I suprised that no one hase pointed out that all the American participants have won or statistically tied.
Saddam Hussein vs. Pol Pot wtf?! Neither of these guys are warriors, neither of them fought on the front lines. They both sat in an office and then signed a piece of legislation that said “gas the Kurds” or “Kill the teachers.”
What I want to know is why they insist on matching historical figures against each other when you can't put their individual fighting skill in a machine?
Bias, the show couldn't let a frenchie win over an "American hero". Just listen to how they described napoleon. "crule, asshole, rapist,dictator who planned 9/11 and was a member of alquida" VS "george washington, The son of God, third coming of jesus, freer of the slaves, brilliant mastermind who made the first space craft, etc"
Lawrence of Arabia vs. Theodore Roosevelt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And Napoleon lost to Washington!!!!!!! *head explodes*
I know it was lame, it was squad on squad which pretty much gave George the advantage, also in the battle sim, Napoleon got off his horse when he knocked George off his, that pretty much made his Calvary Sabre worthless! Also if the Us Army rangers don't lose to the NKSF, which they will.. Theodor Roosevelt will lose to Lawrence of Arabia.
Anything USA related will be declared a winner on that show. After all it's made by and for people with this mindset: [yt:3vm4wid9]XWEyf-gZ0PI[/yt:3vm4wid9]
Haha, Duty Calls was one of the better single episodes Stalin did and all of it was true. BTW, this show is just simply BS.
Omg, you guys are the same as the people on the DW facebook page, saying people makers of this show wont let Americans lose, DID YOU WATCH the Green Berets vs Spetsnaz, the Spetsnaz won! :evil:
I think this show has a great concept. I also enjoy watching it more than most. What KILLS it for me is 3 things, 1. Every time an explosion occurs or one of the plastic dummies gets hit or the ballistic dolls squirts blood, all the guys on the crew have to give their loudest, most masculine sounding "AWWWW YEAH!!!!!! OHHH!!!!!! AGH!!!!!!!!!!!!" which is annoying as hell. 2. The trash talking and the boasting by members of the opposing historical teams too each other is just retarded, and the guys they get to be combat experts for the historical figures are all tools. 3. They get the results totally wrong half the time! I mean, they gave Washington a better GENERALSHIP rating than Napoleon! Napoleon!!! He is the best general of all time!!! Also the historical information is way off sometimes and I still can't get over the fact that they said the IRA could beat the Taliban.
I could understand Washington killing Napoleon, but never in any place in this world would a real historian give the higher generalship rating to anyone other than Napoleon. It just looks like a bunch of kids who gives random numbers to their heroes forgeting any historical plausability.
