The effective prosecution of any war requires a load of decisions at all junctures. Many times, commanders will blunder through misinformation, faulty intelligence, or a misreading of the tactical or strategic situation. We, safely ensconced here in the future can play Monday morning quarterback with the decision of the past often without acknowledging the fact that the commanders in question lack our brilliant hindsight; however, some decisions are simple unconscionable. One has to think that someone, somewhere had to look at this choice and say “God, this is stupid!” This list represents, in chronological order, ten of what I consider to be the dumbest decisions anyone ever made. Each of these decisions either resulted in tremendously unnecessary loss of men and materiel or it resulted in the ultimate loss or needless prolonging of the war in which it took place.
The only motivation I can fathom behind this idiotic blunder by a military genius is sheer boredom. To this point in his military career, Napoleon has known nothing but victory after victory. He’s conquered pretty much all of Europe that refused to ally with him and suddenly he was sitting around with the largest army ever gathered in Europe up until then with nothing to do. So Napoleon looks west, to Mother Russia.
We all know how it turned out but you have to think someone in that huge army knew it was a bad idea. In any event, he didn’t say anything and the rest is history. Napoleon invaded Russia with three quarters of a million men and didn’t fight much of a battle. The Russian retreated into the vastness of their country and burned everything in their wake. Result? Napoleon gets to Moscow only to find smoking ruins. Dejected at not getting to move his toy soldiers around on his big map, he turns the Grand Armee around and begins for home.
But then the real trouble began. Constant harassment by tiny, mobile Russian units. Constant hunger because the supply lines are cut in more places than Danish lace and, worst of all, winter sets in and the soldiers start freezing to death in droves. Three quarters of a million went in, but less than one in three would made it out.
Someone has remarked that the Alamo seems to show up on nearly every military list. Well, it’s a great story. Not the least great part about it was it was so totally unnecessary. All the Alamo consisted of was a tiny adobe walled mission in the middle of a prairie. Basically, Santa Anna, aka Napoleon of the West, decided the tiny garrison in the tiny fort had to be taught a lesson about Mexican politics by his great big army.
One just has to think that someone, some hard campaigning Sergeant in the Mexican force had to look around at the wide open prairie on both sides of the Alamo and think to himself, “Why don’t we just go around? We can even shoot at them as we go by, but let’s get to the rebel capital and put down the rebellion.”
Instead, mainly as a result of Santa Anna’s pride, the main Mexican army spends days and days held up attacking this insignificant little outpost. This needless delay gives the Texas government time to get organized, gives people time to flee, and gives the main Texan army time to get reinforced and into better position. The end result was the Battle of San Jacinto where old Santa Anna got caught napping – literally – and the Republic of Texas was born.
This one will be a little obscure to some, but in the grand scheme of things, it was a world-changing event. The cartridge in question was for the new Pattern 3 Enfield rifle that was to be issued to all the Empire’s troops and replace the older, less efficient models. On the surface this doesn’t seem like a big deal and to us, it probably wouldn’t be. However, in 1857, cartridges weren’t brass, they were paper, and to load them, one had to first BITE the end off the cartridge and pour the contained powder down the barrel of the muzzle loaded weapon. Again, no big deal, until one realizes one singularly important fact. The lubricating lard smeared on the cartridges was made from animal fat. This fat could be obtained from either pigs or cows. In and of itself, that doesn’t present a problem until one realizes that the vast majority of foreign troops in the British Empire were either Muslim or Hindu, especially in India. Now, pigs are unclean to Muslims and cows are sacred to the Hindus so the thought of putting a cartridge with lard into their mouths was anathema to both parties. It didn’t help matters much that the political climate in India was becoming a powder keg, but the lard cartridges proved the final straw – the match that blew the keg, so to speak.
What resulted is known to history as the Sepoy Rebellion or the Sepoy Mutiny. Basically, without going into the very involved, tense and delicate political situation, the Sepoys or Indian soldiers, refused to touch the cartridges which constitutes mutiny. When the first few were seen being punished by the British colonial overlords, the rest rose up and began a bloody rebellion that lasted 13 months and saw tremendous bloodshed and cruelty on both sides. The British severity in putting down the revolt – many leaders were tied to the mouths of cannon and blasted to bloody vapor — remained in the minds of the Indian people through the rest of the 19th century and through two world wars in the 20th. In many ways, the Indian Independence Movement lead by Gandhi can trace its roots to this one monumentally boneheaded decision.
During the American Civil War, one of the qualities that made General Robert E. Lee of the Confederacy so effective was the mysteriousness with which he moved and operated. His troops seemed to appear, fight, and melt away with uncanny speed. Now in reality, this was nothing more supernatural than very detailed and well-executed battle plans. Imagine what the Union generals could have done if they had only possessed a copy of one of Lee’s battle plans. In a wildly providential moment, that is exactly what happened on the eve of the Battle of Sharpsburg in September of 1862.
Union General George McClellan’s 90,000-man Army of the Potomac was moving to intercept Lee, and occupied a campsite the Confederates had vacated just a few days before. While setting up their tent, two Union soldiers discovered a copy of Lee’s detailed battle plans wrapped around three cigars. The order indicated that Lee had divided his army and dispersed portions, intending to bring battle near Antietam Creek. Everything was there in writing. It was a colossal blunder by some Confederate officer.
The outcome would have been even more disastrous for the Confederates had not McClellan waited about 18 hours before deciding to take advantage of this intelligence and reposition his forces. As it was, the Battle of Sharpsburg (or Antietam) would be the single bloodiest day of combat in American history with 23,000 killed and countless wounded before the sun set.
All that saved Lee was McClellan’s indecision. Still, the battle sapped numbers of soldiers that the Confederacy could ill afford to lose. More importantly, though, was the fact that England had been teetering on the fence of coming into the war to aid their cotton supplying Confederates, but with the outcome of Antietam, they decided to sit back for a little while longer, thus robbing the Confederacy of help it desperately needed. A different choice of wrapping paper could have made all the difference in the world to the history of North America.
It sometimes looks like Lee did have some sort of guardian angel; either that or the Northern generals before Grant were all monumentally stupid. The former is more romantic, but the latter is easier to prove. In any event, Meade’s decision to let Lee slip back to Virginia is another example of Lee’s luck and an opposing general’s horrendous decision making ability.
The Army of Northern Virginia was done. Three days at Gettysburg had reduced the proud rebels to a shell of their former strength. Devil’s Den, Little Round Top, the Peach Orchard, and, at the last, Pickett’s Charge up Cemetery Ridge had produced the High Water Mark of the Confederacy. With all his reserves spent, Lee was gathering his badly mauled forces and trying mightily to make it back to the relative safety of Ol’ Virginy.
In his way was the rain swollen Potomac River. On his flanks were the persistent if largely ineffectual Union cavalry pickets. The roads were a quagmire of mud. In all, the stage was set for the final crushing blow to be delivered by the Army of the Potomac, which had several reserves that had seen little if any fighting. They would sweep down on the defeated boys in grey like an avenging blue tide. The Army of Northern Virginia would be crushed and the Civil War would be all but over. All that remained was for General Meade to give the order to attack.
Well, the order never came. For reasons that, to this day, are unclear Meade was reluctant to follow Lee. Instead, he gathered his forces in strength and waited. No one is quite sure what he was waiting for, but when President Lincoln found out that Meade had literally allowed the end of the war to slip through his hands, Honest Abe was incensed. It was largely Meade’s indecision that resulted in General Grant being called east from Vicksburg and placed in command of the Army of the Potomac. Had Meade attacked the defeated rebels at that opportune moment, the Civil War probably would not have drug on in a morass of attrition for nearly two more years. Countless lives, Union and Confederate alike, could have been spared and the Reconstruction Period would likely have looked much different.
It is generally held to be a good idea among most military men that, when the latest and greatest weapons are available, they should be used. The newly patented Gatling Gun was the earliest machine gun and had completed its trials. Custer had two to four of the guns and abundant ammunition available when he set out to uproot a “small Indian village” on the bank of the Little Bighorn River. Custer’s reasoning behind not using them was that the Gatling guns would impede his march and hamper his mobility. More importantly, he also is said to have believed that the use of so devastating a weapon would “cause him to lose face with the Indians.” Considering reports of Custer’s vanity, this is not hard to believe.
