The Greatest Military Victories in History?

[Belisaire_]

Battle of Valui 1475.

50 000 Moldavian crushed Ottoman army (more than 100 000 men)

maybe 40 000 Ottomans have been killed in one day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vaslui

i like this picture

[Darsh]

Yeah England only lost the HYW because we felt sorry for the French

false England lost many other wars but the English have a incredible talent for the revisionism have you forget the Zulus warrios, the invasion by the French Normans, Wars of Scottish Independence, War of the Grand Alliance, the America independance war, the Campaign of France, etc.?

England had also great victories but a blind nationalism is very pathetic.

[Centurion-Lucius-Vorenus]

Hougoumont: The 12,000 men did not actually hold the Chateau, but they did keep the Chateau's supply line open for ammunition and the occasional company of reinforcements from other Guard regiments.

? the reinforcements were a KGL Brigade, and a hanoverian brigade from halkets division i beleive. Not to mention that if it wasnt for those 12,000 men keeping supply lines open. Hogoumont would of fallen a long time ago.

The Nassuers did hold the wood, but were driven out by Prince Jerome's Division. The actual Chateaux Hougoumont was held by several companies of Guards from the British Army.

Well obviously, its not like a few light infantry men could hold when you have French infantry and cavalry filling the whole area.

In reference to the sacking of Gawilghur and Badajoz. It was not uncommon for that time period, even with British troops. Are you saying the French never sacked a fortress or a town after they sieged it? Besides, let me point out that the French often brutalized conquered people who would not serve Napoleon. Just look at French treatment of the Spanish vs British treatment.

Im not talking about the brutality, im talking about the absolute disintergaration of discipline upon victory. The French skilled the spanish because they were ordered to, and they followed out thier orders and didnt regret it. Cruel ? yes it was, but warfare is cruel. However, In case of the Sack of Badajoz, that was the destruction of an allied city not an enemy city, nor was the looting ordered. For 3 days it went on, bodys filled the streets. That kind of ill-discipline is what i would of crucified my men if i was commanding.

In reference to there being large contingents of non-British at multiple British victories. So what? Britain had a small army, they were a small country. They couldn't really do anything else, so they opted for a small army, as well-trained as possible.

If they were so well trained, then they wouldnt be getting owned by Poles who are outnumbered by them 10 to 1. Or sacking Allied cities for 3 days.

But thats another matter entirely.

As far as your point, well thats just it. They had a small army, so they didnt do everything. You cant say that a battle where only half the men were british was a british victory. Its Ludacris.

Besides, would you say that the victories of La Grand Armee couldn't be counted as French victories because there was such a huge contingent of non-French?

Apparently you werent reading when i said to you "Napoleon had been commanding a multi national army for the better part of his service as emperor, in 1812 almost half or more then half of the Grande armee was french"

But yet, i was referring to the french infantry by themselves when i put them at the Top 3.

I can and will prove that the British Army was just as capable of heroics as any other. And i'm prepared to debate the fact tirelessly until we both have a migraine and nothing makes sense anymore! Hell, if neccesary i'll extend the range we're talking about here, from the War of Spanish Succession up until the Crimean War!

Errrr, what ?

Yeah England only lost the HYW because we felt sorry for the French

Actually the french only let you win crecy, poitiers, etc because they felt bad you had to live on such a cold damp island. But then we decided you've been babied enough.

[Belisaire_]

For Poitiers and Crecy many troops in English side weren't English.
At Poitiers half of them were French (gascons)

[jackwei]

Vorenus be careful your going abit too far and i don't like your tone in basing the British too much since your insulting my ansectors who fought very and brave for this country who died on many occasions. Sometimes i wonder why my grandfather went to war in WWII on the same as the USA to free the French from Germany i just can't believe they bash us soo much.

I seriously have not seen one person bash our people this much it is just pathetic really honestly childish as you don't see me bash the French since i respect their history in those times and i don't make a big deal out of it.

At the end of the day Britain was the world domination power between 1763-1783 and 1815-1920s. Also she had biggest empire in history and created the new countries like the american colonies (USA later), Canada after taken over from France, New Zealand, Austrailia and made South africa even better too.

Plus this country has been invaded since 1066 and annexed by another neighbour or anything and there has been many times in history the british infantry has proved their worth if not then i am sure we would not of had good reputation and respected by our rivals. Oh yes the British infantry and cavalry proved their worth at Blenihiem, which was the first time truly the british army was recognized as a great power in europe.

I just don't have time for these childish games!!

[Eric]

Also Centurion, in reference to the King's German Legion, they were still a British regiment, just composed of Germans. Similar to the Irish Brigade of Civil War fame, American brigade, but formed of Irishmen.

[Eranshahr]

Even if I hate to admit it.

Battle of Al-qadisyya, I don't understand how stupid Persian commanders are. WE HAD ELEPHANTS AND THE ARABS CAMELS, THEY WON!

hmm Siege of Constantinople by the Turks was a grat victory too.

[Eric]

How could the Fall of Constantinople be seen as a great victory for the Turks? I know it was influential, but great? You blew the walls down with cannons then flooded the Byzantines with your vast numbers. And I do mean vast, it was over 10-1 in Turkish advantage.

