Wars and Conflicts permalink
Most one sided battles?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.
Posted by iPad (U2181937) on Friday, 6th January 2006
I remember reading about the French Navy back after the turn of the century engadged the Chinese Royal Navy comprised of sail driven Junkas near Hong Kong and was entirely sank in 2 minutes.
Have there been any other massively one sided engadments that have actually been resolved? -
Message 2
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Friday, 6th January 2006
What do you mean by "Actually been resolved"?
-
Message 3
Posted by iPad (U2181937) on Friday, 6th January 2006
OK, a clearly superior force arrive, most of the time you would retreat or surrender.
By resolution I mean both sides seriously fight in more than a token manner. -
Message 4
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Friday, 6th January 2006
I suppose the most famous would be Thermopylae...
-
Message 5
Posted by craigd1973 (U2853338) on Friday, 6th January 2006
The Little Big Horn. I remember reading about the French Navy back after the turn of the century engadged the Chinese Royal Navy comprised of sail driven Junkas near Hong Kong and was entirely sank in 2 minutes.
Have there been any other massively one sided engadments that have actually been resolved? -
Message 6
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Friday, 6th January 2006
Battle of Islandwhala (is that the right spelling). On paper, we should have won. We lost badly.
-
Message 7
Posted by DaveMBA (U1360771) on Friday, 6th January 2006
The US in Iraq - it really was no contest, without erm... WMD!
-
Message 8
Posted by Erik Lindsay (U231970) on Friday, 6th January 2006
The Japanese rampage through the Indian Ocean and around Ceylon in early 1942 has to be considered. Their Carrier Striking Force with its support craft spent a couple of months staging a wide blitz in the area, sinking every challenger and closing all the ports. While they were operating there, no non-Japanese vessel dared to venture onto open water. The Indian Ocean and its surroundings were so throughly dominated by the Imperial Navy that the RN Admiral commanding the British Far East Fleet moved his entire command to Madagascar and stayed there until mid 1943.
-
Message 9
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Friday, 6th January 2006
According to my sources, the fastest defeat in a War was 38 minutes.
27th August 1896, Said Khalid, Sultan of Zanzibar, having German sympathies declined the British Ultimatum too surrender to the Royal Navy led by Rear Admiral Harry Holdsworth. The ultimatum is that the Sultan surrenders to British rule, with the instalment of a Britsih envoy who controls Zanzibars suzerainity?
A short resume follows:
09:02: Hostilities break out: British Fleet begin bombardment.
09:10: The pride of the Zanzibar fleet makes way to challenge the RN Fleet. (This was the Galsgow, an ageing ocean merchant ship, armed with harsh words and very little else).
09:16: Glasgow sunk (admit it, you didn't see that one coming!)
09:40: Sultan surrenders, after his Palace has benn raised to the ground.
Rear Admiral Harry Holdsworth enforces the trems of the Ultimatum, yet still allows the Sultan Said Khaild to remain in power, providing, he pays for the ammuntion costs in destroying his Palace and people.
All timings are approximate due to the confused nature of the action.
As an aside I'd say the most unexpected defeat was by the Maori Warriors of Gate Pa against seven times their number of British troops.
Just my ramblimgs,
Cheers AA. -
Message 10
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
Battle of Islandwhala (is that the right spelling). On paper, we should have won. We lost badly.
ive always wondered about that, as one of the greateset defeats of a british army ever and it was only a single battalion (500-800 men) -
Message 11
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
Battle of Islandwhala (is that the right spelling). On paper, we should have won. We lost badly.
Lord Ball, I disagree, I don't think on paper given the formation we should have won it. Many of Chelmsford's decisions took the advantage from the column. -
Message 12
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
yeah, if anything the odds where against the british. seperated from the rest of the army, a prat of a commander, formed up in line against a numerically superior foe and outflanked. i dont think we could have won
-
Message 13
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
According to my sources, the fastest defeat in a War was 38 minutes.
27th August 1896, Said Khalid, Sultan of Zanzibar, having German sympathies declined the British Ultimatum too surrender to the Royal Navy led by Rear Admiral Harry Holdsworth. The ultimatum is that the Sultan surrenders to British rule, with the instalment of a Britsih envoy who controls Zanzibars suzerainity?
A short resume follows:
09:02: Hostilities break out: British Fleet begin bombardment.
