It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: alldaylong
Dunkirk was classed as a " Strategic Withdrawal "
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: caf1550
What about Dunkirk? I understand the impressiveness of evacuating the troops on such short notice but that has to be considered a rather large tactical defeat as the Allies would not get back into northern Europe for some time after that setback.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: alldaylong
Dunkirk was classed as a " Strategic Withdrawal "
Yeah, kind of like Washington's retreat from New York City and across New Jersey. I am curious to see the film though, looked pretty good in the trailers.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: caf1550
What about Dunkirk? I understand the impressiveness of evacuating the troops on such short notice but that has to be considered a rather large tactical defeat as the Allies would not get back into northern Europe for some time after that setback.
originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: alldaylong
Dunkirk was classed as an ass whopping.. And no I not cheering for them Nazi sommamabitches ..
originally posted by: Spider879
originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: caf1550
OK. Eighteen-hundred men with rifles, that are bolt-action at the best, against 12,000 to 20,000 warriors that can run and fight like the wind with spears that don't need a belt box full of limited bullets with which to kill the vastly outnumbered enemy. Other than a failure on the truly intelligence part of the British command structure, what is the point of this history lesson?
1.Don't get cocky.
2. know your opponent.
originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: alldaylong
Dunkirk was classed as an ass whopping.. And no I not cheering for them Nazi sommamabitches ..
originally posted by: Spider879
originally posted by: Ohanka
originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: caf1550
OK. Eighteen-hundred men with rifles, that are bolt-action at the best, against 12,000 to 20,000 warriors that can run and fight like the wind with spears that don't need a belt box full of limited bullets with which to kill the vastly outnumbered enemy. Other than a failure on the truly intelligence part of the British command structure, what is the point of this history lesson?
The Commander was an idiot, and the battle was conducted extremely poorly. Men weren't given bullets despite an abundance of them, orders were confused and often contradictory leading to confusion among the ranks.
Look up Rorke's Drift. Immediately after Isandlwana. Arguably one of the greatest moments in British military history following from one of the worst.
The Zulus had guns that time around.
Perhaps the man who saved the Brits from being driven into the sea.
True but idiocy and over confidence cuts both ways..
While the Undi Corps had been led by inkhosi kaMapitha at the Isandlwana battle, the command of the Undi Corps passed to Prince Dabulamanzi kaMpande (half-brother of Cetshwayo kaMpande, the Zulu king) when kaMapitha was wounded mopping up British fugitives from Isandlwana. Prince Dabulamanzi was considered rash and aggressive and this characterization was borne out by his violation of King Cetshwayo's order to act only in defence of Zululand against the invading British soldiers and not carry the war over the border into enemy territory. The Rorke's Drift attack was an unplanned raid rather than any organized counter-invasion, with many of the Undi Corps Zulus breaking off to raid other African kraals and homesteads while the main body advanced on Rorke's Drift.
en.wikipedia.org...'s_Drift
The British got their asses handed to them in the First Boer War as well.
originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Asktheanimals
The British got their asses handed to them in the First Boer War as well.
And then in the re-match Britain whipped The Boers.
Odds even i think.
originally posted by: crazyewok
When the French pissed there pants and ran us Brits only choice was to retreat.
These were the first modern concentration camps as we know them today, invented by the British.
originally posted by: Asktheanimals
a reply to: alldaylong
Wow! Those are horrendous pictures.
I was not aware of this episode of history.
But was it part of warfare or just genocide?
Eta: Insurgency is war imo so you're right.
It makes the Spanish-American war at least in Cuba somewhat more palatable.
The Philippines was another story however.
Several sources I've read claimed the Boer camps were the first but the Spanish camps were 2 years earlier.
Thanks for the tip!
I'm always happy to learn new things and after 50 years of reading history you still find much you don't know.
I never claimed to know history just that I have a deep interest in it.
Cheers,