[Eranshahr]

Am i free to say my own opinion or do I have to listen to what westerners have to say?

the city had only fallen once before, The Turks did't destroy art works, and it was a great victory for the Turks, Finally the Roman empire was gone and was replaced by the Ottomans.

a battle can only be delcared a great victory if it is very influental and it was.

Oh and I forgot, for the western tastes, or better said Christian. I also think the Siege of Vienna was a great battle, the last one of them. The Ottomans were defeated and the whole war changed in a drastic and great way.

[Freddie]

The British & French with help from the Americans over Germany in WW1. More so the British, in 2 years Haig had transformed the British army into the most effective fighting force in the world.

[Woad-Warrier]

false England lost many other wars but the English have a incredible talent for the revisionism have you forget the Zulus warrios, the invasion by the French Normans, Wars of Scottish Independence, War of the Grand Alliance, the America independance war, the Campaign of France, etc.?

England had also great victories but a blind nationalism is very pathetic.

I was actually replying to your mate CLV and all his blind nationalist posts he makes about the English king at Agincourt.. perhaps you should rant at him?

By the way, the Normans weren't French.

[Eranshahr]

England is nice I like the english history too, Besides British museum contains much of history from the world, if I ever get to visit the UK, London and British museum is my first priority.

Agincourt was also a great battle, the way the English won and fought, inspiration. But how come the Normans weren't French?

[Eric]

I'm sorry Eranshir, but I just don't think a battle you won where it was 10-1 in your advantage, you had cannon and the other guys didn't, is a great victory. Maybe decisive or influential, but not great. Great Victories, in my opinion, are usually won when out-gunned and out-manuevred. Or possibly vice versa, but never when you have a 10-1 advantage.

[Woad-Warrier]

It was definitely decisive and influential.. one of the reasons for the crusades.

The Normans were originally vikings who were granted land in northern France by the French king. They spoke French but had they're own culture. I guess you could compare it to the Scots and English to some degree.

[Eranshahr]

So England was conquered by Scandinavians? * pride*

[Woad-Warrier]

So England was conquered by Scandinavians? * pride*

... who spoke French

The shame, the shame

[Eranshahr]

HAHAHA English people

we went somewhere with my old school 2-4 years ago, and together with teh French school owning first floor of our building. Then some English guy said the french are like frogs, and the French teacher went berserk

today I have understood one thing, the human kind is good at comlaining. And to be honest, the greatest victories were made by the ottomans, the victories were so great that even about 100 years after the Empires end, and the name change to Turkey, Armenians, Kurds, Bulgarians, Serbians and Greeks are crying about how bad the Ottomans were, The Ottomans made an attack that went directly against their brains and That I call a great victory.

[Buff]

Numbers dont ammount to much when thousands of arrows that can break platemail are coming at you while your wading in the mud, as was the case in battles like Crecy. Even during Agincourt when the armour had advanced so it could repel arrows they did add to the pains by making french soldiers who were alredy virtually stuck in the mud by knocking them over, and in that mud and with the weight of your armor once you fell you couldnt get up. And lets not forget that French armies were always on the offensive, while the english took positions behind stakes and fired volley after volley. Obstacles that would be hard for any army to overcome

Stop trying to come up with excuses. On paper, the English did very well, they achieved far more than would have been expected, given the variables. And why use Agincourt as your only example, why not Poitiers? This was largely a battle for the Knight and Men and Arms. Or perhaps Cravant? Or Verneuil?

Agincourt was won because A. The English troops were battle hardended B. French leadership was inept among the ranks and higher echelons C. The narrowness of the battlefield negated the French superiority in numbers D. The mud caused many a French Knight to dismount E. Henry V was an extremely competent leader F. English Longbowmen, extremely fit and extremely strong, caused mayhem in the tightly packed French ranks by both using their bows and short swords/stabbing knifes.

You're not doing yourself any favours by attempting to maliciously bash the English (even though most of your facts are made up on the spot) you're simply feeding everyones inner most desire to go on a French bashing trip.

[Phoebus]

today I have understood one thing, the human kind is good at comlaining. And to be honest, the greatest victories were made by the ottomans, the victories were so great that even about 100 years after the Empires end, and the name change to Turkey, Armenians, Kurds, Bulgarians, Serbians and Greeks are crying about how bad the Ottomans were, The Ottomans made an attack that went directly against their brains and That I call a great victory.

Well... if that's the criteria by which we measure great victories...

The greatest victories were made by the Hellenic-speakers, the victories were so great that even about 2,000 years after the last of the Hellenes fell to/were incorporated by the Romans, and the name change to Roman Empire, and the name change to Hellenic Republic, Iranians* are crying about how bad Alexander was and how the Hellenes never beat so many Persians, The Hellenes made an attack that went directly against their brains and That I call a great victory.

* Iranians outnumber the Hellenes, Serbians, Bulgarians, Kurds, and Armenians... combined. So that's a bigger victory, right?

[Mig el Pig]

The British & French with help from the Americans over Germany in WW1. More so the British, in 2 years Haig had transformed the British army into the most effective fighting force in the world.

The butcher?

He was still waiting on a cavalry breakthrough and did nothing for the combined arms warfare.
Unlike Arthur Currie and John Monash who co-ordinated infantry, airplanes and artillery combined with great planning and the use of extensive information about the enemy to gain victory.