NationStates Jolt Archive

Could be a battle in Fallujah, or way back.

The Sack of Baghdad, 1254, by the Mongols.

I was rather wishing that history would repeat itself in detail, because it and the associated campaign across the region against the Assassins mirrors current US intent - to crush overt and covert resistance.

The Mongols, in much less time, with far less sophisticated weaponry, were far more successful, because they had the will to do what no one today would dream of doing.

I love the Mongols. Some claim they started globalization.

So many to choose...

Troy. Yeah, sounds good. Mythical, maybe. Historical, maybe. We aren't sure yet.

Crecy or Agincourt, for very evident reasons...:)

Siege of Tyre by Alexander the Great (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tyre)

He built a blooding bridge, an armored tunnel over the bridge, and archer towers on the bridge. Fuckin' Brilliant.

Omdurman.
*grin*

Omdurman.
*grin*
If you liked Omdurman, you would LOVE the sack of Baghdad.

The Battle of Britain. It has it all. Backs to the wall heroics, evenly matched opponents in terms of skill, technology, etc and both good & bad tactical/strategic (can never remember which means which) decisions. Such a pivotal point in modern history.

Naw. Can't even pretend it was a 'battle'.
You got to give the Dervishes credit: at least they TRIED to make a good show.

Pydna or other battles that include mercenaries

Cannae. Deffinetly.

Outnumbered Carthaginian troops exterminate a force much larger than theirs with tactics. It was one of Hannibals greatest achievements.

American Revolution.duh!:sniper: isn`t it a battle?

Battle of Saragarhi, 12 September 1897.

21 Sikhs against 10,000 to 12,000 Afghans.

They did not last the night and all 21 died, but that is what makes this battle my favorite. Unsurpassed bravery in the face of certain failure.

You guys like the destruction of Muslim cities, don't you?

Cannae. Hands down.

Battle of Saragarhi, 12 September 1897.

21 Sikhs against 10,000 to 12,000 Afghans.

They did not last the night and all 21 died, but that is what makes this battle my favorite. Unsurpassed bravery in the face of certain failure.

Sounds more impressive than Camerone.
In this period occurred an incident that would bring glory to the annals of the French Foreign Legion, but would underscore the basic problems the French faced in Mexico. As the French advanced into Mexico their supply line became more and more vulnerable to disruption by Liberal guerillas. One mule train working its way up from Veracruz carried $3 million in gold to the pay the French army besieging Puebla. This attracted the attention of the Liberal command, which sent a force of cavalry and militia to intercept it. The French Foreign Legion tasked a company of 62 men under Capt. Danjou to go out to meet the convoy. On April 30, 1863, at the hacienda of Camarón, fifty miles southwest of Veracruz, some 2,000 Juaristas pounced on Danjou's force. The Legionaries fought back with desperate courage. Only five men were still standing when they finally surrendered. To this day the French Foreign Legion celebrates the anniversary of Camerone.

Cannae. Definitely Cannae. Hannibal barca and his diverse army of troops (Celts, Iberians, Numidians, Libyans etc), whilst outnumbered, and whilst invading Roman land, defeat a Roman army so decisively, and with such perfect tactical flair that many believe he could have won the war there and then, had he assaulted Rome.

The crusaders sack of Constantinople!!! (1204)

I like to go more recentely
and say Battle of Kursk.
Come on, 2700 German tanks and assult guns with 1800 aircraft and 800,000 men
vs. 3600 Soviet tanks with 2400 aircraft with 1,300,000 men.
WOW!
nothing can beat that!
If not that then its also a tie between the Battle of Britain, Midway, and Marinaras Turkey Shoot.

The Battle of Austerlitz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Austerlitz), I dont think ever has so much been lost by the defeated side in such a small amount of time. Napoleon singlehandedly dissolved the Holy Roman Empire and left both the Austrian and Russian armies in ruins. If any battle gave Napoleon decisive control over central Europe, it was Austerlitz. It was such an act of genius, he infiltrated 180,000 troops right into Francis I's backyard without them seeing it coming, and he actually let the enemy occupy the seemingly defencible higher position of the Pratzen heights, and fooling Alexander that his right flank was weak and he intended to abandon the road.

