Bosnians and Chechens.

I've always regarded bravery a synonym of stupidity.

Me I'm more interest who's the least brave, they're the people I'll meet up with next war.

modern warfare Ghurkas

Te suddenly retake of Grosny by 5000 Chechen fighters, they also took thousands of Russian Soldiers as hostages, so that they got a Peace agreement, and a de facto independant state.

I think the policemen in Iraq are brave... I admire how they continue trying, even though there are daily attacks against them.

Originally posted by Capt. Lubber Originally posted by Capt. Lubber Originally posted by akýncý Yeah the same old story....Brave outnumbered warriors defeated because of a traitor..... blahblahblah Eventhough you might have heard the story before, doesn't make them any less brave. And what does the turks do, to make them so brave? Oh, the bravest were of course the vikings

Ý really don't know.But it sounds like the Greeks changed the facts and made it more epic than it was.Ý mean if you look at the war stories of old times some brave strong thing is betrayed or cheated and that's why they loose.Ý mean look at Troy...

Chinese are the bravest people, because they eat all living beings like worm, cockroach, scorpion, fly, butterfly, locust, frog, rat, cat, dog and donkey without fear!    

I think that is why the chinese have very ugly teeth.   

I have deep admiration for lithuanian bravery in the past but i cant say that we are bravest ppl at moment .Our army probably wouldn't shoot a bullet for it's motherland in face of danger...everybody would rise their arms and go home under beautiful white flag:0.....

i love my country but this is reality...even the forever mighty germans and jepanese...had had enough of wars they look very calmly by now

British? Are you joking, or being sarcastic? No offense, but I think in a poll of "the most coward and sneaky people ever", they would be on top of list.

They even didnt fight in their armies. Their colonial slaves or dependent civilians fought for them. Some of their commanders were gambling in their super lux warships when Anzac soldiers were fighting for nonsense British. You should have a look at history, and watch the movies "Braveheart", "Gallipoli" and another movie (I couldnt remember its name now) about their "brave" battle with "Zulus".

Americans? Bombing civilians shows how brave they are. Their bravery is only enough to throw bombs from air. Bravery shows itself in a battle of teeth to teeth, like the war of Vietnam.

Arabs can be brave when they are provoked by a sneaky British...

I call bravery to fight for your beliefs, honor and independence like a man. I call braveary to run against enemy when you know you'll die. Bravery is to sacrifice yourself in the name of your nation and beliefs. But to fight with your honor.

So I can list some of the bravest nations in history:

Turks

Japanese

Mongols

Tatars

Scottish and Irish

Zulus

American Indians

Yes I agree the British are not one of the bravest(In fact they are one of the most cowardly)

And where is this evidence of English cowardice, pray tell? 

For example at the battle of Albuera in Spain during napoleonic wars single regiment of polish lancers made thousands of brits run away. British officers reported that brigade of polish cavalry was attacking them while it were only about 500 lancers (1 regiment). Poles in this battle took 5 colors of british regiments.

Battle of Fungirola also in Spain, 1810, 300 polish infantry attacked 1200 british, 1000 foreign and another 1000 spanish soldiers who after night battle run away, captured british commander general Lord Blayney (his saber is still held in Poland) and all the british canons. Brits had also warship Rodney and 2 or 3 frigates which all together had over 100 canons. Polish captains Bronisz and Mlokosiewicz defeated british general and his army being outnumbered 10:1.

I only dont know why in the most of statistics the battle is counted as French victory while there were only Poles, 11 french husars and 2 polish officers playing the role of commanders.

I'd say

1. Spartans
2. Celts
3. Vikings
4. Poles
5. Turkic Tribes
6. American Indians
7. Huns
8. Germanic Tribes
9. Japanese
10. The French

C'mon! You can do better than that! If one or two battles alone were sufficient to prove a nation's cowardice, than the invasion of Poland by Germany in 1939 would leave the world with a poor impression of the Poles.

