.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
Yes. Turks were defeated by their own commander in chief, Enver Paşa.
.
Printable View
.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
Yes. Turks were defeated by their own commander in chief, Enver Paşa.
.
Ah yes, Enver Pasha. Clear-cut madman if there ever was one! Well, excluding Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot... he fits right in ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
Well, another factor that pushed Turkey into the war was the German warships that anchored just outside Istanbul. They bombarded a Russian base, then scuttled back to Istanbul. When Russia started threatening Turkey to hand over the German ships, the Germans threatened to bombard Istanbul. This added to the fact that Britain decided to stop the sale of dreadnoughts that had already been paid for by the Turks brought them into the war.
Well, another factor that pushed Turkey into the war was the German warships that anchored just outside Istanbul. They bombarded a Russian base, then scuttled back to Istanbul. When Russia started threatening Turkey to hand over the German ships, the Germans threatened to bombard Istanbul.
How can that be ?
When the Goeben attacked Sebastopol it did it in company with 3 Turkish ships , the Breslau attacked Novorossisk and Theodosia with another Turkish ship and the attack on Odessa was done solely by Turkish ships .
Now that I think of it, the greatest boob in history was Al Tennyson, the jerk who helped to overblow the disastrous Light Brigade charge on the Don Cossack battery (I can't remember the name of the battle.) Only around 100 brigadiers were killed, and another 50 were captured, yet they took all the glory, whilst the Turks, the real heroes of the battle, held for three hours, under far more severe bombardment (30 guns), and against a massive Russian assault. They were used as scapegoats by the British commander, who got there three hours late, and came just in time to see the four redoubts fall. They also formed two-thirds of the thin red line, and without the disciplined, hardy Turks the Scots would have collapsed. And afterwards, they were porters for the wounded French and British.
Okay, maybe Tennyson wasn't the Boob in this situation, but I'm still pissed about it.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grey_Fox
That was a simple, too simple plot arranged by the government, determined to go to war on the German side from day 1. ~:handball:
.
Hmm. I really should have looked again at 'Castles of Steel' again before I wrote that. Sorry.
Red Harvest,
you mentioned mcclellan flirted with marching on washington, and didn't lincoln suspect hooker of wanting to do the same also? why did some of the commanders of the best equipped and supplied union army harbor treason thoughts?
i could understand if their men were suffering due to a lack of war material, or if they felt lincoln was too soft on the objective, but lincoln was for total victory too so that negates that idea. i assume the horror of a civil war within the civil war partially held them back.
Among the first candidates I'd place Marshal Semyon Michailowich Budyonny and Sir Redvers Buller.
Yup, that's where I learned to laugh at Buller.
Geoffrey , Buller was made a scapegoat for the failings of the military and the politicians (plus some disgraced businessmen who should never have been influencing policy , let alone strategy) .
Buller never wanted to split his forces , neither did he want to cross the Tuegla until he and his forces were ready .
White should never have advanced and been cut off , Baden-Powell was a complete failure in his mission to re-enact the Jamestown raid and like White ended up besieged .
By exagerating the threat of the sieges Rhodes forced the armies hand , with disasterous results .
Roberts , who replaced Buller , managed to not only destroy the only large mobile force the British had he also lost his supplies condemning his men to suffering from hunger and disease .
The Boer war on the whole was one blunder after another , and the lessons were not learned , which makes it a very big boob .
Oh and Baden-Powell should have been in front of a courts-martial facing up to the serious charges against him , not trying to repeat an previously failed pre-emptive strike that had no chance of success and was guarateed to start an uneccesary conflict for the most dubious of reasons .
A far better candidate for an incompetant British commander would be Gen. Townsend and the Iraq campaign .
That is true, to a certain extent. There was a brilliant Turkish commander present at Balaclava (the battle in question IIRC), whose name escapes me, who held off the Russians masterfully in Moldavia as well, on the outset of the war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorba
Ah, I remembered. It was Omar Pasha (not sure if that link is correct -- it is quite pro-Turkish, especially in its description of his actions at Eupatoria).
