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.
I mean Victories which are almost universally accepted (not draws that both sides claim victory), but utterly Pathetic.
I nominate The Battle of the Somme
US Victory in Iraq against the Republican guard. Big deal.
Any US victory since WWII. First, there aren't too many and second any foe the US beat was pretty much a nothing. Considering how much resources the US has - there is nothing to brag about.
US Victory in Iraq against the Republican guard. Big deal.
Any US victory since WWII. First, there aren't too many and second any foe the US beat was pretty much a nothing. Considering how much resources the US has - there is nothing to brag about.
I was thinking along the lines of a Pyrrhic Victory.
US Victory in Iraq against the Republican guard. Big deal.
Any US victory since WWII. First, there aren't too many and second any foe the US beat was pretty much a nothing. Considering how much resources the US has - there is nothing to brag about.
Another vote for this complete waste of just about everything associated.
Another vote for this complete waste of just about everything associated.
The only thing I agree about is that the wars were a waste. But from a military standpoint, the initial victory of Iraq's forces in 2003 was a spectacular success. Iraq had the world's 4th largest army and we completely defeated them in a matter of 2-3 weeks with virtually almost no troop deaths. I'm not sure a more effective invasion has ever been launched in world history. It was the subsequent occupation (going on 10 years) and the reasons behind going to war that was pathetic. I'm still not sure why we went to war with Iraq in the first place.
Vietnam was similar. It is generally seen as a lost war for the U.S. But the U.S. military inflicted far more deaths on the North Vietnamese than we endured. I believe we inflicted 2 million kills on North Vietnam while enduring only around 500,000 U.S. troop deaths. Whenever a substantial U.S. force battled a substantial Vietnamese force, the U.S. won easily. We just couldn't break the back of the Ho Chi Min Trail. They were like cockroaches that just kept coming out of the woodwork. The U.S. strategy was severely hampered by us not being able to invade/occupy Cambodia, Laos, and other surrounding countries with a larger force. We were confined to Vietnam which allowed the Vietcong to launch quick attacks and then retreat out of bounds to surrounding countries. Our "allies", the South Vietnamese, did not have the will to fight for their freedom.
The third significant war was Korea. One could argue we "won" because a relatively small U.S. force was able to hold off a billion Chinese troops and another 500,000 North Korean R.O.K. troops. In the end, it was a win for the U.S. since South Korea has become a stable, successful country to this day.
I was thinking along the lines of a Pyrrhic Victory.
Then I wonder if the Indians at Little big Horn would qualify. They won. Pretty clear.
But their impeccably bad timing (2 Weeks before the Centennial July 4th) paved the way for outrage, a populist uprising, and ultimate defeat. Perhaps the outrage would not have been quite so bad in any other year.
Then I wonder if the Indians at Little big Horn would qualify.
I wouldn't think so. The battle wasn't one of their choosing. In fact if they could have they would have avoided the battle in the first place, for the Cheyenne and Lakota this was a purely defensive action against an aggressor force.
US Victory in Iraq against the Republican guard. Big deal.
Are you referring to Gulf War I or II, because if it was the first war, I would have to disagree. The defeat of Iraq and their removal from Kuwait was a., one of the finest moments for the use of U.S. Forces since WWII and one of damned most impressive victories in just about as long a period of time.
US Victory in Iraq against the Republican guard. Big deal.
Any US victory since WWII. First, there aren't too many and second any foe the US beat was pretty much a nothing. Considering how much resources the US has - there is nothing to brag about.
Seriously? You figure there ought to be rules whereby the stronger opponent ties one arm behind their back to make it a "fair" fight? The main failure of the allies was not being able to utterly eradicate the Republican Guard because Bush I called a halt to things. The only thing accomplished was to prop up a Kuwait that practically enslaves people who come there to work and one with one of the top 4 or 5 per capita incomes in the world for its citizens.
The whole idea of military operations is to overwhelm the enemy and force him to capitulate under your terms, not to play a game with referees or a sport where every kid gets a trophy.
The Iraqis did fight back but due to our tanks having a huge advantage of main tank gun range over the Russian tank, they stood little chance not to mention our tank sights could see through the dust, the haze, the darkness.
No one who has ever been in a fight desires a fair one; just a win.
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.
