Colin Williams Posted November 16, 2007 Posted November 16, 2007 Reading a book on the Battle of the Marne, a stray thought crossed my mind that the victory of the Marne may have been France's greatest moment of military glory. A second later I realized it would have intense competition from various earlier battles, particularly momentous victories like Austerlitz or strategic victories like Valmy. Or, perhaps the greatest moment comes in defeat, such as with the Legionaires at Camerone? My guess is that each nation has a defining military moment which expresses the stereotypical national character. Anyone care to start the list?
Xavier Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Netherlands: Raid on the Medway, too bad for the brits Belgium: eeh...hmmm...euh nevermind, although very expressive of the stereotypical national caracter Germany: Verdun in 1870, without it there wouldn't be a unified Germany(at least not then), OTH Tannenberg&Masurian lakes in 1914 aren't bad either from a military POVRussia: Stalingrad Damn this is difficult, so many battles to choose from!
Archie Pellagio Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 (edited) I'd say france would be Austerlitz, WWI isn't remembered fondly. In Australia, greatest or most remembered?Gallipoli is obviously the most widely known and popular, but Light Horse's charge at Beasheba, Isurava and Long Tan would probably come up for it. Edited November 17, 2007 by Luke_Yaxley
Corinthian Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 For the Philippines, I nominate the Battle of Binakayan where my great great great grand uncle Gen. Candido Tirona, with best friend ( ) Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo (later to become first Philippine President) defeated a Spanish force at Binakayan, Cavite. Gen. Candido was KIA in that battle, bayonet thru the head. Yes, I'm biased hehehehe!
KingSargent Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 I don't think the French Navy has one. I mean they had to name the biggest ships they ever built after a priest and a pirate? For the USN it has to be the frigate actions in 1812. Not too much before that.
Manic Moran Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Ireland (As a Republic) would be Jadotville. 300+ enemy casualties vs 5 Irish over a three-day siege. NTM
T19 Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Canada - Vimy Ridge - Many historians and writers consider the Canadian victory at Vimy a defining moment for Canada, when the country emerged from under the shadow of Britain and felt capable of greatness. Canadian troops also earned a reputation as formidable, effective troops because of the stunning success. But it was a victory at a terrible cost, with more than 10,000 killed and wounded. The Canadian Corps was ordered to seize Vimy Ridge in April 1917. The Canadians would be assaulting over an open graveyard since previous French attacks had failed with over 100,000 casualties. Attacking together for the first time, the four Canadian divisions stormed the ridge at 5:30am on 9 April 1917. More than 15,000 Canadian infantry overran the Germans all along the front. Incredible bravery and discipline allowed the infantry to continue moving forward under heavy fire, even when their officers were killed. There were countless acts of sacrifice, as Canadians single-handedly charged machine-gun nests or forced the surrender of Germans in protective dugouts. Hill 145, the highest and most important feature of the Ridge, and where the Vimy monument now stands, was captured in a frontal bayonet charge against machine-gun positions. Three more days of costly battle delivered final victory. The Canadian operation was an important success, even if the larger British and French offensive, of which it had been a part, had failed. But it was victory at a heavy cost: 3,598 Canadians were killed and another 7,000 wounded. The capture of Vimy was more than just an important battlefield victory. For the first time all four Canadian divisions attacked together: men from all regions of Canada were present at the battle. Brigadier-General A.E. Ross declared after the war, "in those few minutes I witnessed the birth of a nation."
Marek Tucan Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 I'd say actions of Czechoslovakian Legion in Russia during the Revolution - conquering and controlling the entire length of Trans-Siberian Magistral is no small deal. Close contestants:Some Hussite stuff, most likely battle of Vitkov (overrated, in fact a minor skirmish but with good PR)Battle of Zborov (Czechoslovakian Legion against Austro-Hungarian army)Battle for Dukla Pass (controversional)Prague uprising (has good PR)
RETAC21 Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 For Spain I suppose it would be: Covadonga (722): Stopping the Moor invasion before the christians run out of country.Navas de Tolosa (1212): the final big battle of the reconquista, which would go on for another 200+ years.Cortés and Pizarro exploits in Mexico and Peru.The Gran Capitán conquests in Italy.Bailén in the Napoleonic wars.
