Worst military mistakes.

actaully it wouldnt had done anything due to the torpedo bombers going in first and luring all defending zeroes to sea level leaving the prime dive bomber altitute of 8-10k without defense and all AA aimed low for torpedo runs.

the admiral ordered the land attack ordnance changed to ship and back when he heard aircraft carriers were sighted but swapped back when aircraft began to return but the torpedo runs came and the ordnance were improperly stored leaving the 500lb bombs from SBD dive bombers making them good toaster ovens
btw
only 3 were killed outright by the first attacks, the last one Hiryu survived and managed to damage Yorktown so bad it was abandoned but bought into tow if repairs could be done by a jap sub i65? sunk it with 2 torpedoes

The Japanese bombing of pearl harbor.

Gallipoli

Any battle a nation has ever fought with the Mongols hordes. (maybe except the Mameluks)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intranetusa

Any battle a nation has ever fought with the Mongols hordes. (maybe except the Mameluks)

---

The Chinese and Japanese did pretty well against them, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ludens

The Chinese and Japanese did pretty well against them, too.

---

The Japanese got lucky because of 2 typhoons, over use of non-ocean going ships, and sabotage of Mongol ships by Chinese and Korean shipbuilders.

The Chinese Song Dynasty...well, they still lost in the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tls5669

The Japanese bombing of pearl harbor.

---

military speaking it did its job quite well... stragically... em not so much

BUT if the carriers had been there AND if a 3rd wave had been launch to destroy the port's support buildings as it was intended... they would have crippled the US naval power...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ||Lz3||

military speaking it did its job quite well... stragically... em not so much

BUT if the carriers had been there AND if a 3rd wave had been launch to destroy the port's support buildings as it was intended... they would have crippled the US naval power...

---

Yeah, it would have made the Pacific war a hell of a lot harder for the America's.:sweatdrop:
The victory for the Japanese goes to show that saying about Winning a battle but losing the war.....:skull:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intranetusa

The Japanese got lucky because of 2 typhoons, over use of non-ocean going ships, and sabotage of Mongol ships by Chinese and Korean shipbuilders.

---

The Japanese were lucky the first time, but the second time they managed to contain the invasion force even before the typhoon struck. Off course, it helped that the Mongols were out of their element, and many of their men didn't feel strongly about the Mongol cause. As for the Song, yes they lost, but given that they gave the Mongols a hard time as well it may not have been a mistake on their part.

It's actually believed if the harbor had been put on high alert that week, it could have totally wrecked Japan's early war effort.


Honestly, I don't believe in the conspiracy theorists opinions on it (mainly due to many having fringe political beliefs). I seriously do believe we knew there would be an attack, but we miscalculated where it was going to be. The army and the navy believed the Philippines would be the first American holding to be attacked. Not Hawaii due to the sheer distance away from Japan.


Lets think here, even using a carrier based attack force, how far away is the Philippines from the nearest Japanese holding vs. the Hawaiian islands? Letting the Japanese attempt to attack Hawaii and messing up the attacking force would still work into Roosevelt's want for us to get into the war. If anything, it would be better due to the sheer morale boost of thrashing the Japanese navy, and possible subsequent successful defense of the Philippines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ludens

The Japanese were lucky the first time, but the second time they managed to contain the invasion force even before the typhoon struck. Off course, it helped that the Mongols were out of their element, and many of their men didn't feel strongly about the Mongol cause. As for the Song, yes they lost, but given that they gave the Mongols a hard time as well it may not have been a mistake on their part.

---

True, but the force they 'contained' was an expeditionary force. For some reason, the Mongols decide to camp out in their ships and not deploy the majority of their army. sucks for 'em when the typhoon came

invading Russia
1. Napoleon lost his army during napoleonic wars
2.Ottomans lost the Caucasian army 90 000(frozen) in 1.WW
3.The German invasion of USSR or at east the 3rd assault resulting Germans to lose many things they could have spared.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dogukan

invading Russia
1. Napoleon lost his army during napoleonic wars
2.Ottomans lost the Caucasian army 90 000(frozen) in 1.WW
3.The German invasion of USSR or at east the 3rd assault resulting Germans to lose many things they could have spared.