Wizard, what's up with the new avatar?
I'll read up on some more info about all this; taking what was said in that Greatest Blunders book for granted wasn't too bright, considering their goals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
What's wrong with it?
And you must admit that Buller made some important mistakes that greatly protracted the Second Boer War.
.
On Ömer Paşa
I'm holding the relevant volume of the Ottoman History by Ziyâ Nur Aksun*, which is quite reliable in its access and analysis of primary and secondary sources, but definitely not in his solid apologetic "Ottoman" stance, although it's almost a non issue in this case.
:duel:
Ömer Paşa was promoted to "Serdâr-ı Ekrem" (Commander-in-Chief) following his triumphant defense of Chatana. The following accounts are related to later events.
Aksun quotes from a letter of the British ambassador Canning, without credit:
(non-verbal translation)Quote:
"I sent Sir J. Burgoyne to convince Ömer, about thoughtlessly to cross the Danube, which would endanger himself, his army and the Empire. He seems to have calmed down by now."
Aksun's apologetic style makes a brief entrance to accuse Ömer Paşa for being sold out to the British (which almost obviously contradicts with his own quotation) but the status of Austria, who auto-proclaimed herself the guardian of the Donau (phrase taken from Aksun) with the subtext of entering the war on the Russian side, was the true concern of Canning et al. Indeed, with Bucaresht secured and Russia practically defeated, an overpowered Ottoman Empire would alert Austria in the most radical way.
:charge:
The next account, though, a qoute from the History of Cevdet (contemporary chronicler) is apparently in favour of Ömer Paşa, who suggested to assault and capture Besarabia. The British and French disagreed and Crimea was attacked instead. The pronounced reasoning of this was more effective naval support, and for the British, the destruction of the Russian base at Sevastapol (Akyar). But Cevdet thinks it was due to Austrian threat.
:knight:
My quick and dirty conclusion of Ömer Paşa is a brilliant tactician but lacking in greater (political) strategic aspect.
:book2:
Ziyâ Nur Aksun, Osmanlı Târihi, V. 2 pp. 348 - 349, Ötüken Neşriyat Istanbul 1994, ISBN 975 - 437 - 145 - 8
*I know the author personally. He has been parallyzed since 1976 and wrote more than half of his history in that state. Whatever the outcome, the endeavor is respectworthy. :bow:
.
The fact that he made some large mistakes isn't in question; whether they were enough to merit him the dubious award of 'one of history's biggest boobs' may be. As I said I don't know enough about him to really make a fair judgement, since my only real knowledge of him is from various small bits of information and the Military Blunders book, which may not be the most reliable or balanced source for such information.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
Wizard , Buller did make mistakes , mainly giving in to political pressure over military neccecity , but also by using unsuitable tactics for modern warfare .
His successors continued to use those same tactics throughout most of the battles which is even more of a blunder . Kitchener even over ruled others and ordered a frontal assault against entrenched positions at walking pace in mass formation as though it was some sort of parade ground .
14 years later they would prove that they hadn't learned anything at all .
Buller is often criticised for the loss of the guns at Colenso (where Roberts' son died "saving the guns") yet in 1914 they still lost lots of men doing exactly the same thing , deploying artillery in the open without protection where there crews would be cut down and any one who tried to "save the guns" faced the same fate .
So perhaps the nomination for biggest boobs should go to the multitude of military commanders who have , throughout history , failed to adapt to new innovations , changing tactics and the various different landscapes and climates on different battlefields .
This thread is a huge blunder. Where are the damn b00bs!?!? :furious3:
~:cheers: ~:cheers: ~:cheers: ~:cheers:Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince
BP & sfts - thanks for volunteering. ~;) What a pair! :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince
One does as one sees... ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregoshi