Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Most One-sided Battle in History
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Sarmata View Drop Down
Consul
Consul

suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 314 		  Quote Sarmata Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Most One-sided Battle in History
    Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 02:09
There was also the battle of Kluszyn (Klushino) 5,000-6,000 Poles against a Russian army of 35,000 including some German-Scottish mercenaries. Polish victory...though i dont know the casualty rate, does anyone? Im guessing the Poles didn't lose too much since they took Moscow shortly after that battle.
Back to Top
Sarmata View Drop Down
Consul
Consul

suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 314 		  Quote Sarmata Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 02:20
...forgot to add also, Battle of Beresteczko, one of the biggest battles in 17th century Europe, Poles, 57,000, against a Cossack-Tatar force of about 125,000. It lasted for about 2 days. Polish Victory.
Back to Top
JeremyScott View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 19-Oct-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote JeremyScott Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 03:29

What about Ira Drang in 1965? 395 men against 4000. 1st Battalion/7th Regiment sustained around 50 dead to the cost of around 2000 VC and NVA.

God Bless Texas
Remember The Alamo
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 04:21
Originally posted by Mangudai

Quetzalqoatl, will you please refer to your sources? Extraordinary claims calls for extraordinary evidences...

 

what extraordinary claim you referring to. battle of patay? here you. Notice I said less than 5, less that 5 could be 1 casualty. Meaning 1 for 2000. perhaps the most one sided in the history of warfare. I don't believe that blood river claim of 0 for 3000. Someone will always die in battle.

 

http://www.xenophongroup.com/montjoie/patay.htm

 

 
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 04:32

 

 It's not a battle but a war. 3 million chinese vs 50,000 frenchmen. Still the war was one-sided in favour of France. there was even a case where 25,000 chinese trying to defeat 500 french soldiers unsuccessful for months, until french reinforcement arrived and scattered the chinese. 2000 french casualties was mostly from diseases.

 

Military History of France
Military History of China
Conflict Sino-French War
Date 1881-1885
Place South-east China & Northern Vietnam
Result French sovereignty over Tongking and Annam is assured
Combatants
France China
Strength
50,000 Soldiers 3 Million Soldiers
Casualties
2,100 Killed
or Wounded 		10,000 Killed
or Wounded

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Franco-Chinese_War
Back to Top
Janissary View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 02-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 446 		  Quote Janissary Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 17:44

Lipani,

Battle between Babur and Indian king-14000-100000
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Oct-2005 at 08:04
The decisive battle of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05, Tsushima Strait, readily comes to mind. The Russian Baltic Fleet was utterly annhilated, while the Japanese suffered the loss of three torpedo boats. 4800 Russians died and nearly 6000 were wounded, for Japanese casualties of 117 dead and 600 wounded.
Back to Top
ulrich von hutten View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Court Jester

Joined: 01-Nov-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3638 		  Quote ulrich von hutten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Nov-2005 at 01:58
what a discussion ? count all this poor victims of doubtable interesst of
unconscionable tyrants, of mad generals and other despots. but count all this brave men and women that defeated their homes and famlilies against this babarian done of all those  who attacked them in the name of god or other cruel ideas.
         &nbs p;  



         &nbs p;                                     

Back to Top
ulrich von hutten View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Court Jester

Joined: 01-Nov-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3638 		  Quote ulrich von hutten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Nov-2005 at 02:50
Originally posted by ulrich von hutten


this brave men and women that defeated their homes and famlilies against this babarian done of all those  who attacked them in the name of god or other cruel ideas.
           



                  &nbs p;         &nbs p;         &nbs p;  

sorry , of course i meant defended not defeat .
every battle is one-sided , cause none one of the fighters can only loose.
his freedom,peace and the opportunity to make his own dicision.

Back to Top
Sudaka View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 14-Nov-2004
Location: Argentina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 31 		  Quote Sudaka Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Nov-2005 at 05:12

I like to contribute whit a point thats is not been taking in consideration. Casualties in warfare information are passed for low level officers to medium ranking officers then to generals and then to goverment and the to media. After several years history books are made. In evry case the numbers get biggers. The usual reason is very common. No battle are like video games. U just cant see most of what u want to know, u rely on the information of ur subaltern officers. If im a regimental officer who wants to reach higher places and pay ,and i suffer a defeat i shure will lower my casualties and said that were confronted by an entire divition.  If im a general and i suffer a masive defeat i will declare only a part of the losses in order to kepp my job, specyally if my head is in danger. If i win a similar  case happend, I ll beat a huge savage horde, i may give any number i like whe the other side cant reach to the commom peole of my country. When we reach to historians the numbers are really far from the reality and then politics gets in the middle. I may tooks a lot of Sources to do some text, the one i choose depends in the political or  cultural intrest that i serv.
Not yet mein friend, not yet
Back to Top
Sudaka View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 14-Nov-2004
Location: Argentina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 31 		  Quote Sudaka Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Nov-2005 at 05:39

There are many cases to analize. If u see the battle of britain in wwii u will see that the losses and victories given by both size difered incredibly. Seens to be talking about differents battles.