---

The Mongols had no problems blitzing and invading Russia.
They would laugh in the face of the Siberian blizzards. XD

some people in the island knew there was going to be an inminent attack but the telegraph got delayed ... wich according to the discovery channel was... a bit of a good luck in a sense... cause according to them IF the naval force had been alerted they would have tried to escape the harbor and go to high seas ... but the japanese had way more military power in their hands so if the battleships did actually escape the harbopr they would had been eliminated in the high seas increasing the losses.

the fact that the attack was made in a shallow harbor allowed many survivors to swim to the shores and even many ships were restored to a fighting position , if they had been attacked at sea ,those ships would had been lost forever, same goes to the sailors.



another one I remember and I think someone mentioned earlier was Ottawa 4th carrier division
(I think that's the name...) , the japs lost all their naval power in there... , not entirely cause it was a bad decision but cause their pilots had no experience , and they didn't know that the IJN code had been discovered :thinking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intranetusa

The Mongols had no problems blitzing and invading Russia.
They would laugh in the face of the Siberian blizzards. XD

---

well ... we all agree that the mongols were freaks :P

as far as ancient Rome is concerned, anything concerning Hannibal Barca (i loled when reading through the prequels to the EB historical battles, esp the one where they were afraid of going to see the seleukid chap because hannibal was in the city, lol)

hitler invading russia, and also stopping bombing everywhere in britain and focusing only on london

actually, I think one of the worst military mistake was the fact that the German high command thought it could pull off the shiefflen plan; the whole idea that you can knock out one of 2 countries (France) before the other(Russia),in light of the logistical, tactical, and technological ability of the german empire in 1914. also equally terrible was the militaries of Europe thinking that the war would be over by autumn of 1914, again in liht of the logistical and other situatons mentioned above.


when khosrow II decided he wanted to dispose of an-nu3man ibn al-mundhir..
actually the above mentioned one is far worse than this paticular one.

What would have happened if the romans had guns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ibrahim

actually, I think one of the worst military mistake was the fact that the German high command thought it could pull off the shiefflen plan; the whole idea that you can knock out one of 2 countries (France) before the other(Russia),in light of the logistical, tactical, and technological ability of the german empire in 1914. also equally terrible was the militaries of Europe thinking that the war would be over by autumn of 1914, again in liht of the logistical and other situatons mentioned above.


when khosrow II decided he wanted to dispose of an-nu3man ibn al-mundhir..
actually the above mentioned one is far worse than this paticular one.

---

I think that they could have done the shieffen plan, but for 2 things: If Belgium hadn't flooded itself, and if Britain hadn't got involved in the battle of the Marne.

It's Schlieffen plan, after Alfred Graf von Schlieffen

Battle(s) of the Iconzo (and the general Italian front in WW1)- wouldn't it be fun if Austrians and Germans fought Italians over just about the largest mountains in Europe whilst pulling their artillery up with pulleys, froze to death and had most of their casualties being discovered 80 years after the war? They all knew what they were on about, clearly.

Battles(s) of Monte Casino- Despite being advised to take a different route by Italians a US company tried to advance through what was, in essence, a flooded forest, and were simply picked off by the German snipers, who eventually stopped firing to let them gather their wounded and retreat.

On a less serious note

That battle in the third lord of the rings where they don't expect the rohan riders to arse rape them at the siege. I mean come on, if that army in the second film got rinsed by a couple thousand knights surely those orcs would get steamrolled by the entire army? No, apparently not :wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ||Lz3||

military speaking it did its job quite well... stragically... em not so much

BUT if the carriers had been there AND if a 3rd wave had been launch to destroy the port's support buildings as it was intended... they would have crippled the US naval power...

---

The Raid was a colossal failure. Instead of concentrating on the support ships and submarines plus the Harbor Facilities, they hit old Battleships.

Hitting the Support Ships and Harbor Facilities would have crippled American Fighting ability for over a year and would have required much investment to rebuild.