I asked for evidence of British cowardice! Not accounts of defeats, which every nation experiences (and it's very curious you should mention the Peninsular War, the one the Brits won after monstruous sieges and battles). Nothing in world history leads me to believe that the English, Welsh, Scottish (or indeed Irish) were ever cowards!

So when someone outnumber his enemy 10:1 and flee from the battlefield leaving all the artillery and general in hands of enemy - he is not coward but he is damn brave?

As for 1939 polish campaign we Poles dont have to feel ashamed for it. We fought enemy who outnumbered us 2:1 in men and even more in the equipment and who attacked us from west, north and sought. And after 2 weeks we were attacked also from the east by even bigger army. We did everything what was possible in such harsh conditions.

I think here someone made the job and posted nice text about british bravery:

http://web2.airmail.net/napoleon/BRITISH_DEFEATS.html - http://web2.airmail.net/napoleon/BRITISH_DEFEATS.html

 And how is that, they avoided conventional combat most of the time and usually attacked  smooth targets like monasteries.  They were thoroughtly defeated by Robert Le Justicier in conventional combat at Chartre.

 Bravery is a stupid term more fitting for an individual rather for an entire people, the more warlike you are the less likely you'll be brave, cunning is  appropriate term for warlike people. Unless you are some barbarians who just fight for the sake of fighting like the celts, without thinking much of objectives, glory etc. This I have a lot respect for that, fighting just for the sake of fighting is honourable.

1. turk
2. arab
3. british
4. german
5. russian
6. japaneese
7. mongol
8. huns

They sailed in stormy seas with their small boats all the way to America

That recuires bravery.

Turks the bravest!!??? Is this a joke?Can you give me at least ONE example of your Turkish "bravery"?My opinion on the bravest people ever:

1. Hellines
2. Celts
3. Vikings
4. Romans
5. French
6. Poles
7. Scots
8. Arabs

Well you cannot really attribute bravery as a collectively stable trait inherent in a people over dozens of generations. But lets make the best attempt we can. I reckon that for the early period the Spartans come out as the bravest. Records of their deeds at Thermopylae must be accepted as accurate when we consider how unbiased so much of the work of men like Herodotus (who freely admits the bravery of the Persians) is, as well as still recent archaeological excavations which actually uncovered a mass of arrowheads atop a small hill in the area (the Spartan's last stand around the fallen Leonidas). So knowing the battle occured and knowing the relative size of the two armies, it meant that the force of Spartans which constituted only one type of soldiery (heavy infantry) managed to hold off a combined-arms army which outnumbered it (almost incredibly) literally hundreds of times over. They fought to the last man. If you can provide me with a better example than this then do so but nothing else I have learnt about compares so well.

I think the Celts deserve a good mention, when one considers a nation as small as Scotland as never being conquered by its much larger southern neighbour (except for one generation by Edward I), then you have to give them credit. The English couldn't take Ireland the first time and only managed to do so once they were united with the Scots. And remember that from 1603 onwards Celts and Englishmen fought side by side. Though you could refer to certain regiments as Celtic (e.g. the Highlander corps), the British armies from this period must simply be defined as British. The Celtic and Anglo elements in Britain managed to hybridise surprisingly well to form a single national people. I don't think anyone can offer two defeats for an army which was not even entirely British and then call a nation of people who managed to bring a massive portion of the globe under their dominion and have proved their armies to be some of the most exceptional in the world over the past several centuries to be cowards. Look at the Zulu uprising in South Africa, a British garrison post of 200 men stood their ground against 10,000 Zulu warriors who then retreated purely through the bravery of the British soldiers. And any historian will confirm when I say the British armies in India battled enemies who also had their own advanced cavalry regiments, artillery crews and infantry corps well equipped with gunpower weaponary and rifles. Outnumbered almost always and faced with armies at no real technological disadvantage, historians attribute the incredible British success to the good discipline, firm organisation and steadfast resolution of the British armies on the one hand and relatively tolerant and capable administration on the other. Look at how small the island of Britain is, actually get out an atlas and take a look. From such a small land no race of cowards could possibly come to dominate so much of the world and leave such a massive legacy that affects each and every one of us today.

