Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > General History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

General History General History Forum - General history questions and discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 6th, 2012, 05:57 AM   #81
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,561

Before the first crusade, the People's Crusade, which was not lead by the aristocracy. They sacked Jewish neighborhoods in Europe, partly to raise money for the expedition. The Bysantine Emporer had them ferried accross to Asia Minor where they were wiped out by the Turks.

The first British invasion of Afghanistan, where the British and Indian force was almost wiped out, like 99.9% dead. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan given all the problems the British had there in the 19th century.

As far as helping the Afghans, think it was mostly a US/Saudi/Pakistani project.They may have bought Chinese arms, but the Chinese didn't put up the money or distribute the equipment.
betgo is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 6th, 2012, 06:09 AM   #82
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,111

Quote:
Originally Posted by srb7677 View Post
When it comes to dumb invasions, I think the British invasion of the German-occupied Dodecanese Islands in the autumn of 1943 deserves a mention, carried out on a shoestring with insufficient air cover. And to what purpose? Talk about peripheral! And of course it proved to be totally unsuccessful in the end anyway.
Not as bad as the Norwegian and Greek expeditions

Britain's invasion of Afghanistan was a poorly executed failure and the Gallippoli landings were another
Poly is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 06:25 AM   #83

Sicknero's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: Here to Eternity
Posts: 4,404

Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorian View Post
The Spanish Armada invasion of England.
Really, when you read about it, it was a disaster before it started.
And ends up with starving Spanish sailors on the beaches of Ireland, their ships literally falling apart, getting murdered by the locals.
Agreed, it seems to me that the plan could never have succeeded... the plan for Medina and Parma to meet up in the Channel was a terrible idea and breaks one of the primary rules of warfare (attempting to meet up in the face of the enemy).

The last minute "substitution" of Santa Cruz with Medina - Medina had absolutely no knowledge of or love for warfare or the sea, and indeed wrote several times to Phillip asking to be excused the task and saying openly that he had neither the skills, temperament nor funds to accomplish it.

Misinformation coming from his spies, that English Catholics would gladly rise up to support him.

A letter from Phillip to Medina at the time shows that even Phillip had real doubts about the project having any chance of success. Hindsight is a great thing of course, but this does seem to me to be one instance where it should surely have been obvious that the plan would fail.

Gallipoli - wasn't helped at all by the earlier failed attempt to force the straits with ships alone. This obviously tipped off the Turks to Britain's intentions and gave them 2 months in which to improve their defences in the area. Afik before the naval attempt, the Dardanelles were very poorly defended and a landing in force might well have succeeded. Hindsight again ...
Sicknero is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 11:03 AM   #84

srb7677's Avatar
Liberal Crusader
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Plymouth,UK
Posts: 2,354

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
Not as bad as the Norwegian and Greek expedition.
Those "expeditions" were not invasions, but unsuccessful attempts to aid the invaded. The actual invasions, carried out by the Germans, were highly successful.
srb7677 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 04:55 PM   #85
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,111

Quote:
Originally Posted by srb7677 View Post
Those "expeditions" were not invasions, but unsuccessful attempts to aid the invaded. The actual invasions, carried out by the Germans, were highly successful.
True they weren't invasions like D-Day was but they were still armed operations into overseas countries that looked a bad idea on paper and so they proved in reality
Poly is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 05:09 PM   #86
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Moorhead, MN
Posts: 77

In the 500s BC the last king of the semi-Hellenized Anatolian kingdom of Lydia went to the Oracle at Delphi and was told that if he crossed the Halys River (in what is now north-central Turkey) that he would destroy a great kingdom. The Halys was the boundary between Lydia and the Persian Empire, so the king thought the Oracle was telling him he could defeat the Persians. So he invaded Persian Phrygria, and he had his rear end kicked and his kingdom was turned into a Persian satrapy. The great kingdom he destroyed was his own.



Sadly, the fall of his kingdom made the Greek cities of Asia Minor sitting ducks for the Persians. Thus the stupidity of a king eventually lead several decades later to the Graeco-Persian wars.
TaylorS is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 06:08 PM   #87
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,561

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan seems real questionable. They had a lot of influence over the government, but were getting resistance from the government. So they put in a more complete puppet.

The Afghans had held off the Russians and British in the 19th century and so on and were hard to conquer mountain people.

Plus Communism had little appeal, with atheism and nontraditional roles for women in the Muslim society. Communist theory made no sense in a tribal society, and abolutism was in conflict with traditionally a weak central government.

So the Soviets probably would have been better to settle for some influence over the government, when it was way to difficult to turn the country into a Communist state and semicolonial Soviet satellite.
betgo is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 06:14 PM   #88

laxattack45's Avatar
Citizen
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 4

Crassus's invasion of Parthia was a complete and utter failure. he was inexperienced and made bad decisions.

Parthians prefer to fight on horse and Crassus broght his force into open desert when he had the chance to go through rugged mountains.
laxattack45 is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 06:40 PM   #89
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,034

Quote:
Originally Posted by betgo View Post
Before the first crusade, the People's Crusade, which was not lead by the aristocracy. They sacked Jewish neighborhoods in Europe, partly to raise money for the expedition. The Bysantine Emporer had them ferried accross to Asia Minor where they were wiped out by the Turks.

The first British invasion of Afghanistan, where the British and Indian force was almost wiped out, like 99.9% dead. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan given all the problems the British had there in the 19th century.

As far as helping the Afghans, think it was mostly a US/Saudi/Pakistani project.They may have bought Chinese arms, but the Chinese didn't put up the money or distribute the equipment.
This is wrong again. China set up training camps for the mujahideen near kashgar and directly distributed weapons to the fighters.
deke is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > General History

Tags
attempt, dumb, epic, fail, invasion


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.