Wars won using Inferior weaponry

[Freedom-Fries]

Which were the top battles that were won by forces using inferior weapons but better tactics. Or which wars saw superior weapons fail because of the military tactics and propaganda of the opponent. Here are some of my examples where military groups didn't have high-tech weapons but used good tactics, aggression & their training helped them prevail.


1American rebels versus the might of the British Empire

2Soviet invasion of A-stan

3Roman occupation of parts of Germania failed even though the Romans were a superior fighting force.

4America the world's number one superpower failed in Vietnam

5Israelis defending against Arab nations (see Arabs at war thread)

6Italian loss to Ethiopia during the Adowa battle

[jamaKinson]

Battle of Endor.

[blue104]

Eritrea over Ethiopa (Prior to Badoa conflict)

Chad over Libya (1987)

[Bandeirante]

The Battle of Guararapes, Brazil 1648
The biggest colonial battle in the Americas !
Brazilians won !

[Kastor]

The Italian loss during the attack on Greece 1940-41.At the second attempt (spring assault 41)took place the most bloodstained battle of the front. HEIGHT 731.It is also reported at the UNKNOWN SOLDIER MONUMENT.

[Hollis]

Two disagreements, Revolutionary war, perponderance of battles were fought using European battle tactics and weapons. The colonialist were given as a gift from La Fayette 20,000 Charlieville muskets (69 Cal). US patterned the 1806 Springfield of of that musket and did change the caliber till about Civil war time.

Viet-Nam US never lost a engagement, the US withdrew. The South fought for two more years. The agreement was all outside parties would stop aiding either side, The US and allies kept the agreement the Communist did not.

That may be similar to Soviets and A-stan, Plus the west dumped something like 3 Billion dollars in military to help A Stan bleed the Soviets. (typical cold war mentality at the time from either side)

[PeoplesPoster]

The communist defeat of the nationalists in China. The nationalists had a pretty big advantage technology wise, but they never used it effectively.

[TR1]

last i checked Vietnam or Afghanistan were nether battles nor losses for the superpowers involved. more drawn out conflicts, were the SU/USA truimphed militarily but failed to garner enough popular support from the local populace to win.

and if Andropov did not die, Aghanistan would have been ours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111

[bluffcove]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Isandlwana

[J-Bags]

Wern't there a few famous British losses against African tribes during the Victorian era?

[bluffcove]

Such as the one just posted!

[Kaapeli]

Zulus won a couple of battles but lost the war so it isn't exactly a war won using inferior weapons.

[bluffcove]

1234564567890-=

[bluffcove]

Going back ot the original post.

Israel has superior weaponry.

[Mastermind]

Isandlwana immediately came to my mind, too. Excellent battle tactics by the Zulu, and complete snafu on the part of the Brits. should go down as "How to quickly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory". MM

[Kilgor]

armored thrust into France via German tanks. Inferior designs, but used in a concentrated point, via blitzkrieg doctrines.

[nullterm]

Allies vs Germany in WW2, in battles such as the Bulge. The Germans had superior tanks (Tiger vs Sherman), jet fighters (Me-262), small arms (MG42, MP40) and other weapons. The Allies had the quantity factor in their favour.

Air superiority and resources were big factors. And the Allies were more advanced in some fields (radar, atomic weapons, etc). So it's not as clear as a bunch of mountain rebels turning back an army of tanks and helicopters.

[bluffcove]

Hanz Guderian would beat the living out of you if you called his tanks inferior.

They had radios! and had been built in the east with the most up to date technology available. French tanks by comparison were at the end of their tenure. Germany was the first force to mechanise in any remarkable quantity.

Where, can I ask did you get your insight from, so that I can correct my ill advised assumption about the revolution in armoured warfare that was "achtung panzer"

[nullterm]

German tanks were superior throughout the war. In many regards, Allied military technology had a lot of catching up to do compared to the Germans, especially at the start of the war. Look at the American submarines vs German U-boats.

[Kilgor]

Hanz Guderian would beat the living out of you if you called his tanks inferior.

They had radios! and had been built in the east with the most up to date technology available. French tanks by comparison were at the end of their tenure. Germany was the first force to mechanise in any remarkable quantity.

Where, can I ask did you get your insight from, so that I can correct my ill advised assumption about the revolution in armoured warfare that was "achtung panzer"


Errr, one of the great misconceptions of ww2. And alot of people fall for it.

"Equipment imbalances. In most ways the Allied and German armies were comparably equipped. Both had roughly the same number of tanks and motorized divisions. In armor protection and penetrating power of main armament many of the French and British tanks were actually superior to their German counterparts. While German small arms may have been somewhat superior to Allied equipment, the Allies had a significant advantage in artillery. The German advantages did not lie in having an overall better equipped army, but rather, in superior operational and tactical"

From wiki, I could go into better sources. But ill let the frenchmen lynch you for calling the Char B a POS :)

[Kilgor]

German tanks were superior throughout the war. In many regards, Allied military technology had a lot of catching up to do compared to the Germans, especially at the start of the war. Look at the American submarines vs German U-boats.

Not in France, and not in 41/42 Soviet union.

[TR1]

Kilgor is correct. the french had a number of comparable tanks....nwhile the Soviet Union fielded the T-34..not to speak of the KV...the germans had nothing comparable at the time.

[Kilgor]

There the no doubt the germans were advanced in certain fields of technology, but post ww2 there seems to be a stereotype of all prevailing uber Nazi wonder waffen tech.

[nullterm]

Not in all areas, like I said British radar and tactics proved far more effective than Germans. And the Americans were the ones to get the atomic bomb working first.

[Laworkerbee]

German tanks were superior throughout the war.

Do you have any idea how long it took to traverse the Tigers turret? not a very good thing when your outumbered 4/5-1 at times, the German heavy tanks were under powered and way too heavy for most conditions in the East where they would bog down or destroy bridges unable to handle the weight.

[mas-36]

From wiki, I could go into better sources. But ill let the frenchmen lynch you for calling the Char B a POS :)


Well, I'm not a Frenchie, but I know a bit of this part of history. The Char B had it's limitations, mainly lack of speed and very limited traverse on it's main gun. Very heavily armored though. Only a direct hit from a German 88 or Stuka dive bomber could knock it out. IMO, the best tank overall in 1939-40 was the Souma. Just not enough of them, and even fewer of them had radios. Not sure what Col. de Gaulle used during his counter-attack, mostly H-39s I think and maybe a few Char Bs and Soumas.
Not all the French had outdated tanks tactics either. The first large all-armored clashes of the European war at Gembloux and Stonne were initially French victories.

[mas-36]

Back on topic: How about the Pharaoh's army vs. Moses and the parting of the Red Sea? The power of God anyone?p-)

[RECON DOC]

I'm really surprised that you didn't look in the thread below your's.
Hannibal vs the Roman legion. He was massively outnumbered and totally kicked their ass.




Posted by Bigfoot http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif The Battle Of Cannae
This is just part of a documentry "Hannibal Enemy Of Rome"...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRAH7-shE7o

[Freedom-Fries]

Going back ot the original post.

Israel has superior weaponry.

Today it can be said that they have
but in the past they didn't have it in every conflict - Syrians once had better tanks, Egyptians better aircraft...but Israelis still had to use captured weapons like AK-47 to survive, they had superior training and were better on the battlefield

[Hollis]

Today it can be said that they have
but in the past they didn't have it in every conflict - Syrians once had better tanks, Egyptians better aircraft...but Israelis still had to use captured weapons like AK-47 to survive, they had superior training and were better on the battlefield


The war of 1948, was amazing that the Israeli survived, 5 modern militaries from surrounding Arab countries... and Israel with not much of anything. the '67 war similar along with the '73 war. Each War the Israelis still facing insurmountable odds, each newer war, they were still out number but better prepared......... They prevailed.

I think the '48 war was the most amazing.

[Nano]

if Andropov did not die, Aghanistan would have been ours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111

ahhhh simply no my Russian friend simply no.:slap:

[nullterm]

Do you have any idea how long it took to traverse the Tigers turret? not a very good thing when your outumbered 4/5-1 at times, the German heavy tanks were under powered and way too heavy for most conditions in the East where they would bog down or destroy bridges unable to handle the weight.