These problems do not change the fact that the Gatling guns would have been a decided equalizer in the face of what turned out to be overwhelming Indian superiority, and that elsewhere in the Indian wars, the Indians often reacted to new army weapons by breaking off the fight. Instead, Custer led more than 250 doomed men of the famous 7th Cavalry into the Montana hill country. If he had taken the then greatly improved machine guns with him the outcome of the much-discussed Last Stand would surely have been very different.
What could have been going through Custer’s mind as he stood, the breeze whipping his famous golden hair behind him, his loyal men dead all about him, and several hundred Sioux warriors galloping towards him intent on making him a human pincushion? Could it possibly have been, “I really could use those Gatling guns right about now.”
By the start of 1915, the Great War had ground to a halt. The trench lines stretched from Belgium through Italy and neither side was making progress. The war had devolved into mad suicide rushes across no man’s land into the teeth of the new Maxim guns. Predictably, casualties were mounting daily and the war that “will be over by Christmas” seemed to have no end in sight. To make matters worse, Russia was getting their mess kits handed to them all up and down the Eastern Front and the tsardom was beginning to look shaky. The German navy had cut all the usual supply lines to accessible ports and any port safe from the German fleet was either icebound or entirely too far away to be of any practical use. Something had to be done and quickly.
Enter Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill. Now Churchill is well know for his personal bravery as well as his usually keen mind. He is also known for being a fan of a good stiff drink and apparently, he’d had several when he thought of this plan. Churchill proposed that a third front be opened up in the western Mediterranean. Specifically, he planned an attack on the Ottoman Empire held Dardanelles. The attack on what he termed the “soft underbelly of the Central Powers” would open up a warm water resupply depot for Russia and effectively turn the flank of the vast trench network. It was a great idea in theory and on paper.
The Gallipoli Campaign took place at Gallipoli peninsula in Turkey from 25 April 1915 to 9 January 1916. The intent was for a joint amphibian attack by British Empire and French forces up the peninsula to capture the Ottoman capital of Istanbul. To put it mildly, the attempt failed miserably with heavy casualties on both sides. The whole operation was botched from the beginning. The planned invasion was tipped off to the Turks who reinforced the peninsula with heavy guns and additional troops. Once the invasion began, it quickly stalled on the beachhead, thwarted by the Turkish occupation of the high ground.
To make a very detailed and long story short, the allied forces, the bulk of which were Australians and New Zealanders (who ultimately had the highest number of dead per capita of all nations in the war), were essentially trapped on the beaches in the open for months. No real progress was ever made inland despite several dogged attempts all around the peninsula. Promised naval artillery support was cut short as soon as the Admiralty found out – by the sinking of two battleships – that German U-boats were in the waters. The whole event was an unmitigated disaster. Conditions were unreal. In the summer, the heat was atrocious, which in conjunction with bad sanitation, led to so many flies that eating became extremely difficult. Corpses, left in the open, became bloated and stank. The precarious Allied bases were poorly situated and caused supply and shelter problems. A dysentery epidemic spread through the Allied trenches. Autumn and winter brought relief from the heat, but also led to gales, flooding and frostbite.
In the end, Churchill was sacked as Lord of the Admiralty, several generals saw their careers ended but most of all; tens of thousands of men on both sides were killed for absolutely no gain whatsoever. To this day, Gallipoli is remembered as ANZAC Day in Australia and New Zealand in honor of all the brave ANZACs who gave their lives for a stupid decision.
Honestly? See item 10. Replace “Napoleon” with “Hitler”, “Russia” with “Soviet Union”, and “Le Grand Armee” with “Wermacht” and you have the gist of the story. Operation Barbarossa was, without a doubt, the worst case of someone who failed to learn from history being doomed to repeat it. Adolf Hitler proved that it’s not only teenagers who think, “It can’t happen to me.”
Wars are best run by the professionals. Lyndon B. Johnson was President, but he was not a professional soldier by any means during the Vietnam War. That did not stop him from blowing what was a small insurgency with American “advisors” into an all out “police action” that would claim the lives of nearly 60,000 American soldiers, sailors, and airmen before it ended two Presidents later.
Johnson expanded American involvement on the ground in Vietnam as soon as he took office after JFK’s assassination. Unfortunately for the troops, LBJ watched opinion polls and it is hard to fight a war if you watch opinion polls. Basically, field commanders couldn’t attack certain high value targets without Johnson’s say-so and, given the distances and the time it would take to brief the President on each given situation, the men were fighting one step behind at all times. He also took fire from the press who said he was too cozy with the defense businessmen and the war was justification for increased defense spending to make these businesses rich. That speculation, like Johnson’s supposed involvement in JFK’s assassination, is better left to the conspiracy theorists.
What is a fact, however, is LBJ’s insistence on being a hands-on Commander-in-Chief seriously handicapped American efforts in the jungles of Vietnam. Ultimately, his decision to try running a war based on opinion polls proved his undoing and he dropped out of the 1968 Presidential elections.
For centuries, countries outside of Afghanistan – from the Indian Mughals, to the British Empire, to the Islamic fundamentalists – have tried to impose their will upon the Afghan people. As a result, the Afghans are a hardy bunch and they can fight like devils. The are experts at guerilla warfare and it is always a safe bet to assume that whoever is invading them has enemies all to willing to supply the natives with effective weaponry. That is over 1200 years of history totally lost on the Soviets in 1979 when they sent in a massive number of troops to prop up the unpopular communist government in Kabul.
What followed was a ten year blood bath of death among the rocks. For years, Soviet Hind helicopters would hunt in the valleys for any of the Afghan fighters. Upon finding them, the guerillas would be mown down by cannon fire from the craft they called “The Crocodile”. Then the CIA saw a chance to return the favor the Soviets had played on the United States during its involvement in Vietnam and began supplying the Afghan fighters with Stinger surface to air missiles. So much for Soviet air superiority. Stingers shot down 333 Soviet helicopters in the course of the ten year war.
The saddest part is the Soviets had just witnessed the USA’s horrific ten year quagmire in Vietnam, but, like other groups in history, they figured it couldn’t happen to them. They were wrong. The Soviets lost 15,000 men and billions of rubles worth of equipment to Afghanistan and they got nothing in return. For the Afghans, the country was left devastated and ripe for a group called the Taliban to take over.
























September 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 am
No Varus?
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:47 am
Great list
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:52 am
Great list, there should be more military ones!
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 am
cool list. Custer had to be on it
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:55 am
Where is Iraq invasion by great great BUSH ????
And Alexanders invasion for INDIA ?
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:57 am
Napoleon looked WEST to Russia?
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:00 am
Gallipoli campaign – I don’t think you meant to say ‘a joint amphibian attack’.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:03 am
To be honest – you’d be hard pressed to whittle down a top 100 military blunders.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:04 am
This was a great list, well written and well researched. I use to hate history while in high school, but love it now. It is said education is wasted on the young. I’m proof of that. I thoroughly loved reading this list. Thank you.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:15 am
@Clantargh (6): he had a VERY powerful telescope for the time.
great list! custer had it coming.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:22 am
Great list !!!
Glad to see the Sepoy Mutiny making it to the list. Also popularly called in India as the First war of Independence.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:24 am
Are there any such mistakes done by Mongols after Genghis khan ???
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:30 am
Great List! Though you should have included the Canadians at Dieppe
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:33 am
This is a great list, it has already taught me things i didnt know before
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:34 am
*sigh* LBJ. I remember my dad… “Johnson, Johnson, he’s our man! Goldwater goes in the garbage can!” I’m afraid Texas doesn’t have a very good association with presidents. The ones we’ve provided are not among the favorites, and we hosted an asasination (sp?).
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:37 am
surely Napoleon looked EAST to russia lol.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:39 am
Good list, interesting to see that no.1 isn’t a shared USSR/American entry.
How many more people have to die before the pig ignorant governments learn that Afghanistan is a no win situation..
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 am
Vietnam! Lots of people dead, and Bubba-Gump Shrimp Corporation story. The horror…
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 am
No.3 should be renamed: Invading Russia… Again
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:48 am
“…Meade had literally allowed the end of the war to slip through his hands…”
I would like to have seen that.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:50 am
Great list. So good to see Gallipoli mentioned it was a massive mistake and well remembered here in Australia.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 am
What about Vietnam, Korean war (still officially going), 1948 Arab–Israeli War (Israel owned the arabs), American forces in Somalia and the current campaigns in Afghanistan & Iraq?
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:11 am
Seeing number 2 on this list makes me happy. Sadly, most history textbooks prefer to ignore it.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:19 am
I’ve heard quite a few people voice the opinion that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was one of the worst military decisions of all time, since it brought the US into WWII. I could see it at least getting an honorable mention here…
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:26 am
I thought for sure the Maginot Line would be on here. I wonderful waste of time. If ever in France, don’t mention it.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:26 am
@totalstranger (11):
Yes…invading Kuwait was a stupid decision too, but it was fueled by the american government at that time to give themselfs a justifiable reason for invading Iraq…THAT’s what i call savage.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:27 am
Agincourt for the french and poitiers, hattin for the crusaders moving away from a water source, carrhae for the romans against the parthians…
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:35 am
What a great list! Wonderful writing; accessible without being condescending or patronizing and again – no copy/paste.
I too think Dieppe is a notable omission but the ones you’ve chosen are definitely spot on. There are so many to choose from, it must have been difficult to whittle it down to ten.
For those complaining about Iraq not being on the list – I would argue that it wasn’t a military blunder – that was the only part of the operation that was a success, if you’re gauging it on the overthrow of Saddam and his family/circle of insiders. It was a moral and political error – The Armed Forces did do what they were instructed to, the just shouldn’t have been instructed to do it. Of course because of the above errors, the clean up is likely going to end up more costly than the war. That’s what happens when the populace has little or no respect for the decisions and folks that put them in the mess they’re in.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:57 am
fascinating…
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:04 am
I knew there would be a million Bush comments on here in minutes. Seriously people, regardless of what MSNBC tells you, Iraq has not been this horrible “military blunder”. The US conquered an entire country in a few weeks. Destroyed one of the biggest armies on earth with the least amount of friendly casualties of any major conflict. It was the occupation that took so many lives, and even those numbers, not to belittle all the brave men who have died, compared to some of the numbers on this list, are small. Look at #1, 15,000 dead soviets in Afghanistan. I think we are still under 2,000 total allied dead there.
This “instant gratification” generation sickens me, and I’m part of it. People die in wars, but the last two we have fought have been thankfully very one-sided. I can only imagine what would happen today with the new media and our weak-stomached liberal leaders if we had to fight a real war like some of these in this list. Can you imagine what ol Nancy Pelosi would do if the news was reporting something like “American invasion of Europe started! First day estimates of dead over 2000, 10,000 wounded”
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 am
Re Gallipoli:
The Turkish machine-gunners were heard on occasions begging the ANZACS not to mount another suicidal charge, but the orders would come down that they had to.
The trenches were so close together that each side took to throwing gifts to each other (tins of beef and tobacco). (I’m not sure how many grenades were thrown as well).
Almost a century later, Gallipoli is visited by thousands of Australians and New Zealanders each ANZAC day. If anything the numbers are increasing. The predawn commemorations at the site are televised live here in Australia.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:20 am
To no 23, the Israelis got help from the Americans, that was why they won.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:27 am
no walk don’t run?
in the first world war British troops were seen as under qualified to run with any kind of weapon, and therefore for a large portion of the war countless troops were sent walking towards the German lines. as you can guess heavy casualties were taken and the British were forced to change their battle plan.
plus, the propaganda videos of British soldiers marching ruthlessly and bravely over a fake no man’s land, led the Germans to believe they were superior troops whereas they were in fact highly untrained. the Germans upped their game and slaughtered a lot of them. once again tactics would have to be changed
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:28 am
Back on the Napoleon thing, would make sense he failed in Russia if he gave the orders to go West, half the troops would follow them, the other half would go east and be outnumbered. Bad decision there. Ok so he stands on a mountaintop looking east. If everything in the way was cleared and a line of mirrors set up around the world at the right angles to get around curvature of the earth it is indeed possible, and he was probably too stubborn to just turn around.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:43 am
Another thing that could work would be the final battle of Darius, emperor of Persia, against Alexander the Great. Darius was scared stiff of the Greeks. He had over a 5:1 advantage, but he knew his opponent was a genius so he was terrified enough that when the Greeks arrived, exhausted after a forced march, Darius didn’t attack until the next day. Worse, Darius commanded his troops to stay awake and in full armor the whole night because he was sure the Greeks would raid. That’s right – he got his army tired, and effectively told them how scared he was, in one move.
Alexander the Great, however, told his troops that he was going to stay up until he figured out how he was going to win. Then, at around 8 PM, he laughed, said he had it, and told them all to get a good night’s sleep.
The battle the next day was a phenomenally one-sided stomping. With numbers alone, the Persians should’ve won, but the Greeks managed to open up their center and struck at where Darius was. The moment they got close, Darius ran for his life, and his army had no inclination of dying for a coward. He was stabbed by one of his own generals a few days later.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:46 am
You forgot “Invading Iraq – George W. Bush”.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 am
***Sigh***
Yes, I do, in fact, know east from west. I tend to write rather long-windedly and jfrater wisely edits my lists to save bandwidth. Unfortunately, I originally said something about Napoleon looking west to Britain and then deciding to go east to Russia. In the editing, the two got mixed up, lol. So yes, Napoleon did look West, although, as some of you have pointed out, if he’d told his army to march West until they invaded Russia, they’d probably have tried to do it . . . two oceans and all. They were a dedicated bunch.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:53 am
thank you russ
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:58 am
@drshady (27): “Yes…invading Kuwait was a stupid decision too, but it was fueled by the american government at that time to give themselfs a justifiable reason for invading Iraq…THAT’s what i call savage.”
huh? last time I checked, we invaded Iraq for less than a week. I think hostilities were over in 4 or 5 days. if your “theory” made any sense, wouldn’t have stayed in Iraq? Also, the “forces “invading Iraq” were part of a multi-national force made up of just about every NATO nation, Australia, NZ, etc.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:58 am
i remember reading about supplies to gallipoli being so bad that some troops started throwing stones.sounds maybe exaggerated to say it could have happened on the large scale. but maybe there was some truth in it.
(i mean after all i read it on d’internet so it must be true)
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:00 am
ANZAC…RIP
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:10 am
I’m sure Iraq is going to be a big topic of discussion on here, so here’s my two cents.
Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom are still ongoing, and thus it would be somewhat premature to make an objective assessment of the wisdom of the conflicts, which is why I’m glad that they were left off of this list. That said, just from how the wars have been conducted thus far, US Military legacy has definitely been tarnished further by a combination of poor strategic planning and high-level mismanagement of forces.
OEF (Afghanistan) was a conflict that had a wide base of support from its very beginning. Not only was manning not an issue at the time, but it did not take much to garner support from Afghanis who were tired of the oppressive regime. It’s a relatively culturally homogeneous region that doesn’t fall prey to sectarianism. The Bush admin and the Pentagon felt that a Special Ops-heavy strategy would suffice, with minimal conventional forces.
Fast forward a year, OEF was still going, but attention was diverted toward Iraq. A strategy was developed by then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to use as minimal of a force as possible. Emphasis was put on creating a highly-mobile, modular force that could be adapted for a variety of different kinds of missions. This strategy, however, was not suited for a long period of sustained combat. After Shock and Awe kicked off OIF, US and Coalition forces quickly steamrolled through the Iraq forces, and soon-after dismantled the entire Iraqi government infrastructure and military. This is more of a political blunder than a military one, but just as with President Johnson’s micromanagement of Vietnam, politics can play a major role in military victories and losses. All the major Ba’ath party members were either arrested or put in exile, leaving Iraq with no one with any political influence to keep the two major Muslim sects — Sunni and Shia — from killing each other. What followed was a civil war, followed by ethnic cleansing, on top of the influence of foreign Jihadists sneaking in to spark a stubborn insurgency.
All those factors combined left the unprepared occupying US and Coalition forces overwhelmed. The Bush administration struggled to reconcile with its errors and spent its last two years in office working rectify them by appointing new officials in key advisory and military command positions, and shifting to new strategies to adapt to the new threats.
Unfortunately, with all the attention being focused on the Iraq quagmire, the US and Coalition forces engaged in Afghanistan found themselves somewhat neglected by Washington and by the American public. Meanwhile they were facing a regrouped and increasingly well-organized Taliban force. By early 2008, it was becoming apparent that the US needed to send more conventional troops to Afghanistan. However, most of the conventional force by then had been tied up and bogged down by multiple deployments in Iraq.
