For my native country (Ukraine), I guess the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-198. A waste of nearly 15 thousand soldiers, and of course the afghan loss of life; over a million and a half I believe. Of course that war helped to shape and toughen the famous and feared Spetsnatz batallions, but overall the war resulted in a shameful defeat and unjustified loss of life on both sides.

I think the worst blunder in U.S military history is when accidently bombed the Chinese Embassey because the CIA was using outdated maps.

The Vietnam conflict hands down.......the only war we ever lost.

Originally Posted by vargsriket

For my native country (Ukraine), I guess the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-198. A waste of nearly 15 thousand soldiers, and of course the afghan loss of life; over a million and a half I believe. Of course that war helped to shape and toughen the famous and feared Spetsnatz batallions, but overall the war resulted in a shameful defeat and unjustified loss of life on both sides.

It is a shame we did not finnish what we started

Pretty much all of World War 2 was the worst moment for Germany's and Italy's military history as far as I know. However, for Italy, it went uphill once Mussolini resigned before founding the Republic of Salò (i.e. when most of Italy joined the Allies). WWI&II were Belgium's.

If we speak in strictly post-WW2 terms, then the bombing of an Italian base in Nassirya last year was the worst loss of life of the Italian military ever. Another "traumatizing event" (which ended happily) was the loss of an Italian Tornado over Iraq in 1991 (the 2 crewmembers were later released by Iraq).

Germany's worst moment was probably the suicide bombing of a busload of Sodiers on the Kabul airport. However, there was a big scandal at some point during the cold war, when Soldiers were to be trained in anti-tank combat: Infantrymen were positioned in cement-enforced foxholes and were supposed to let a battletank roll over them, then shoot the tank from behind. After one of them had collapsed under a tank, crushing the occupant(s), the ******* CO continued the exercise, until another (group of) soldier(s) was crushed by a tank

I think Belgium's worst moment was the 1991 killing of a squad of Paracommandos in Rwanda during the genocide.

Originally Posted by Farseer

I think that the worst moment of Finland military history was civil war in 1918. Even with communists and worker-class defeated it made terrible rift between workers (red side of war) and nationalists-capitalists (white side of war). That rift however healed in time and when second very dark moment came our nation stood united against Soviet Unions numerous forces. Maybe many old people thinks that worst day of their life was either March 13 in year 1940 when Finland had to sign shaming treaty with Stalin, even we remained independence and non-aligned. Old people also sometimes how desperate they felt when another treaty were signed in September 4 1944 (confirmed in Paris 1947) when very harsh terms had to be signed. Still, after all everyone in here is happy that we survived without annexation by Soviets.

Think about it this way: Stalin probably wanted ALL of Finland, yet succeeded in conquering only Karelia even though Finnish forces were VASTLY outnumbered (but they had better taining and equipment, didn't they?).

Originally Posted by rocco

australia: shameful waste of men in gallipoli

israel: politicians screwing things up in yom kippur war

Was the Yom Kippur war the one in which Egypt regained Sinai?

Originally Posted by Mohmar 'Deathstrike'

Think about it this way: Stalin probably wanted ALL of Finland, yet succeeded in conquering only Karelia even though Finnish forces were VASTLY outnumbered (but they had better taining and equipment, didn't they?).

Actually my friend, that's not the case. The war was started to gain land north and west of the city of St. Petersburg (Leningrad) in order to have a buffer between western countries and the city, because it was the biggest port in the Baltic sea. So USSR succeeded at exactly what it planned to do, of course with extreme casualties in the process, something around 400,000 I believe? But wasn't that always the case with all the USSR wars, to throw as much meat as possible at the enemy. Quite a strategy.