09:10: The pride of the Zanzibar fleet makes way to challenge the RN Fleet. (This was the Galsgow, an ageing ocean merchant ship, armed with harsh words and very little else).
09:16: Glasgow sunk (admit it, you didn't see that one coming!)
09:40: Sultan surrenders, after his Palace has benn raised to the ground.
Rear Admiral Harry Holdsworth enforces the trems of the Ultimatum, yet still allows the Sultan Said Khaild to remain in power, providing, he pays for the ammuntion costs in destroying his Palace and people.
All timings are approximate due to the confused nature of the action.
As an aside I'd say the most unexpected defeat was by the Maori Warriors of Gate Pa against seven times their number of British troops.
Just my ramblimgs,
Cheers AA.
there was somethin like this called the twenty minute war or somethin, where we got of our boats, marched into the palace and captured the sultan of somewhere or other-lowest casualties of any war i can think of, by about 100% less (no one got hurt or died) -
Message 14
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
yeah, if anything the odds where against the british. seperated from the rest of the army, a prat of a commander, formed up in line against a numerically superior foe and outflanked. i dont think we could have won
I think we could have won, looking at Rourke's drift and Ulundi as comparisons, but not with the formation used. -
Message 15
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
both of those we had defensive postiions didnt we? (genuine question, not fececiousness)
-
Message 16
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
marduk_report
Indeed, although Ulundi wasn't defensive in the same sense as Rourke's drift i.e. Fixed positions. It proved that with a good defensive position, even the good old fashioned square could absorb the Zulu attack until when the British attack came it was a formality.
Isandlwana’s defence was planned with Neolithic incompetence. -
Message 17
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
quite true-a hald decent major in a defensive position and formation (with the prerequisite of bein british) could well have held off the zulu's at isandlwhana
-
Message 18
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
above meant that us brits have some sort of mythos where we can win any battle so long as weve got some defensible ground.
-
Message 19
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
The US in Iraq - it really was no contest, without erm... WMD!
erm...There are 8,000 British soldiers in Iraq. -
Message 20
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Saturday, 7th January 2006
Most one sided battles
Dunkirk, When the German army rolled up the Brits into the English Channel.
Cheers. -
Message 21
Posted by Mark (U2073932) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Battle of the Abraham Heights. 1759
Britsh under General Wolfe climbed up cliff to face french army under Montcalm.
The French advanced and the whole british line "fired the most perfect volley on any battlefield".
Charged with the bayonet and the French fled.
Both generals died soon after. -
Message 22
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
erm...There are 8,000 British soldiers in Iraq.
There are 100,000 + US soldiers in Iraq.
And also about when the Germans rolled us into the channel, I wouldn't say it was that one sided. The British and French forces managed to hold off the German advance for a fair few days, albeit they didn't have to deal with the panzers. -
Message 23
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
erm...There are 8,000 British soldiers in Iraq.
There are 100,000 + US soldiers in Iraq.
And also about when the Germans rolled us into the channel, I wouldn't say it was that one sided. The British and French forces managed to hold off the German advance for a fair few days, albeit they didn't have to deal with the panzers.
Dave’s post was in respect the U.S. not the U.K. or were you too dim-witted to follow the flow as usual.
The Krauts kicked your backsides fair and square. Not the fault of France, or Belgium, or anyone else. They open up a can/tin of woopass and the British Army ate it up big time. Heck they kicked our butts also the first time we took them on. Dunkirk was the biggest defeat the British Army ever had. It's interesting to watch y'aal 60 years later still in denial. BTW the French not only fought the rear guard action to get most of the able-bodied Brits afloat ( I say able bodied because most of your non walking wounded was left on the beach and inland) they also evacuated more than 50,000 Brits and French.
Cheerz. -
Message 24
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Hi Expat,
"Dunkirk was the biggest defeat the British Army ever had"
I think Singapore pales even Dunkirk.... -
Message 25
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Dave’s post was in respect the U.S. not the U.K. or were you too dim-witted to follow the flow as usual.
The Krauts kicked your backsides fair and square. Not the fault of France, or Belgium, or anyone else. They open up a can/tin of woopass and the British Army ate it up big time. Heck they kicked our butts also the first time we took them on. Dunkirk was the biggest defeat the British Army ever had. It's interesting to watch y'aal 60 years later still in denial. BTW the French not only fought the rear guard action to get most of the able-bodied Brits afloat ( I say able bodied because most of your non walking wounded was left on the beach and inland) they also evacuated more than 50,000 Brits and French.
