What was the most one-sided battle in history? - Page 5




 
--
 
December 16th, 2004  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcoat
My favourite
1941 Britain v Italy

The British counter-attack on the Italian forces which had attacked Egypt, ending in the battle of Brada Fomm
A force of 50,000 British Commonwealth troops defeated an Italian army of 250,000, capturing 130,000 troops, 845 field guns, 380 tanks for a loss of under 2000 men.
The only quibble I'd have with this nomination is that the Italian forces in WW2 were not of the highest quality shall we say. Quite well equipped but poorly trained, poorly led with poor morale. The outcome of this battle was never in doubt.
December 16th, 2004  
Locke
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beardo

what about the famous ''Bravo Two Zero'' SAS patrol in the 1st Gulf War...

8 SAS sent out to recce a supply route and blow up a communications line, ended up being compromised and having to retreat 200 miles. During this retreat they came upon fire and had to take out APC's and dodge 57mm AAA rounds. 3 were killed, 4 were captured, 1 escaped. During the mission they got 250 confirmed kills
yes but it depends who you listen to
if you read "the real bravo two zero" he refutes most of what mcnab says, about being discovered, and the ammount casualties, and even the taxi they used to get out of there at the end!]
craziness, who to believe?
December 16th, 2004  
beardo
 
i have read about 10 different versions lol
--
December 16th, 2004  
Big_Z
 
 
What about Rangers and the D guys in Somalia? I believe it was something like 18 Rangers dead and 1500+ insurgents deaths. There have been claims of far more then 1500 insurgent deaths.
December 22nd, 2004  
Guaripa
 
Your all wrong


Its that of Husband and Wife !!

The Wife must WIN, hands down !
December 22nd, 2004  
Claymore
 
 
For another small scale battle how about the Battle at Cowpens in South Carolina during the American Revolutionary War? According to the official reports (which admittedly may or may not be accurate on the American side) the Americans had roughly 800 men vs the 1200-1300 Royal Dragoons and Highland Infantry of the british. The battle lasted just about an hour with the British losing over about 100 dead, 200 wounded and 500 captured. The American (again according to the official reports) lost 12 dead and 60 wounded. It can be said this stunning victory (against one of the British army's up favorites of the time - Banastre Tarleton)
led directly to the victory at Yorktown. Some historians believe that one of the reasons for the British loss was that Tarleton basically ran his men into the ground trying to catch the Americans.
December 28th, 2004  
bushpig1998
 
 
I have to Say the Battle of Blood river. But then again, I'm biased! I had ancestors at the battle.
If memory servers, I don't thenk there were any major Boer casualties (fatalities).
December 29th, 2004  
chewie_nz
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

"The scouts were astounded to see the Spartans doing callisthenics and braiding their hair"

ahahahahahaha!
December 29th, 2004  
bushpig1998
 
 
I can't say what I think about the braiding hair part! hahahhaha

Really funny.

December 29th, 2004  
Charge 7
 
 
Thermopylae, no question. 300 Spartans vs. 10,000 Persians if the numbers are to be believed and they probably can be. The Spartans were tougher than woodpecker lips. Since the shield is the heaviest thing to carry into battle if you ran from battle in cowardice it would be tossed away. Spartan mothers and wives urged their men to "come home with your shield or on it (dead)".