The transition between the two wars has already begun, but it’s a slow process. As Iraq winds down, soon we’ll be able to make a better assessment of what was done right and wrong. The Afghanistan campaign, though, still has a few years of life left in it. With any hope, the lessons learned will be applied in conflicts to come.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:15 am
Sorry for the War & Peace-lenth post. Ha!
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:18 am
really badly written- mocks military leaders who had experience and expertise just because you know the bad effects due to history books.
for example invading russia with a massive and experienced grand army was not stupid for napoleon or hitler and only huge russian space and numbers eventually ground them down- however both were very close to victory
the cartridges in rifles were not made with pig or cow fat- it was a rumour spread to ignite a rebellion but wasnt true.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:22 am
@alexman (45):
Hitler commenced to invade Russia, even though his generals were firmly against it for military reasons.
Seems like an unwise decision, even at the time…
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:26 am
Paschendale, Cannae, Carrhae, Teutoberg Forest, Battle of Blood River…..
That said, it’s still a great list and worth mentioning that a bonehead move can be made more glaring by the brilliance of the opposing forces.
The Alamo battle buildup was a little more complex than you made it out here.
Mexico had made the land open to people to populate, rid it of its lawlessness, and make it respectable so that it could be taxed like any other state in Mexico.
Mexico had abolished slavery, the Texans wanted to continue their slave holding traditions (this also included black slaveowners, a very rare sight). This and other transgressions of Mexican law caused Mexico to feel that its laws and territories were being violated and felt the only way to stop this was by sending in the army. The Texans were fighting for freedom, one of those freedoms was the right to possess slaves.
Often the victors DO write the history books to make themselves look better.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:28 am
@alexman (45): I’d give Napoleon benefit of the doubt, but Hitler’s decision to take on the Soviets was extremely ill-advised. The Nazis were already occupied in their western front, and he virtually cut himself off by biting off more than he could chew. On top of that, he pressed on in spite of concerns from his advisers that the conflict would likely be drawn out through the winter. He ignored that contingency and left many of his own soldiers to freeze thanks to being under-equipped. It was a massive gamble that did not pay off.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:32 am
ANZAC Day is near-sacred in Australia and New Zealand, but more British troops fought and died there than Aussies and Kiwis. It was Australia’s first contribution in its own right to world events.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:48 am
Johnson’s War on Poverty: The War on Poverty is still claiming casualties. While not a military operation, its family-busting, moral-undermining, and work-ethic-crushing nanny-statism paved the way to the coming horrors of Obamacare, the next great doomed-to-fail operation. Obamacare will prove to be worse to America’s health and freedoms than the Napoleonic and Hitlerian invasions of Russia were for France, Germany, and Russia combined.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:54 am
save world no war pls
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:02 am
@That Guy From Pennsylvania (50): *rolls eyes*
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:02 am
Hitler made a poor decision because he was constantly given information about his armies that only showed them in the absolute best light. His generals and staff were terrified of him and would only reinforce ideas that assured him of his superiority and victory. Only when it was too late did they finally begin to speak freely.
On top of that, Hitler had a daily regimen of amphetamines- meth- which had been invented by the germans in WW2 to create supersoldiers. They had no idea that long term amphetamine useage leads to mental and emotional instability. When everyone talks about how Hitler went mad in the end, they forget to explain that it was due to this, not because he was an ‘evil genius’.
More than any other reason, the Germans lost the war because of drugs.
I have to agree with a previous poster that some of the writing in this list is just insulting, and it passes judgement from a place that doesn’t have all of the facts of the situation or understanding of what the people in it were thinking or what their view of the situation was.
It’s easy to pass judgement in hindsight. Most of this list is based on a basic, year one university debunked logic flaw called the Historian’s Fallacy.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:05 am
I knew when reading the title that invading Mother Russia would be on the list. Glad that both were added. No matter which way you look at it, invading Russia during winter is dumb…no matter what was said or done before. Just common sense.
Very cool list, Shannon. Awesome writing and well researched. I only knew about half of these. Very interesting to read, so thank you!
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:12 am
cool story, bro
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:13 am
The Winter War sucked pretty hard for Russia.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:16 am
Hey for number two. And I don’t want to seem like an ass. But it was Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines. Marines are not soldiers, they are Marines.
Great list though, it made me giggle.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:20 am
Somewhat long, but well written list. I enjoyed it quite a bit more than I expected to. Military lists aren’t usually my thing. Good Job.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:23 am
The great mistake is to anticipate the outcome of the engagement; you ought not to be thinking of whether it ends in victory or in defeat.
— Bruce Lee
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:36 am
Serg,
That was a very well thought out post but I do have two points of contention.
1) The American military’s prestige hasn’t taken a hit although if we had lost in Iraq it definitely would have.
2) Afghanistan is NOT a homogeneous culture. Although they are not sectarian like Sunni and Shia, they are extremely tribal which means that you don’t have two groups a loggerheads but several hundred. That makes it much worse since it is hard to have a distant centralized government tell far away tribes what to do.
Afghanistan is likely to be lost unless we can figure out how to extend Afghan’s governmental controls over the tribal regions. The only thing is that this was ALWAYS the case, regardless of troop strength. Probably our only hope is that we can strengthen the government in Kabul and surrounding areas and let the tribes pretty much run themselves until kabul is ready to try to exert itself over long distances.
Either way, it probably will have little to do with us after a few more years.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:38 am
The Pearl Harbor attack.
Why on earth Japan would attack US when American doesn’t want to get to the war?
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:55 am
In Hitler’s defense, (did I just type that?), the Russians lost the previous war (for more than just military reasons).
The REAL mistake was opening up a second, unnecessary front before finishing Britain.
Speaking of WWII, Pearl Harbor was a mistake which lead to the utter dismantling of the Japanese military.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:57 am
4.Invade Gallipoli
I think Churchill opposed the ground operation on the forts in the Dardanelle peninsula, that the allied forces were held. His initial plan was to sail up obsolete battleships* up the straights to knock out the forts, and minesweepers were to clear the straights of mines. Thus leaving Constantinople open to a naval barrage and possible attack with ground forces. The hope was The Ottoman Empire, with their capital threatened/under attack, would sue for peace. Which would enable the Allies to cut off the Central Powers supply of oil.
Unfortunately and inexplicably, part way through the operation it was cancelled, and ground forces were sent to attack the forts…
* Obsolete battleships were used because of the high risk posed to the fleet sailing up the straights.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:57 am
Great list. Maybe read through it a few times before posting the next one. It only slows the reader down when he trips over one grammatical error after the other.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:06 am
Number 7 doesn’t make a great deal of sense.
Special Order 191 was lost by some Confederate but McClellan thought the orders were false. He never acted upon the information contained within them. Furthermore, the orders say nothing about wanting battle in or around Sharpsburg, MD. The order was a movement order – not an order of battle or attack order.
Much has been made of the famous lost order. While it was a blunder, it was a blunder whose consequences was that of a lost opportunity, and not damaging to the Confederates whose order was lost.
The blunder here is not the lost order, but McClellan’s lack of response to the order.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:12 am
@gr81disp (60): I suppose homogeneous wasn’t the proper word to use. Granted, they’re a very tribal people, there isn’t the same animosity between those tribes that exists in Iraq between the Sunni/Shia/Kurdish sects. Afghanis have shown themselves to be more willing to unite for a common nationalistic cause (see entry #1 on the list). Had Washington invested more interest and resources in Afghanistan from the beginning, I truly believe that the Taliban would have been smothered by now; if not at the very least lost their foothold in that nation.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:16 am
What an arrogant bastard that Russ (31) is. To quote “2,000 total allied dead there”,there have been over 300,000 civilians that have been killed or maimed in Iraq don’t they count? or is it just Americans casualities that are being considered here. 3000 dead on the attack at New York in september 2001 and the whole world views it as some sort of apocolyspe, what makes americian lives more valuable than the lives of any other nation? it is this sort of arogance that perpetuates the animosity against the USA around the world.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:23 am
@gr81disp (60): Oh, and to touch on your other point: while I have the utmost confidence in my military (I’m going on my 8th year of active duty in the Army), I do indeed regret that we’ve taken a big hit in the image department. I’m a big believer that choosing your battles is a major part of strategic planning. I do think that our entry in Iraq was poorly planned and poorly timed, regardless of whatever politics may or may not have been involved. This is not the fault of the American fighting man, but unfortunately, we are the face of American foreign policy, and thus we suffer the consequences, both physically and even politically; but that has historically always been the lot of the warrior.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:32 am
You could fill this list with Hilter’s blunders alone.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:32 am
67. Peter Breen
He was talking about military decisions. And he quoted the number of the aggressor (the Allies) as it was their decision to go to war. And he did it as a way of defending his opinion that the war in Iraq should not be included in the “Top 10 Worst Military Decisions In History”.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:38 am
So according to this list, Napoleon looked “west” towards Mother Russia?