Cannae. Definitely Cannae. Hannibal barca and his diverse army of troops (Celts, Iberians, Numidians, Libyans etc), whilst outnumbered, and whilst invading Roman land, defeat a Roman army so decisively, and with such perfect tactical flair that many believe he could have won the war there and then, had he assaulted Rome.

I may be mistaken, and it has been some 15-20 years since I read history in Unif... but I think it was indeed Cannae where one of Hannibal's generals ( his brother Hasdrubal? ) cried out: Hannibal, you know how to win a battle, but you don't know how to win a war!

I dont think ever has so much been lost by the defeated side in such a small amount of time. Napoleon singlehandedly dissolved the Holy Roman Empire and left both the Austrian and Russian armies in ruins. If any battle gave Napoleon decisive control over central Europe, it was Austerlitz. It was such an act of genius, he infiltrated 180,000 troops right into Francis I's backyard without them seeing it coming, and he actually let the enemy occupy the seemingly defencible higher position of the Pratzen heights, and fooling Alexander that his right flank was weak and he intended to abandon the road.

Shoot ya, I forgot that one. It realy put Napolean on the map. hehehe

Thermopolyae no doubt about it.

Shoot ya, I forgot that one. It realy put Napolean on the map. hehehe
Well, if you're going to put that one forward, then we have to consider Waterloo.

I may be mistaken, and it has been some 15-20 years since I read history in Unif... but I think it was indeed Cannae where one of Hannibal's generals ( his brother Hasdrubal? ) cried out: Hannibal, you know how to win a battle, but you don't know how to win a war!
Hold on, hold on. Hasdrubal was with Hannibal!?!? I was under the impression that he was bakc in Carthage at the time

Oh ya and Crecy, I read a sweet novel about it (Bernard Cornwell)

Battle of Saragarhi, 12 September 1897.

21 Sikhs against 10,000 to 12,000 Afghans.

They did not last the night and all 21 died, but that is what makes this battle my favorite. Unsurpassed bravery in the face of certain failure.how about the battle of thermopylae to match that?

my favourite is spanish armada vs british fleet 1588

Hold on, hold on. Hasdrubal was with Hannibal!?!? I was under the impression that he was bakc in Carthage at the time

*scratches grizzled hair*
Dude, the 15 years since I got my Master's have been sufficiently filled with foreign adventures including natives shooting at me that I'm just happy enough to still have a head to even remember the quote, nvm the exact details.
You may be right, you may be wrong.

I like to go more recentely
and say Battle of Kursk.
Come on, 2700 German tanks and assult guns with 1800 aircraft and 800,000 men
vs. 3600 Soviet tanks with 2400 aircraft with 1,300,000 men.
WOW!
nothing can beat that!
If not that then its also a tie between the Battle of Britain, Midway, and Marinaras Turkey Shoot.

I agree. I'm a Kursk fan.

Thermopolyae no doubt about it.

I'll go along with that.

Go tell the Spartans, stranger passing by,
that here, obedient to their laws, we lie.

Gettysburg, for what it decided.

I say Midway. In a 10 minute time frame, the US Navy defanged what was at the time the strongest navy in the world.

I would say Jutland if the British hadn't fucked that one up.

The Battle of the Sexes.

I agree. I'm a Kursk fan.
thank you!
We will never have another battle like that again! :(

Well, there was the battle along the Tapline Road during the October 1973 War, where 180 Israeli tanks were attacked by 1400 Syrian tanks, and in one engagement, two damaged Israeli tanks destroyed 180 Syrian tanks in a few hours.

I agree. I'm a Kursk fan.

That is a pretty cool battle, but I prefer battles like Cannae or Auserlitz where a clearly outnumbered opponent dominates because they're just that much better. I find that amusing. I always create battles in Rome: Total War where I give myself one unit of completely upgraded Praetorian Guard soldiers and pit them against several thousand peasants and see who wins. :D

Battle of Lepanto (1571)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lepanto_%281571%29

I'll go along with that.

Go tell the Spartans, stranger passing by,
that here, obedient to their laws, we lie.
Yeah, definitely Thermopylae...and Cannae....and Khursk. But don't forget Attila the Hun's defeat at Chalons. That halted the Hunnic invasions and sped the downfall of the Western Roman Empire. Oooooo! So many battles!