Also the Japanese could not launch a third wave. They were too low on ammo and AVGas to do so and a Third Wave would have to wait till morning, but their destroyer escorts couldn't wait till morning as they would be too low on fuel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tollheit

It's Schlieffen plan, after Alfred Graf von Schlieffen

---

How did I mispell that? I wrote a 3-page essay on it a few months back!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Che Roriniho

the battle of the Marne.

---

There was no battle of the Marne, it was actually five separate battles fought simultaneously nowhere near the Marne River.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiTank

There was no battle of the Marne, it was actually five separate battles fought simultaneously nowhere near the Marne River.

---

The ffirst one, with the French and the taxis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberius Aurelius Cotta

as far as ancient Rome is concerned, anything concerning Hannibal Barca (i loled when reading through the prequels to the EB historical battles, esp the one where they were afraid of going to see the seleukid chap because hannibal was in the city, lol)

---

I don't think they're fair to include, because they detract from the genuine brilliance of Hannibal. Few of the generals who faced him did anything "wrong" from the perspective of what any competent Roman commander would do. They were simply outclassed by the man facing them.

The Aleutian Islands is and other similar events. I mean you can hardly believe any army to be as incompetent as that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

I don't think they're fair to include, because they detract from the genuine brilliance of Hannibal. Few of the generals who faced him did anything "wrong" from the perspective of what any competent Roman commander would do. They were simply outclassed by the man facing them.

---

Hmm, where have I heard that before...

:idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWFanatic

I would have to disagree with some of the previous posters on Cannae being a military mistake--at least tactically. Strategically, it never should have happened. If I may indulge in hindsight here, ol' Fabius the Cunctator was right. Of course, Varro did not have the advantage of hindsight and lacked Paullus' caution.

Having said that, Varro did not do anything wrong. At least, he did not do anything any other mediocre general would have seen as out of the ordinary. He deployed his cohorts in the standard triplex acies with the Roman legions in the center and the allies on the flanks. He positioned about a third of his cavalry (the citizens) river-side and the rest (the allies) on the left. Hannibal’s Balearic slingers dominated the skirmish, and so Varro, making his last mistake, chose to advance.

That Hannibal was able to encircle the legions is not do to any shortcoming on Varro’s part or that of his men, it is do the genius and cunning of Hannibal. AFAIK, the double envelopment was never used before in history--Varro had no way of knowing what his foe had in store for his legionaries. Which is my next point--the tenacious Romans were highly successful in breaking Hannibal’s center. The latter, as he so often did, merely used his opponents' own strengths against them. The principle of Judo comes to mind. Use your opponents momentum against him--e.g., you push, I pull; you pull, I push. Hannibal also played mind games with them, tempting them to do exactly what he wanted and expected. That is one reason why I believe that Hannibal was a better general than Alexander (on the battlefield, at least). The former would tempt the latter into doing something rash and would have no trouble capitalizing on it.

Did Varro fall for it? Most certainly. But I believe that few commanders would have done any better. Any armchair general who claims he would have seen the pincer coming is abusing the objective study of history by injecting the usage of hindsight into it. Regardless, Varro's countrymen certainly forgave him, and we should as well.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Che Roriniho

The ffirst one, with the French and the taxis.

---

Axis Alliance did not exist in 1914. Also First Marne again was five separate battles well past the Marne River.

sorry for necroposting-
i have another military mistake:
the atlantic wall

ahahh true
encomposed of badly mauled units from eastern front sprinkled with a few vets here and there and plenty of ost battalions (POWs who aggreed to fight for hitler against stalin)but were first to run
+ the hitler youth who were fanatic but just cant aim or do anything tactical

+ what added to there disastrous start was hitler insisting nobody wake him up during the night of DDay and reports of a 5000+ allied fleet and the splitting of the panzer SS corps
with 3 crack divisions deployed around calais with no order to move to normandy and rommels panzers all under attack from aircraft during the day

i wonder what would happen if as many soldiers lost in the beach landings were to happen in 1 battle today? i wonder what would civilians be like? :P:juggle2:

Ok, so put yourself in the German High Command's shoes. How would you handle a war that could not be won at this point? You'd probably follow von Rundstedt advice.