Foolish

[Craterus]

Craterus,

are you talking about WW2? France already gave up before the Germans invated Russia.

Sorry, I was right about Mutual Assistance Pact. I get mixed up between those two wars. I think they're boring anyway. Sword and spears is much better.

Unfortunately, we only learn about WW1 and WW2 in my history.

[cunctator]

There are so many. I think this example is suitable at least there are many very foolish mistakes.


Gaius Atilius Regulus, Battle a near Tynes 255Bc

The carthaginian had 12.000 infantry 100 elephants and 4000 cavalry.
The roman army had 15.000 inf. and 500 cav.

-Despite better knowledge he had decided to fight in the open flat country.
-To counter the elephants he increased the formation deep, making it still easier for the cart. cav. to outflank him.
-He has done nothing else to counter the protect the flank against the obvious attack despite placing his cavalry there.

As result all but 2000 romans were dead or prisoned.

[Meneldil]

Well, about the invasion of France in 1940, I just read a book written by Karl-Heinz Frieser (who's working for the Bundeswehr) in which he explains quite successfully that the invasion worked that well because the germans were lucky as hell.

And yeah, Hitler wasn't a military genius. The invasion of France was planned by Von Manstein only a few months before the attack (the german leaders were first planning to re-use the Schlieffen plan, and that would probably have meant lost for them).

[Franconicus]

Well, about the invasion of France in 1940, I just read a book written by Karl-Heinz Frieser (who's working for the Bundeswehr) in which he explains quite successfully that the invasion worked that well because the germans were lucky as hell.

And yeah, Hitler wasn't a military genius. The invasion of France was planned by Von Manstein only a few months before the attack (the german leaders were first planning to re-use the Schlieffen plan, and that would probably have meant lost for them).

Meneldil,
we all know that luck is an essential attribute to any good commander.

Here is a short anectode:
Napoleon was known for promoting officers with high skills very fast. Many of his general's were very young. On e day he was asked why he did not promote a young officer who was very smart. He replied: He has no luck. I do not need generals that have no luck!

[Basiliscus]

I suppose you could argue Emperor Montecuhzoma of the Aztecs was a fool also. He believed a prophesy that in the First Year of the Reed their God Quetzalcoatl would arrive and he would defeat the Aztecs and bring peace to Mexico. He would be recognisable as a bearded white man.

When Cortez arrived he fitted the description and Montecuhzoma handed over his Empire to the Spaniards with his famous speech:

"We have known for a long time that neither I nor the people who live here are the original inhabitants. We know it belongs to strangers who come from distant parts. We always knew that they would return one day to rule us. We will obey you and all that we own is yours."

Although there are many examples of people following false prophecies including King Croesus of Lydia who believed the Oracle of Delphi when it said that "A Great Empire will be destroyed" when he asked what would happen if he went to war with Persia. Infact he was defeated, as the Oracle meant HIS empire would be destroyed.

[The Wizard]

I doubt the Oracle meant either the Persian or the Lydian empire... whatever those stoned nutjobs said was open to the interpretation of everybody.



~Wiz

[Basiliscus]

I doubt the Oracle meant either the Persian or the Lydian empire... whatever those stoned nutjobs said was open to the interpretation of everybody.

LoL Very true, but in the topic of this discussion any commander who follows the advice of an oracle should be under the heading of 'Foolish'. Indeed, what the Oracle said to Croesus was anyone's guess and he was entirely a fool to plan a campaign based on its advice.