I may be mistaken, and it has been some 15-20 years since I read history in Unif... but I think it was indeed Cannae where one of Hannibal's generals ( his brother Hasdrubal? ) cried out: Hannibal, you know how to win a battle, but you don't know how to win a war!

It was one of his generals, but I don't think it was his brother. His name was Maharbal. And yes, that's pretty much what he said. (I've thought it was "You know how to win a battle, but not how to use it.")

Well, there was the battle along the Tapline Road during the October 1973 War, where 180 Israeli tanks were attacked by 1400 Syrian tanks, and in one engagement, two damaged Israeli tanks destroyed 180 Syrian tanks in a few hours.

yeah that was pretty cool too.
Over all though, I love the battles where two massive goliaths go battling each other to death in one massive battle.
Although I do like the occasional David and Goliath scenario.

I say Midway. In a 10 minute time frame, the US Navy defanged what was at the time the strongest navy in the world.

I would say Jutland if the British hadn't fucked that one up.
Then what about Leyte Gulf? That marked the end of the Japanese fleet as a significant presence. Almost a disaster, too.

That is a pretty cool battle, but I prefer battles like Cannae or Auserlitz where a clearly outnumbered opponent dominates because they're just that much better. I find that amusing. I always create battles in Rome: Total War where I give myself one unit of completely upgraded Praetorian Guard soldiers and pit them against several thousand peasants and see who wins. :D


You should try a Carthaginian army against a post-marian Roman one. I've won a few landmark victories against them, but the post-reform armies are stupidly unbalanced. But it admittedly doesn't have the outnumbered feel to it. Just the crushing bitterness when Roman legionarries are attacked at all four sides by cavalry, and win...

yeah that was pretty cool too.
Over all though, I love the battles where two massive goliaths go battling each other to death in one massive battle.
Although I do like the occasional David and Goliath scenario.
I'm just fascinated that you can be outnumbered by nearly 10 to 1, and the attacking force can have night vision equipment (and you don't), and you haven't zeroed (boresighted) your tank main guns (and they have), and you still kick their asses (in the end, the Syrians lost nearly all their tanks, and the Israelis ended up within artillery range of Damascus).

Hold on, hold on. Hasdrubal was with Hannibal!?!? I was under the impression that he was bakc in Carthage at the time
Actually, I think Hasdrubal was in Spain, raising an army to make his way to reinforce Hannibal. I know for a fact it was Maharbal who said, more or less, "Hannibal, you know how to win a battle, but you don't know how to use it!"

It was one of his generals, but I don't think it was his brother. His name was Maharbal. And yes, that's pretty much what he said. (I've thought it was "You know how to win a battle, but not how to use it.")
Yeah, that was it, like I said a minute ago, but I think Maharbal was one of Hanibal's brothers. Anyone else know?

Yeah, that was it, like I said a minute ago, but I think Maharbal was one of Hanibal's brothers. Anyone else know?

Maharbal was his general. His brother, Hasdrubal, never met up with hannibal in Italy; he was defeated up North while Hannibal was down south, and unlike when Hannibal defeated the Romans and gave them honorable burials, the Romans chopped his head off and sent it to Hannibal.

Yeah, that was it, like I said a minute ago, but I think Maharbal was one of Hanibal's brothers. Anyone else know?

Maharbal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
Maharbal was Hannibal's cavalry commander during the Second Punic War. He was often critical to the success of the side of Carthage over Rome. Throughout his Italian campaign Hannibal maintained an edge in mounted soldiers and thus relied upon them and Maharbal to give himself a sizeable edge.

Maharbal is most famously known for what he said in a conversation with Hannibal immediately following the Battle of Cannae. According to Livy the conversation went like this after Maharbal expressed interest on marching to Rome immediately: 'I commend your zeal,' he(Hannibal) said to Maharbal;'but I need time to weigh the plan which you propose.' 'Assuredly,' Maharbal replied,'no one man has been blessed with all God's gifts. You know, Hannibal how to gain a victory; you do not know how to use it.' -Livy, The History of Rome 22.51

The famous Latin for the last sentence of the conversation goes like goes like this: "Vincere scis, Hannibal; victoria uti nescis."

Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maharbal

I guess we have to answer a Dunno to the question of bloodsanguinity.

The Battle of Britain. It has it all. Backs to the wall heroics, evenly matched opponents in terms of skill, technology, etc and both good & bad tactical/strategic (can never remember which means which) decisions. Such a pivotal point in modern history.

I have to agree, that one was pretty impressive.

However, on pure entertainment value, I like the Toledo War. It wasn't necessarily a "war" as there was no combat and only one person ever died in the dispute.
What happened was there was an error in the borders given to different territories, and thus territory that should have belonged to Michigan was given to Ohio when it became a state, and this territory was known as the Toledo strip. There was a huge fuss over this from Michigan and they didn't want to give up the strip, but neither did Ohio. Apparently the two states sent their militias to the area, and I've heard mixed stories on what happened but my favorite involves the two getting lost in a swamp and unable to find each other.
Ultimately the incident was settled when Michigan surrendered the Toledo strip in exchange for the remaining two thirds of the Upper Peninsula. It appeared at first that Ohio did indeed win and Michigan lost, but in the long wrong that statement turned out to be half true. Ohio won, but Michigan had an even greater victory as the Upper Peninsula turned out to be a vast mineral source far greater than anyone could have imagined. Of course this wasn't known at the time, so Michigan wasn't too happy.
It's also rumored that Michigan's nickname, the wolverine state, came out of this as the Ohioans passed stories of the Michigan people being vicious and bloodthirsty like a wolverine.

I just found the whole thing to be quite amusing, even hilarious because before I knew about it I always used to joke that Ohio and Michigan would probably go to war some day XD Besides, who else can say their states have something like that? =P

Anyway, the most informative page I could find on the subject was this one -
http://www.geo.msu.edu/geo333/toledo_war.html

So yah, for real battles, the Battle for Britain was a very interesting one and WW2 in general was very fascinating, but for pure amusement I can't help but laugh about the Toledo War XD

The Battle of Lake Champlain. United States Navy under Master Commandant Thomas MacDonough with its largest ship being a 26 gun corvette defeats a Royal Navy squadron flagged under a 36 gun frigate HMS Confiance. That helps turn back the first of the three pronged British invasion of the U.S. Britain's failures in Baltimore and New Orleans don't add much to the war, but ensure the strategy fails.

Sounds more impressive than Camerone.


Link: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Foreign_Legion) It was in Mexico on 30 April 1863 that the Legion earned its legendary status. The small infantry patrol led by Capitaine Danjou numbering 62 soldiers and 3 officers was attacked and besieged by over two thousand Mexican infantry and cavalry units organized into 3 battalions, and was forced to make a defense in Hacienda Camarón. Despite the hopelessness of the situation they fought nearly to the last man. Danjou was mortally wounded in the defense of the hacienda, and the last of his men mounted a desperate bayonet attack. When the last three survivors were asked to surrender, they insisted that the Mexican soldiers allow them safe passage back home, to keep their flag, and to escort the body of the fallen Danjou. Upon seeing this, the Mexican commander commented, "these are not men, they are devils," and out of respect agreed to these terms.

See? That's those frenchmen, always surrendering :p

Concerning battles, I think I may say Stalingrad. That's a nasty one...

The Fall of Rhodes in 1522. The Knights of St. John might have lost, but damn, did they give the Seljuks a hard time.

I've always been fond of Hattin, Tsushima, Chalons, Wu-Sung, and Lutzen as well.

Sounds more impressive than Camerone.

Yes it is. Sepoy Gurmukh Singh's bravery is amazing.