I base that on seeing interviews with WW2 tank veterans on both sides (British, American, German) who all chose the Tiger. Allied tanks (namely the Sherman) although far more maneuverable, lacked the armour and firepower of the Tiger. The Shermans were the deciding factor because of superior numbers, but 1-on-1 the Tiger would win the majority of times. The Allies won because they could swarm the Tiger and move in behind. Otherwise, shells just bounced off the Tiger.

[Fee Fi Fo Fum]

Isandlwana certainly. Defeat at the height of the Empire. Although the British with a strength of just over 1000 where taking on a army of 22,000 men we certainly had the upper hand with the fire-power. News of the massacre hit the Empire hard, resulting in a harsh rethink and a reinvasion over Zululand. Thus the battle of Ulundi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ulundi) a British square 5000+ strong with no entrenchment but numerous fire-power slaughtered the 20,000+ strong Zulu army in it's paces.

[TR1]

ahhhh simply no my Russian friend simply no.:slap:
umm.......yes.

[kosse]

The Winter war. Finnish side had practically no tanks, too few AT weapons and only a small amount of planes. Artillery was old and there wasn't enough ammunition.

Finns
Strength 250,000 men
30 tanks
130 aircraft

Soviets
1,000,000 men
3,000 tanks
3,800 aircraft

Our Russian friends will propably complain about this intepretation of history but in Finland Winter war is considered a defensive victory. We lost some land but remained independent. It could have ended in a far worse way for us.

[Icarus1]

The Battle of Dien Bien Phu. French troops against the Nort Vietnamese Army. The french lost their fortified bastion against masses of vietnamese communists lead by Ho Chi Minh and his first General Giap. After the loss at Dien Bien Phu, the french colonial era in Indochina was over.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40386000/jpg/_40386661_dienbien238.jpg

[Bitogno]

The Battle of Dien Bien Phu. French troops against the Nort Vietnamese Army. The french lost their fortified bastion against masses of vietnamese communists lead by Ho Chi Minh and his first General Giap. After the loss at Dien Bien Phu, the french colonial era in Indochina was over.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40386000/jpg/_40386661_dienbien238.jpg

That's the proof you have to choose carefuly where you fight. And the French era in Indochina endend before but military whished to take avantage of a military victory for the negociations.

[Jaeger07]

The Winter war. Finnish side had practically no tanks, too few AT weapons and only a small amount of planes. Artillery was old and there wasn't enough ammunition.

Finns
Strength 250,000 men
30 tanks
130 aircraft

Soviets
1,000,000 men
3,000 tanks
3,800 aircraft

Our Russian friends will propably complain about this intepretation of history but in Finland Winter war is considered a defensive victory. We lost some land but remained independent. It could have ended in a far worse way for us.

x2 you guys totaly kicked ass.

[Insane Tadpole]

This wasn't a big battle or anything but gotta put some kiwi history into this... also the death toll is pretty even.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagstaff_War

[DeltaWhisky58]

and if Andropov did not die, Aghanistan would have been ours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111

That is simply one of the most ridiculous and inaccurate statements I've ever seen on this board.

No chance!

[gaijinsamurai]

Perhaps it wasn't a war, but William Wallace defeated a larger English force at Stirling Bridge in 1297.

[Johnny_H02]

Battle of Endor.

That was pure rubbish!!!!

There is no godamn way those ewoks should of won that.

[CMNot]

May as well chuck Rorkes Drift in here.

Bloody leek eaters don't know when they are beaten.

Except Saturday gone mind =P

[Johnny_H02]

May as well chuck Rorkes Drift in here.



Except the british at Rorkes Drift prevailed due to supirior weaponry lol total polar opposite of the thread, I think you are refferring to Isandlwana where upwards of 12'000 Zulus overran and defeated 2 guns and 70 men of N Battery, 5th Brigade, Royal Artillery (equipped with 2 seven pounder guns). 5 companies of 1st Battalion, the 24th Foot 1 company of 2nd Battalion, the 24th Foot
Mounted volunteers and Natal Police & 2 companies of the Natal Native Infantry numbering 1200 British and Native troops in total.

[Mastermind]

Insane Tad, that was a very interesting read...I had no idea it even happened. And, I must agree, it fit the bill as a contender for a most lop sided victory...I put it in the top ten.MM

[Labud]

Battle of Suomi-Salmi (I think I wrote it right) in the Winter war where Finnish forces beated Soviets.

Serbian victories against Austro-Hungary in Cer and Kolubara battles in 1914. when Austro-Hungarian forces were totaly crushed.

[kosse]

Battle of Suomi-Salmi (I think I wrote it right) in the Winter war where Finnish forces beated Soviets.

Serbian victories against Austro-Hungary in Cer and Kolubara battles in 1914. when Austro-Hungarian forces were totaly crushed.

Agreed. That's a great battle. The correct name is Battle of Suomussalmi.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Suomussalmi

[Hollis]

Except the british at Rorkes Drift prevailed due to supirior weaponry lol total polar opposite of the thread, I think you are refferring to Isandlwana where upwards of 12'000 Zulus overran and defeated 2 guns and 70 men of N Battery, 5th Brigade, Royal Artillery (equipped with 2 seven pounder guns). 5 companies of 1st Battalion, the 24th Foot 1 company of 2nd Battalion, the 24th Foot
Mounted volunteers and Natal Police & 2 companies of the Natal Native Infantry numbering 1200 British and Native troops in total.

The web-site on the battle at Isandlwana stated there was no Welsch there in the unit. I as at the 22nd Borderer Museum in Southern Wales and picked up a copy of the battle at Rorkes Drift (from Reg. Historian) and it said Welsch were there. They had a regt. List of those who fought, lived and died. (hopefully memory is right on this, this was 1989)

Rorkes Drift was a amazing battle, to bad the movie was hokey.

[Nebelwerfer.]

Here's one, oldie but goldie, 16th century Battle of Szigetvár (also Battle of Siget).

Strenght

Habsburg Monarchy: 2500 defenders

Ottoman Empire: 90000 soldiers, 300 cannons

Casualties

Habsburg Monarchy: almost all 2500 defenders dead(hungarians and croats, including ban Nikola Subic Zrinski), only 4 soldiers survived.

Ottoman Empire: 25000 soldiers dead, estimated at 18,000 cavalrymen and 7,000 elite janissaries. Also, Sultan Suleiman the Magificent lost his life at Siget.

Result: Ottoman invasion on Vienna and Europe was repelled.


A moment later Zrínyi and his 300 men stormed out of the fortress. "Like a fiery ray of lightning he cracked down on them, cutting down everybody within range to make way for himself and for the courageous men following him," wrote the German historian Wagner.

Emminent french cardinal Richelieu, minister of King Louis XIII wrote this:'A miracle was needed for Habsburg Monarchy to survive. And that miracle happened in Siget.' Interesting read...


The Battle of Szigetvár (also Battle of Siget) was a siege of the fort located in Szigetvár (http://www.answers.com/topic/szigetv-r), Hungary (http://www.answers.com/topic/hungary) between 6 August and 8 September 1566 (http://www.answers.com/topic/1566), fought between the defending forces of the Habsburg Monarchy (http://www.answers.com/topic/habsburg-monarchy) under the leadership of the Croatian (http://www.answers.com/topic/croatia) ban (http://www.answers.com/topic/ban-title) Nikola Šubić Zrinski (http://www.answers.com/topic/nikola-ubi-zrinski) (in Hungarian Zrínyi Miklós), and the invading army of the Ottoman Empire (http://www.answers.com/topic/ottoman-empire) under Sultan (http://www.answers.com/topic/sultan) Suleiman the Magnificent (http://www.answers.com/topic/suleiman-the-magnificent-1).
The entrenched Croatian forces of Zrinski, "...two thousand and three hundreds of them", held off a large Ottoman army (more than 90,000 men and 300 cannons) for several weeks. Despite being greatly outnumbered, the commander of the Habsburg army did not send them any reinforcements from Vienna (http://www.answers.com/topic/vienna).
After many days of exhausting and bloody struggle, the remaining defenders retreated into the Old City for their last stand. The Turks had attempted to convince Zrinski to surrender, offering him rule over all of Croatia (of course, under their sovereignty). To no avail: "...nobody will point his finger at my children in contempt." On the morning of 7 September the all-out attack by the Turks began: fireballs, "Greek fire (http://www.answers.com/topic/greek-fire)", and concentrated cannon fire. Soon, the last Croat stronghold within Siget was set ablaze. The entire Turkish army swarmed against the Old City, drumming and yelling, "...their flags darkening the skies." Reportedly, Zrinski prepared for the last charge, addressing his brothers-in-arms:
"...Let us go out from this burning place into the open and stand up to our enemies. Who dies - he will be with God. Who dies not - his name will be honoured. I will go first, and what I do, you do. And God is my witness - I will never leave you, my brothers and knights!" In the third and decisive engagement Zrinski was first wounded, then killed. The Turks took the fort and effectively won the battle. Only seven defenders managed to escape through Turkish lines.

The Ottoman army suffered heavy losses, estimated at 18,000 cavalrymen and 7,000 elite janissaries (http://www.answers.com/topic/janissary). Yet, probably the biggest loss was the death of Suleiman the Magnificent (http://www.answers.com/topic/suleiman-the-magnificent-1) from a stroke (http://www.answers.com/topic/stroke) during the siege. All this deterred that year's Ottoman push for Vienna (http://www.answers.com/topic/vienna).
The battle was immortalized in the epic poem The Peril of Sziget (http://www.answers.com/topic/peril-of-sziget) (Szigeti Veszedelem (http://www.answers.com/topic/peril-of-sziget) in Hungarian) (1664 (http://www.answers.com/topic/1664)) by Zrinski's great-grandson, Nicholas Zrinski (http://www.answers.com/topic/nikola-zrinski), also a ban of Croatia. This was one of the first such epics in the Hungarian language (http://www.answers.com/topic/hungarian-language). Arguably the best work of Ivan Zajc (http://www.answers.com/topic/ivan-zajc) is the opera Nikola Šubić Zrinski where the battle is depicted and sung about (U boj, u boj (http://www.answers.com/topic/u-boj-u-boj)).

Siege of Szigetvár

Szigetvár, situated close to the city of Pécs in Southern Hungary, was never a particularly large or strong fortress. Its existence, however, had been a thorn in the Turks' side since 1556, when Ali Pasha of Buda had lost ten thousand men under its walls in an unsuccessful siege. Ten years later Suleiman the Magnificent, the victor of Mohács, decided that as a preparatory step to the capture of Vienna, Szigetvár must be destroyed. When in August 1566 he arrived with 90,000 troops and 300 cannons under Szigetvár, he was not impressed. To him, Szigetvár was a "molehill."
A few hundred kilometers to the north another army, 80,000 strong, struck camp between Gyor and Komárom. These were the troops gathered by Emperor Maximilian, King of Hungary, to fend off the anticipated Turkish advance on Vienna after the expected fall of Szigetvár. The efforts of Hungarian leaders to induce Sam Ekhard, the Imperial commander of his force, to aid the beleaguered fortress were of no avail.

Count Nikola Šubić Zrinski, who was then the Ban (viceroy) of Croatia, decided to take charge of the defense himself. With only 2,500 Hungarian and Croatian soldiers he had no illusions about the final outcome. The wives and daughters of Zrinski's officers refused to leave the city, they wanted to stay with their husbands and fathers until death.
After due preparations for the siege, Zrinski gathered his men for a meeting during which all swore to defend Szigetvár against the infidels to their last breath. Then red flags were hoisted as a signal to the Turks that Zrinski was ready for battle.

What made Szigetvár defensible at all were not high hills or strong walls, but the marshes of the Almás Creek which surrounded Szigetvár, a city built on three islands. A dammed lake added to its defense potential. Szigetvár's three islands were connected by wooden platforms built over the water. The largest island was situated in the middle, serving as the base for the "old city." Connected to it on one side was the "new city" and on the other side the fort proper, which included a high point called Nádasdy Hill. From Nádasdy Hill, gun emplacements looked down on the plain around Szigetvár.
The defenders were at an immediate disadvantage, because an unusually dry summer had reduced their best weapon: water, to inundate the marshes. Whatever was left in the lake and moats had been drained by the Turks, who had destroyed the dam in preparation for the siege. As a next step, the Turks built three causeways of brushwood and dirt across the drained lake bed. The Portuguese artillery expert, Aliportug, whom the Sultan had employed at the siege of Malta, devised a monster platform, made of forty-two wagons (three wagons wide, fourteen wagons long). fastened together by tree trunks to bridge the gap between the bastion and the causeway.

The Turks took the indefensible "new city," built on the smallest island, in two days, a feat claiming the lives of 3,000 Turks and 300 defenders. But the fortress proper still stood and the guns from Nádasdy Hill continued to batter the attackers, causing heavy casualties. In his frustration, Grand Vizier Ahmed Sokolovits changed tactics. He sent envoys to Zrinski, promising him eternal possession of all of Croatia and Slovenia if he would only surrender. Zrínyi turned the offer down with contempt. Next, the Turks used arrows to shoot messages written in Hungarian and Croatian to the defending soldiers to induce them to open the gate. The result was the same. Angered, the Grandvizier ordered the fortress to be bombarded on all four sides day and night. At the same time, his men began sinking shafts to undermine the entrenchments, to no avail. The general attack on the night of August 26 was beaten back with the Turks losing Ali Pasha of Buda, and Ali Borsuk, the commander of Turkish artillery.

Suleiman Dead and Still "Alive"

Suleiman the Magnificent was furious. On August 29, the 40th anniversary of his Mohács triumph, the aged Sultan personally took charge of an all-out attack which was renewed ten times during the day. But this time it was Zrinski who took revenge for Mohács. The Janissaries, elite troops, made ten assaults, trying to break through the breaches, and ten times were repulsed by the valiant resistance of the brave defenders. Thousands of the Sultan's best soldiers were piled up dead or wounded in these ten futile attempts at a breakthrough. Aliportug was one of the first victims, felled on his wagon-bridge trying to cross over with Janissary troops. The defenders even captured the commander of the Janissaries.
The "Magnificent" was crying in shame and anger when he witnessed how his best regiments took to flight from the walls. At the end, when he was helped down from his horse, he was a dying man although he had not been touched by any weapon.

For five days a deadly silence fell upon the Turkish camp while new attempts were made to sink shafts under the fortress. This time the Turks succeeded. On September 5th a shattering explosion demolished Nádasdy Hill, fire engulfing the surrounding buildings. Through the gaps caused by the explosion thousands of Janissaries poured in and began to sack the buildings in the marketplace, killing women and children. They thought the fortress was already theirs. Not quite. Zrinski and his soldiers descended on them like avenging angels killing most of the invaders and repelling two new attacks. Turk bodies were piled up in the passages made by the explosion, blocking further attempts to enter. Those who remained alive were seen fleeing like scalded ants from an ants' nest. Sultan Suleiman could not bear the sight any longer. When the Turkish trumpets signaled retreat again, a fatal stroke felled him. Sultan had come to kill Nikola Šubić Zrinski and ultimately it was Zrinski whose resistance killed him.

Suleiman died, but he lived for three more days - officially, that is. The grand vizier believed it was essential to conceal the truth from his troops to prevent a general panic. In an act of make-believe unprecedented in history, he had the Sultan dressed up in his imperial robes with a diamond-studded turban on his head and a golden war-hammer in his hand, and placed him in a chair under his tent as if he were watching his troops in review.
This farce continued for three days to allow time for the complete capture of Szigetvár, now practically ruined and with only 300 defenders left under Zrínyi's command. All their cannons and supplies, except for the ammunition, had been destroyed by the flames. Zrínyi knew that the end was near.

Storming out into Certain Death

The defenders were all prepared to die in keeping with their oath, but first a horrendous task awaited them. Their wives and daughters were still alive in the tower. Should they fall into Turkish hands, they would suffer a fate worse than death, and so, they had chosen instead to die at the hands of their beloved fathers and husbands. After tearful farewells the men plunged daggers into their loved ones' hearts. This was the Hungarian version of Masada. the immortal self-sacrifice of Jewish zealots in a Roman-besieged fortress two millennia before.
With this tragic event behind him, Zrinski's donned the silk and velvet garment he had worn on his wedding day, and hung a heavy gold chain around his neck. He discarded his shirt of mail and instead, stuffed his pockets with gold pieces to "provide for my funeral" and with the unsheathed sword of his father in hand he joined his men in the tower yard. He blessed and thanked them for their loyalty.

His men, following their commander's example, also discarded their armor. Then Nikola Šubić Zrinski, with the national flag in one hand, his sword in the other, ordered the opening of the gate behind which enemy troops swarmed on a bridge. When the gate was flung open Zrinski's men fired two heavy cannons stuffed with nails and sharp pieces of iron, point-blank into the enemy ranks. A moment later Zrínyi and his 300 men stormed out of the fortress. "Like a fiery ray of lightning he cracked down on them, cutting down everybody within range to make way for himself and for the courageous men following him," wrote the German historian Wagner.
The bridge had been cleared of Turkish troops when the inevitable happened. Zrinski was fatally hit by two bullets in the chest and by an arrow in his eye. His officers and men also fell - all except three. Zrinski head was promptly severed by the Janissaries and his body placed on a cannon. As a sign of victory, his head was put on a plate and rushed to the Sultan's tent by troops still unaware of Suleiman's death.
This, however was not the end of the resistance.

Booty-hungry Janissaries invaded the fortress searching for the alleged treasures of Nikola Šubić Zrinski. Thousands jammed the yard and the tower when the last holdout, a young woman hiding in the underground ammunition chamber, threw a flaming torch into the gunpowder stored in the cellar. The terrible detonation which followed buried not only those in the tower but practically everyone in the yard. Thus, it became the burial ground for 3,000 Janissaries.
All told, the Battle of Szigetvár claimed the lives of 2,500 Magyars and Croatians and 25,000 Turks in a siege in which no stones remained unturned. The remains of the fortress of Szigetvár still stand as a silent memorial to a battle fought for country, faith and honor.


Source: http://www.answers.com/topic/battle-of-szigetv-r

[Insane Tadpole]

Insane Tad, that was a very interesting read...I had no idea it even happened. And, I must agree, it fit the bill as a contender for a most lop sided victory...I put it in the top ten.MM
Cheers man, alot of people don't know about the maori wars so I thought I should put that battle in.

[bluffcove]

The web-site on the battle at Isandlwana stated there was no Welsch there in the unit. I as at the 22nd Borderer Museum in Southern Wales and picked up a copy of the battle at Rorkes Drift (from Reg. Historian) and it said Welsch were there. They had a regt. List of those who fought, lived and died. (hopefully memory is right on this, this was 1989)

Rorkes Drift was a amazing battle, to bad the movie was hokey.
Not sure If Ive misread your post.

The isandlwana website says no welch were there.
The Rorkes drift history text says the Welsh were there.

This is because they are too different battles.

genuinely no smart aleckry or wind ups, is that what you meant?

[Hollis]

Not sure If Ive misread your post.

The isandlwana website says no welch were there.
The Rorkes drift history text says the Welsh were there.

This is because they are too different battles.

genuinely no smart aleckry or wind ups, is that what you meant?

I may have missread the site, On a side note I thought it mentioned that no Welsch was at Rorkes Drift.

I have to find the article I bought at the Regt. Museum.


Ans no Missionary and cranky daugther either.

Thanks.

[Kaplanr]

The war of 1948, was amazing that the Israeli survived, 5 modern militaries from surrounding Arab countries... and Israel with not much of anything. the '67 war similar along with the '73 war. Each War the Israelis still facing insurmountable odds, each newer war, they were still out number but better prepared......... They prevailed.

I think the '48 war was the most amazing.

A more accurate statement would be "...5 armies with modern equipment..." only the Jordanians displayed any competence, and they were British led.

[TR1]

That is simply one of the most ridiculous and inaccurate statements I've ever seen on this board.

No chance!
oh really no chance?
the bandits would have been ground down in the end, Andropov would have sent the reinforcements needed by the 40th army, along with newer equipment from the deployemnts on the Chinese and German borders.
the war would not have been won politically, but militarily it is very possible a large portion of anti-governemt resistance could have been eliminated.

[EsoognomEhT]

1234564567890-=


Maybe they have you on ignore and they can't see your posts (or they're just stupid ;) )

[USMC-Congbuster]

John travolta and his pyschlo buddies lost to ug-ugg humans in battlefield earth

[ZeroZ]

I almost diverted this into stupidity, but the thread has been saved.

[bluffcove]

Napoleonic Landing at Milford Haven.

Defeated by Welsh women in national dress lining the hill tops to look like redcoats.

At the same time the advance party sent ahead to garner support from the Wlesh nationalists got beaten up in a pub for complaining about the food!

No foreigner has been back since - regretfully I have to say thankyou to the welsh :(

[big_les]

I may have missread the site, On a side note I thought it mentioned that no Welsch was at Rorkes Drift.

I have to find the article I bought at the Regt. Museum.


Ans no Missionary and cranky daugther either.

Thanks.

I can't see any way that even a website could claim that there were no Welsh soldiers at Rorke's Drift! Also, the regiment was the 24th Regiment of Foot, not the 22nd. All this is easily Googled.

Another battle from antiquity involving defeat of superior numbers and technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest

[sp2c]

german air assault on the Hague on the 10th of may ... but we pretty much lost every other battle in that war ;)

[MalteseFalcon]

The war of Flagstaff War the Maoris were not that primative, there weapons were pretty advanced i forgot the name of one of there spears but it was more effective then the bayonet also the Maoris used trench warfare (i heard that somewhere so don't quote my ethnic ass)

[Insane Tadpole]

The war of Flagstaff War the Maoris were not that primative, there weapons were pretty advanced i forgot the name of one of there spears but it was more effective then the bayonet also the Maoris used trench warfare (i heard that somewhere so don't quote my ethnic ass)
But also the maoris were vsing a very professional armed force.

[Miami Vice]

I may have missread the site, On a side note I thought it mentioned that no Welsch was at Rorkes Drift.

I have to find the article I bought at the Regt. Museum.


Ans no Missionary and cranky daugther either.

Thanks.

Hiya, your posts made me remember this website http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/myths/myths.htm
which gives this quote from a historian of the period

"We've all seen the marvellous movie, where the heroic Welsh garrison at Rorke's Drift match the awesome Zulu war-chants with a stirring rendition of Men of Harlech. Come on Ivor, sing something they know .

Well, it wasn't quite like that. In fact, the county designation of the 24th Regiment in 1879 was the 2nd Warwickshires; they didn't change their title to the South Wales Borderers until 1st July 1881 - almost exactly two years after the war had ended. True, the Regimental Depot had been established at Brecon, in South Wales, in 1873, and from that point there was a small but significant increase in Welsh recruits in the ranks. In fact, however, recruits for the regiment - like every other battalion in the British army - were signed on at recruiting depots across the country, and the 24th consisted of men from England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales. The most that can be said is that the Welsh connection had, by 1879, led to a rather higher proportion of Welshman in the ranks than was common elsewhere. Nevertheless, even the most optimistic search of the regimental roll can find only 19 men of B Company, 2/24th, with any sort of Welsh connection - out of a total strength of more than 80. Of course, there were detachments of numerous other units - including Colonial Volunteers - present at the battle, making a total garrison of about 145. So the Welsh contingent comprised no more than 15% of the total.

And no-one, I'm sorry to say, sang Men of Harlech; the regimental march in 1879 was The Warwickshire Lads."

So you were right that the welsh have been over represented in recent years but there were some there nevertheless

[Miami Vice]

The war of Flagstaff War the Maoris were not that primative, there weapons were pretty advanced i forgot the name of one of there spears but it was more effective then the bayonet also the Maoris used trench warfare (i heard that somewhere so don't quote my ethnic ass)

You are quite correct. The Maoris are the only example I can think of (but there are probably others) where inferiorly armed natives actually reacted to the new challenges brought with the European style of warfare and while others resisting colonial expansion, such as the Zulus who attacked the british squares such as those at the aforementioned battle of Ulundi, did not adapt the Maoris seem to have actually sat down and thought up an efective response in the form of fortifications.

