Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 6th, 2012, 07:54 AM   #41
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

New Orleans had no impact in the war (the OP) because the war had already ended and the peace had already been signed; it's like giving CPR to a corpse.
It would be hard to be any more pointless that that.
sylla1 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 6th, 2012, 08:01 AM   #42

Brisieis's Avatar
Historian
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Sep 2011
From: UK
Posts: 16,033
Blog Entries: 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
New Orleans had no impact in the war (the OP) because the war had already ended and the peace had already been signed; it's like giving CPR to a corpse.
It would be hard to be any more pointless that that.
True.

It may have had meaning in a different respect, but not what I was asking in the OP.

By the way, thanks everyone for your answers.
Brisieis is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 08:27 AM   #43

Tairusiano's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Brazil
Posts: 1,393
Blog Entries: 6

For the Brazilian and Argentine point of view the Cisplatine War is very pointless, both side fought to conquest the actual region of Uruguay both countries poured men and resources in a war to acquire this land but them by Great Britain pressure Uruguay became independent, and Brazil and Argentine must give up from the aimimg of conquering the region
Tairusiano is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 01:55 PM   #44

Gnaeus's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Toronto
Posts: 197

Pointless battles include every battle ever fought.
Gnaeus is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:19 PM   #45

Pacific_Victory's Avatar
SEMISOMNVS
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: MARE PACIFICVM
Posts: 4,682

Has the last day of WWI been mentioned yet?
Pacific_Victory is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:04 PM   #46
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacific_Victory View Post
Has the last day of WWI been mentioned yet?
Not AFAIK; it's a good candidate indeed IMHO.
sylla1 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:17 PM   #47

Sicknero's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: Here to Eternity
Posts: 4,016

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Not AFAIK; it's a good candidate indeed IMHO.
I think it might have been mentioned in passing earlier on. But yes, thousands died on both sides on November 11th 1918. I think I read something like 3 1/2 thousand for America alone. One attack took place at 10.30 a.m. and cost many lives.

I know that many soldiers and commanders - Pershing in particular - claimed to be ignorant or at least unclear about the definiteness of the armistice, but I guess it's likely that in many instances there was just simple bloodlust and a desire for revenge. I recall reading also about an RA battery who preferred to fire off all their remaining shells rather than pack them up and take them back.

In terms of the OP though, do these incidents qualify as 'battles', pointless or otherwise?
Sicknero is online now  
Old December 7th, 2012, 08:51 AM   #48

Darth Roach's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2011
From: Jelgava, Latvia
Posts: 1,325

Quote:
There's really no battle that has no impact on a war.
Au contraire, most battles don't sway the war in either direction.
Darth Roach is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 08:53 AM   #49

Sicknero's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: Here to Eternity
Posts: 4,016

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Roach View Post
Au contraire, most battles don't sway the war in either direction.
Would you care to elaborate on that, with examples? From the opposing point of view, off the top of my head I'd mention the Battle of the Bulge which undoubtedly had a big effect on the subsequent Allied advance into Germany.
Sicknero is online now  
Old December 7th, 2012, 12:27 PM   #50

Darth Roach's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2011
From: Jelgava, Latvia
Posts: 1,325

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicknero View Post
Would you care to elaborate on that, with examples? From the opposing point of view, off the top of my head I'd mention the Battle of the Bulge which undoubtedly had a big effect on the subsequent Allied advance into Germany.
Did Germany lose the war because they lost the Ardennes offensive? No. They were about to lose it anyway. Could Germany have won if they were victorious at Kursk, Stalingrad or Moscow? Again, most likely not. Why? Lo-*******-gistics. When two nations fight a total war, it's the one with most resources that will win. In a limited war, political and economical factors are just as important as the deployed logistical support and strategy... But pitched battles almost never decide wars.
Darth Roach is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
battles, pointless


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pointless attacks in trench warfare in WWI: did the Germans do them as much? betgo War and Military History 13 May 5th, 2012 09:13 AM
Most Pointless Wars? MST7 General History 42 August 20th, 2011 05:21 AM
pointless humdrum antics of mankind galteeman Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 15 September 30th, 2008 07:26 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.