[fastspawn]

British only had a larger empire because they were technologically way superior than their subjugated people.

Isn't that always the case with empire?

Yes most of them, but the Mongols had equivalent technology, and won by sheer tactical knowledge and efficiency. (they had a technological advantage in that their composite bows, were more advanced than anything seen in the West. But China had repeating crossbows, phosphorus grenades and mortars then, so they weren't the sole reason)

[TROI]

Did they fight many huge pitched battles though? Were there any opponents with numerical opposition or was it pure mongolian tactics which pulled them through?

[Countium]

The British Empire of course

If we are going to talk about size in comparison to achievement then Britain gets the gold.

Such a small Island but had such a massive grip on the world.

[clownboy]

The Spartans hands down. 300 men holding off 10,000.

[Tovarish Spetsnaz]

The Spartans hands down. 300 men holding off 10,000.

That was mostly exagerated.

[clownboy]

That was mostly exagerated.

He led a large part of the Persian army to attack the Greek forces from the rear. Leonidas learned of this treachery and decided to evacuate the Greek army while holding the pass with only three hundred other Spartans long enough for the army to make an organized retreat. The battle at Thermopylae ended with every last Spartan fighting until they were killed. This distraction gave enough time for the rest of the Greek army to retreat into southern Greece. Ephilates expected to be rewarded by the Persians but this came to nothing when they were

http://joseph_berrigan.tripod.com/ancientbabylon/id28.html

[TROI]

True... but has anyone ever heard of Rorke's drift?

[clownboy]

True... but has anyone ever heard of Rorke's drift?

Impressive , isn't this what the movie Zulu is based upon?

[TROI]

Technically. It is a great film but there are a number of historical inaccuracies... check out the myths page on the Rorke's drift VC site

[Boris]

No one wants to challenge my Napoleonic Period assertion.

[TROI]

Well the British had won the war at sea already so even if the first British invasion force failed, the second one would of hit home harder.
You can say it was all down to a few mistakes in the end, but it was the British ability to exploit those mistakes that fucked him up in the end.

[Al Khabir]

Rourke's Drift was propaganda, to draw the attention of the public away from the vast battle happening only a few miles away... in which the British army was slaughtered and routed by men armed with Asagias.

First, the Mongols, just because Tamerlane was the king.

My second vote goes to the Boers. Small numbers, infrequently supplied, and they almost defeated a great power.

[TROI]

Rourke's Drift was propaganda

It may well of been, but it was still a great feat of camraderie, mental and physical strength in the face of overwhealming numbers.

My second vote goes to the Boers. Small numbers, infrequently supplied, and they almost defeated a great power.

Almost, in that respect the NVA are better because they did beat a major power. But saying that, the Boer war was just one series of fuck ups after another...

[Stipe]

Spartan society was entirely geared towards warfare, true, but they were just too inflexibile to really be THE greatest war machine. They do rank high though do to their social organization and culture was deliberately geared towards combat, but in battle against Thebes, the Thebans destroyed Spartan armies twice easily using exactly the same tactic both times.

[Tovarish Spetsnaz]

He led a large part of the Persian army to attack the Greek forces from the rear. Leonidas learned of this treachery and decided to evacuate the Greek army while holding the pass with only three hundred other Spartans long enough for the army to make an organized retreat. The battle at Thermopylae ended with every last Spartan fighting until they were killed. This distraction gave enough time for the rest of the Greek army to retreat into southern Greece. Ephilates expected to be rewarded by the Persians but this came to nothing when they were

That part is mostly true...but the myth around it exagerated. First of all...they lost. It wasn't that impressive. Second off, they didn't face 10,000 Persians...They were in a narrow path where only a few hundred Persians could go in at any one time...not 10,000. And again as I pointed out, they lost. It wasn't that impressive...there have been more impressive battles in history.

[TROI]

Like Agincourt!

[Al Khabir]

Actually, if we are going for low medieval, the Black Prince's longbowmen were the best in battle.
The classic was when it came to ransoming back French kings... they would empty their treasury to buy him back, then we would capture him again in the very next battle... good times.

[Piano Red]

Alexander: its a good list, but you need some qualifiers. For example, what Greeks? Alexander's Macedonians? the Athenians in their heyday? or perhaps the Spartans? Each state was completely different militarily.

British, French and Spanish: what time period, this century, 200 years ago, or 500 years ago?

Egyptians? Their kingdom lasted at least a couple of thousand years if I'm not mistaken.

So you really need to be more specific. But it is a fascinating topic.

Well, when I said the Greeks I was referring to all the city states, ranging from the Myceneans, Thebans, and the Corinthians, and I don't believe the Macedonians are considered to really be Greek by all accounts, then again I could be wrong. As long as people gave reason for whichever nation/military force they choose then it can be from any circa.

Anyway, i'm kinda surprised no one has talked more about the ancient Babylonians or Assyrians, or the Macedonians under Alexander the Great. Practically the only general in history to conquer the known world in his day. I'm almost certain things would be a lot different today if he had marched his armies westward rather than to the east. There's also Hannibal Barca and the Carthaginians, not to mention the Vikings during the dark and middle ages.

[clownboy]

Hannibal maybe?

http://www.ssnp.com/hannibal.htm

[GandalfTheGrey]

One, Tubrok is in Africa two I never knew there were Aussies in North Africa?

Known as the Desert Rats. They held Tobruk for a while before they were overrun by Germans. The teancity of their defence made them legends in the eyes of Australian war historians. All Australian infantry forces were evacuated in 1942 to combat the Japanese threat. Some airforce personnel remained.

I'm not saying it was significant, but too many Australians believe it was one of the great turning points in the war, which of course is pure BS. They also say that the Australian defence of the Kokoda trail was THE turning point in the pacific. No 1. this is rubbish, the battle of Midway, and the battle of Coral Sea were the two turning points, and No 2. it was not Australians who successfully defended New Guinea, but the Americans.