[Insane Tadpole]

You are quite correct. The Maoris are the only example I can think of (but there are probably others) where inferiorly armed natives actually reacted to the new challenges brought with the European style of warfare and while others resisting colonial expansion, such as the Zulus who attacked the british squares such as those at the aforementioned battle of Ulundi, did not adapt the Maoris seem to have actually sat down and thought up an efective response in the form of fortifications.
The maoris were also I believe the first ones to actually adapt trench warfare.

[bluffcove]

Romans fought everyone they found in the general scale of things.

Got to Northumbria, Saw an angry scotsman with a stick and built a wall declaring it the edge of the empire. Then decided that cold weather, midges, and peat bogs werent as nice as Italy and trotted back home.

[Freedom-Fries]

German tanks were superior throughout the war. In many regards, Allied military technology had a lot of catching up to do compared to the Germans, especially at the start of the war. Look at the American submarines vs German U-boats.

Good point there, the nazi war machine had built up some high-tech weapons

[Limeyfellow]

Romans fought everyone they found in the general scale of things.

Got to Northumbria, Saw an angry scotsman with a stick and built a wall declaring it the edge of the empire. Then decided that cold weather, midges, and peat bogs werent as nice as Italy and trotted back home.

Not at first though. For a while they extended the line all the way to Northern Scotland and around the highlands, since no one really lived there anyway. It just became a costly thing to do to maintain a line of forts that long and so pulled back to create Hadrian's Wall because that just happened to be the place of a really big ridge for a large portion of it. The wall was genius however. It helped control trade routes and merchants fantastically on both sides of the wall were Roman forts and settlements were in place. The Scottish tribes had very little to do with the wall and many of the tribes further north were loyal subjects. Now the Welsh tribes or even the Iceni. They knew how to give the Romans a good beating until Vespesian turned up.

[Lt. KoNAne]

battle of tour

[Taekwondo]

Battle of France (a bit side of the topic though)

I'll throw this in just because Germany didn't have a high-tech überpanzer army everybody always talks about, but relied on horses and boots to move its forces around and played the game with a lot of stuff that was modern in 1914. The tanks that were around were worse than their allied counterparts in armoring and weapons, the only good sides they had was a big enough crew and communications equipment (intercom and radio). The French just goofed it up and didn't pay attention to what was happening in the world at the time (Liddlell-Hart, Guderian, de Gaulle anyone?).

It wasn't excactly inferior weaponry, but very close. I'd choose a Somua S35 any time over a Panzer II or a Panzer III.

[PELEIDES]

1940 Italy Vs. Greece. The Italians had newer weaponry and superior numbers but were pushed back with the Greeks capturing 1/4 of Albania.

[AC434]

US Army armed predominately armed with Model 1889 Trapdoor rifles, single shot, blackpowder, showing the Spanish where the shooter was, plus the poor trooper had to wait until the smoke cleared to get another shot off. Versus, the Spanish armed 7 x 57 mm Mauser Model 1893, 5-shot, smokeless powdered during the Spanish-American War 1898.

[Hollis]

US Army armed predominately armed with Model 1889 Trapdoor rifles, single shot, blackpowder, showing the Spanish where the shooter was, plus the poor trooper had to wait until the smoke cleared to get another shot off. Versus, the Spanish armed 7 x 57 mm Mauser Model 1893, 5-shot, smokeless powdered during the Spanish-American War 1898.

The Spainish could not see them too, thought the trapdoor was a mini field gun... J/K...

[roland]

armored thrust into France via German tanks. Inferior designs, but used in a concentrated point, via blitzkrieg doctrines.

the biggest battle of tank of all the war in western front was the battle of Hannut in may 1940.

http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=6699

Hardly a french defeat despite German air superiority.

The French lost for another reason that is having left its right wing wide open while deeply engaged in Belgium/Holland with no reserve behind (to make it short)

[roland]

The French just goofed it up and didn't pay attention to what was happening in the world at the time (Liddlell-Hart, Guderian, de Gaulle anyone?).


so did the Brits and everybody else, even the Russians despite they've been warned by Poland and French example but didn't do any better until they've lost 2000 Km of ground and winter arrived.

Now I agree the French high command was particulary old, stupid and incompetent.
Too bad since they have blocked the carreer of excellent Captains/Colonels at the level just below: De Gaulle, Juin, De Lattre ...

[Mastermind]

On this one, I don't think we can set too much blame on the French for their short sightedness. I like to try to understand the political atmosphere of the time when considering historical events. In my opinion, the French were doing what everyone else was doing at the time. Which is preparing to fight the last war…a mistake almost every nation’s defense ministers fall into to this very day. When we consider the Brits and their failures on two fronts (the Pacific and the Atlantic)….underestimating the enemy and their preparations, we see more than enough blame to share. The Americans were out of the picture with a 12th rated military. The Russians were completely ill prepared… the Poles had no idea what was about to come at them, either (Horse lancers???really!). Tank warfare was actually experimental at the time and not an arm to be trusted. Patton had dallied with the solution to “Blitzkrieg” warfare at Ft. Bliss and the concept had been conceived at his desk at Ft. Stanton (in New Mexico) long before the war began…it was not an unknown concept…it just was considered “risk” strategy…which it is. Risk strategy is a naval concept…and it could have been an utter disaster for the Germans on land if the French had given it any real thought before the war…but they had expended so much energy on their “Fortress” concept it was not seriously considered. The fortress concept was also what diluted and confused their reserve strategy. I think if we wanted to place some gray matter in history it would have been with Chamberlain for a very tardy (and idiotic IMO) foreign policy…everyone knew in their heart of hearts, that appeasement was not going to work with Herr Hitler. But, they went ahead with it grasping at straws. They were really sheep in a lion’s den.

The real cause for the military disasters of 1940 era were the Germans and their outrageous blind thrusts in strength against foes that, as it turned out, were totally ill prepared. I think the real success of “Blitzkrieg” warfare for the Germans was their preparedness to capitalize on unexpected gains. As Patton proved later, such audacity against properly prepared and equipped defenses is suicide.MM

[foxtrot023]

On this one, I don't think we can set too much blame on the French for their short sightedness. I like to try to understand the political atmosphere of the time when considering historical events. In my opinion, the French were doing what everyone else was doing at the time. Which is preparing to fight the last war…a mistake almost every nation’s defense ministers fall into to this very day. When we consider the Brits and their failures on two fronts (the Pacific and the Atlantic)….underestimating the enemy and their preparations, we see more than enough blame to share. The Americans were out of the picture with a 12th rated military. The Russians were completely ill prepared… the Poles had no idea what was about to come at them, either (Horse lancers???really!). Tank warfare was actually experimental at the time and not an arm to be trusted. Patton had dallied with the solution to “Blitzkrieg” warfare at Ft. Bliss and the concept had been conceived at his desk at Ft. Stanton (in New Mexico) long before the war began…it was not an unknown concept…it just was considered “risk” strategy…which it is. Risk strategy is a naval concept…and it could have been an utter disaster for the Germans on land if the French had given it any real thought before the war…but they had expended so much energy on their “Fortress” concept it was not seriously considered. The fortress concept was also what diluted and confused their reserve strategy. I think if we wanted to place some gray matter in history it would have been with Chamberlain for a very tardy (and idiotic IMO) foreign policy…everyone knew in their heart of hearts, that appeasement was not going to work with Herr Hitler. But, they went ahead with it grasping at straws. They were really sheep in a lion’s den.

The real cause for the military disasters of 1940 era were the Germans and their outrageous blind thrusts in strength against foes that, as it turned out, were totally ill prepared. I think the real success of “Blitzkrieg” warfare for the Germans was their preparedness to capitalize on unexpected gains. As Patton proved later, such audacity against properly prepared and equipped defenses is suicide.MM


Also include superb field grade officers training, and iniciative (in regards to Blitzkrieg)

[gandon]

Mastermind, good point there. Also, I think another downside of Blitzkrieg was that simply moving forward did not necessarily mean that land was conquered. There were tons of resistance partizans left in occupied areas that continued to inflict damage on railways, roads, bridges, troops, etc. Even notorious Einsatzgruppen did not achieve anything useful other than pissing off the locals.

