Most Epic Screwups in History?

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Only by people indoctrinated by the Renaissance.

What a great line.

Here's an epic screwup, which I already mentioned in the "unexpected wars" thread. The ruler of Khwarazem, a Muhummad II, had sent envoys to make a pact with Genghis Khan. He basically stipulated that Genghis was the rightful ruler of the Eastern half of the world, and that he was the ruler of the Western half of the world. Rather than being enemies and competing for it all, he proposed that they work together for mutual trade and benefit. Genghis seemed to agree, or at least had no immediate plans for an invasion of of SW Asia, and so the two were at peace. However, Muhummad suspected, perhaps rightfully so, that Mongol caravans passing through his lands were acting as spies. When one of his governors in Transoxiana took a large caravan sent by the Khan himself, supposedly as a gesture of goodwill, into custody, Muhummad ordered them slaughtered. One of the camel herders escaped, however, and returned to tell the Khan of the massacre. By this harsh show of force, Muhummad hoped to show the Khan he meant business, and to leave him the hell alone. Interestingly, the Khan responded rather weakly, and sent three more emissaries to Urganj. Muhummad had one killed, and shaved the beards of the other two, who then returned to their master in shame. Genghis thus felt compelled to right these wrongs, and began assembling one of the largest armies in history for an invasion of Kara Kitai and Khwarazem. This army then continued on to Afghanistan, India, Persia, and up around the Caucasus, where it participated in the invasion west, into Europe, with further armies coming East.

Great job Muhummad II.

 

[Camikaze]

Not really - it was the inevitable result of Germany's decision to pursue unrestricted submarine warfare.

I suppose that the Zimmermann Telegram was not a blunder, in that it was probably a good idea to pursue an alliance with Mexico, but more of a screwup, in that it fell into enemy hands, and was the major contributing factor, in combination with the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, that led to the US entry into the war, which was a major factor in Germany's loss of the war.

This, of course, led to the Treaty of Versailles (I won't even bother with the Yugoslavia mess), which caused an environment susceptible to right wing loonies in Germany, leading to the rise of Hitler, causing World War Two. This war led to the development of nuclear weapons, aided the rise of Communist China, and entrenched communism in Eastern Europe causing much tension in the Cold War. The Cold War caused the Cuban Missile Crisis, possibly leading to the assassination of JFK, and also the Vietnam War. Also, the Cold War caused America to back Saddam Hussein (screwup #2), leading to the Gulf War, and of course, the second Gulf War (or whatever you want to call it).

As you can see, the actions of Arthur Zimmermann on that fateful day of January 16, 1917, directly caused World War Two, the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the assassination of JFK, and of course, both Gulf Wars.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I still disagree - Germany was expecting to go to war with the US anyways, which is why Zimmerman, when confronted, bragged rather than denying it.

 

[Camikaze]

Sure, Germany was expecting to go to war- otherwise they wouldn't have been seeking an alliance with Mexico. But the Telegram (which I'm pretty sure they didn't want publicised) put the nail in their coffin.

 

[sydhe]

The future Charles VII's arrangement of the murder of John the Fearless, the Duke of Burgundy, which cemented the alliance between England and Burgundy and came close to losing Charles his country.

Xiang Yu's vicious sack of the Qin capital after Liu Bang had deliberately spared it, which showed China the vast difference in temperament between the two men.

 

[negZero]

Not the same thing. Billion is not a unit of measurement, it's an order of magnitude. There is no such thing as the word Milliard in modern English; it is a German word.

I know off-topic but this is bugging me.

How can Milliard be a German word when it is derived French word?

Only by people indoctrinated by the Renaissance.

Am sigging this, kgthx.

 

[Reno]

That's only positive if you're not Russian.

And I'm pretty certain that we Finns, Estonians, Latvians, Liethuanians and Poles are very happy that we aren't Russian. No thanks to any lack of trying on the Russians part to Russianize us, of cource.

The fact that Russia fell into civil war and turned into Soviet-Russia and then the Soviet Union is not a positive thing by any means, but it's an unfortunate side effect of the First World War. I just wanted to mention that something good happened to some people after the First World War too, the aftermath wasn't all bad for everyone.

 

[Sharwood]

And I'm pretty certain that we Finns, Estonians, Latvians, Liethuanians and Poles are very happy that we aren't Russian. No thanks to any lack of trying on the Russians part to Russianize us, of cource.

The fact that Russia fell into civil war and turned into Soviet-Russia and then the Soviet Union is not a positive thing by any means, but it's an unfortunate side effect of the First World War. I just wanted to mention that something good happened to some people after the First World War too, the aftermath wasn't all bad for everyone.

The aftermath of any war is good for someone. After all, WWII may have been the best thing to happen to the US, the CCP, etc. But it usually comes at someone's expense, which was my sole point.

 

[Agent327]

Technically milliard is the right word, from a mathematical and scientific viewpoint. Plenty of books used it prior to the popularisation of billion. It may be a loan word from German, but how many other loan words does English have?