.
Aaah, expat, provocative and ill informed as ever. How is the weather in Texas?
In the evacuation of Dunkerque (as the French like to spell it), there were approximately 340,000 troops evacuated, of which 120,00 French. In the interests of fairness and accuracy I will admit that the French fought an admirable rearguard, with the support of the 51st Highland Division which was not decimated, but destroyed in this action.
I'll totally admit that in France in 1940 the British Army got its bottom spanked.
And that's the bottom line cos AA says so. (Tip of the hat too Stone Cold there).
Cheers AA. -
Message 26
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Hi Expat,
"Dunkirk was the biggest defeat the British Army ever had"
I think Singapore pales even Dunkirk....
Hiya Mani,
As best I remember there were about 78 thousand surrendered to the Japanese. About half of them were allies from the commonwealth. I would say it pale’s Dunkirk only with respect to the amount of prisoners taken by the Japanese. The little pissants did us a number also at the beginning. Off the thread a bit with this but... I sent my first Boar of the year to hell this morning. He will dress out at about 150lbs. I was reading where someplace in the south of England the PETA folks turned some guys Russian Boars loose. They will multiply like rabbits and are dangerous as heck, but it will make for some decent solid ball shotgun hunting if they breed with feral pigs.
Cheers. Matt. -
Message 27
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Dave’s post was in respect the U.S. not the U.K. or were you too dim-witted to follow the flow as usual.
The Krauts kicked your backsides fair and square. Not the fault of France, or Belgium, or anyone else. They open up a can/tin of woopass and the British Army ate it up big time. Heck they kicked our butts also the first time we took them on. Dunkirk was the biggest defeat the British Army ever had. It's interesting to watch y'aal 60 years later still in denial. BTW the French not only fought the rear guard action to get most of the able-bodied Brits afloat ( I say able bodied because most of your non walking wounded was left on the beach and inland) they also evacuated more than 50,000 Brits and French.
.
Aaah, expat, provocative and ill informed as ever. How is the weather in Texas?
In the evacuation of Dunkerque (as the French like to spell it), there were approximately 340,000 troops evacuated, of which 120,00 French. In the interests of fairness and accuracy I will admit that the French fought an admirable rearguard, with the support of the 51st Highland Division which was not decimated, but destroyed in this action.
I'll totally admit that in France in 1940 the British Army got its bottom spanked.
And that's the bottom line cos AA says so. (Tip of the hat too Stone Cold there).
Cheers AA.
I thought I had answered this but I guess its out there in cyberspace someplace. I will tolerate the “provocative” if you will explain the “ ill informed” If you’re refering to the 51st they could hardly be evacuated, as you say, they were destroyed. The French still had units fighting on. Your numbers concerning the amount of evacuees is correct. When I referred to the figure of 50,000 that was in reference to the amount evacuated by the French on French boats and ships. The weather here has been super. About 29/31C that’s a few degrees higher than normal. I could sure use some rain real bad.
Cheers, Matt. -
Message 28
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
I thought I had answered this but I guess its out there in cyberspace someplace. I will tolerate the “provocative” if you will explain the “ ill informed” If you’re refering to the 51st they could hardly be evacuated, as you say, they were destroyed. The French still had units fighting on. Your numbers concerning the amount of evacuees is correct. When I referred to the figure of 50,000 that was in reference to the amount evacuated by the French on French boats and ships. The weather here has been super. About 29/31C that’s a few degrees higher than normal. I could sure use some rain real bad.
Cheers, Matt.
expat, apologies, now you have explained your reference to 50,000 I understand. I withdraw the "ill informed". Sorry, I thought you were referring to a number of total evacuees.
As you will have no doubt have noticed I treat posts literally, without any benefit of doubt. So, I have a somewhat brusque style. (I must stop responding to your posts as you seem to bring out the worst in me.)
Have a cyber pint on me,
Cheers AA. -
Message 29
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Arnald, don't you dare stop answering my posts. I should have made myself more clear in the first place.
Am sending you a plate of Tx cyber BBQ'd briskit with potato salad, black eyed peas in jalapino gravy on the side, and fresh baked corn bread.
Cheers. Matt. -
Message 30
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Yeeeehaaaa!!!!!
(That is my impersonation of the Rebel Yell).
Cheers AA.
(Could you serve up a side of Roadkill, I've got a taste for some good eating!)