Another example very intresting was a battle along the center group of armys in the german retried, i cannot remenber now which it was it (Fuller "WWII tactical and historical hystory"). But one official russian hystory declare that 200.000 germans dyed in that medium battle. If we keep in mind that according to english wwi stadistics in  battle, losses are 1 dead by 2 injured by 1lost in actions. Thats 1x2x1 if we have this in mind we may said that germans suffer 800.000 lost or wounded. But in a battle u dont stay till u lost all ur man. We may said that they lost a 40 % of their force. So the german army fighting should be at least 3 millions man. But in mother warfare there are at leats one non fighting man by evry one fighting. Son  thats makes 6 millions germans soldiers involved in that battle. The entire german army in russia, norway france, italy and north afrika never passed 5 millions. Well that show my point. I must apologyse my poor enghlish
Not yet mein friend, not yet
Back to Top
Sudaka View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 14-Nov-2004
Location: Argentina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 31 		  Quote Sudaka Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Nov-2005 at 05:44

I remenber a quote of a UN soldier from korean war. A journalist ask him to describe the attack of the hordes of chinese  army. He answer "How many hordes are in one plattoon?
Not yet mein friend, not yet
Back to Top
Manuver View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 24-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28 		  Quote Manuver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 22:28
Us invasion of iraq durring "major Hostilities". Iraqi armor was crushed, and i have not heard of one air-to-air battle...
Ice cream has no bones
Back to Top
Isbul View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 04-Feb-2005
Location: Korea, North
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 542 		  Quote Isbul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jan-2006 at 07:11

Battle of Doiran 17,18,19 Sept. 1918.47000 english man and 11000 greeks death in the end.Bulgaria-500 deaths
Back to Top
Terry View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 11-Apr-2014
Location: South Africa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2 		  Quote Terry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Apr-2014 at 07:30
The Battle of Blood River (Afrikaans: sl*g van Bloedrivier; Zulu: iMpi yaseNcome) is the name given for the battle fought between 470 Voortrekkers led by Andries Pretorius, and an estimated 15,000–21,000 Zulu attackers on the bank of the Ncome River on 16 December 1838, in what is today KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Casualties amounted to three thousand of king Dingane's soldiers dead, including two Zulu princes competing with prince Mpande for the Zulu throne. Three Trekker commando members were lightly wounded, including Pretorius himself.

Casualty rate = 3000/0. Witch is an impossible sum to make!  That in itself is something to behold.


Edited by Terry - 11-Apr-2014 at 08:08
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226 		  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Apr-2014 at 11:56
Originally posted by Terry

The Battle of Blood River (Afrikaans: sl*g van Bloedrivier; Zulu: iMpi yaseNcome) is the name given for the battle fought between 470 Voortrekkers led by Andries Pretorius, and an estimated 15,000–21,000 Zulu attackers on the bank of the Ncome River on 16 December 1838, in what is today KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Casualties amounted to three thousand of king Dingane's soldiers dead, including two Zulu princes competing with prince Mpande for the Zulu throne. Three Trekker commando members were lightly wounded, including Pretorius himself.

Casualty rate = 3000/0. Witch is an impossible sum to make!  That in itself is something to behold.
 
 
Wasn't there a movie made about this?  I may be wrong, but I think Robert Redford may have been one of the major actors.
 
 
 
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
Mountain Man View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16-Aug-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 873 		  Quote Mountain Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Apr-2014 at 12:07
Originally posted by the Bulgarian

Hmm, let me see.

In WW2 there was fortres in Belgium that was suposed to be impregnable. It had a strong heavy artilery defence, but it was defenceles against an air assult - something the Germans didn't fail to notice. Nobody expected an attack fro the air, after all. The Germans managed to capture it with just 15 casualties, where as the Belguese lost much more men. I don't rememder exact numbers and which fortres it was, but I'm sure professor Komnenos would gladly enlighten us.



Germans "noticed" because the Belgians hired them to build Eban Emael.  Talk about stupid...they hired their enemies to build the fortress to defend against them.

Eban Emael had six anti-aircraft MG's, but they were clustered at the south end of the fortress.  The Belgians correctly calculated that no one could actually land on top of the fortress...until the Germans came up with a trick to drastically slow the landing distance by wrapping barbed wire around the landing skids.

Of course, the Germans also attacked without declaring war, and required major reinforcements as well as Stukas when the Belgians got one gun turret back into action. and the Belgians, once warned, chewed up the German at the nearby bridge until they ran out of ammo.  There is also the little known fact that the German assault commander never even got into the battle, or even into Belgium, although he got a medal anyway.  His glider had problems and was forced to land far away from the fortress.

However, before we take the Belgians to task for putting their faith into a fortress, we will have to take a good look at the fortresses Hitler then proceeded to build at vast expense, none of which did any better, despite Hitler and the Germans knowing better from their own experiences with Eban Emael and the Maginot Line.

Meanwhile...

Custer.  The ultimate one-sided battle.


Edited by Mountain Man - 12-Apr-2014 at 12:10
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Back to Top
Mountain Man View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16-Aug-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 873 		  Quote Mountain Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Apr-2014 at 12:15
Originally posted by strategos

Originally posted by Paul

 

Pearl Harbour, 2,898 Amercans vs 64 Japanese.

 

Pearl harbor was not really a battle though...,




Yes, it was.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Back to Top
AnchoritSybarit View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 04-Nov-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 23 		  Quote AnchoritSybarit Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2017 at 17:31
The "poor" little red men were armed with repeating rifles; the big bad cavalry because of post war austerity were using single shot muskets.
What I have I hold.
Back to Top
AnchoritSybarit View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 04-Nov-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 23 		  Quote AnchoritSybarit Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2017 at 17:33
Couldn't have been too decisive.  Within a year or so the English were back in charge of Scotland and "Braveheart" was hung, drawn and quartered.
What I have I hold.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.