Countries that win battles but lose wars
The following is just a musing, and I hope the TWC community helps me flesh this discussion about military history out a bit more.
It seems to me in the discussion of military history, people talk about the fiercest warriors, most stunning victories, armies with best weaponry. Some countries are unfairly labeled weak for defeats or setbacks at key battles, even if those countries were able to win long-term strategic victory. Other nations are glorified for their military prowess and victories, even if they eventually lose a war or cause so much damage to their economy/infrastructure that they cease to be a great power.
Some examples:
Sparta vs Athens - The Spartans are legendary warriors unlike the Athenians, who are best remembered for their cultural pursuits. But today Athens is still a major city while Sparta is little more than a tourist attraction.
America vs Great Britain - With some notable exceptions such as Yorktown, the British army dominated many of the battles during the American Revolution. But the American colonists in the end prevailed strategically, forcing England to give up 13 very prosperous colonies.
America vs Vietnam - Once again, big power (this time America) dominates smaller nation's forces on the battlefield. The Americans never suffer a major military defeat like Yorktown, and the so-called defeat during the Tet Offensive was actually a major victory for American forces (the Viet Cong fail to hold any major cities and the resistance movement is virtually wiped out). Yet this is the only strategic defeat the US has ever suffered and still the war haunts American culture.
Germany vs France - Germany spanks France in the Franco-Prussian War, bloodies France in WW I, and takes the whole place over in WW II. Germans gain notoriety for being some of the finest and best equipped soldiers in history; the French become labeled as cowards and incompetents. Yet strategically, the French regain their independence and in the end the Germans are the ones with an occupied country.
Just a few examples - there are many more I know. Anyhow, I was wondering why nations can win almost every battle yet lose a war. Is it lack of a clear strategic plan (Germany taking on everyone in WW II, America trying to "stop communism" in Vietnam); problems with command and control; political motivations; lack of will on one side to keep fighting when the other side refuses to accept defeat? Would it have made a huge difference if America waged a total war on North Vietnam, or if England had gone after the 13 colonies with the same rabid ferocity that English troops showed against the rebelling Indian sepoys or the Jacobite uprising in Scotland?
Do some countries deserve a break in history for accomplishing strategic goals, even if their soldiers made a pathetic showing in combat? On the flip side, are "legendary" forces such as the German stormtroopers, American Green Berets, the Spartans overrated because their country lost the war in the end?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Count of Montesano
) - they had their victories - no empire is maintained or even enlarged by timidity 
