February 27th 1776: Scotsmen meet Americans in battle

On the 5th November 1854 a  smaller British and (yes) French army beat off an assault by the Russians at Inkerman in the Crimea. It was known as “The  Soldier’s Battle” as men fought small engagements due to poor visibility in dense fog.
The Russians had massed 32000 men on the Allied flank and headed for the 2700 man 2nd Division, commanded today by the aggressive Pennefather. Instead of falling back in the face of superior numbers, he advanced. The British had their rifles to thank this day as they took a terrible toll on the musket armed Russian Infantry, who were hemmed in by the valley’s bottle neck shape. The British 2nd Division pushed the Russians back onto their reinforcements and should have been routed by the Russians’ numbers, but the fog and the British Light Division saved them. Three successive Russian commanders were killed in this engagement.
The Russians other 15000 men approached and assailed the Sandbag Battery, but they were routed by 300 British defenders vaulting the wall, blunting the lead Battalions, who were then attacked in the flank. More Russian attacks ensured the Battery exchanged hands several times.
The British 4th Division was not as lucky. Arriving on the field, its flanking move was itself flanked and its commander, Cathcart, killed. This enabled the Russians to advance, but not for long. They were soon driven off by French units arriving from their camps and made no more headway.
The battle was lost and they had to withdraw.
This was the last time the Russians tried to defeat the Allied troops in the field. Despite this reverse, however, the Russian attack had seriously stalled the Allies from capturing Sevastopol. They had to instead, spend one harsh winter on the heights overlooking the city, before it fell in September of 1855.
The British suffered 2573 casualties, the French 1800 and the Russians 11959.

On the 24th May 1864 Grant gifted Lee the  kind of opportunity that rarely happens in a campaign: to wreck the other’s army.
After the bloodletting of May 5-12th, that cost Lee 22000 casualties and Grant 34000,'weakening both armies by 33% and 25% respectively, Grant again disengaged and moved South towards Richmond. Lee had followed and had been reinforced with 7 small Brigades from his capital.
Grant had inadvertentally straddled his large army across the North Anna river.
Lee saw the way to take advantage of his smaller numbers and punish the Federal II Corps, Grant’s best. He could throw 30000 men at the 24000 that were over the V in the river separating Grant’s two halves of his army. Hancock’s 24000 could not be reinforced, because of the V of the river, so he readied his assault.
On the afternoon of the 24th Lee fell violently sick with diarrhoea. He lay helplessly for hours while the opportunity to assault, before the Union commanders realised the sure situation were in.
The reason Lee’s defensive strike could not be undertaken was simple: the attrition of the last 19 days had robbed him of a subordinate able to manage it.
Time and opportunity passed. Grant and Hancock’s isolated Corps were extremely lucky.
We all know the loss of a quarter of Grant’s force would never have changed his resolve to “fight it all out, even if it takes all Summer”, but another battering would have diminished his potential to do so sooner.

@Gargantua:

Oakland Raiders for sure.

Vader: So, you have accepted the truth.

images.jpg

Rome used the victory in the 2nd Punic War to expand againist Carthage’s supporters in Greece and other areas in the East.

Since the depression is global, then I do believe it is hitting China as well as it is us.

The difference, IMHO, is that China has been building up a manufacturing infrastructure while America has been disassembling ours and replacing it with a service industry infrastructure.

It is my personal opinion that a country with a manufacturing base can grow it’s GDP.  In fact, the P in GDP stands for PRODUCT, it does not stand for SERVICE.  I also, personally, determine wealth by not only money, but products owned - but in any case, it is not services received that creates wealth.  I can hire an attorney all day long, but that attorney did not give me wealth, it may have given me knowledge, but not wealth.  If I were to take that knowledge and change raw materials into some PRODUCT then that PRODUCT would give me wealth.

It’s a fine line, and I’m sure some of you will attempt to disagree with me (some because they legitimately don’t understand what I am trying to say, some because they honestly think I am wrong, and some out of pure habit.)

That said, a nation with a manufacturing basis will be able to recover from depression and experience less impact from a depression than a nation who relies on services for it’s economy.

To put it into perspective:

If Nation A makes tanks then they have tanks.
If Nation B cleans Nation A’s tanks, then they have nothing.

@whoman69:

I wouldn’t at all say stomped.  In fact he was not defeated, merely not able to further advance due to the logistics.

Logistically, beginning the overland journey from Boston to Quebec City in September was a dumb idea to begin with, but Arnold then lost the part of his army that hadn’t died from disease or exposure in his attack on the city itself. The city was held with the loss of only 5 of its defenders. Arnold should get credit, however, for having his men going into the attack on Dec 31st knowing that their enlistment was up the following day…

Craig, a friend of mine and former flatmate, asked me in how far the performance of the american football will depend on the temperatures in winter 2006. My opinion is that the more blue the teams have in their shirts, the better they will perform if it is cool. Less blue means they perform better if it is hot.

your opinions?

@marine36:

I would rather go without the prize then cooperate with the french. :lol:

too easy.