The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

an Siarach
Britain wasnt conquered in 43AD...Britain has never been conquered.


Britain didn't exist back then!
NDGAARONDI
Britain didn't exist back then!


exactly.
NDGAARONDI
Britain didn't exist back then!


Indeed, the English weren't even living in Britain at the time.
Just an LSE guy
Indeed, the English weren't even living in Britain at the time.




or how about Britain as in the British isles, did you think of that? dear me....
John Paul Jones
or how about Britain as in the British isles, did you think of that? dear me....


What the peoples of this land did before we came and slaughtered them is of no importance to me, and has nothing to do with us.
John Paul Jones
or how about Britain as in the British isles, did you think of that? dear me....


Its still incorrect if you think of it in that context.
Also, your question was what was the "worst British Military Defeat in a 1,000 Years"?

How can what happened 2,000 years ago be an option?
Reply 47
there's no need to be so picky about the question and poll. look, you clearly know what he's asking, and so does he. So if your interested, answer the question, if your not, don't.

As for me, i only did history until GCSE and even then we only did super modern stuff or ancient. So i don't know much between ancient and modern.
On my basis of limited knowledge, i would have to agree that the battle of the Somme was the most devastating defeat, but not the most important one. I think the most important one was the Norman conquest. If it wasn't for that invasion, i don't think Britain would have began to progress as quickly or as far. the Norman touch brought a little flair to Britain, and thank you for it.
Reply 48
It seems that you people are missing a lot of military defeats by britian.

Singapore: british loss of 150,000 men
Ragoon: from ragoon to India longest retreat ever
Tabruk: loss of 50,000 men
The somme: loss of over 200,000 men
pashendale: loss of 40,000 men
Battle of the atlantic: although not a loss, but a loss of 20% of the Royal navy
Isandhlwana: British were defeated by zulu natives with spears, while the british soldiers had guns. 1000 men slaughtered.
war in afganistan: British loss of the war and the loss of 50,000 men

well thats of the top of my head

what surprises me is how little the british know about the far east during WW2

Britian played a crucail part, but america takes all the glory for itself

Id have to say, Britian has done the best out of any nation in military victories, since 1770.
canuck
It seems that you people are missing a lot of military defeats by britian.

Singapore: british loss of 150,000 men
Ragoon: from ragoon to India longest retreat ever
Tabruk: loss of 50,000 men
The somme: loss of over 200,000 men
pashendale: loss of 40,000 men
Battle of the atlantic: although not a loss, but a loss of 20% of the Royal navy
Isandhlwana: British were defeated by zulu natives with spears, while the british soldiers had guns. 1000 men slaughtered.
war in afganistan: British loss of the war and the loss of 50,000 men

well thats of the top of my head

what surprises me is how little the british know about the far east during WW2

Britian played a crucail part, but america takes all the glory for itself

Id have to say, Britian has done the best out of any nation in military victories, since 1770.


you sure the somme was only 200k i thought i went up to nearly a million
canuck
It seems that you people are missing a lot of military defeats by britian.

Singapore: british loss of 150,000 men
Ragoon: from ragoon to India longest retreat ever
Tabruk: loss of 50,000 men
The somme: loss of over 200,000 men
pashendale: loss of 40,000 men
Battle of the atlantic: although not a loss, but a loss of 20% of the Royal navy
Isandhlwana: British were defeated by zulu natives with spears, while the british soldiers had guns. 1000 men slaughtered.
war in afganistan: British loss of the war and the loss of 50,000 men

well thats of the top of my head

what surprises me is how little the british know about the far east during WW2

Britian played a crucail part, but america takes all the glory for itself

Id have to say, Britian has done the best out of any nation in military victories, since 1770.



I wanted to include other battles such as the 1870s Afghanistan campaign and Rangoon - but there were only 10 options available !
Reply 51
BloodyValentine
you sure the somme was only 200k i thought i went up to nearly a million

Killed and wounded, both sides.
Reply 52
hey, another one i remembered when i was at work was the dardenelles campaigne, now that was a big defeat, and very pointless. 250,00 men lost

wait


actually it did have one signifigant figure

the best retreat in history.
almost no cassualties.
Reply 53
Suez was not a military defeat, it was political :smile:.
PhilipsCDRW
Worst British defeat in history? Joining the EEC in 1973. 'Here, France, help yourself to our sovreignity.'

Signing the Maastrict treaty in c.1993. 'France, it's now official, you own our country and UK citizen is on the road to the scrapheap.'


lol this post has a lot of potential.
Reply 55
The German's retreating to the Sigfried Line. It left the British (and to some measure the French) utterly bewildered and upon realising what had happened, the British had to come to terms with the fact that the Germans had beaten them soundly and decisively. Simply in terms of gaining the prepared ground of battle and holding every advantage, despite giving up several miles of territory on a long and relatively even front. This is without question, the greatest defeat the British have ever suffered in the field of human conflict. If you choose to argue this, then think of a few things. First, they were taken by surprise. Second, when they realised what was going on, they could not do anything about it. Third, they were immediately put at a disadvantage. Fourth, it was only the entry of America on the British and French side that caused the Sigfried Line to become redundant.
Reply 56
Sire
The German's retreating to the Sigfried Line. It left the British (and to some measure the French) utterly bewildered and upon realising what had happened, the British had to come to terms with the fact that the Germans had beaten them soundly and decisively. Simply in terms of gaining the prepared ground of battle and holding every advantage, despite giving up several miles of territory on a long and relatively even front. This is without question, the greatest defeat the British have ever suffered in the field of human conflict. If you choose to argue this, then think of a few things. First, they were taken by surprise. Second, when they realised what was going on, they could not do anything about it. Third, they were immediately put at a disadvantage. Fourth, it was only the entry of America on the British and French side that caused the Sigfried Line to become redundant.


may i ask what war are you talking about, sure isnt WW2.
Reply 57
canuck
may i ask what war are you talking about, sure isnt WW2.


In WW1, the German army retreated to the Siegfried Line (sp) commonly known as the Hindenburg Line. This was a manoeuvre that strengthend and straightened the German trench lines by giving up some thirty, or even forty miles of ground for the British and French to occupy. Ground which was set with booby traps of all kinds, ranging from actual mines, to flooding of the ground etc. It cost the British and French valuable time and resources to bring the fight back to the German army, and to do so on the terms set by Germany. The Germans occupied a shorter line, backed by an efficient and already working rail system, and further were able to put some extra 30 divisions into that same line after they had knocked Russia out of the war. It was masterful, hence the commonly accepted name of Hindenburg Line in honour of the great Field Marshall (Generalfeldmarschall) for the concept and execution of the Siegfried Line (sp).
Reply 58
In the- often justified- criticism of French and British strategy and tactics in WWI, it's worth remembering that the Germans occupied ten percent of the most productive area of France and nearly all of Belgium, for which- ostensibly- Britain had gone to war. This meant that they were inevitablty committed to an offensive posture: the territorial status quo suited the Germans perfectly.
I can't remember what the war was... but it had a poem written about it.

'Cannon to the left of them, Cannon to the right of them...'

It was about the charge of the light cavalry against lots of heavy guns...

sorry for the lack of info but i have tried to forget A-level history as much as possible.