Based on every map and atlas out there, and this thing called a compass, Russia is EAST of France.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:39 am
Good list, but very poorly written.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:44 am
71. Wasabi Shiba
Well Napoleon wasn’t the kind of person to do things the conventional way ;-} Or maybe he just liked The Pet Shop Boys…
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:49 am
On item 6 you are inaccurate regarding the change in command structure following Gettysburg. Grant was not recalled from Vicksburg to replace Meade. George Meade remained the commanding general of the Army of the Potomac until the end of the war. Following the fall of Vicksburg Grant was promoted to commanding general of all Union armies, which placed Meade and the Army of the Potomac under Grant’s command.
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:07 am
Holland, September 1944, Operation Market Garden: the brain child of the famous (more likely infamous) General Montgomery should also be included in the list.
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:12 am
@63… I hate to be the grammar Nazi, but in this instance, someone has to….
The word you are looking for is “Strait” not “straight”. Two totally different words with very different meanings.
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:14 am
The Somme surely!
The Brittish were massacred because they were ordered to walk at the German trenches
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:30 am
Coool list… as pointed out before, Napoleon looked EAST to Russia… otherwise, that would be looking the long way around.
To the person who said that Pearl Harbour should be added… Pearl Harbour was a tactical genius of a manouvre.
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:35 am
33 AHMAD:
The U.S did give support to Isreal. But believe it or not Isreal got most of its weapons through the black market from none other than Czechoslovakia of all countries. So you could say they were assisted by the U.S.S.R and U.S.A
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:38 am
Fantastic list well written – well done Shannon !
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:41 am
I thought I would include a quote from the Art of War. (which somehow has been repeatedly left off the most influential book lists on this site)
“The skillful leader subdues the enemy’s troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field. With his forces intact he disputes the mastery of the emp”
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:42 am
#53 KGraves
#45 alexman
I will gladly submit myself to being picked apart because of my lack, in this post, of proofreading skills. I will pat the back of those who disagree with me on some of my choices. However, I will not suffer ignorance and lack of basic reading comprehension to disparage my work. If you two will read the introduction to the list again, you will find the phrase:
“We, safely ensconced here in the future can play Monday morning quarterback with the decision of the past often without acknowledging the fact that the commanders in question lack our brilliant hindsight;”
So gentlemen, I acknowledged that examining history is fraught with perils like judging someone who lacks all the information you have. Unfortunately, to study history, we must, by definition, look backward and it is difficult to look back save through the lens of our own experiences.
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:07 am
@Peter Breen (67)- Could not agree more with you
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:12 am
76 Ato,
Quite right, sorry. Not even sure how I missed that one. Hmmm…
82 Shannon,
I thought it was a good list, thanks. More History! MORE!!
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:19 am
Oh Shannon. I was halfway through writing this list. You got there first. Cant help but be a little bitter… Too American and too disregarding of the great blunders of history.
Included in my list were
Battle of Dyrrhacium – Pompey squandering the chance to alter the future immeasurably by not smashing Rome.
The Second Crusade: an entire Christian army is slaughtered when it stops for a drink of water.
1314 The Battle of Bannockburn when Scotland won independence and a decisive battle against poorly led English army
The Charge of the Light Brigade, Crimean War was a desperate and futile act that has to be read about to be believed.
1916 Battle of the Somme wow what a nightmare and crushing psychological blow which shattered a generation for England and Germany.
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:22 am
To answer the question about the Mongols, I dont believe they had any major Military Blunders, perhaps the closest could be the failed invasion of japan, but that is only acceptable if you can say the commanders made a mistake in invading in typhoon season or something to that effect. Same with the persians at Thermopylae or the Romans at Cannae those battles can better summed up as good generaling by one side, as opposed to bad generaling on the other other.
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:37 am
Operation Barbarossa wasn’t a bad decision, the germans made several bad decisions before and during the invasion like postponing the attack and not preparing to fight in the winter but the operation itself wasn’t one because there would have been a war even if the germans hadn’t attacked.
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 am
First, thanks for an interesting list.
Second, thanks to Russ for the lengthy post. Well put. Nothing of substance to add.
Third, it is entirely possible to assemble this list using nothing but World War One. The German attack on Verdun cost France about 500,000 dead, wounded and missing soldiers, but the Germans also lost 400,000 and gained next to nothing, largely attributable to the German High Command’s tardiness in allotting reserve troops to the fight. Someone else previously mentioned the Somme offensive. The three battles of Ypres should go down on the list; the first cost the aggressors 130,000 soldiers for ground measured in yards. Other WWI blunders include: throwing tanks into battle piecemeal instead of springing a large quantity on a surprised Germany, giving German forces time to manufacture their own and devise counter measures; attaching tank forces to cavalry, limiting the speed at which the horses could move and (I kid you not) forcing the tanks to retire from the battle once the horses got thirsty; the entire Trentino offensive, which went on for the better part of the war and resulted only in hundreds of thousands of dead Italians and Austrians, with nearly no territorial gain or loss by either side; the Allied encampment at Salonika, which wasted time and manpower by sitting inert through most of the war (and took a terrible toll on the troops in disease); the German declaration of total U-Boat war, which was largely responsible for US entry into the war; the Russian involvement in the war, which though it started well quickly bogged down and brought the government down with it.
A good single volume history is World War I by S.L.A. Marshall, a retired Brigadier General who began as a foot soldier in that war.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:02 am
this may be a bit early but pompey failing to destroy caesar after devastating his forces was a huge military blunder, was that dyrrachium?
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:03 am
The Mughals did not invade afghanistan , they were descended from the Afghan tribes.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:03 am
Oh, as for Barbarossa, the single biggest military blunder there was Stalin’s. Reports came in for days and he did nothing but close himself in a room and freak out. The Eastern Front may well have been an entirely different animal had Stalin reacted, or more accurately allowed his generals to react, quickly. The entire war may have ended a year or two earlier if the Germans had suffered the losses on the drive toward Moscow that the Soviet armies later inflicted. Furthering the error, many of the officer who might have reacted swiftly were dead or incarcerated.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:05 am
Argh…officerS. I know my plurals, not my touch typing. Damn typos.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:11 am
With russia I believe a lot less than 1 in 3 survived. It was more like 9000 out of 600000 wasn’t it?
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:45 am
Personally, I think Hannibal’s decision to not march on Rome after routing the consul after consul at the Battle of Canae deserves a look. Rome was in shambles, and would have been hard pressed to stop him from taking the city and forcing terms of victory for Carthage.
But instead, he decided to sit back and wait for Rome to come to their sense and admit defeat. That of course just gave Rome time to raise new armies and continue attacking with a now better understanding of Hannibal’s tactics. The result, eventually, was a major Mediterranean civilization practically wiped off the map.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:47 am
another great list. a bit too american and modern for me, but you write about what you know i guess. a couple i would have included: the charge of the light brigade, one of the most famous cock-ups in british military history; and the decision of bonnie prince charlie and his generals to retreat after reaching derby, with the english forces in disarray and london potentially within the young pretenders grasp. can’t have too many complaints though, really.
on the issue of iraq and afghanistan, wouldn’t it be a bit premature to put ongoing conflicts into a history list?
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:12 am
@WiseMenSay (94):See my post (#42)
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:42 am
Very well written.
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:49 am
Number 10… isn’t Russia east of France? I mean, I know that if you go west long enough, you’ll get to Russia too, but east is much faster!
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Sauron should have had his orcs combing the hills for those two little bitches fiddling around up there. Sheesh. What a dumbass.
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:22 pm
I agree with 5…what about Iraq?
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:24 pm
I have one honourable mention: I think it was during WWII the army stocked up on a new patent for a shovel-shield. It was meant for soldiers to dig trenches with, and if the enemy started shooting at them, they could use the shovel as a shield and shoot through the hole. Except that the shovel was too small to be an effective shield, there was little visibility through the shovel head, and the hole in the shovel made digging impossible.