clicky
(http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/History/1765/Saragarhi.html)
The Battle at Saragarhi is one of eight stories of collective bravery published by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). It has been mentioned as one of the five most significant events of its kind in the world which includes the Saga of Thermoplyae associated with the heroic stand of a small Greek force against the mighty Persian Army of Xerxes in 480 B.C.
..
The relief column from Lockhart on the return trip reinforced the signalling detachment at Saragarhi making its strength to 1 NCO (Non-Commissioned Officer) and 20 ORs (Other Ranks). In a renewed effort, on 12 September 1897, hordes of tribesmen laid siege to Fort Lockhart and Saragarhi, with the aim of overrunning the latter and at the same time preventing any help from the former. The Commanding Officer of 36th Sikh, Lt. Col. Haughton, was at Fort Lockhart and was in communication with the Saragarhi post through helicograph. The defenders of Saragarhi under the indomitable and inspiring leadership of their detachment commander, Havildar Ishar Singh, resolved to defend their post in the best tradition of their race and regiment. They were not there to hand over the post to the enemy and seek safety elsewhere. Havildar Singh and his men knew well that the post would fall, because a handful of men in that make-shift fort of stones & mud walls with a wooden door could not stand the onslaught of thousands of tribesmen. These plucky men knew that they will go down but they had resolved to do so fighting to the last.

From Fort Lockhart, troops and the Commanding Officer could count at least 14 standards and that gave an idea of the number of tribes and their massed strength against the Saragarhi relay post (estimated at between 10,000 to 12,000 tribals). From early morning the tribals started battering the fort. The Sikhs fought back valiantly. Charge after charge was repulsed by the men of the 36th Sikh. The tribal leaders started to make tempting promises so that the Sikhs would surrender. But Havildar Singh and his men ignored them. For quite some time, the troops held their own against the determined and repeated attacks by the wild and ferocious hordes. A few attempts were made to send a relief column from Fort Lockhart but these were foiled by the tribals.

At Saragarhi, the enemy made two determined attempts to rush the gate of the post and on both occasions the defenders repulsed the assault. While the enemy suffered heavy casualties, the ranks of the defenders too kept dwindling as the fire from the attackers took its toll and their ammunition stocks were depleting. Unmindful of his safety, Sepoy Gurmukh Singh kept signalling a minute-to-minute account of the battle from the signal tower in the post to Battalion HQs. The battle lasted the better part of the day. When repeated attacks failed, the enemy set fire to the surrounding bushes & shrubs and two of the tribesmen under cover of smoke, managed to close in with the post's boundary wall in an area blind to the defender's observation and rifle fire from the post holes. They succeeded in making a breach in the wall. This development could be seen from Fort Lockhart and was flashed to the post.

- Cairn on the Site of Saragarhi Post

A few men from those defending the approaches to the gate were dispatched to deal with the breach in the wall. This diversion by the enemy and the defenders' reaction resulted in weakening of the fire covering the gate. The enemy now rushed the gate as well as the breach. Thereafter, one of the fiercest hand-to-hand fights followed. One of the Havildar Singh's men, who was seriously wounded and was profusely bleeding, had taken charge of the guardroom. He shot four of the enemy as they tried to approach his charge. All this time, Sepoy Gurmukh Singh continued flashing the details of the action at the post. Beside this the Commanding Officer of 36th Sikh and others at Lockhart Fort also saw his unique saga of heroism and valour unfold at Saragarhi. The battle had come too close for Sepoy Gurmukh Singh's comfort, so he asked Battalion HQs for permission to shut down the heliograph and take up his rifle. Permission was flashed back. He dismounted his heliograph equipment, packed it in a leather bag, fixed bayonet on his rifle and joined the fight. From this vantage point in the tower he wrought havoc on the intruders in the post. He died fighting, but took 20 of the enemy with him.

The tribals set fire to the post, while the brave garrison lay dead or dying with their ammunition exhausted. Next morning the relief column reached the post and the tell tale marks of the epic fight were there for all to see. The tribals later admitted to figure of 180 dead and many more wounded. This episode when narrated in the British Parliament, drew from the members a standing ovation in the memory of the defenders of Saragarhi. The story of the heroic deeds of these men was also placed before Queen Victoria. The account was received all over the world with awe and admiration. All the 21 valiant men of this epic battle were awarded the Indian Order of Merit Class III (posthumously) which at the time was one of the highest gallantry awards given to Indian troops and is considered equivalent to the present-day Vir Chakra. All dependants of the Saragarhi heroes were awarded 50 acres of land and 500 Rupees. Never before or since has a body of troops - that is, all of them won gallantry awards in a single action.

The Mud March of the American Civil War, because it had Ambrose E. Burnside in it.

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/hh/31/images/hh31n2.jpg