Yes, there was famous cavalry charge in that battle, in the Battle for Krojanty, but that was a victory for the Polish cavalry, they were not foolish to charge horses against tanks, they charged German infantry. So we have to eliminate the clear cases of one-sided victories, where British colonial armies used breech-loading rifles or Hitler's Wehrmacht rolled over several divisions of the Polish infantry with 300 tanks in Tuchola Forest (incidentially, it is a myth that the Polish cavalry charged against tanks. But this is not a fair measure by any reasonable standard. As far as I can find, this is the most lopsided victory of actual battle engaged where the smaller army won.
Three of the Voortrekkers were 'lightly wounded'. So you are outnumbered more than 20 to 1, what happens? 3,000 of the Zulus are dead. Zulus had their classic warrior shields and spears. When 12 guys kill at least 130,000 (practically all civilians) in one day without any 'losses' to their own 'side' that is obviously a hideously one-sided massacre.Īnd I also don't want to count any other obvious massacres where there was a decisive technological advantage on one side, like the Battle of Blood River (Ncome) where 470 Voortrekkers led by Pretorius faced - get this - over 10,000 Zulu warriors led by Dambuza. And I mean in battle - so lets not count the 12 aircrew on Enola Gay who dropped Little Boy on a city in Japan, the B29 Superfortress bomber that dropped the first atomic bomb on a town in Japan called Hiroshima. What has been the most lopsided victory, where a general actually had a smaller army, and defeated a bigger opponent. WHEN I SAY BATTLE, I MEAN BATTLE AS IN ACTUAL COMBATĪnd that had me thinking. Perhaps its not such a surprise then that Napoleon went down in defeat that time. So the Duke of Wellington had a 63% bigger army. He brought 72,000 French troops to the small town in Belgium, while the Duke of Wellington and von Blucher amassed 118,000 troops. Did you know that Napoleon faced considerably larger forces. Waterloo has become one of the classic synonyms of total defeat. You probably have to be a bit of a war history nut to remember the name of the commander who beat him - that was the Duke of Wellington (and as his ally, from the Prussian army, von Blucher). Napoleon had the perception of being an invincible commander, yet at Waterloo he was defeated.
Bear in mind, that Elop's actions are motivated by a personal secret goal, that he will earn 25 million US dollars if he can wreck the Nokia handset business so totally, it is ruined, and will be sold to Microsoft for scrap value. Please bear that in mind when you read this blog article. Today it emerged that Elop's CEO contract with Nokia included a bonus clause worth $25 Million dollars, if Elop sold the handset unit specifically to Microsoft.
NODEFENDER MIRROR UPDATE
UPDATE SThree weeks ago it was announced that Nokia will sell its handset unit to Microsoft and Elop will depart Nokia to rejoin Microsoft. But if you are interested in Nokia, or of management failure, or the competition in smartphones, or of Microsoft's mobile strategy, this will be worth your while. I am serious, get a big cup of coffee before you start, this will take you maybe half an hour to read. So this is massive even by my blog standard. This article could even be published as a booklet or definitely as an ebook all by itself. 29,000 words would be three chapters in a regular printed book. So be prepared, this is not something usually found on a blog. WARNING - I often write long detailed blogs. And yes, on my mind I have the song Waterloo, that launched Abba 38 years ago - boy was that really so, so very long ago? Waterloo, I was defeated, you won the war. Hey! I don't mean Waterloo Ontario Canada (RIM).
0 kommentar(er)