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 pm
@Wasabi Shiba (70):
@archangel (77):
@bailunrui (97):
Remember, it is always a good idea to read through the comments before posting one of your own. That way, you avoid looking silly since the author of this list, Shannon, posted an explanation in comment (37).
Anywa, great list Shannon! I think I´ve said before that I´ve never fancied myself much of a military history fan but this is the second fascinating list on the topic. I think the title could have been more time specific considering the oldest blunder listed is from the 1800s. Maybe a future list could cover disastrous military decisions in the ancient world?
Now, I know I should probably look this up before posting but I´m work and pressed for time… I remember watching a movie about Gallipoli when I was in school… It was one of the most depressing movies I´ve ever seen. Anyone know which one I´m talking about?
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 pm
@bucslim (98): Good call, sir!
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Number 3: The German Army was called “Wehrmacht” not “Wermacht”. No Werewolves involved
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Hitler’s real mistake in terms of invading Russia, though not necessarily the smartest of ideas, was that he decided to place preference on political victories with the attempted taking of Stalingrad, Leningrad, and Petrograd (St. Petersburg), rather than focusing all his forces on taking the Capital Moscow. In fact Hitler was very near taking the Moscow and Stalin was terrified, that is until he decided to divide his forces in a vain attempt at a political statement.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Bonnie Prince Charlie retreating from Derby when he could have marched on London. Could have rules the British Isles, ended up getting crushed at Culloden the last land battle on British soil, and the battle in which my ancestor was killed.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Good list! I enjoyed it much!
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:10 pm
@Shannon (81):
i wasn’t insulting a lack of proofreading as small mistakes dont matter to me i was instead judging the mockery of commanders and politicians who knew ( to an extent) what they were doing. this applies to some more than others. e.g mcellan was a terrible commander.
you say you wrote we have the benefit of hindsight yet you made the mistake of saying the fat used in cartridges WAS pig and cow fat (which in all history books and sources it wasnt) AND you still made fun and insulted the commanders despite what you had earlier said.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:11 pm
maybe not a top ten, but invading iraq was freaking retarded.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:18 pm
I have a question, why its The Alamo in every damn list, even in list that have no sense like the most overrated guys in tv and you ask yourself the alamo, WTF?
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia in 1896 was also wrong move…it brought Italy shame
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:56 pm
@alexman (107)
Okay. Sooo, what were the cartridges greased with?
Here’s why I ask. Most of the stuff I’ve read states that the cartridges were greased. Now, as far as I know, there are two types of grease 1) mineral based (gear oil) and 2) animal fat. I won’t go so far as to say “no” lard is made from vegetable sources, but if it is, I’ve never seen nor heard of it. So the cartridges were waterproofed and lubricated with what? Beeswax is a choice I suppose, but it would be fabulously expensive.
We’re talking Britain in the 19th century. The early Victorians weren’t exactly known for being “politically correct” about the religious feelings of their colonial charges. If the cartridges were not greased with something, how did the rumor propagate? Obviously the men could look at the paper and see that nothing was on it, but apparently there was. So what was it?
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Good list, but Austria-Hungary invading Serbia starting WWI should be there.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
@Alexman (107)
C’mon buddy. We all have our own opinions and Shannon just added hers to her list. She didn’t intend any harm in her words, they were just making light jokes at the actions of some of the generals. Nobody is denying that these were all incredibly intelligent strategists. However the fact of the matter is that in all of the items on the list they made mistakes. Some of them very costly to whatever war they were in. We know that NOW and, as such, can point out these “blunders”. Admittedly, at the time they may have been good ideas in the mind of each of the leaders. In the end though they ended up mistakes, which allows us to reap the benefits of making jokes out of it, not to insult but to add a light-hearted twist to a serious situation. If that offends you, just realize that it wasn’t intended to do so. I mean honestly, your complaints about it are rather fruitless seeing as in the end it doesn’t prove anything.
Now on a different note I was rather disappointed to not see Hitler’s mistrust of Rommel. I mean the man was Hitler’s top general, easily sweeping through the African campaign, and because of a foolish mistrust he leaves him in Africa. Had he brought him back to Europe and put him in charge of the western front, the Americans quite possibly would have had a much more difficult time getting through Europe to end the war on their Eastern Front. With the way German technology was developing during the war, with extra time it’s possible there may have been an invention the helped them win.
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Couple of things:
Andropov wasn’t the head of the USSR in 1979, it was still Brezhnev. Yuri didn’t take over until 1982.
Hitler’s failure to invade Britain in 1940 really planted the seed of his own destruction. With Britain out of the way, Barbarossa may well have succeeded.
Everybody knows that Custer’s real last thought was “Wow! Look at all the f**king Indians!”
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Hi!
First I would like to say that I really enjoy your site. Lists are one of my favorite hobbies, and you do make lists quite well.
I just like to make a consideration regarding Napoleon, he invaded Russia not because he was bored, but because Russia didn’t respect the continental blockade imposed by him on England. That country kept on comercializing with England, wich “forced” Napoleon to invaded it.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:34 pm
good list.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Isnt it amusing that “Invading Russia” was listed twice? People never learn. :p
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Good going, Shannon. That was a really interesting list and very well written. You brought these battles to life.
One of the things that the Alamo did, besides allowing the Texans time to prepare for battle, was to royally piss the freedom fighters off. The Alamo and the Goliad massacre drove the Texans to an overwhelming victory at San Jacinto. The battle itself lasted only 20 minutes, and about 700 Mexican troops were killed, with less than 10 Texans killed. They still say “remember the Alamo” with pride. No, I am not from Texas.
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:53 pm
How do so many people type with their heads up their asses?(looking at you Russ, peter breen, and that guy in pennslyvania, not to mention the grammer police.)Its an anomaly!
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:33 pm
I have not read all the comments so sorry if this has already been mentioned, but in number ten you said “west to Russia.” I think you meant east
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:43 pm
@GTT (101): I’m pretty sure you’re talking about the movie Gallipoli (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082432/).
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:52 pm
I would say the OCCUPATION of Iraq 2.0 is probably warranted in the list. With no confirmed exit strategy, it is a waste of money, resources and most horribly, life.
Otherwise, great list. Though I would reconsider the wording of Napoleons entry into Russia. You said it several times in your prose. BIG ARMY with NOTHING TO DO. Those guys were hungry, and with money being spent like mad to shape up his newly made empire, I’m sure Napoleon thought he could get a quick bite in Russia. Too bad he had to stick around for the winter.
And to #23 Russ, I think it is you my friend who have been watching to much Msnbc if you believe the so called ‘allied casualties’ are below 2000. What allies? What was that about monkeys sent to blow up mines?
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:55 pm
No Teutoburg Forest?
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:35 pm
@60..(pearl harbor)
Japan was building an empire in the pacific at that time. By destroying the only other formidable naval force in that theatre makes perfect sense. As to why (Hiromoto?) did not carry out the full attack plan,(thankfully) is beyond me. It would have taken years to replenish the lost vessels.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:04 am
great list mate.
a wrong military decision was the invasion of crete during ww2.
also where is invasion of iraq and afghanistan in modern times?
September 4th, 2009 at 4:26 am
To much of USA for such a short history.
September 4th, 2009 at 7:00 am
NO U!
September 4th, 2009 at 7:06 am
@ Krishna:
The Mughals were NOT descended from Afghan tribes at all- Babur the founder of the Mughal Empire was of turko-mongol descent, albeit his army invaded from their base in Kabul. Furthermore, from the time of Akbar the Great, all the proceeding Mughals were intermixed as they started taking local wives.
I agree that consideration should be given to Alexander’s boneheaded attempt to invade India. In the modern era, three words: George Bush Jr.
September 4th, 2009 at 8:44 am
how come there be No Iraq, No Afghanistan US invasions??
September 4th, 2009 at 9:47 am
The guy in number 5 is in Night in the Museum 2 =)
number 7 is more of unluckiness than of bad military decisions… it could’ve been his generals who let it slip out or what so ever…
September 4th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
@Peter S. (121):
That was it. Just reread the summary and relived the darn movie in my head. Now I´m depressed all over again… Why my teacher decided it was a good movie to show elementary school children is beyond me.