Interesting connection with the Norman invasion: English has quite a bit of French in it - as does German (Milliarde); France and Germany evolved from the same (Frankish) empire, of Charlemagne. With Louis XIV France temporarily became a lingua franca, instead of Latin, disused with the emancipation of native languages such as Italian (music!), French, Spanish, German, English etc.

 

[Dachs]

Winrich von Kniprode letting Kestutis escape. I mean, come on. He was in the middle of Marienburg castle, the most well defended place in Eastern Europe, and yet he contrives to escape and takes the grandmaster's personal horse out the gates with no contest? Jeez, dude. Talk about your royal cockups.

And millard might not be the right word, but a thousand million in English is just that. It's the crazy Americans again who decided that a billion ought to be a thousandth of its real value.

Technically milliard is the right word, from a mathematical and scientific viewpoint. Plenty of books used it prior to the popularisation of billion. It may be a loan word from German, but how many other loan words does English have?

It's archaic. Meseems an we such words oft use, iwis we'll get all the hell confused. Nobody says Milliard auf Englisch anymore, so using it on a message board is right silly.

 

[Sharwood]

Winrich von Kniprode letting Kestutis escape. I mean, come on. He was in the middle of Marienburg castle, the most well defended place in Eastern Europe, and yet he contrives to escape and takes the grandmaster's personal horse out the gates with no contest? Jeez, dude. Talk about your royal cockups.


It's archaic. Meseems an we such words oft use, iwis we'll get all the hell confused. Nobody says Milliard auf Englisch anymore, so using it on a message board is right silly.

Hang on, let me get this straight. Of all the people on this message board, you're the one bashing the use of milliard for being archaic? Because you've never once used archaic non-English terms?

 

[Dachs]

Hang on, let me get this straight. Of all the people on this message board, you're the one bashing the use of milliard for being archaic? Because you've never once used archaic non-English terms?

There's a difference between using archaic English words conversationally and using non-archaic non-English words for the topics that they're supposed to describe. Anglicization of non-English place names ain't the same as Anglicization of orders of magnitude.

 

[Sharwood]

There's a difference between using archaic English words conversationally and using non-archaic non-English words for the topics that they're supposed to describe. Anglicization of non-English place names ain't the same as Anglicization of orders of magnitude.

In which case milliard should be the word used, as milliard is not an Anglicisation, it's a loan-word.

 

[Dachs]

In which case milliard should be the word used, as milliard is not an Anglicisation, it's a loan-word.

A loan-word that isn't used anymore? We're not talking about German use of numbers here, we're talking about the use of the number in general. That's not the same thing as referring to a historical event, person, or place in a non-English setting by a closer transliteration of the actual name. I call equatism and therefore BS.

 

[Sharwood]

A loan-word that isn't used anymore? We're not talking about German use of numbers here, we're talking about the use of the number in general. That's not the same thing as referring to a historical event, person, or place in a non-English setting by a closer transliteration of the actual name. I call equatism and therefore BS.

Now equatism, that's not a word. And it's a loan-word that should be used, as it's a hell of a lot more accurate than "billion." I mean, WTH is that?

 

[Dumanios]

Pearl Harbor.

 

[say1988]

Not really, it was their best bet. It failed, and really had no chance of success, but they were screwed either way.

 

[Sharwood]

Not really, it was their best bet. It failed, and really had no chance of success, but they were screwed either way.

They could have, you know, not invaded China? Or negotiated with the US? Pearl Harbour was their best bet to prolong the war, they could never have won it, no matter how much they thought they could.

 

[say1988]

They started the war under very different conditions than they were in in late '41. They had a good supply of oil and looked to be able to easily crush the Chinese. There was no reason not to.

At the time, stopping the war with China was not possible, nor was swiftly winning it. The Japanese people likely would not have accepted peace and the General staff most definitely wouldn't. If they had went to the Chinese for peace, teh Chinese would probably have demanded their at least some of land back, and there is no way the Japanese could have given into that.

With the US embargo (and that wasn't going away no matter the diplomacy without ending the war, which they could not end) they had to get oil, and the best source was the Dutch East Indies. And what happens to be stuck in a very strategic spot in the sea lanes from the East Indies to Japan? The Philippines, US territory.

Now at this point they have no choice but to attack the US, and a victory at Pearl could have bought them a significant amount of time.

While it is clear Pearl Harbour turned out badly, they really had few other viable options. When I think of screw-ups I believe there must be a realistic option that would have resulted in something better, at approximately the same time.
Say Italy's invasion of Greece. Italy was already involved in the African War, there was no reason to invade Greece at the time. It also placed the Allies on Germany's flank and possibly a critical delay in Barbarossa.

On the other hand, if the British had not moved their troops from North Africa to Greece, Lybia may have fallen in 1941, greatly changing the war.

 

[Camikaze]

Now at this point they have no choice but to attack the US, and a victory at Pearl could have bought them a significant amount of time.

So let me get this straight. There best option was to enter into a war with the other major Pacific power?