[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

It seems that you have looked over a couple of facts. Fact: dragons are the fiercest of Morgoth's creation and Glaurung is fiercest of the dragons. The dragon's were all routed and the Dwarves WON!.

They won a skirmish, a section of a battle on one wing. They left before the battle ended. It would be like saying that Napoleon won the Battle of Waterloo because he defeated the Prussians at Ligny, and not taking into account Wellington, the Prince of Orange and the rest of the three day battle.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I think that is more of a compliment, Morthoron.

It was never meant otherwise. The masks of the Dwarves seemed impervious to fire, which gave them a distinct technological advantage.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

Azaghal had only a knife while Turin had a sword. Turin didn't exactly face the dragon in a fair fight.

Glaurung was surrounded by an army of Dwarves. Azaghal was not in a solo combat situation. The remaining Dwarves did not follow up on their success, a major blunder in any military campaign.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

What about Glaurung's gaze? It affected Turin, but doesn't seem to do anything to the Dwarves, how can this be?

Perhaps when surrounded by heavy axes, there is little time to be proactive and focus power. In any case, one doesn't have a discussion with a dragon, that was Turin's mistake, and Bilbo almost fell under the same error with Samug.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

They didn't give up they did their part. I think that says more about their love for their king than anything else. The passage also says that none dared to hinder them, that description doesn't sound like a people who have given up.

They left an unfinished battle with the outcome hanging in the balance. Certainly none dared hinder them, why would they? They were leaving. They were no longer a factor in the battle.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

The passage I chose from the Silmarillion did not downsize the might of the Elves, it emphasized the might of the Dwarves. Like I said before, there is so little known about the Dwarves and I gave that reference as the best that I could find.

It was an excellent reference; however, it only related a portion of the overall battle. Had the Dwarves followed up their defeat of the Dragons with a further attack (as someone like Patton, Grant or Napoleon would certainly demand), the outcome might have been different. Remember, Tolkien stated on more than one occasion that it wasn't dragons or Balrogs that defeated the Noldor, it was treachery. That does not necessarily mean that the Dwarves shared in the treachery of Men, but it is disheartening (and rather odd, as I have thought for a long time), that the Dwarves simply packed it in when Azaghal died, particularly given their noted thirst for vengeance when a king is killed as evidenced in the War of Dwarves and Orcs.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

He still got beat. I also dislike the way that people say the things are unfair when people are fighting, you do whatever it takes to survive. You can also use that kind of argument with the Dwarves. Everything could have gone so well for them if Glaurung hadn't "cheated" and use his breath to melt the Dwarves or when he used his gigantic sized to roll over one of them.

Do you think Gandalf would have been successful if he had a Balrog before him on the bridge and one behind him, binding him with a thong of fire? Gandalf died against one Balrog, and he was not fighting Gothmog, Lord of Balrogs and Captain of Angband. Would Azaghal have done anything at all against Glaurung had he been without the aid of an army of Dwarves? Hurin lost while hewing numerous trolls, does his eventual defeat somehow diminish his renown? Your premise does not hold water.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

The passage does not say that Beren "wrestled" with the Dwarves it just says that he slew them and took the necklace. It also refers to how the cowards chose to kill the Dwarves with bows and not hand to hand, though I am sure that they did fight hand to hand once the Dwarves where low enough in numbers.

I would suggest the Dwarves would have not been slaughtered if they had not cowardly murdered Thingol in the first place. They surrounded him and murdered him -- a gutless thing to do. And since when is using bows considered cowardly? It is a matter of using technology just as the Dwarves' armor and masks aided them in fighting Glaurung. But I suppose the French felt the same way as they were mowed down at Poitier, Crecy and Agincourt (but I never heard it claimed, even by the French, that someone like the Black Prince or Henry V were cowards). As far as Beren, Tolkien says he slew the Lord of Nogrod (just as Azaghal was Lord of Belegost), and obviously this was a very important Dwarf (he was wearing the Nauglimir), but it is evident Beren didn't have to stab him in the back to do it (one thing you couldn't say about Beren was that he ever commited a cowardly act).