Single most important battle in History?

[aronnax]

Forests still break up cavalry formations, and allow hit and run tactics.

They still cross and defeated Hungary within a year. To my knowledge, I dont think Hungary was flat or not heavily forested

Very true, but I don't know the effect that disease had on the Vietnamese campaign.

To my account, every and any large army going through a rainforest suffered from disease. From Alexander to British attacks in India

Nonsense. Russia fell so easily because it was unorganized and weak. At that point it was a small principality around Moscow and Novgorod. A good snowstorm or a cold hard winter can ruin and campaign, if there is a force worth a damn to take advantage of it.

Yes, and no. True enough, any invasion force in Russian Winter would crack if a strong enough force could attack it. But Isnt Mongol Winter quite harsh? They would have quite alot of practise with dealing with winter/blizzard attacks. Also, Napoleon and Hitler, went to Russia and did not fight the Russian Army but, the Russian Winter. The Mongols did cross the frozen terrain prepared for the winter. They could take the harsh climate of winter.

Ah, but to take that path, you have to know that it exists. They don't have Schieffen to look to for answers.

Maps and traitorious powers! Venice did exchanged information about Europe for the mongols in order for the trading routes to be left alone. That would be information they could have easily gained, especially after defeating Hungary.

Keep in mind that, in the 13th Century, there were a great many more forests in Europe than there are today.
Keep in mind, China was just as forested as Europe
They could have just as easily tried to enter Austria and had the snot beat out of them. Hell, there are plenty of hills and what not in Northern Germany and NE France.

True. But they did invade Mountainous Georgia, however thats after it was hapless and defenseless from an intial Iranian Attack. But I think they could have suceeded. China is exceptionally hilly in the central South.


And they did. I'm talking about France, Germany, Italy, and Austria.

10 characters

 

[Brighteye]

Although the mongols were stopped in the thick Vietnamese Rainforest, Theres a difference bewteen thick Vietnamese Rainforest and forest of Europe.

A rainforest was really thick, really tall and really confusing. It was like a fog, you cant see anything but green for more than 50metres.

But a temperate forest is more "open". It was easier to maneover with horses.

A rainforest is denser than a temperate forest, quite possibly. But have you ever been in a well-established temperate forest? It's not wide-open avenues with the occasional tree, as depicted in many films or television programmes.
Temperate forest is as bad as rainforest, at least from the view of cavalry action. There are dense thickets, low branches, scrub, uneven ground, fallen tree trunks etc.

 

[Mirc]

They still cross and defeated Hungary within a year. To my knowledge, I dont think Hungary was flat or not heavily forested

Hungary is flat. It's a biiiig plain. And it's called the Pannonian plain. One of the biggest plains around here. In fact, that's exactly what most people criticize the Hungarian landscape for - you've got only plains everywhere.

To my account, every and any large army going through a rainforest suffered from disease. From Alexander to British attacks in India

Same for temperate forests.

Yes, and no. True enough, any invasion force in Russian Winter would crack if a strong enough force could attack it. But Isnt Mongol Winter quite harsh? They would have quite alot of practise with dealing with winter/blizzard attacks. Also, Napoleon and Hitler, went to Russia and did not fight the Russian Army but, the Russian Winter. The Mongols did cross the frozen terrain prepared for the winter. They could take the harsh climate of winter.

The climate alone, maybe. But combined with the other factors it's not that simple. You could say they could beat every single factor, but it's not fair to judge them separately.

A rainforest was really thick, really tall and really confusing. It was like a fog, you cant see anything but green for more than 50metres.

50 meters? Just go 10 kilometers out of Bucharest and you won't be able to see more than 10-12 meters ahead, in the forest, and it's a mere shadow of the forests that used to cover the whole area centuries ago. Just think of heavy bushes, swampy terrain, tall trees, meters of fallen leaves on the ground, smaller trees, even smaller trees, thousands of wolves and bears, etc.

 

[REDY]

To my knowledge, I dont think Hungary was flat or not heavily forested
OMG

 

[Steph]

50 meters? Just go 10 kilometers out of Bucharest and you won't be able to see more than 10-12 meters ahead, in the forest, and it's a mere shadow of the forests that used to cover the whole area centuries ago. Just think of heavy bushes, swampy terrain, tall trees, meters of fallen leaves on the ground, smaller trees, even smaller trees, thousands of wolves and bears, etc.

And the Dragons! Don't forget the dragons!

However, I'm not sure Western Europe was as heavily forested as that.

France currently has 15 millions hectares of forest 26% of the French territory. And we are now at the level we have and the end of the middle ages.

I don't know what area of forest was removed during the middle ages, but even if it's half of it, it means the forest was no more than half the territory.

Leaving the other half which were not forested.

 

[Gecko1]

easy, the battle of marathon, and we are done.

 

[aronnax]

Hungary is flat. It's a biiiig plain. And it's called the Pannonian plain. One of the biggest plains around here. In fact, that's exactly what most people criticize the Hungarian landscape for - you've got only plains everywhere.

The Kingdom of Hungary stetched from the Dinaric Alps of Croatia to the end of the Alps in Slovenia, to the Carpithina Mountains in the other edge. Very flat eh?

Same for temperate forests.

Theres a higher chance from me dying from a malaria mosquito bite in the Rainforest than a squrriel bumping my leg in that of a temperate

The climate alone, maybe. But combined with the other factors it's not that simple. You could say they could beat every single factor, but it's not fair to judge them separately.
Then what other factors?

50 meters? Just go 10 kilometers out of Bucharest and you won't be able to see more than 10-12 meters ahead, in the forest, and it's a mere shadow of the forests that used to cover the whole area centuries ago. Just think of heavy bushes, swampy terrain, tall trees, meters of fallen leaves on the ground, smaller trees, even smaller trees, thousands of wolves and bears, etc.