I think the Russians deserve the greatest credit for bravery in the first half of the 20th century. In WWI historians estimated that had the soldiers of any other European nation been fighting the experience of the Russian soldiers then the Eastern Front would have collapsed in mid-1915. The Russians in that war endured some of the most atrocious conditions possible, launching offensives on the East Front whenever the Western Front was being assaulted by the Germans and so critically sabotaging their plans. This fact is something the Russians do not get enough credit for. In WWII I could talk on and on about how brave the Russians were. Let me just skip past it to a simple generalization: the Russians were the foremost power responsible for winning WWII, the courage of their soldiery is some of the most exceptional in all history, and had it not been for their courage and tenacious valour I doubt the Allies would have come out on top.

-but then again you could say that for any suicide bomber.... 

When somone is not afraid, he is not brave. There is no fear that he has to defeat.

I think that the bravest people in the world would either be the indians or the Russians.

Yes the Finns are very brave.The Winter War is probably the most known in Finnish history but i have heard of a battle between Russians and Finns before the Winter War where 700 Finns defeated a Russian force off 6000 soldiers.Maybe wilpuri can tell us something about that battle.

I'd say:

Sperms

History couldn't break their bravery and they've always challenged against greater structures.

Also, they die fighting...

Yes, they fight for such a worthy cause too! The Catholic church has the right idea...

http://www.mwscomp.com/movies/mol/every-sp.mp3 - http://www.mwscomp.com/movies/mol/every-sp.mp3

Originally posted by mark1100 reasons why germans are bravest: - germanic tribes raped roman - in crusades under kaiser barbarossa 400 heavy german knights beat 13000 turkish cavalary - we conquered paris 2 times within 100 years - and germany was host of ww1 and ww2 (wasnt intelligent but brave) - uncounted wars against all neighbours - never get occupied, exept ww2

Well not quite true, Napoleon established his hegemony over it and to all practical purposes occupied it where there was resistance to him, while the Romans took a great part of it for a time. It still has an impressive military record though.

my Choice are:

1. Persian: for example they had to fight with 27500 men with swords againest 200,000 men of Attomon's king (Soltan Salim) who equiped with guns & cannons at Safavid time( Shah Esmaeil I ), Iranian were who captured 1700 men but we didn't even get 1 prisoner. They were who fight to last drop of Blood

2.Spartian
3.German
4.Japanese
5.French: Jean of Arc

Originally posted by mark1100 reasons why germans are bravest: - in crusades under kaiser barbarossa 400 heavy german knights beat 13000 turkish cavalary -

when there are 4312412 German how can turks catched 400 heavy knight alone

Spartians. When I am child I was thinking they are Turks, Because of a city named Isparta

brits kick zulu is not a good example if u have rifle and cannon where opponent have spear and bows u can absolutely win zulu were brave to attack

persian has gon in to far inside iran to escape selim I is it braveness to leave capital (tebriz) to enemy

in mute war (muslim vs. byzantine) byzantine commander asked one of their commanders why they coudnt win while they were 10 to 1. general said 'becouse they love death as we love to live' all men believe to go heven after killed by enemy would be and is and will be brave

British? Are you joking, or being sarcastic? No offense, but I think in a poll of "the most coward and sneaky people ever", they would be on top of list.

They even didnt fight in their armies. Their colonial slaves or dependent civilians fought for them. Some of their commanders were gambling in their super lux warships when Anzac soldiers were fighting for nonsense British. You should have a look at history, and watch the movies "Braveheart", "Gallipoli" and another movie (I couldnt remember its name now) about their "brave" battle with "Zulus".[/quote]

You listed movies, I hope you were trying to be funny.