sunday Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 (edited) For Spain I suppose it would be: Covadonga (722): Stopping the Moor invasion before the christians run out of country.Navas de Tolosa (1212): the final big battle of the reconquista, which would go on for another 200+ years.Cortés and Pizarro exploits in Mexico and Peru.The Gran Capitán conquests in Italy.Bailén in the Napoleonic wars. Well, when I saw the title of this thread, I didn't know how to select "one" exceptional feat of arms in Spanish Military History. There are plenty. For instance, in a sideshow of the Disaster of Annual, a lone Cavalry Regiment, "Alcántara", saved the day by buying time to the main corps to retreat at the expense of 90% casualties, and after suffering those crippling losses, they made a last charge at a walking pace -because horses and men were extremely tired- and retreated in order. Agree with the items presented by RETAC, but I should add some more victories: Granada (1492), Lepanto (of course), Terceiras Islands (1580, one of the first "modern" naval battles, not sure of the English name) and some battles of the Thirty Years War, as Mühlberg, White Mountain, or the siege of Breda. And one battle very forgotten by English historians, the siege of Cartagena de Indias (1741, the English "Invincible", Vernon vs. Blas de Lezo). But defeats also shape the character of a country, and I put forward Guadalete River (711), the beginning of Muslim conquest of Spain, Rocroi (1643, both as an impressive feat of arms of the Tercios, and a major shock for Spanish society), Trafalgar (1805, end of Spain as a major naval power), Santiago de Cuba and Cavite in the SpanAm war (1898, end of empire, and the strengthening of Separatist tendencies in some parts of Spain), and the aforementioned Disaster of Annual (1921, indirectly caused the coup of general Primo de Rivera in 1923). About defeats that were moral victories, well, from Numantia, to Baler (in Philippines), and Santa Maria de la Cabeza, there also plenty. Edited November 18, 2007 by sunday
Tomas Hoting Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 As a German: The attempt by Colonel Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg and the resistance movement to kill Hitler on July 20th 1944. Even though I am not Japanese: The naval battle in the Tsushima strait during the Russo-Japanese war 1905, which ended with a smashing Japanese victoryThe attack on Pearl Harbor 1941The fall of Singapore 1942 Xavier, you forgot Operation Dragon Rouge in November 1966, when the Belgian Para-Commandos freed the hostages held by the Simba rebels in Stanleyville in the Kongo. That would be at least one Belgian military victory I can think of right now.
Suhiir Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Not a nation, but I don't think anyone can argue Iwo Jima was the US Marines greatest battle.
Brian Kennedy Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 I agree with OT that for the US it's Midway. The narrative has a lot of characteristics that we like to think are emblematic of the US national character -- technical wizardry (the codebreaking), a can-do attitude (fixing up the Yorktown early), laconic and un-show-offy courage (Torpedo 8), personal initiative (McClusky's dive-bombers), etc.
Olof Larsson Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 I don't think the French Navy has one. I mean they had to name the biggest ships they ever built after a priest and a pirate? Well, they do have the battle of Cheasapeak Bay.That battle, and their consequent victory at Yorktown was obviously small affairs,but their historical implications was far larger than most big victories, like Bleinheim, Stalingrad, Midway and so on. For Sweden I'd nominate: The battle of Breitenfeld (1631), when the numericaly inferior swedish army,defeated the army of the catholic league, so decicevly, that the catholic army temporarely was reduced by 5/6,while the swedish army grew in size by replacing losses with POW:s. The march across the belts (1658), when the swedish army marched over the frosen sea,from Jutland/Jylland, via Funen/Fyn, Langeland och Lolland to Zealand/Sjælland, forcing the danes to secede large parts of their territory. The battle of Narva (1700), when a swedish army of 8'100 men and 2'500 from the garrison in Narva,defeated a russian army of 37'000 that was laying sieg to the fortress of Narva in detail.Killing or capturing virtualy the entire army.
T19 Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 As a German: The attempt by Colonel Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg and the resistance movement to kill Hitler on July 20th 1944. Well, you have to admit that the Battle of France, taking out the Larger, better equiped allied forces in record time is pretty good.
swerve Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 I don't think the French Navy has one. Tut-tut. 5th-9th September 1781 should have come to mind.
