Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tonguez" data-source="post: 9525653" data-attributes="member: 1125">You have the Roman who became a highly organised and highly disciplined military, able to operate as both independent units and as a large army, bringing various innovations supported by a centralised state and excellent logistics.|Genghis Khan also developed a highly organised and disciplined military structure built around a central code and use of technology (stirrups, fast horses and recurved bows) that was perfectly adapted to the terrain, as well as the openess to adopt and adapt new technology they came across as the reappointed the conquered peoples as administrators under the Mongol Law.The English/British who had a well supported central authority and significant resources and technology. By the 17th C their military was professional and reasonably good too (despite inefficient leadership nepotism) but most notably the English were masters in the use of economic and diplomatic power to both curry the support of allies and also to weaken the enemy position. They were also unsurpassed in exploiting existing enmities among their enemies to divide and conquor. The US is similar to how England was with the added benefit of massive investment in military technology.</blockquote>