modern Fighting men vs Cowboys Gunslingers of the old west?

Status
Not open for further replies.
150 years ago I doubt very much there were many "fair" fights.
Modern soldiers with modern weapons would carry the day.
Not talking one on one but even then it ain't even close to a "fair"
fight, those weapons vs. todays weapons & training.
 
JW noted
I agree, the bad men of the Old West weren't shooters, they were killers.
They would not give your modern weapons and honed skills an opening.
Doesn't matter how good you are if you are shot in the back at dinner, or your rooming house burned down over your heads, or if your dance hall girl is paid to take a straight razor to you as you sleep.
Click to expand...
Since this is all fantasy....
I'd take exception to that: The small team tactics used by SF teams would account for the CQB tactics described above, resulting in a sniper-based stand-off attack, with weapons the cowboys will never know about, but lead to their demise.
 
THE GREATEST AMERICAN GUNFIGHTERS OF ALL TIME have all been alive in the past sixty years and several are still alive today. One I know personally has put bullets in thirty three men and dodged at least two assasination attempts while getting ALL those sent from South America to do the job. His work has been on four continents if memory serves.
HIS advise for living through it all: ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS use a revolver on first contact.
 
"Even WW2-era Airborne types armed with revolvers, lever-action rifles and double-barrel shotguns would devastate the old "gunfighters".


I'm sure that's what the Soviets thought when they rolled into Afghanistan.

Or the US thought when it decided to pick up the French banner in Vietnam.

Didn't work out so great...
Click to expand...

The Soviets were kicking butt until the USA provided surface to Air missles to the Afghans and leveled the playing field.

The USA never lost a major battle in Vietnam, and the military could have quite easily won the war. In both cases it was the politicians that pulled the troops out, not the soldiers who lost the wars.

How much real skill the old gunslingers actually had, and how much is pure fiction will never be known. I believe the best of the best back in those days could hold their own with the best of the best today. Using the same weapons. But I believe the average Joe back then was probably pretty poor compared to many average shooters today.
 
The late Bob Munden or Jerry Miculek could probably have taken on the entire "OK Corral shootout" single handed while the Earp's and Doc Holiday stayed back at the saloon playing cards.
 
its no contest, the old time gunslingers would win.

they liked strength in numbers, but them boys had no problem running 1 man versus 3 or 4 opponents wearing badges.

watching Cops and all other copshows i can for 23 years has shown me that cops need a ratio of 3 badges to 1 drunk prostitute to make an arrest.
 
The fight would be even enough that if Batman decided to join either side, that would be more than enough to tip the scales.
 
Andy Blozinski said
Darn those Time Travel Control activists and their Common Sense laws keeping us from going back in time.
Click to expand...
Going back is easy as an observer and fits within Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. (Coming back is a Major No No. Interacting is also a Major No No, just look up the "Grandfather Paradox" on why you can't.) You can go back tonight by stepping outside and look at the lights from stars. Put a massive mirror a long way away and look into it and see what happened some time ago.
Sorry to burst the (time) bubble.
 
Interacting is also a Major No No, just look up the "Grandfather Paradox" on why you can't.
Click to expand...
One theory is that you could go back, but if you changed anything, it would split off into an alternate universe.

Think of telling Custer to bring the darned Gatling gun, no matter how heavy it was. Or telling Abraham Lincoln to skip the play. Or telling Gary Hart to leave Donna Rice alone.

Think of the implications!
 
I'm sure that's what the Soviets thought when they rolled into Afghanistan.

Or the US thought when it decided to pick up the French banner in Vietnam.

Didn't work out so great..

Well, we are talking pure fantasy, but a bunch of well-fed, highly fit, highly trained guys who have sent thousands of rounds downrange jump into a time machine and square off against dangerous but poorly nourished, poorly trained guys living off of bacon and whiskey while riddled with TB and VD...I'd bet the Millennium Falcon and two lightsabers on the Spec Ops guys.

Now if we're talking Spec Ops vs Jedi...
 
"The Soviets were kicking butt until the USA provided surface to Air missles to the Afghans and leveled the playing field."

The Soviets were taking heavy losses even prior to being supplied SAMs.

SAMs allowed the Mujahaddein to become even deadlier than they already were.

Soviet losses in Afghanistan were officially about 14,500 over the 10 years they were there. There are some claims that the actual death toll was far higher than that.
 
"..dangerous but poorly nourished, poorly trained guys living off of bacon and whiskey while riddled with TB and VD..."

With the exception of bacon and whiskey, you're describing the kinds of fighters that the Soviets encountered in Afghanistan and the US encountered in Vietnam.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top