Cheers, in jest, AA. -
Message 31
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
I said briskit, not chili
-
Message 32
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 8th January 2006
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmh, Brisket.
AA. -
Message 33
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Monday, 9th January 2006
Hi Expat,
Personally, I think if you look at the overall scenario, Singapore pales Dunkirk in most aspects. Prisoners taken, the way we were out manoeuvred, domination by the Japanese in all facets of the battle, overall embarrassment. I think most people would agree that Singapore is the biggest defeat that the British army has ever faced.
You're right, I've read about those Boars in the south. One friend in Germany is Employed by the Government (Or the regional government in Bavaria) to hunt Boars. He says much the same thing, they can be dangerous as hell, hence the cannon he uses to put them down.
Personally I'd love to go hunting them before putting them in my smoke house and devouring.
You are making me somewhat envious regarding your boar. 鶹Լmade Boar and red wine sausages - What a lovely thought! -
Message 34
Posted by iPad (U2181937) on Monday, 9th January 2006
In regards to Dunkirk I beleave Hitler probably went light on the British forces as he at the time considered that Britian played an important role in the world and saw it dispite Churchill's government as a natural allie of Germany.
-
Message 35
Posted by Turnwrest (U2188092) on Tuesday, 10th January 2006
Three one-sided naval battles :
Yalu.
2nd Lissa.
pre-eminently - Tsu-shima -
Message 36
Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Wednesday, 11th January 2006
How about Rommell in North Aftica in the spring of 1942? He was outnumbered, outgunned, had less than a third of the tanks and support equipment of his enemy, and in three days captured most, including Tobruk, and drove the rest back to El Alamaine. (please forgive the spelling)
Or, how about the entire German Armed forces in WWII. There is no recorded case of anyone defeating them unless they outnumbered them by at least four to one or greater. -
Message 37
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Wednesday, 11th January 2006
Or, how about the entire German Armed forces in WWII. There is no recorded case of anyone defeating them unless they outnumbered them by at least four to one or greater.
It galls me no end to give that bunch of thugs any positive credit, but mano a mano they had the edge. I find that a strange contrast to today’s young Germans, they strike me as being a bunch of woosies, almost pacifist even. Does anyone have any information regarding their performance in Afghanistan? I understand they had some marines there. Perhaps they were never tested.
Cheers -
Message 38
Posted by Huscarl (U1753368) on Wednesday, 11th January 2006
Or, how about the entire German Armed forces in WWII. There is no recorded case of anyone defeating them unless they outnumbered them by at least four to one or greater.
How about;
THE BATTLE OF BRITAIN? The RAF were the ones who were outnumbered- 2500 Luftwaffe to 700 serviceable RAF fighters?
The Germans were not outnumbered 4:1 at Stalingrad, Kursk. -
Message 39
Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Wednesday, 11th January 2006
At Stalingrad the Russians attcked approximately 300,000 Germans with 1,500,000 new men. Not counting the 250,000 already on the scene.
At KURSK the Russians had more armour, men, and supplies and they only reason they won was because the allied invasion of Italy pulled five divisions from the battle.
One of the reasons young Germans are so anti war is because they are so ashamed of what their country did in the 1940s. -
Message 40
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Wednesday, 11th January 2006
on the battlefield its actually a stalemate, though strategically any hopes the germans had of holding the russians back died with the men and tanks at that battle
-
Message 41
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Wednesday, 11th January 2006
I am told, by those who served there that Tubruk fell because one, the defences after the seige was lifted, were left to decay, and two a large part of the Defenders were South African who conciderede the Germans more their friends than the Brits. Also, Britain had its lines of supply stretched. (Rommell fell fowl of this later, and the British had Churchill on our side, who insisted on striping the Desert Army of troops it could not afford to loose to prop up Greece, before it had kicked the Italians out. If he had kept his nose out, Rommell would have never landed, because he would have had to try a D Day type landing, and the Luftwaffe could not have covered it, as their planes would not have the range to give fighter cover.
-
Message 42
Posted by The Researcher Strikes Back (U2183402) on Wednesday, 11th January 2006
I don't know if this counts but the siege at Iwaya in 1586 between Shimazu Yoshihiro (with 50,000 men) and Takahashi Shigetane (with 760 men).