[zulu261]

The Italian loss during the attack on Greece 1940-41.At the second attempt (spring assault 41)took place the most bloodstained battle of the front. HEIGHT 731.It is also reported at the UNKNOWN SOLDIER MONUMENT.

No flame but Italy sucked at fighting. The Wehrmacht had to do the job and they did it actually real fast.

[Laworkerbee]

No flame but Italy sucked at fighting. The Wehrmacht had to do the job and they did it actually real fast.

Poor Southern Italian troops let by rich Northern officers, they lacked spirit and thats all!

Italian fighting men are smeared constantly and unfairly.

[Weasel]

Poor Southern Italian troops let by rich Northern officers, they lacked spirit and thats all!

Italian fighting men are smeared constantly and unfairly.

Word. Even today jokes about italian fighting abilities circle in Germany.

[foxtrot023]

indeed. When properly led, italian troops performed (like in the Afrika corps)

In any case, how can the italians be discussed, haven´t people heard about the Romans and their legions and their centurions?

[kenshiroIT]

1940 Italy Vs. Greece. The Italians had newer weaponry and superior numbers but were pushed back with the Greeks capturing 1/4 of Albania.

what kind of modern weapons?

[kenshiroIT]

Poor Southern Italian troops let by rich Northern officers, they lacked spirit and thats all!

Italian fighting men are smeared constantly and unfairly.

southern italian troops? BS the troops were from all the country, not only the south!

Italian troops (belive it or not) are just good as everybody else, and perharps even better. The reason they got defeated was not because of the lack of fighting spirit, you have to look somewhere else.

[kenshiroIT]

Word. Even today jokes about italian fighting abilities circle in Germany.

jokes for imbecils....

[Insane Tadpole]

southern italian troops? BS the troops were from all the country, not only the south!

Italian troops (belive it or not) are just good as everybody else, and perharps even better. The reason they got defeated was not because of the lack of fighting spirit, you have to look somewhere else.
No. They were poorly trainned... and had stupid officers who didn't know what they where doing. My grandad was telling me stories about fighting them. They never put up a good fight. But their moral was low

[Laworkerbee]

Italian troops (belive it or not) are just good as everybody else, and perharps even better. The reason they got defeated was not because of the lack of fighting spirit, you have to look somewhere else.

I never wrote Italian troops were anything other than good! re-read my post and you will see I was defending Italians! why do you imply (belive it or not) instead of just agreeing they have historicaly been good soldiers?

Either way I'm done with the subject, this thread isn't about Italians.

*Jesus!*

[Vandervahn]

jokes for imbecils....

Not really, jokes stemming from the fact the Italians were not able to control even one of their chosen theatres by themselves. Thats a historic truth you can´t argue against.

[kenshiroIT]

No. They were poorly trainned... and had stupid officers who didn't know what they where doing. My grandad was telling me stories about fighting them. They never put up a good fight. But their moral was low

they poorly trained and equipped only for the modern war (but doesent make them bad soldiers...you know?), but when properly lead they kick ass...aaaaand they had SOMEbad officers but not all...some were pretty good.

[kenshiroIT]

I never wrote Italian troops were anything other than good! re-read my post and you will see I was defending Italians! why do you imply (belive it or not) instead of just agreeing they have historicaly been good soldiers?

Either way I'm done with the subject, this thread isn't about Italians.

*Jesus!*

First, I dont care if u are done or not, that's your problem. Second dont say the name of jesus invain! Third you said the italians soldiers were poor southerns who were lead by rich northens. And that's bull (belive it or not) , second lacking of fighting spirit has nothing to do in what happen in the war!.

so now you can say...I'm done [..]

[kenshiroIT]

Not really, jokes stemming from the fact the Italians were not able to control even one of their chosen theatres by themselves. Thats a historic truth you can´t argue against.

still JOKES for IMBECILs, and Im pretty sure you cant argue against it!

[Insane Tadpole]

they poorly trained and equipped only for the modern war (but doesent make them bad soldiers...you know?), but when properly lead they kick ass...aaaaand they had SOMEbad officers but not all...some were pretty good.
how does being poorly trainned make u not a bad soldier?

[Roanoke]

Kenshiro, stop double and triple posting. If you have more to say edit your last post.

[kenshiroIT]

how does being poorly trainned make u not a bad soldier?

read what u quoted....

[Insane Tadpole]

read what u quoted....
yeah i have.... nothing wrong with it....

[STIG]

Here is an interesting event describing how a handfull of Indian troops(about 100)fended off a pakistani brigade attack supported by regiment and squadron of tanks



BATTLE OF LONGEWALA: BESTOF BRAVES

By Colonel Anil Shorey (Retd)



The Battle of Longewala goes down in the annals of military history as a classic case of human resolve and motivation in the face of extremely heavy odds. In this battle a handful of troops, numbering approximately 100, not only faced a brigade attack supported by a regiment and a squadron of tanks but successfully stalled the same after incurring heavy losses on the enemy at the cost of negligible casualty to the defenders. In addition, as a result of the subsequent combined Army-Air Force effort, the enemy suffered more casualties thereby turning the tides against the superior force of the attackers. The enemy had no option but to withdraw from the battle area. In 1971, Major K N Chandpuri was commanding 'A' Coy of the 23 Punjab Regiment which was occupying a defensive position at Longewala, a small hamlet in Rajasthan situated in the Thar desert. The rest of the battalion was at Sadhewala, about 17 km to his north-east. While Major Chandpuri had under his command a detachment of the Border Security Force (BSF), a section each of medium machine guns (MMGs) and 81mm mortars and his two recoilless gun detachments were under training at the battalion headquarters. He had no armour and artillery support. Defences were sited on a high sand dune.
Immediately after Pakistan's pre-emptive air sorties on Indian airfields on December 3, 1971, Major Chandpuri dispatched a strong patrol of 20 men under Lieutenant Dharam Vir towards Boundary Pillar (BP) 638, erected right on the international border. On the night of December 4/5th, Lieutenant Vir reported noises from across the border suggesting a major armour movement. Since this development was totally unexpected and uncorroborated by Indian intelligence, the initial reaction to this news up the channel of command was casual. Shortly afterwards, Lieutenant Vir reported a very large number of tanks and other vehicles crossing the border and heading towards Longewala. Soon the Pakistanis started shelling the Longewala position by medium artillery guns from across the border, killing five BSF camels. When Major Chandpuri heard the enemy tanks advancing, he directed his patrol to shadow the enemy forces and sent an urgent message to his battalion headquarters for reinforcements, armour and artillery support.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/History/1971War/Images/Longewala1_small.jpg (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/History/1971War/Images/Longewala1.jpg) A Chinese-built T-59 tank, of Pakistan's 22nd Cavalry, destroyed by RCL gunners of the 23 Punjab. At 4:00 a.m. on December 5th, the enemy armour was seen enveloping a prominent dune south of BP-638, ostensibly to overrun the Longewala defences. These forces were later identified as the 22nd Cavalry consisting of Chinese-built T-59 tanks, plus a squadron of US-built Shermans. Following close behind the armour was a long column of assorted vehicles including agricultural tractors, towing trailers filled with combat troops belonging to what was later identified as the 20th Frontier Force battalion of the 51st Infantry Brigade forming part of Pakistan's 18th Infantry Division. Later, it was discovered that Pakistan had not only intended to overrun Longewala but had also planned an attack on Jaisalmer. The frightening prospect of being overrun by the enemy caused trepidation among some jawans for whom it was to be the first baptism of fire. Sensing this, Major Chandpuri told his men in chaste Punjabi, "Any one who is afraid to face the enemy is free to run away now, although it will be a shame to the battalion and its ancestors," and added, "but remember, I intend to stand and fight to the last." This touched them, and soon they all reassured that they would fight and die till the last man. Major Chandpuri, although apprehensive, had complete faith in his men and took a silent pledge not to vacate Longewala under any circumstances. This act made a tremendous impact on his men and they were determined to live up to the expectations of their company commander, battalion commander and the regiment.
The enemy armour was closing in fast. There was no time for laying the mines. At about 4.30 am, the leading tanks crept forward within effective RCL range and the RCL detachments were ordered to fire. Once RCL gun scored a direct hit on a T-59 tank which immediately burst into flames while the other knocked out a jeep carrying a senior officer. After the first few casualties, the bulk of the remaining tanks turned around and took cover behind some sand dunes. Some tanks started making a detour to the south-west in order to attack the company from the left flank and rear. During this critical manoeuvre, while withholding all small arms fire, Major Chandpuri ordered his MMGs and mortars to open up and took a heavy toll of the Pakistan infantry. Surprisingly, some troops were still on the tanks while others were running about, seeking cover. In spite of innumerable odds, the attack was courageously held. The tanks then attempted to assault and started closing in. It was at this juncture that Sepoy Bishan Dass, with his detachment of pioneers, started placing anti-tank mines along the route of the assaulting tanks. He unfortunately made the supreme sacrifice in the process, but not before blowing off the tracks of three tanks.

