A while ago I started a thread asking about the best military actions by a unit or individual. Now I would like to reverse the question. What is the worst blunder ever committed militarily? I'll start out by nominating the actions of General Custer at the Little Big Horn. His entire command was wiped out by his rash actions.

Any attempted land invasion of Russia from the West. Doesn't matter who tried - Napoleon or Hitler.

General George Armstrong Custer's stand at the Little Big Horn is another fine example, and would have been my first choice.

the worst militarer mistake is Sweden ceded Finland to Russia in traktat at Fredrikshamn 1809

Canadian invasion of Dieppe during WW2. British idiots didn't know what the hell they were doing when they sent our boys to Dieppe. Because of certain things that happened enroute to Dieppe, the boats showed up on the beach in broad daylight, and the Nazis could see us coming from 5 miles away. There was also a lack of artilery support and bomber support. The battle went so bad many medical boats and retrival boats were destroyed either when they were loading or escaping. Many Canadians died that day, thanks to the British commanders.

Originally posted by CX returns
Many Canadians died that day, thanks to the British commanders.

If there's anything positive to be taken from Dieppe, it's that the hard lessons learned there resulted in fewer Allied casualties on D-Day. So their lives were certainly not given in vain.

Actually...

"The disaster did point up the need for much heavier firepower in future raids. It was recognised that this should include aerial bombardment, special arrangements to be made for land armour, and intimate fire support right up to the moment when troops crossed the waterline (the most dangerous place on the beach) and closed with their objectives.

However, it did not need a debacle like Dieppe to learn these lessons. As judged by General Sir Leslie Hollis - secretary to the Chiefs of Staff Committee and deputy head of the Military Wing of the War Cabinet with direct access to Churchill - the operation was a complete failure, and the many lives that were sacrificed in attempting it were lost with no tangible result."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/dieppe_raid_06.shtml

I'd say trench warfare in WW1 would be the worst.

Let me nominate one more contender, memorialized in "The Charge of the Light Brigade" by Tennyson. Here is a good website on the subject.

http://www.pinetreeweb.com/13th-balaclava2.htm

It was a gallant action, but the lack of support and the confusion about what the objective was led to it being a needless sacrafice of a unit. There were some 14 survivors.

the british attack at Gallipolli has to rank up there too. 300,000 British and Canadian casualties and not an inch of ground gained.

Bay of Pigs. Unfortunate to say the least. But I'd have to go for the Amritsar Massacre as the most brutal military blunder.

Fredricksburg.

Anyone who is familiar with the civil war will know this one.

C'MON

THE WORST MILITARY BLUNDER
THAT'S EASY "VIETNAM" THE CIA KILLS JFK TO STAY PUT AND 30,000 DEAD SOLDIERS LATER WE FINALLY RETREAT

Gifts,

Actually the number of dead was closer to 60,000.

We could've won that war, had LBJ had the balls to have actually fought it.

It's really amazing. The U.S. government spends ?? $$$ on the military. There are schools non-comissioned and comissioned officers of all ranks attend while moving up & learning the fine arts of fighting & supplying a war .. from logistics, intelligence gathering, & tactics, to name but a few ... and then you have politicians sitting in D.C. running the show. Viet Nam could probably have been won had the politicians told the Generals & Admirals .. " ... OK gentlemen, here's the situation, you've benefitted from all this training & experience, fix the problem, and let us know (1) if there's anything you need, and (2) when the mission is completed. ...", or words to that effect. Might have been done before JFK got blown away.

I would tend to agree ES347. The mistakes that lost the war in Vietnam were made in Washington, not in Vietnam.

es347 and imagineer,

I agree with the idea that Vietnam could've been won had the politicians let the military loose. I've read Jack Broughton's (Air Force pilot who fought in World War Two, Korea and Vietnam, plus a member of the Thunderbirds between wars) "Going Downtown." Reading the absolute stupidity of the politicians and their rules of engagement in Vietnam is like reading pages out of a nightmare.

Imagineer:

I don't think that you can say the charge of the light brigade was a military disaster. The commanders were wrong to allow it to happen. But the Earl of Cardigan who headed the charge and was wounded in the proccess was onlyu following orders. He knew that the charge was dangerous and it was going to be bloody. But still he carried out his order (he was quoted to say "here goes the last of the Cardigans!"). I shall give it to you that the charge was a military blunder but it was not the fault of the leader but his superiors.

Lord Cardigan showed bravery in battle was a good example to his men and he even was at the head of the charge and the russian battery guns fleed because of seeing this ferocious man charging at them.

how about the russians at Tora Bora?

what happened to the russians at tora bora?

my vote is for the japanese of pearl harbor- not just for japan but the whole axis powers. way to get the US involved, guys.

The promotion (and SELF promotion) of Bernard Law Montgomery

VietNam was a major military blunder in the fact that we somehow managed to lose the war despite winning most of the battles. It's a blunder in the fact that it demonstrates, painfully, what happens when politicians think they know more about warfare than the generals.