September 4th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
@GTT (131): Elementary school? Aw, that’s just wrong. I’m all for confronting hard truths, but that’s like putting a novice boxer in the ring against Mike Tyson, then telling Tyson the opponent just kicked Tyson’s dog.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
No. 3 was – at the time – the most logical move for Germany. Their ultimate enemy, the one that Hitler had been foaming at the mouth about ever since the Armistice, were the “Marxists.”
The Molotov-Ribentrop (Sp?) pact was purely to buy time for the mighty Wermacht to deal with the Western Allies.
Hitler’s intention was *always* to invade “Russia”, it wasn’t the after thought of a bored military “genius.”
Really, if the 6th army had captured Stalingrad – which they were close to doing – and the southern army group (whatever it was called) had secured the oil in the Caucasus for the Reich, well, the land to the West of the Urals could very well belong to a Nazi controlled Germanic state.
Hitler only has himself to blame for the royal screw up that was Barbarossa. But he came so very, very close to being the most powerful man in the world.
September 5th, 2009 at 4:20 am
The greased cartridges with pig and cow fat was indeed a rumour. And it was widely spread to gather support for mutiny. There were also reports of mutinous sepoys using the controversial cartridges captured from ammunition depots.
However… the tallow used in the grease was unspecified, and that no extraordinary precaution was, at the beginning, taken to ensure the absence of any cow or pig fat.
Before the cartridges were ever even issued or a shot fired by any Indian forces, sepoys and their Indian officers objected to their use at the Dum-Dum depot. After this incident, Colonel Birch, the Military Secretary ordered that all depots were to be issued free of grease and that the sepoys were to be allowed “to apply, with their own hands, whatever mixture for the purpose they may prefer”. The Inspector-General of Ordinance informed Birch that from now on strict orders were to be given for the exclusive use of sheep or goat fat, if it was decided that some form of tallow was necessary. This was all before a regiment even mutinied.
I believe also that orders were given that sepoys could rip open their cartridge papers, instead of biting them off.
September 5th, 2009 at 8:02 am
INVADING IRAQ!!!!!!!
September 5th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Giggity
Nice list! As an european, I know few about American History, but it seems very interesting nevertheless.
Napoleon, and WW II stories are always fun, since we already know who will lose eventually. Imagine if Operation Barbossa was successful!
September 5th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
I would also mention the argentinian attempt to recover the Falkland islands from England in 1982. The military goverment thougth UK would not react: the islands are so small and distant!! And they also thougth USA would support Argentina…
September 5th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Actually, Napoleon invaded Russia because dispite a treaty of alliance, they continued to trade with Napoleon’s mortal enemy, England.
September 6th, 2009 at 11:03 am
TOP FIVE ARMIES!!!!
1st.RUSSIA
2nd. PAKISTAN
3rd. BRITISH
4th. USA
5th. GERMANS
September 6th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
The difference between Napoleon and Hitler, is with Napoleon, it was a genuine mistake. Hitler was a megalomaniac, who believed that he was invincible, and didn`t have to listen to anyone. Britain`s 3 invasions of Afhganistan, were disasters, and Scotland`s attempted invasion of England, where 10,000 Scots, and their king being killed, was a fiasco!
September 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Worth to mention that the swedes made the same exact mistake as Napoleon and te Nazis.
Let’s see i think this was the one were we won a massive battle by call it strategy or luck but we decided to continue on which of course ended up in starvation and people freezing to death.
September 6th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
I don’t think Gallipoli is quite fair because it seemed like a very good idea and it would have been if the initial ships hadn’t been lost and Mustafa Kemal had listened to his commanders and not made his heroic stand to die for reinforcements.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
You forgot to tell that with Afeganisthan invasion USA created Al-caeda and trained Osama!
September 7th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Great list hitler should be #1 and afganstan shouldn`t on the list
September 8th, 2009 at 2:37 am
@edu (143): You are retarded…
September 8th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Hi
Great list. Two things to consider.
1. For the Alamo – It wasn’t important for Santa Anna to have the Alamo, but it might have been important to make sure the Texicans (sp?) didn’t have it. A military force in the rear area can pick off your supplies and reinforcements. It wouldn’t have been a factor given the war was over so quickly, but they didn’t know that then. I would still call it a mistake, but probably not one of the 10 greatest of all time.
2. Meade not attacking Lee. Lee was greatly weaken at Gettysburg, but he still had a sizeable army, powder and short range cannon shot. In the Civil War era a force behind entrenchements (which Lee, the old engineer was very good at building) could hold off a much larger force. Most current Civil War historians will agree that Lincoln was underestimating Lee’s army, and many think Meade made the right decision. For the record, I think that he should have attacked.
September 8th, 2009 at 11:20 am
You could make a whole top ten with just military blunders from the American Civil War. I can’t recall right this moment if it was Meade or McLellan who insisted on those stupid pontoon bridges at Fredricksburg, when the Army could have forded the river just a mile upstream. Instead the CSA was able to dig into the hills above town and just slaughter the Federals. Then of course, there’s the peninsula campaign when McLellan was unwilling to listen to his intelligence and move his army around to intercept, engage and pursue the CS army. So many instances of inept military leadership on the Federal side, it’s just shameful when you consider these were the heros of the Mexican American war just 20 years prior.
September 8th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
What? No one quoting Eddie Izzard’s take on Hitler’s view of Napoleon?
“I’ve got a better idea, I’ve got a better idea! . . . Oh, it’s the same idea, it’s the same idea.”
September 9th, 2009 at 12:46 am
No Major General Edward “Ned” P. King, Jr. surrender?
September 10th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
i dont know if it has already been mentioned but ide say the charge of the light brigade in the Crimean war has to be one of the most pointless waste of humans in military history. even though it was about 400 that died (much less than Gallipoli and others) the sheer bravery of the cavalry men to proceed a full charge on the Turkish front line of artillery with just their sabres..knowing that it was literally a charge into the valley of death is unfathomable to me…i dont know how some people can be that couragous.
September 11th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I love this list. Very interesting, and thought-out
September 12th, 2009 at 2:04 am
For those who have stated that Israel received arms from the US in the 48 war….wrong. The US did not begin arming Israel until during the 73 war. Opinions are nice, but facts are nicer.
One could argue though that the decision by Egypt and Syria (and then later Jordan) to attack Israel in 67 (the Six Day War) was one of the dumbest military decisions ever.
September 12th, 2009 at 3:14 am
No.1 needs some fact checking…..
The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA) created a secular country where women had equal rights as men, there was land reform allowing the poorest members of their society to become self sufficient.
Alas, this wasn’t popular with the Hard-Core Islamic mujahideens who loved living in the stone age and trteating women as items to be owned….They turned to terrorism and violence to bring about the end of the Socialist government, helpfully funded by the USA who saw any attack on ‘commies’ as a good thing….
The Soviets were asked to provide support for the DRA and end the terrorism that was destroying the country….
So, the USSR provided troops, the USA threw money at the terrorists and the seeds of the place we find ourselves in were sown.
September 12th, 2009 at 7:31 am
And who did LBJ have advising him? The leftovers from moron kennedy. Also, it is interesting to hear the arabs narrative of the USA invasion of iraq (2003). It appears that one of the reasons the muslim community and the left are so incensed about that military action is that it netted the USA a whole bunch of intelligence that the above mentioned group would rather the USA did not have.
September 12th, 2009 at 9:42 am
Ignorance on parade here. How about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? How about Varus in Germany? How about resistance to the Mongols, Huns, etc. How about Cannae? How about Tours/Poitiers? This list obviously is to make a tendentious political point, if Afghanistan is the best it can do. If you’ve never heard of the battles I mention, perhaps you should refrain from contributing to this list until you know history a little better.
September 13th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
The people of Afghanistan are Afghans not Afghanis. The afghanis is the currency of the country.
September 13th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
The rifle you have pictured as the one responsible for the 1857 Indian Mutiny is terribly wrong. The Enfield Rifle pictured is a “modern” firearm which wasn’t manufactured until some 50 years after the mutiny. (Note the magazine, which of course was impossible in an 1850’s muzzle-loading black powder weapon.)
The Enfield rifle you want is the 1853 Enfield found here: http://www.indianetzone.com/photos_gallery/8/Enfield-P-53_15633.jpg
This is a huge error which badly undermines your credibility as an authority on “worst military blunders”. Perhaps you think it hyper-critical to say that it is impossible for a person qualified to give such a judgment to have been in ignorance of the correct weapon. But I assure you the difference in the appearance of an 1853 muzzleloader and a 1910 magazine-fed bolt-action rifle is so very basic that a elementary-school-aged child only moderately interested in military history could have immediately pointed out the error.