A tank destroyed by mines thrown along its tracks by Sepoy Bishan Dass.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/History/1971War/Images/Longewala2_small.jpg (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/History/1971War/Images/Longewala2.jpg)
The RCL guns again opened up and knocked out two more tanks but, in the bargain Sepoy (later Naib Subedar) Mathra Dass suffered a machine gun burst from another tank and was severely wounded. One of enemy's infantry assaults, too, had been checked due to the sheer courage of Sepoy Jagjit Singh who continued firing his light machine gun from the open till he was killed by a tank round. The platoon under Subedar Rattan Singh took the brunt of this very assault with great fortitude. Every soldier performed his duty, including the cook Bhagi Ram who ferried ammunition to the gun positions without a break. Major Chandpuri felt that unless he was reinforced quickly, his company position would be overrun by the sheer weight of enemy tanks and artillery. He sent another request to his superiors, this time for immediate close air support. However, the IAF pilots at Jaisalmer airfield had to wait for day break to launch any operations. The first sortie of two Hunters appeared over Longewala and spotted tanks all over, some on the sand-dunes, some heading towards Ramgarh and some just bogged in the sand. Flying low, the sortie leader rocketed the first tank, a T-59 creeping up towards Chandpuri's defended locality, and scored a direct hit. He then knocked out five other tanks.
The Pakistani armour panicked and began taking evasive, albeit futile, manoeuvres, mostly in circles, in order to ward off direct hits by IAF fighter planes. Having run out of rockets, the two IAF Hunters started firing their 30mm cannons and saw many tanks go up in flames when their projectiles hit the diesel tanks. Sortie after sortie began arriving in pairs, knocking out several tanks. Soon, eight enemy tanks were seen heading towards Ramgarh in a single file, or 'line ahead', and were easily rocketed. The IAF, having immobilised all enemy armour near Longewala, spotted a train carrying tanks, guns, other assorted vehicles and infantry towards Khairpur railway station in Pakistan. The Indian Air Force blasted off train and the station by rockets and cannons. Meanwhile, Major Chandpuri's position had been reinforced by Lieutenant Vir's patrol by 11:00 a.m., and, soon after, two companies of 17 Rajputana Rifles, a troop of AMX-13 light tanks and some artillery support was also made available to Major Chandpuri. The Pakistanis made a second desperate bid to capture Major Chandpuri's position, but were repulsed with heavy casualties.
Before quitting after midday, the enemy made one last effort to capture Longewala which, by then, had been considerably reinforced. A battalion attack supported by armour and artillery was launched but, this too, was beaten off by the combined, relentless efforts of 'A' Coy 23 Punjab, the Indian Air Force and deadly artillery. With this failure, the enemy lost the initiative and the will to fight and soon abruptly broke contact and commenced withdrawing towards Gabbar, some 25 km inside Pakistan. During the battle, Major Chandpuri's men had completely destroyed 12 enemy tanks and the Indian Air Force accounted for 25 tanks and a railway train. The Pakistani retreating force was seen moving with only eight functional tanks out of a totally 59 tanks. The battle at Longewala became famous overnight and received nation wide publicity. Major Chandpuri was honoured with Maha Vir Chakra while Subedar Rattan Singh and Sepoy Jagjit Singh were awarded Vir Chakra, the latter posthumously. Sepoy Mathra Das, the RCL gunner and the dare devil Sepoy Bishan Dass were awarded Sena Medals, the latter posthumously. Lieutenant Dharam Vir received Mention-in-Dispatches for his splendid patrol action. The heroic performance of the BSF also did not go unrewarded as Bhairon Singh of the BSF was conferred with the Sena Medal. Seventeen IAF pilots took part in the battle, six of them won Vir Chakra while the Jaisalmer base commander, Wing Commander M S Bawa, received the Ati Vishisht Sava Medal. The 23 Punjab Regiment had also the proud distinction of being awarded the battle honour 'Longewala' and the theatre honour 'Sind'. All this was achieved by the unit at the cost of just three casualties, while three soldiers sustained injuries.

source (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/History/1971War/Longewala.html)

[Laworkerbee]

Nice find STIG

I can't wait for MG3 to read it :)

[PELEIDES]

Originally Posted by PELEIDES http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?p=2130492#post2130492)
1940 Italy Vs. Greece. The Italians had newer weaponry and superior numbers but were pushed back with the Greeks capturing 1/4 of Albania.


what kind of modern weapons?

I'm saying that the Italians had better weapons than the Greeks had and superior numbers. The Italians had been gearing up for war since the 20's, so they had time to prepare.

Although the Italians were the ones who brought the Greeks into the war, the Greeks held no animosity towards them. When Italy switched sides the Germans in Greece said that any Italian found in uniform would become a prisoner or war. The Germans didn't expect the Greeks to give the Italians civilian clothes when they went door to door asking for them, since the Italians were the reason the Germans were in Greece in the first place, but they did.

[AK74]

Israel and its 6 day war?

hey only have a squadrone of planes , some super shermans , UZI's and GALIL's.

Their enemy has MIGS, Soviet tanks and 3 arab countries worth of ak-47's and infantry.

[GiladS]

Israel and its 6 day war?

hey only have a squadrone of planes , some super shermans , UZI's and GALIL's.

Their enemy has MIGS, Soviet tanks and 3 arab countries worth of ak-47's and infantry.

Galils in the Six Day War?

FN-FALs maybe p-)

[AK74]

Galils in the Six Day War? p-)

umm maybe just the UZI's and FAL's.

Im not a historian you know...

[GiladS]

Im not a historian you know...

You don't need to be.

All you need to do is get your facts straight.

[AK74]

You don't need to be.

All you need to do is get your facts straight.

i stand corrected.

[kenshiroIT]

I'm saying that the Italians had better weapons than the Greeks had and superior numbers. The Italians had been gearing up for war since the 20's, so they had time to prepare.


I dont know number's but the weapons were almust the same, beside Greek hand weapon were much better (as far I know they employed 7.92mm munitions, while italians 6,5) but italy emploeyd few tanks, i agree on this.
And italy didnt even have a battle plan for Greece!
Italy had not geared up nothing, they simply used the same weaponry since wwI and some were even older!



Although the Italians were the ones who brought the Greeks into the war, the Greeks held no animosity towards them. When Italy switched sides...

hold on, what are you talking about? italy did not switched side. You are wrong on this!

[Vandervahn]

...
hold on, what are you talking about? italy did not switched side. You are wrong on this!

Umm, excuse me?


"Two hours ago Italy declared war on Germany. A proclamation by Marshal Badoglio brands the Germans with savagery against the civil population and says there can be no peace while a single German remains on Italian soil. Italy's new step has been acknowledged in London, Washington and Moscow. Her status will be that of a co-belligerent and not an ally."
BBC Newscast, October 13, 1943

http://worldatwar.net/timeline/other/diplomacy39-45.html

Or do you regard the puppet regime in Northern Italy as the sovereign Italian government?

[kenshiroIT]

Umm, excuse me?


http://worldatwar.net/timeline/other/diplomacy39-45.html

Or do you regard the puppet regime in Northern Italy as the sovereign Italian government?

OMG for a ignorance.....sometimes I wonder if there are some people who knows some history!

Italy surrendered, Germany attacks Italy....the new italian governement send a small corp to help the allies to free Italy. No NEW ALLIANCE as you can see they are called CO-BELLIGENRANT, NOT NEW-ALLIED!