CV9030FIN Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 (edited) For Sweden I'd nominate: The battle of Breitenfeld (1631), when the numericaly inferior swedish army,defeated the army of the catholic league, so decicevly, that the catholic army temporarely was reduced by 5/6,while the swedish army grew in size by replacing losses with POW:s. The march across the belts (1658), when the swedish army marched over the frosen sea,from Jutland/Jylland, via Funen/Fyn, Langeland och Lolland to Zealand/Sjælland, forcing the danes to secede large parts of their territory. The battle of Narva (1700), when a swedish army of 8'100 men and 2'500 from the garrison in Narva,defeated a russian army of 37'000 that was laying sieg to the fortress of Narva in detail.Killing or capturing virtualy the entire army. Hmm... Correction: For Finland I'd nominate... Because the forces that really fought were finnish*! Oh well swedish army has allways had a habit to fought to the last Finnish solder... And yet we still have joint PRT in AFG today...Should I be worried? *Finland was then part of Swedish kingdom Edited November 17, 2007 by CV9030FIN
CV9030FIN Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 For Finland it is really hard to choose. There is Kollaa 1939-40, Raatteentie 1939, Siiranmäki 1944 and Äyräpää-Vuosalmi 1944, but I have to say as tanknet member Tali-Ihantala 1944 (largest land battle ever in Scandinavia).
Tomas Hoting Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Well, you have to admit that the Battle of France, taking out the Larger, better equiped allied forces in record time is pretty good. Glory is something I wouldn't associate with it. What Stauffenberg and the resistance movement did was a glorious moment in German history. I agree with you from a purely military perspective only. There are other examples from WW2 for Germany as well, however. The airborne assault on Fort Eben Emael in BelgiumThe various battles of encirclement in the early phase of the German invasion ofthe Soviet UnionThe battle for CreteThe African campaignThe last stand of the Bismarck And, in the end:The rescue of 2 million soldiers, wounded, and civilian refugees across the Baltic Sea by the German navy in the last months of WW2.
ShotMagnet Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Hydaspus RiverThermopylaeStirling BridgeGettysburg Shot
Old Tanker Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Wow ! The British contingent has been most quiet in this thread !Where is Billy B. , the world waits ?
Olof Larsson Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Hmm... Correction: For Finland I'd nominate... Because the forces that really fought were finnish*! The area that constitute Finland today, was then a part of Sweden since hundreds of years.Finland, by the way, had not existed prior to that day time and the finnish peoplewas devided between Sweden, Russia and Norway. Either way, the finnish soldiers were hardly a majority in any of those battles.In fact swedish and finnish soldiers combined, were probably a minorety of the soldiers (with the majority being mercenaries of german origin, scottish origin etc.) at both Breitenfeld and the march across the belts. Not to desimilar from the brittish victories of the duke of Marlborough or the duke of Wellington. At Narva the army was shipped over from southern sweden and a majority of the soldiers was probably swedes.The little information I'va found on the TOE indicates that almost all infantry was swedish,while the cavalry seems to be a mix of finnish, Estonian and swedish units (with the finnish being the most numerous). Oh well swedish army has allways had a habit to fought to the last Finnish solder... And yet we still have joint PRT in AFG today...Should I be worried? Personaly I'm more worried that the swedish armed forces don't even pretend like defending Sweden is something they should be consider an option, after we have reduced our abilety from a decent defence* and a decent abilety to send troops abroad**,to a nonexistent abilety to defend sweden and a drasticaly reduced abilety to send troops abroad. (*) 20 years ago we should have been able to mobilise 800'000 men in a few days(training and equipment was obviously lacking in many ways, but it was still an army that could cover the entire country)Today, they talk about mobilise....say 8'000 men after several months. (**) In the 1960's we sent 2 batallions and a squadron of fighters abroad, during a time when volonteering to go abroad was almost seen as treason by fellow officers.In the 1990's we sent a battion aborad, during a time when peace-keeping was considered low-priorety.Today, we might be able to send a few companies abroad, during a time when colonial policing is the only thing the armed forces are supposed to do.
BillB Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Hydaspus RiverThermopylaeStirling BridgeGettysburgShotPlease. BillB
BillB Posted November 17, 2007 Posted November 17, 2007 Wow ! The British contingent has been most quiet in this thread !Where is Billy B. , the world waits ? It's knowing where to start... BillB
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now