What are opinions of the worst defeat of a land army in history?

2014-01-29T17:37:49-05:00

I thought I might add a military history question. I study military history, strategy, and tactics as a hobby. Interested to see opinions on the worst defeat of a land force in recorded history, does not have to be American history. Ill start this thread with my vote for the German Sixth Army at Stalingrad. GO!

Response by Cpl John Davis made Jan 29 at 2014 5:40 PM

2014-01-29T17:40:22-05:00

I'd say the bypass and fall of the French Maginot Line. It gave birth to a new form of war.

Response by SPC(P) Delcina Myers made Mar 22 at 2014 12:51 AM

2014-03-22T00:51:25-04:00

Vietnam. American troops really didn't know what they had coming, and didn't want to adapt.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2014 3:38 AM

2014-03-22T03:38:50-04:00

May 12th, 1780. americans loss of Charleston to the british

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2014 8:10 AM

2014-03-22T08:10:52-04:00

I don't know if it's the worst defeat of all time, but the Battle of Cannae would definitely be up there.

It took place on August 2nd 216 BC in Apulia (southeast italy) as part of the Second Punic War between Rome and Carthage. In short, Hannibal (the Carthaginian commander) took on a numerically superior Roman force, and utterly annihilated it by utilizing the double-envelopment tactic.

The battle is considered one of the greatest tactical feats in all of military history.

Battle of Cannae - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Battle of Cannae (/ˈkæni/ or /ˈkæneɪ/), a major battle of the Second Punic War, took place on 2 August 216 BC in Apulia in southeast Italy. The army of Carthage under Hannibal decisively defeated ...

Pincer movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The pincer movement, or double envelopment, is a military maneuver in which forces simultaneously attack both flanks (sides) of an enemy formation. The name comes from visualizing the action as the sp...

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Mar 22 at 2014 8:38 AM

2014-03-22T08:38:02-04:00

I like the Battle of Watling Steet. Roman Legion commander, General Suetonius led only two legions (10 thousand infantry) against the barbaric hoardes of Britain numbering over 100k non soldiers of which the Romans were greatly out numbered but numbers are not everything. The Roman soldiers were seasoned soldiers; they were killers and many were already veterans of previous battles. The anceint Britons were farmers, bakers, and potters but they are not to be under estimated as they decimated previous Roman Legions. The Roman General chose his battle ground wisley so as to prevent flanking from the enemy on all side except for the front. As the ancient Britons attacked, the General and his soldiers held their ground using a riot contol style style of fighting. The Roman soldiers formed their ranks and files in a wedge like stationary formation trapping the enemy and cutting them to peices with their sharp flesh cutting gladius (Roman sword). With the terror of the Roman war machine it sent the anceint Britons to route and flee the battle field. The Romans causalties reach to about 400 while the ancient Britons lost 80 percent of their fighting force. You can read more about this at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Watling_Street

Battle of Watling Street - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Battle of Watling Street took place in Roman-occupied Britain in AD 60 or 61 between an alliance of indigenous British peoples led by Boudica and a Roman army led by Gaius Suetonius Paulinus. Alth...

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2014 11:45 AM

2014-03-22T11:45:07-04:00

The defeat of Varus's Legions in the Teutoberger Vald by Arminius.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 18 at 2014 8:03 PM

2014-08-18T20:03:20-04:00

As a good German of Prussian decent, I'd submit the Battle of Jena-Auerstedt. This battle broke the Prussian Army and allowed Napoleon to subjugate the Prussian-Saxony army, leaving only Russia as an obstacle to total French domination of the continent of Europe. Among major Prussian military thinkers present, Clausewitz, Gneisenau, and Schoernhoerst were all officers that faught on the Prussian side. Each drew lessons that shaped German strategic thinking for over a century, leading two both WWII invasions of France through the Low Countries.

Response by 1stSgt Eugene Harless made Apr 24 at 2016 2:32 AM

2016-04-24T02:32:45-04:00

Interesting subject. While the massive defeats of The Soviets During Barbarossa and The German Loss at Stalingrad were monumental the defeat of larger empires at the hands of smaller, supposedly "backward" forces are fascinating to me. Three examples stick out to me, and although they weren't large scale and did not neccessariy result in the eventual victory of the "little guys" in the Statregic sense, the results were a drastic shock to the powers that were defeated.
The first was the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest where German Tribes ambushed and defeated three Roman legions in 9 CE. After this Rome never attempted to force their was East of the Rhine again.
The second was the Battle of Isandlwana in 1879 where a Zulu Army anniliated an overconfidenent British Army who had modern weapons killing almost everyone/
the Last was the Battle of Little Big Horn where Custer was soundly defeated because he underestimated the numbers, firepower and willingness to stand and fight of the Natives.