Iwaya was held by Takahashi Shigetane and some 760 men. After holding out for two weeks Shigetane, aware of the futility of further resistance, commited suicide. When the Shimazu heard of his end, they are said to have prayed for his spirit, so impressed were they by his bravery. -
Message 43
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Friday, 13th January 2006
cant get more one sided than thermopylae really, i mean, 3-500 against anywhere between 200-600,000..........ouch!
-
Message 44
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Saturday, 14th January 2006
marduk_report,
Even more so on the last day when Leonidas sent all but His Spartan personal guard and the Thespains home... -
Message 45
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Saturday, 14th January 2006
their who im refering to-at the start of that week there was about 4000 greeks holdong the pass.
-
Message 46
Posted by iPad (U2181937) on Monday, 16th January 2006
I don't know if this counts but the siege at Iwaya in 1586 between Shimazu Yoshihiro (with 50,000 men) and Takahashi Shigetane (with 760 men).
Iwaya was held by Takahashi Shigetane and some 760 men. After holding out for two weeks Shigetane, aware of the futility of further resistance, commited suicide. When the Shimazu heard of his end, they are said to have prayed for his spirit, so impressed were they by his bravery.
I love stories like this.
I remember hearing about a Gerker in Bornio (I think) during WW2, the Japanese were attacking a trench he held and dispite his comrade laying dead around him, he held it day and night. They charged it several times but he drove them off, they lobbed grenades in and he threw them back out. He even lost his hand doing this and carried on. Evetually re-inforcements found him in the trench surrounded by the bodies of dead Japanese Soldiers, he had probably killed them all. -
Message 47
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Monday, 16th January 2006
Ipad,
I think you're referring to Rifleman Lachhiman Gurung, one of the many deserved VC recipients and a legend of the Gurkhas... -
Message 48
Posted by Big Bird Kiwi- (U2871390) on Monday, 16th January 2006
The best story i have heard was of the German Soldier who destroyed 10 or so tanks and killed a 100 men by himself firing his 88mm alone after everyone else was killed.
-
Message 49
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Monday, 16th January 2006
Ipad,
"...Rifleman Lachhiman Gurung was manning the most forward post of his platoon. At 0120 hours at least 200 enemy assaulted his Company position. The brunt of the attack was borne by Rifleman Lachhiman Gurung's section and by his own post in particular...
Before assaulting, the enemy hurled innumerable grenades at the position from close range. One grenade fell on the lip of Rifleman Lachhiman Gurung's trench; he at once grasped it and hurled it back at the enemy. Almost immediately another grenade fell directly inside the trench. Again this Rifleman snatched it up and threw it back. A third grenade fell just in front of the trench. He attempted to throw it back, but it exploded in his hand, blowing off his fingers, shattering his right arm and severely wounding him in the face, body and right leg. His two comrades were also badly wounded and lay helpless in the bottom of the trench.
...Rifleman Lachhiman Gurung, regardless of his wounds, fired and loaded his rifle with his left hand... Wave after wave of fanatical attacks were thrown in by the enemy and all were repulsed with heavy casualties. For four hours after being severely wounded Rifleman Lachhiman Gurung remained alone at his post waiting with perfect calm for each attack... Of the 87 enemy dead counted in the immediate vicinity of the Company locality, 31 lay in front of this Rifleman's section, the key to the whole position...
This Rifleman, by his magnificant example, so inspired his comrades to resist the enemy to the last, that, although surrounded and cut off for three days and two nights, they held and smashed every attack..."
Extracts from London Gazette 27 July 1945 -
Message 50
Posted by FEC (U2276153) on Monday, 16th January 2006
This is a very interesting thread. Most of the examples are centred around battles where one force or other is greatly outnumbered by the other. I thought I'd chuck in a couple of examples, though, where the opposing armies were of approximate size and technology (at least relative to examples such as Thermopilae), yet the result was extremely one sided.
A few of the Napoleonic battles fit this bill, perhaps Austerlitz best. Despite being outnumbered, Napoleon inflicted perhaps 25,000 casualties against maybe 7000.
Also, Moltke the Elder's comical treatment of the French in the Franco-Prussian war in 1870 was highly impressive. At the Battle of Sedan, the Germans killed 41,000 french and managed to capture the rest of the French army, comprising some 90,000 men, and including the French Emperor. The Germans lost around 9,000 themselves, and it is arguable that the French were superior in equipment, having as they did rudimentary machine guns.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
鶹Լ iD
鶹Լ navigation
鶹Լ links
鶹Լ © 2014 The 鶹Լ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.