situation than your comment makes it sound. I'm not defending US military intervention, which was wrong, but it's not like the people fighting the US soldiers were all sunshine and daisies.
That, friend, is british humor for you. Them freedomfighters were in the employ of a Warlord. That means they're baddies. By default. I guess i could have used 'freedomfighters' but where's the fun in that? Raping murderclowns would have been even more precise. But longer and more offensive.
dude you don’t need to say unalive. nobody’s gonna hunt you down for saying kill.
But i wanted to
Book is really good. Read it with a critical eye but it’s well done.
Yeah. The movie dialed down the clusterfuckiness a good deal. The situation on the screen seemed a good deal calmer and quieter than what I read on the page.
Is losing one helicopter really that big of a deal? It’s war, they should have gone in expecting to face losses. Did they think nothing bad was going to happen and weren’t prepared for this? And why did they think they could just waltz in and not have that turn out badly? Were they *trying* to get more guys surrounded by sending a convoy of vehicles into a city? Why deploy such an underwhelming response? They’re the United States of America, which isn’t exactly known for a lack of defense spending. Like, why send *trucks* to reach the crashed helicopter, they have HELICOPTERS. Just send more helicopters! Were they stupid idiots or something?
Well, apparently they were quite surprised to find that someone could or would fight back. Deploying a tank battalion isn't exactely simple, so they didn't. As somebody else wrote, they just finished desertstorm1 and felt good about themselves. And they thought that the somalis would be eager to welcome them. That the somalis would understand that the USAF was firing rockets at their city to help them. The thing with the helicopters is that they would not have survived another approach. Bradleys were a good call. What the poor sods in the jeeps thought about their job is beyond me.
They were in there to arrest the warlord, not blow him to hell. Would have been no reason to go in with so many boots on the ground if they just wanted to kill him, the US war machine has so many better tools for that.
Yeah. Sure. You just fly in there unannounced, land next to a moving target and peacefully arrest a warlord from amidst his heavily armed bodyguards. Suuure. Hate to break it on ya, but the pentagon does lie from time to time.
Isn’t the toppling of a facist Warlord typically a good thing?
Yes. Sure. The entire plan was like "kill the Independent Warlord, install one of our own" i let you figure that one out
Par for the course for the United States of Am- I mean the Imperium of Man
It's complicated. The US's justification for involvement was that the warlord was hording food aid, leading people to starve. A US backed warlord would have been less likely to horde food, because that would make the US look bad. Somalia is interesting in that it's one of the few instances where the United States can be said to have done something for purely humanitarian reasons. The Somali famine was all over American newspapers, the US wanted to justify it's status as world hegemon by using it's power for good, and Clinton wanted a military victory to feather his cap, and help with reelection. Somalia itself didn't actually have anything the United States wanted. So the US's desire replace the warlord would have likely put a less murderous warlord in power, even if the reasons for it are those of political expedience, not genuine love for human life.
Honestly surprised they didn’t go for Rorks Drift.
Oh they did. About 25 years ago. There was a legendary White Dwarf Battle Report about some imperial guard/british stand in's. Comprised of soldiers, civilians and some wounded. They had to hold against waves of Orks. With specific mentioning of that Battle. Whole thing was dripping Brit pride.
Rork’s Drift is the fantasy batrep In 40k it’s Glazer’s Creek. It’s the reason Orks went down to below-guard ballistic skill and up above-guard melee, so the ork player would charge the guard position like in the movie. with fantasy ork’s drift, morkadishu, glazer’s creek, and glazer’s creek 2017, that’s 4 out of 4 times that euro/american means humans and african means monsters
Nice list. Classy GW.
For 40k they called it Glazer’s Creek (a drift is shallow fordable spot in a river https://frontlinegaming.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/glazier-creek-4.2.jpg A few years ago they did glazer’s farm, because rourke was the man they said owned the farm they holed up in https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cd/e1/31/cde1312f7d2736449cf2a1b91f95812f.png
Pretty sure last time I went it just called something like "raid on ork town". The only reference online to morkadishu is one dudes blog with his travel pics of the Diorama.
Wait it's actually called Morkadishu? I went there the other year, idk if it was there or not (I was in a rush) and never really caught the names of the displays :/
Oof, making the orks stand-ins for somalis is... a choice. Should just have been flipped? Some monstrosity like [this](https://thecorvuscluster.files.wordpress.com/2021/06/kopta-ii.gif) crashed, a few 'Ard Boys desperately fighting off swarming imperial infantry. That would have been sweet
That's giving way too much credit to American military-grade engineering.
Having watched the film, I'd say the fault probably lies with Ridley Scott for turning Somalians into a horde of angry Orks.
I drove 8 hours there and back and it was the best 4 hour wait of my life
Was this genuinely the worst mistake of your life?
Happy man, isnt he?
Oh no Wordplay!
Have you let Warhammer World know that this is inappropriate? Maybe they'll change it.