See Stephs qoute

 

[Stapel]

My first idea would be the invasion of Western Europe by Allied forces in 1944. It only marginally helped defeating Germany, but did prevent that Western Europe would be conquered by evil Stalinists.

This brings thing down to D-Day and Market-Garden. The former prevented the Russians to conquer eastern Europe. An allied succes of the latter, might have prevented large portions of Eastern Europe to fall into communism.

 

[Shekwan]

Of course it has to be Marathon. What with all the preservation of democracy and freedom and stuff...
Some would say Thermopylae, as it was a bit of a bigger effort by the Persians, and also because of a certain recent movie sexing it up.
Invasion of europe 1944!? Maybe important for our lifetime, could say it preserved democracy in western europe, however the Warsaw Pact didn't last very long did it?

 

[KaiserElectric]

The battle at Lexington and Concord during the American Revolution is the most important battle in the history of the world. The American Revolution's sucess inspired many revolutions across the world, including the French Revolution. When Napoleon was in power after the Revolution, he spread liberal ideas through the lands he conquered, which helped to toppel the old way of government in favor of democracy, which helped to launch Europe into the Industrial era. In a nutshell, the battle at Lexington and Concord and the American Revolution catapulted Europe and the rest of the world into the modern era. I don't think any other battle came close to that.

 

[Steph]

The battle at Lexington and Concord during the American Revolution is the most important battle in the history of the world. The American Revolution's sucess inspired many revolutions across the world, including the French Revolution. When Napoleon was in power after the Revolution, he spread liberal ideas through the lands he conquered, which helped to toppel the old way of government in favor of democracy, which helped to launch Europe into the Industrial era. In a nutshell, the battle at Lexington and Concord and the American Revolution catapulted Europe and the rest of the world into the modern era. I don't think any other battle came close to that.

England started the industrial era, Napoleon had little to do with that...
Napoleon did not use the American revolution has a model either.

 

[Yui108]

Poitiers, just about hands down

 

[Dachs]

Poitiers, just about hands down

If we were referring to "Greatest Skirmishes" yes, but Poitiers wasn't actually all that important.

 

[KaiserElectric]

England started the industrial era, Napoleon had little to do with that...
Napoleon did not use the American revolution has a model either.

I disagree. Napoleon got his Enlightenment ideas from the French Revolution, and the French Revolutionaries got their Enlightenment ideas from the the American revolution, so in a sense Napoleon did use the American Revolution as a model. Napoleon's Wars also weakened most of Europe and gave Britain a lot of power when it defeated France, making it a prime candidate for Industrialization.

 

[Steph]

I disagree. Napoleon got his Enlightenment ideas from the French Revolution.

Napoleon was not exactly enlightened

, and the French Revolutionaries got their Enlightenment ideas from the the American revolution, so in a sense Napoleon did use the American Revolution as a model.

And the American revolution used some French enlightment ideas... And can you give an example of Napoleon using American revolution as a model? Not just a vague idea, but some factual example?

Napoleon's Wars also weakened most of Europe and gave Britain a lot of power when it defeated France, making it a prime candidate for Industrialization.

Except the British industrial revolution started before the Napleonic wars. And Lexington and Concord had very little impact on the Napoleonic wars in Europe.

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

Most of the ideals and philosophies that found their way into our Declaration, Constitution, and early revolutionary rhetoric came from European Enlightenment era philosophers, the British legal tradition, with some additions by the odd American writer here and there. Yeah, we were amongst the first to put those ideals into practice on any significant scale, but the ideas were not strictly ours. They were simply adapted, expanded, and tailored for our own uses.

The French may have taken some cues from us certainly. We had a monarchical government and threw it off successfully. Of course there's going to be a 'if they can do it, why not us?' mentality and no doubt some of them watched our 'experiment' to see what worked and what didn't. But I doubt there's enough to make a convincing argument that 'without the US revolution, there would have been no French one'. Their movement was largely independent from ours in background, intentions, rhetoric and ideology.

If you want to boil it down to a single word, our revolution was about sovereignty, theirs about class. Now certainly there were anti-aristocratic, populist sentiments throughout the US, but this wasn't a popular (as in 'populist', 'by the people') uprising. This was about our government and policy being dictated to us from some fools 3,000 miles away and us not having any real say in the matter. (and of course taxes. We fricken hated em)

France's was about an oppressed underclass that had been the victims of a privileged aristocracy for thousands of years finally saying 'enough is enough'. America didn't have that long and established tradition of aristocracy. You didn't have much as far as hereditary titles and rigid peasant classes here. In France they were trying to overthrow the entire social order. In America, we were simply saying that we'd like to control our own social order, thank you very much.

Very different movements with differing backgrounds and motivations.

 

[KaiserElectric]

I agree with your ideas, Enlightenment, but keep in mind that France invested a lot of money in the American Revolution, and that plus other military funds and court dashed the economy to shambles, putting yet another strain on the stress growing between the upper and lower classes, who had to pay higher and higher taxes to support the failing French economy.

 

[Civfan333]

the D-day invasion and Pearl Harbour as we would be living in a VERY different world right now if those had turned out just a little differently......

 

[Yui108]

If we were referring to "Greatest Skirmishes" yes, but Poitiers wasn't actually all that important.

Stopped Muslim expansion into Europe. I think a Muslim western Europe, if not disastrous, is at least a verydifferent world.

 

[Tee Kay]

Stopped Muslim expansion into Europe. I think a Muslim western Europe, if not disastrous, is at least a verydifferent world.

Actually, Tours is more important as consolidating Frankish power in Europe.