Manpower was always something of a never ending supply in Russia, it has always used it unwisely. I guess with such a big army it was always easier and more importantnly, cheaper; to throw untrained conscripts into the carnage with no regard for their lives, since there was never a shortage of men. There really are some things that the Russian army should adopt from the west, such as the excellent individual training EVERYONE recieves. It's not a past occurance either, it happened and continues to happen today in Chechnya, conscripts with bare minimum training comprise for most of the fighting force. Not talking about "VDV" or Spetsnatz batallions, those guys get top notch training, but the regular grunts get the shaft, in the barracks and in combat. Not to mention the serious problem of "dedovshina", or, roughly translated to English, "seniority"? This is a serious problem that's more than common, everyone experienced it; it's basically the soldiers that's been in the army for a while beat and basically enslave the new arrivals, to the point where there have been suicides, crazed rampages with AK-47s, and of course the constant desertion to escape the abuse. Problems are abundant, and I dont think there's an effort underway to correct it.

Originally Posted by vargsriket

Actually my friend, that's not the case. The war was started to gain land north and west of the city of St. Petersburg (Leningrad) in order to have a buffer between western countries and the city, because it was the biggest port in the Baltic sea. So USSR succeeded at exactly what it planned to do, of course with extreme casualties in the process, something around 400,000 I believe? But wasn't that always the case with all the USSR wars, to throw as much meat as possible at the enemy. Quite a strategy.

Manpower was always something of a never ending supply in Russia, it has always used it unwisely. I guess with such a big army it was always easier and more importantnly, cheaper; to throw untrained conscripts into the carnage with no regard for their lives, since there was never a shortage of men. There really are some things that the Russian army should adopt from the west, such as the excellent individual training EVERYONE recieves. It's not a past occurance either, it happened and continues to happen today in Chechnya, conscripts with bare minimum training comprise for most of the fighting force. Not talking about "VDV" or Spetsnatz batallions, those guys get top notch training, but the regular grunts get the shaft, in the barracks and in combat. Not to mention the serious problem of "dedovshina", or, roughly translated to English, "seniority"? This is a serious problem that's more than common, everyone experienced it; it's basically the soldiers that's been in the army for a while beat and basically enslave the new arrivals, to the point where there have been suicides, crazed rampages with AK-47s, and of course the constant desertion to escape the abuse. Problems are abundant, and I dont think there's an effort underway to correct it.

Oh yeah, I remember now. Stalin feared that those evil Finns would easily invade Leningrad if the border wasn't further away fom the city. From what I've heard, busloads of Finns do actually invade St Petersburg nowadays for binges, because alcohol is a lot more expensive in Finnland

Does the seniority problem not exist in western armies aswell? To a less dramatic extent I mean. In the German army they sometimes force new recruits to wear gas masks, then pour vodka down the...whatever you call the part of a gas mask you breathe thru..kinda looks like an elephant trunk. Then there is a host of other pranks/tortures aswell.

More recently there was a scandal of NCOs torturing recruits as parts of hostage-situation training.

Yeah. I guess it wasnt a justified war, more of a land grab one, but then again, rarely wars are justified, it's all about property.

I think the seniority problem is much more severe in the Russian army than in any other military foce around the world. I mean civilized, militarily advanced countries of course, I don't really know the kind of atrocities that happen in African or most of those under-developed countries. Mainly, the way I see it, is a problem with conscription. It's a chain reaction, new conscripts who do NOT want to be there are abused when they arrive for about a year or so, then after serving a year they become the seniors and take out their anger and rage torturing the new arrivals just as they were before. It's a vicious circle, so unless the army goes professional, ie, by contract, and not conscription, then I don't see the end of it. It's not very well publicized, but it's been a problem for decades, my father who was in the Army in the 70s said he saw it first hand. He wasn't himself abused only because of the kind of work he did, but it was EXTREMELY widespread, and all the high ranking officers closed their eyes at it, and ignored it, because a lot of these offenders were officers themselves or NCOs. Desertion is highly common, especially in Chechnya. Imagine with the stresses of war you have your fellow servicemen to torture and abuse you in teh barracks. That is why there are a lot of "accidents" with frags and/or incidents where the abused soldiers go berserk and shoot up a bunch of people with an AK-47 on full auto. You just don't hear about it much.

I don't think this is a problem with contractual armies, I've never heard of this happening in the US military besides some ocasional incidents, it's not a widespread occurance. Germany has a draft system in place, doesn't it? Maybe that is why it also happens there, to a lesser extent of course.