September 13th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
@jum1801 (157): It’s not meant to be the exact, absolute type of rifle they used at that period of time and would have been used during the mutiny. It isn’t really even meant to be vaguely that gun.
It’s [the picture included] meant to be a rifle, just a rifle.
“…This is a huge error which badly undermines your credibility as an authority on “worst military blunders”…”
Lol, are you serious?
September 13th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
lol, I wonder why the American invasion’s of Iraq & Afghanistan haven’t made this list? They are still ongoing, I know, but they are still going to lose as history teaches us
…
Also,
“Gallipoli is remembered as ANZAC Day in Australia and New Zealand in honor of all the brave ANZACs who gave their lives for a stupid decision.”
With the above quote, cant we relate this to any war? As in, all wars are stupid? Just a thought..
September 14th, 2009 at 2:37 am
@l to the t (159): Not all wars are stupid. If a country declares war on another for something they did that was belligerent or generally bad – think the UK in ‘39 – then I don’t think that war counts as “stupid” so much as necessary.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
@Mark (160): They are really when you consider the loss of innocent life involved. Not to mention the seeds of hate it sews for generations to come? Then there’s all the bs reasons & lies politicians use to send people to war i.e propaganda..
I’m sorry, but war is totally immoral.
September 14th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
@l to the t (161): War is not immoral, it is necessary. I’m not a consequentalist, I’m a realist. I don’t think that the ends necessarily justify the means, what happens in the middle is what life is about. But sometimes what happens in the middle isn’t the optimal choice, or even one that’s “right”, as those with a strong moral compass would tell you. But I believe there are degrees of wrongness, and letting a big country push a little one around falls farther from the middle than going to war with said country if you ask me.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe that war is cool and I’m not a militaristic or nationalistic person. I don’t even think that war is the right way to be solving problems. But when you’ve got no other choices, you do what you can. That bravery shouldn’t earn you contempt.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
@Mark (162): Defending yourself when you’re being attacked or invaded, I totally understand. Everyone has the right to defend themselves.
It’s when you look at history and you see it repeating itself time & time again? *I dont want to go into detail* That’s the most frustrating part.
Isn’t life also about learning from your own & other people’s mistakes?
Anyway, all in all, I see where you’re coming from mate. Back to work for me.
September 15th, 2009 at 1:30 am
@l to the t (163): I don’t necessarily mean just the cliches of being invaded and having to fight. I mean, sometimes a pre-emptive strike may be necessary to quickly destroy a potentially dangerous enemy. If you kill less civilians doing that than a full blown war – just a little, quick one – then isn’t that the right choice?
In my opinion everything needs to be considered on relative merits, I don’t like absolute moral statements like “war is bad”. I appreciate that you can see where I’m coming from, as I can appreciate your side of the argument.
P.S. Mate? Another Australian
September 15th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
I’m not so sure on the pre-emptive strike. You’d have to be very careful for every action there is a reaction.
A little off topic, but do you remember Beslan? Do you know why the man leading that massacre, did what he did? It was because a Russian helicopter had come to his village & killed his wife & children in a pre-emptive strike. Accident, I know, but this is the sort of thing I was talking about war sewing the seeds of hatred for generations to come.
lol, yeah mate.. I’m Australian.
September 16th, 2009 at 4:15 am
@l to the t (165): Fuck ups happpen. No matter what, they’re going to happen. Just like war, without it Germany would never have united and there would never had been the feverish race for technology that has been occuring since the discovery of calculus.
Without stuff like that, what type of world would we live in?
September 16th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
True, war did unite Germany, but war also seperated her again afterwards.
That was the industrial age for you. Such a big step was taken in technological advancements in the way of fighting over land, sea & air & we sure found plenty of new & interesting ways of killing each other *And still are till this day *Dammit**, but how many of these inventions during WWII benefit us as a society with our day to day lives?
There’s a new list right there! =P
September 21st, 2009 at 7:44 pm
“Churchill proposed that a third front be opened up in the western Mediterranean. ”
Isn’t Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean?
Excuse me if someone else caught that. I glanced over 167 comments, and I don’t think anyone did.
Also, although it was not a formal war or strategic decision, America’s obsession with communism cost her dearly. There was Vietnam. There was the creation of the Taliban to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.
In the seventies, Iran was crawling with CIA. And yet, the Islamic revolution was a total surprise. The spooks were there to spy on the Soviet Union. Meanwhile, The Shah was laying the groundwork for his own dismissal, which caught us by surprise. Then the Ayatollah took over and the embassy hostages were taken. Saddam Hussein was recruited to invade Iran. When Kuwait tried to collect on its war debt, Iraq invaded them. and on and on it goes.
September 23rd, 2009 at 2:28 am
Hitler had to delay his attack on Russia in order to save Mussolini in Greece. Otherwise he would have conquered Russia before the winter set in.
September 26th, 2009 at 1:28 am
Oh, how I love history. ^-^
October 6th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Germanys invasion of russia was not a blunder. Hitler feared (and quite rightly) that in a year or two russia would enter the war and invade their eastern territories. Using the Blitzkrieg tactic he decided to seize the oppurtuinty while the western front was tied down and russia were unprepared for war and attack quickly. You have to remember that they very nearly pulled it off and it was only the ruthless leadership and bravery of the russian soldier that slowed them long enough for the winter to set in and halt their progress entirely. Yes ideally you would never try to invade russia (in those days anyway) and hitler was in fact very reluctant to inavde russia but his hand was effectivley forced and tbh the german army did staggeringly well before the battle of stalingrad.
October 6th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
@Jangby (171): Yes, but he still failed spectacularly, didn’t he?
October 6th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
It doesnt matter if they failed(and whether it was a spectacular one is arguable), i am contesting it being considered a military blunder in terms of the decision making. It was absolutley the right decision in the circumstances irrespective of the likelehood of success. In fact i would consider it a very different scenario to the Napoleons decision to invade, with an entirely different set of circumstances.
Using Napoleon as an example, he failed in that he lost the battle of waterloo but most people consider his decision making as to where and when to meet wellingtons army and the decision to split the prussians from the british/allies to be pretty much spot on in those circumstances.
October 6th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Good point. I’m just reluctant to let Hitler to get anything remotely like praise.
October 6th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
lol im Jangby btw, logged in on my blog account.
October 6th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Dont get me wrong, im no lover of hitler or anything and i dont consider him a military genius or anything but i just disagreed with the list maker as to the blunderness of operation barbarossa.
October 6th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
I could figure that out, you were typing like it a reply.
October 20th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
commnet#62 Yawyack
I don`t think at the time anyone including Churchill himself, ever heard the name M.K.Ataturk before.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:34 am
@Charlie (RE #100-shovel-shields) EXCELLENT suggestion for an honorable mention-I gathered from the list itself that the idea was to include military decisions that, like Custer’s refusal to use Gatlin guns, were intensely stupid in their own right, and although some of them MIGHT be stretching a tiny bit (e.g., #7, like McClellan’s indecision, perhaps unsure as to the validity of the “found” plans), the plan to use these “shovel-shields” as they were intended was immensely retarded in it’s own right.
November 1st, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Great list. I can also think of The Charge of the Light Brigade at the Battle of Balaclava. “Yes! Let’s charge the cannons, they cannot hurt us.”
November 27th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
One of the few successful invasion of Russia was made by the Mongols who as a matter of fact used the winter to their advantage by using the frozen lakes to ride their ponies across.
December 7th, 2009 at 9:10 am
good list!
December 17th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
stopped reading after the first couple of lines.
napoleon was bored…
nothing to do. So Napoleon looks west, to Mother Russia.
russia is in the east. fucking hell. idiotic.
how can you expect to have any credibility with mistakes like that within a couple of sentences
December 28th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Great list
http://www.pvc-dresses.com/
February 8th, 2010 at 1:20 pm
What? Nothing about the Japanese blunder at Midway? They threw away a huge tactical advantage by diving their forces and basically lost the war in a matter of days. This surely belongs on this list.
February 8th, 2010 at 2:08 pm
This list should have included older wars too. After all, the list is top 10 worst military decisions in HISTORY, not in past two centuries.