yet in some ways it hadnt

not many people knew about agent orange and its effect in nam'

Nam itself was a blunder. They ran and lost the war from Washington.

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

The Persian Empires attempts to conquer Greece, and subsequently the Greek/Macedonian conquest of Persia.

Macedonia was a province of what was called "Hellas". Macedonian's, like Athenian's or Spartan's nationality was hellenic. They spoke, wrote, dressed and lived like all other hellenes. After the hellenic indepence war (1821-1829) from the Turks, the new state formed was called "Greece" and its people "Greeks". So there is no point stating Greek/Macedonian, it's like saying British/Welsh or American/Texan.

one of the biggest blunders ever made was by america and france was in vietnam. the fact that they didnt understand the people or their culture/language and traditions and didnt understand that this was a poples war and that they had no right to be there and didnt understand the motives each side had. they should have left as soon as they could have before they got boggd down.

In one of the earlier posts that I read the person was saying that Dieppe was a great disaster which in it's way it was just that, but with out that disaster would we have had successful D Day in Normandy, I for one don't think so. From what was leaned at Dieppe was the following, the need for greater security and only a handful of people knew just were the attack would take place so that there would not be any lose talk by junior officers trying to impress his girl friend. There was need for harbours so Britain built two floating ones, for fuel they laid an undersea fuel line across the channel known as Pluto. the other things that came out of all this was Hobart's funnies, a Major Hobart designed a range of modified tanks for specialist duties, the flail to clear minefields and barb wire, Flame thrower tanks that shoot flame several hundred yards, there were artificial road layers to stop vehicles getting bogged down on the beach, there were the swimming tanks known as DD, their were bridge laying tanks to deal with anti tank ditches, and there was a mortar tank that would fire a mortar shell the size of dustbin to clear strong points also the was the Sherman Firefly tank that mounted a 17 pounder gun that could take a Tiger Tank. It should be remember that with out Dieppe there would not have been a successful D Day

Originally Posted by Lord Londonderry

In Les Carlyon's book, Gallipoli, even the turks were surprised at where the ANZACS landed.

Yep, initially they were. I spent a couple of days there and was lucky enough to spend it with a Turkish historian (ex-military). He claims that because of the steep cliffs, the Turks could never take full advantage of their artillery which was mainly run by the germans. He also went so far as to say that it was "a lucky mistake".

Not something I've read before but an interesting theory.

Some peope said Barbarossa I disagree. For the record the Russian campaign was divided into 3 offenses each followed right after the other. Babarossa (the invasion), Fall Blau and Zitadelle. But I assume you mean the Russian campaign. The Russian campaign might have been success had Hitler (who thought he was Frederick the Great reincarnated) drove on to Moscow instead of diverting time and support to invade the Caucauses.

My choice the failure of the French to extend the Maginot line to the Ardennes in 1940. That bit of brilliance cost them the war even before the battle started.

I was watching History Channel tonight and they were talking about the biggest military blunders of the entire history.

They named 'Light Brigade' charge in the valley of death under heavy russian cannon fire as the biggest one.

what do u think?

Charge of the Light Brigade

A chronicle of events that led to the British involvement in the Crimean War against Russia and which led to the siege of Sevastopol and the fierce Battle of Balaclava on October 25, 1854.

http://www.historytelevision.ca/tv/s...itle_65370.asp

Originally Posted by mmarsh

Some peope said Barbarossa I disagree. For the record the Russian campaign was divided into 3 offenses each followed right after the other. Babarossa (the invasion), Fall Blau and Zitadelle. But I assume you mean the Russian campaign. The Russian campaign might have been success had Hitler (who thought he was Frederick the Great reincarnated) drove on to Moscow instead of diverting time and support to invade the Caucauses.

My choice the failure of the French to extend the Maginot line to the Ardennes in 1940. That bit of brilliance cost them the war even before the battle started.

Barbarossa was only intended as a one season campaign though. Fall Blau and other operations only came about because of the failure of the original plan.

To be fair to the French, nobody expected that the Germans would throw their panzers through wooded, hilly country. And the Germans nearly didn't as initially, Fall Gelb called for the reenactment of the Schiefflen Plan.