Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one has mentioned the Normandy invasion, D-Day. If the victory itself is not the greatest victory, then surely the preparations themselves must be taken into account. I doubt that so much effort was ever put into one movement, and I doubt that that much effort will ever be used again.
Everyone has rightly noted that the Finns eventually lost the Winter War but in defense of the OP I will add that in some ways they also won. Because of their incredible defense, the Finns were able to keep their political independence as Stalin had to give up his plans to install a puppet communist government on them (Finnish Democratic Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) the way they later did on Eastern Europe.
While the Finns were eventually overrun by superior forces, it should be noted that because they did so well in the beginning of the war that Britain and France, already at war with Nazi Germany, were actually thinking of joining with the Finns with 100,000 troops. The Allies would have been at war with Germany and the Soviet Union! Franco-British plans for intervention in the Winter War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In addition to possible Allied intervention, thousands of volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets from around Scandinavia and as far away as Italy and America.
For a single battle, probably the Battle of Tannenberg (1914), on the Eastern Front of the First World War.
One of the most complete military victories in history, in which the Germans cleanly encircled 4 entire Russian Corps despite a two-fold numerical disadvantage. Also, relatively few fatalities given the scope of the battle, given that the bulk of the Russian Second Army surrendered after it became evident their situation was hopeless. The following is a communique from Russian Northwest Headquarters illustrating the totality of their defeat and the absolute state of disarray of their armed forces, now fighting each other in confusion:
Also an impressive maneuver battle in the use of screening tactics, encirclement and the Napoleonite principle of divide-and-conquer.
Above, a single cavalry division screens the Russian First Army advance in the north, while the bulk of the German army ablates the Russian Second Army to the south.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariete
I agree that Finland eventually did lose, but we won by retaining our independence. It's naïve to think that Stalin would have stopped there had he gained what he wanted in the negotiations. Stalin wanted the whole country, starting the war and setting up a puppet government in the first days of the war indicate this.
If Finland wouldn't have take up arms, we'd had probably followed the same path as the Baltic States - eventually total occupation without war. I'd also like to remind you that the public favored war in this case, istead of giving up territory, so technically the war was a democratic decision.
What is interesting to see in the casualties section is that the number of captured was very low. The fighting was literally "to the death".
I would like to mention the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Some 20,000 German barbarians destroyed 3 Roman legions and the battle led to the Roman withdrawal from parts of modern Germany. The battle was so humiliating for the Romans, that the lost legions (XVII, XVIII, XIX) were never raised again, and those numbers were banned to use in another legion.
In the battle of Kap'Yong, 700 Canadians fought off 5,000 Chinese.
That ain't too shabby.
All 4 are very good. Missionimpossibru, I was reading about the Battle of Tannenberg, with the two Russian Armies being defeated by the single German one and how the single German cavalry division was used to screen the flank. Very interesting!
In the battle of Kap'Yong, 700 Canadians fought off 5,000 Chinese.
That ain't too shabby.
It isn't, but I'll see your Kap'Yong and raise you the Battle of Blood River in Natal, December, 1838. 464 Dutch Trekkers inflicted 3000 casualties on the 15,000 attacking Zulu warriors. The Trekkers suffered three wounded and zero dead.
Impressive in what sense? Battles on a huge scale are impressive just by the numbers of fighters engaged. Battles won against odds are always impressive. Stalingrad is impressive because of the great tenacity exhibitied, especially by the Soviet forces. The bravery and excellence of the fighting skills of the Finns were impressive even though the Soviets eventually overwhelmed them with vastly superior numbers and won. The Battle of Midway was impressive because it was a stunning victory of an inferior force over a superior force.
So this thead, while interesting, is pretty open-ended.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one has mentioned the Normandy invasion, D-Day. If the victory itself is not the greatest victory, then surely the preparations themselves must be taken into account. I doubt that so much effort was ever put into one movement, and I doubt that that much effort will ever be used again.
Most impressive military victory?