So, you are wrong buddy, plain and simple, perhaps is not your fault because there are lot of BS on the internet, but trust me, ITALY didnt change side! Italy surrendered and THEN they cooperate with the allies to BEFREE Italy.

Italians didnt fought against the Germans in Berlin, or against the Japans in Asia...they only fought in Italy against the germans who were occuping the italian soil!

[baboon6]

Israel and its 6 day war?

hey only have a squadrone of planes , some super shermans , UZI's and GALIL's.

Their enemy has MIGS, Soviet tanks and 3 arab countries worth of ak-47's and infantry.

Israel had significant numbers of Mirage III aircraft and Centurion and M48 tanks which were all arguably superior to the weapons the Arabs had. A lot of the Egyptian tanks were T-34s, they also had SU-100 assault guns and even some Shermans- by no means were all their armoured units equipped with shiny new T-55s. Some Israeli kit may have been outdated, such as the Ouragan and Mystere aircraft and Sherman tanks, but the Arabs also had their share of obsolete/obsolescent equipment.

The myth of Israel having inferior weapons to the Arabs is just that, a myth. In all the Arab-Isreali wars the IDF has had technology equal to or better than the Arab armed forces.

[Ea$y-8]

American Revolution (for the Americans)
Third Anglo-Afghan War (for the Afghans)
Franco-Prussian War (for the Prussians)
Sino-Japanese War (for the Chinese)
Winter War (even though the Finns didn't techically "win")
Vietnam War (for the Vietnamese Communists)
Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan (for the Afghans)
First Chechen War (for the Chechens)

[SpikeBayonet]

Mexican nationalists against the French (2nd) Empire/Maximillian
Any "barbarians" v. the Roman Empire (especially the Germans- most "Roman" soldiers and pretty much all later emporers in the west were actually Germans)
Rome v. Cathage

[young_gun13]

That was pure rubbish!!!!

There is no godamn way those ewoks should of won that.

hey those fuzzy little intrepid bear-thingys adapted and overcame using what they had around them...its a classic example of the David-Goliath...er...asskicking

[Saranof]

Rome v. Cathage

Huh? Is this true? I've never given it much thought

[Vandervahn]

OMG for a ignorance.....sometimes I wonder if there are some people who knows some history!

Italy surrendered, Germany attacks Italy....the new italian governement send a small corp to help the allies to free Italy. No NEW ALLIANCE as you can see they are called CO-BELLIGENRANT, NOT NEW-ALLIED!

So, you are wrong buddy, plain and simple, perhaps is not your fault because there are lot of BS on the internet, but trust me, ITALY didnt change side! Italy surrendered and THEN they cooperate with the allies to BEFREE Italy.
...

Thanks but no thanks for your psycho profile of me... I don´t like these fights over single statements. But you chose to play the Italian stallion and carry this on.

The fact that Italy WAS allied to Germany and LATER declared war on Germany, for whatever reasons and circumstances, IS switching the sides! That Italy wasn´t integrated into the "Allied network" is understandable, but it is irrelevant to the issue of the German-Italian relations. I don´t understand your hostility, neither Peleides nor me connected any derogatory remarks to that, it is a simple reality.

Now swallow it or continue disputing any shadow that may be cast on the glorious Italian nation, I don´t care.

[Simp]

Israel had significant numbers of Mirage III aircraft and Centurion and M48 tanks which were all arguably superior to the weapons the Arabs had. A lot of the Egyptian tanks were T-34s, they also had SU-100 assault guns and even some Shermans- by no means were all their armoured units equipped with shiny new T-55s. Some Israeli kit may have been outdated, such as the Ouragan and Mystere aircraft and Sherman tanks, but the Arabs also had their share of obsolete/obsolescent equipment.

The myth of Israel having inferior weapons to the Arabs is just that, a myth. In all the Arab-Isreali wars the IDF has had technology equal to or better than the Arab armed forces.

But still, Lil 'ole Israel kicked how many countries' asses during that war? 3 last time I counted. It wasn't that Israel had better equipment than the other guys, it was Israels leadership that won them that war. The Arab leadership could've been replaced with your typical American third grade student and come away no worse for wear. Arabs have proved this time and time again. If the going gets tough, the Arabs get going! It's not their fault really. They've not been trained how to fight properly, that's all. They have a "spray and pray" attitude, and when they see some of their comrades fall via well placed shots, they tend to not want any part of that.

[SpikeBayonet]

re: Rome v. Carthage

In the First Punic War (and Second really) Carthage easily had dominant technology over Rome - especially Naval power (until the Romans got ahold of a Cathagian ship and made a bunch of copies of it, tactics, weaponry - even basic metallurgy (Spanish steel - Spain still belonged to Carthage), and a much better war-fighting economy. By the time Hannibal invaded Italy, Rome was losing its allies/client states on the peninsula and fighting a purely defensive cut-and-burn war under Fabius ("Fabian tactics" are what we used to call guerilla warfare). No way Rome beats Carthage, except that they did.

Of course the Third Punic War consisted of Rome picking a fight with what was left of Carthage and turning it into a parking lot - you got to admire those Romans...

[kenshiroIT]

Thanks but no thanks for your psycho profile of me... I don´t like these fights over single statements. But you chose to play the Italian stallion and carry this on.

oh no...here we go again...the waterfall of the BS.



The fact that Italy WAS allied to Germany and LATER declared war on Germany, for whatever reasons and circumstances, IS switching the sides! That Italy wasn´t integrated into the "Allied network" is understandable, but it is irrelevant to the issue of the German-Italian relations.

the italian-german relations was already compromised, dont forget Germany attack italy!
so the declaration of war was just a formality.


I don´t understand your hostility, neither Peleides nor me connected any derogatory remarks to that, it is a simple reality.

For you what contrast with the reality is trut, but for us all it calls a lie!

Well we all agree italy did not recive (and it was not requested either) the title of allied but cobelligerant AND ONLY IN THE ITALIAN SOIL! so there was no switching sides (actually it was a self defence move), and guess on on witch side of the table was italy? on the winner sides or the loser sides? I belive this put a end to all the debate...dont you agree?




Now swallow it or continue disputing any shadow that may be cast on the glorious Italian nation, I don´t care.

why u dont just swallow the fact u r ignorant, and go out and buy a icecream to remove the bad taste. Just face it, u r wrong and take it as a man!

[Jaeger07]

I told you ITALY DIDNT SWITCH SIDES, ITALY SURRENDERED! THEN GERMANY ATTACK ITALY! what was in the name of HEAVEN Italy supposed to do? off course (with the new anti fascist republica governement) they declare war and they send a small contingent to fight the germans.

So what you are saying is... that they changed sides?


Jesus man give it up...

[kenshiroIT]

So what you are saying is... that they changed sides?


Jesus man give it up...


Witch sides of the table was italy? on the winner or loser sides?

Just give up, go out and make a nice snowman instead....

[Jaeger07]

You are the funny-man rofl





Witch sides of the table was italy? on the winner or loser sides?

In my book they are totaly losers - ha! In real life they were partly on the losers side, but the new pro-allied government was not.


Jesus a norman ignorant...how funny, and look how they usually vaunt of how good they school are! LOL

You have to explain this sentence to me. Between your bad english and your zealous support for Italy i know there is an unintended extremely funny point.



Just give up, go out and make a nice snowman instead....
No snow today, mind as well sit here and bash you... rofl



EDIT: Now why did you go and edit out all the funny parts of your last post? Makes me sad...

[kenshiroIT]

You are the funny-man rofl




In my book they are totaly losers - ha! In real life they were partly on the losers side, but the new pro-allied government was not.

I want to know, italy WON or lose the war? no half and half!



You have to explain this sentence to me. Between your bad english and your zealous support for Italy i know there is an unintended extremely funny point.


I dont need to explain nothing to you...if you dont get it, it's not my problem.




No snow today, mind as well sit here and bash you... rofl

no snow? that such! So you want to bash me? u welcome, show me what a kiddo like u can do!

[kenshiroIT]

EDIT: Now why did you go and edit out all the funny parts of your last post? Makes me sad...

so u r sad now? so go back to momma and cry LOL

[martinexsquaddie]

german forgin minister to churchill in the coming war italy will be on our sir
churchill seems only fair they were on our side fro the last one