What are ranged attacks the sole property of the Turks???  I find your assertions amusing coming from a nationality whose main staple in warfare was hit and run...

when there are 4312412 German how can turks catched 400 heavy knight alone Spartians. When I am child I was thinking they are Turks, Because of a city named Isparta

4,312,412 so Correct, But did German have 4,312,412 population on their territory(lol)

Think about your number

LOL, Turks think all over of the world were  Turk

What did you do??? when most of your men had been killed againest 200000 turk

Americans? Bombing civilians shows how brave they are. Their bravery is only enough to throw bombs from air. Bravery shows itself in a battle of teeth to teeth, like the war of Vietnam.

lol, like hit and run tatics in vietnam is brave? Americans fight with their minds, rather than brute force.

you call air/sattelite support, braveness?

LOL of course there were not 4,312,412 crusader. I just randomly typed. I dont know their number. But our historian say, Germans comed so horde, Turks cant find enough number against them. And Turks used hit and run tactics. But If 400 man overcome 13000 Turk I am not sure that is a good tactic

I think this time It is not us who exaggerate number(This time). Mark1100 do you know name of war?

I think this tactic is not bad.  If you cannot win war than dont accept war. We lost war too. To lost a war is not covardice. By the way I think most army of safavid are Turk. Am I wrong Aryan?

Sorry, but porn movies are way braver than British battle movies...

No, I am not trying to be funny. The funny thing is that using the words braveary and English nation in the same sentence.

Hit and run? I think you confuse us with Mongols. Even before the Battle of Mohacs, when Ottoman army have beaten the Hungarian army in two hours, the war message was sent one week ago for them to surrender or die. Is this hit and run tactic? Com'on...

I didnt say that. But attacking with your tanks to people wo respond you with slings isnt such brave thing to me, but I can be wrong...

Shah Ismaeil were at Kurdestan on that time, most of men were from Kurdistan, Hamedan, & some from Talesh at Gilan & Azarbaigan & Torkaman

I've read shah Ismaeil left chaldoran with 500 men, the rest had been killed.

Yes, It was bloodcurding lost for both side , Shah Ismaeil couldn't win & Soltan salim couldn't keep Tabriz,

i didn't say that.

yes and the Turks certainly never used their superior technology against the Kurds in eastern Turkey... 

So you're disputing that the Turks made heavy use of ranged tactics?

you call air/sattelite support, braveness?

So you're saying that Air and Sattelite support made a difference in Arnold's wilderness march, the Alamo, Bellau Wood, Bastogne?  Following the battle of Antietam European and Turkic observers were astonished at the ferocity of the battle and many wondered how men could stand in the face of such fire.  At Midway japanese flag officers compared American pilots to samurai

As for your complaints of the British, I say you Turks are suffering from a bad case of Empire envy...

P.S  Am I the only one who feels these forums are often an arena for a contest of absurdity between Greek and Turkic forummers.  Maybe I'll stumble into another thread and read a forummer of a certain nationality claim Greek is in fact the root language of an ancient Hawaiin dialect.

All of our war with Safavids are futile I think. No side gain any benefit for this wars.

I dont understand why Brits were thinking as coward?  coward cannot build that  empires. Maybe they are not most brave(If there is a such thing) people of world, But dont think they are cowards too.

what made the brits an empire was that they were never broke to money

note:

hey, this is my 400th post

Empires arent build with braveness but with power, wealth and of course, smart brains...

and with Armies. I dont think english always used other people for their war. I have no idea about english history, But I am sure they have some good fights too.

Infact bravery nation is just a joke. sometimes People can brave and sometimes they dont. I am sure All nation have heroes and cowards.

 If I need army I dont call English, If I need a politician, Yes I will call Brits.

Because they are  better politicians,  this does not mean they are cowards. And no I dont like brits much. Even I have some dislike brits because of their devil politics.But I dont think they are coward.