Last Stand of the 300 (Battle of Thermopylae 480BC)

[FaujHistorian]

I personally see this is similiar to why North Korea lose momentum and failed at Pusan Perimeter. The Persian had covered a lot of ground without actually consolidate their gain. The Greece on the other hand, was pushed in a corner, and was fighting a delay action after another delay action. SO in the end, when they have bought enough time and resource and they wait for a bottleneck for a counter strike. and that would general broke the back bone of an invasion enemy.

While you absort your enemy attack using your stragetic depth and while you counter punch when the time is ready, happened over and over again in the history of battle. This war, along with what the Russian did in Stalingrad and what the American did in Korea is a prime example that what would happen when you cover your ground faster than yo ucan resupply it.

Mind you, Xerxes lost bulk of his troop due to stavation on the way back to hellespont.

not to distract the main thrust of discussion.

during my discussions on this topic with friends in US/EU (especially military guys/gals)

i notice that they tend to side with 300 and the Greeks.

However I try to explain to them, that modern day American, NATO (and even Indian) forces have much in common with Xerxes and Persians rather than Greeks,

off course there are multiple reasons that I here.

But still it is kind of an interesting point to mention.

thank you

 

[jhungary]

not to distract the main thrust of discussion.

during my discussions on this topic with friends in US/EU (especially military guys/gals)

i notice that they tend to side with 300 and the Greeks.

However I try to explain to them, that modern day American, NATO (and even Indian) forces have much in common with Xerxes and Persians rather than Greeks,

off course there are multiple reasons that I here.

But still it is kind of an interesting point to mention.

thank you

Militaristically, Greek and Spartan suffered a major defeat. They lose the battle and subsequently Athens was sacked and Greece are evacuated.

However, the prospect of what 300 did was admirable, the self sacrifice that guarantee the war will not be lost and several thousand of their allied troop would fight for another day.

When it's time to choose between Fight, Fxck or Die, and you would almsot always sided with people who choose to fight.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Militaristically, Greek and Spartan suffered a major defeat. They lose the battle and subsequently Athens was sacked and Greece are evacuated.

However, the prospect of what 300 did was admirable, the self sacrifice that guarantee the war will not be lost and several thousand of their allied troop would fight for another day.

When it's time to choose between Fight, Fxck or Die, and you would almsot always sided with people who choose to fight.

That's true.

Back then we could see the human side of defense.

Trench warfare, invention of machine gun, and barbed wire like things took all that away from soldiers.

 

[asad71]

1.Wonder why didn't the Persians land some troops east of the pass?

2. Living god Xerxes emerges as totally ruthless caring nothing for loosing own soldiers. Relied totally on brute force and superior numbers exercising his mind v little on strategy or tactics.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

1.Wonder why didn't the Persians land some troops east of the pass?

2. Living god Xerxes emerges as totally ruthless caring nothing for loosing own soldiers. Relied totally on brute force and superior numbers exercising his mind v little on strategy or tactics.

Battle was going on at artemisium simutaneously between to navies in order to prevent such a move.The new upcoming movie 300: rise of an empire is supposed to be about it.300 was a unhistorical propaganda film,but entertainer nonetheless.Expect no less from this one.As for relying totally on brute force,well thats the only approach he knew and had always worked.

 

[vostok]

That's true.

Back then we could see the human side of defense.

Trench warfare, invention of machine gun, and barbed wire like things took all that away from soldiers.

Soviet soldiers in Stalingrad stood as well as 300 Spartans. To death. Died, called for artillery fire on themselvez - but did not give up! Even burning alive - continued to fight!

 

[forcetrip]

Soviet soldiers in Stalingrad stood as well as 300 Spartans. To death. Died, called for artillery fire on themselvez - but did not give up! Even burning alive - continued to fight!

I wouldn't call Stalingrad anything like the 300. They were probably in the Persian Kings shoes. Not that I doubt them raining fire on themselves. The Russians fought bravely for their land and won.

 

[vostok]

I wouldn't call Stalingrad anything like the 300. They were probably in the Persian Kings shoes. Not that I doubt them raining fire on themselves. The Russians fought bravely for their land and won.

In fact, the situation is somewhat similar. Stalingrad is very important from a strategic point of view. If the defenders of Stalingrad would gave up - the Germans have had open way to the Caucasus oil. Germans - the aggressors, as the Persians. Soviet soldiers - defenders as the Spartans.

 

[forcetrip]

In fact, the situation is somewhat similar. Stalingrad is very important from a strategic point of view. If the defenders of Stalingrad would gave up - the Germans have had open way to the Caucasus oil. Germans - the aggressors, as the Persians. Soviet soldiers - defenders as the Spartans.

I dont know man. Thats straight from Wiki. It was a decisive Russian victory of an important location which would swing the war in Russia's favor, but I wouldn't compare the 300 story with Stalingrad.

Casualties and losses

Germans

est. 850,000 killed, missing or wounded
including 91,000 captured (only 6,000 survived being taken prisoner and returned home by 1955)
900 aircraft (including 274 transports and 165 bombers used as transports)
1,500 tanks
6,000 artillery pieces[1]:122–123
5,762 guns, 1,312 mortars, 12,701 heavy machine guns, 156,987 rifles, 80,438 sub-machine guns, 10,722 trucks, 744 aircrafts, 1,666 tanks, 261 armored vehicles, 571 half-trucks, 10,679 motorcycles were captured[5]


Russians

Approx. 1,120,000 killed, missing or wounded
(including 478,741 killed and missing
650,878 wounded and sick)
40,000 civilians dead
4,341 tanks destroyed or damaged
15,728 artillery pieces
2,769 combat aircraft [6]
​

 

[vostok]

I dont know man. Thats straight from Wiki. It was a decisive Russian victory of an important location which would swing the war in Russia's favor, but I wouldn't compare the 300 story with Stalingrad.

Casualties and losses

Germans

est. 850,000 killed, missing or wounded
including 91,000 captured (only 6,000 survived being taken prisoner and returned home by 1955)
900 aircraft (including 274 transports and 165 bombers used as transports)
1,500 tanks
6,000 artillery pieces[1]:122–123
5,762 guns, 1,312 mortars, 12,701 heavy machine guns, 156,987 rifles, 80,438 sub-machine guns, 10,722 trucks, 744 aircrafts, 1,666 tanks, 261 armored vehicles, 571 half-trucks, 10,679 motorcycles were captured[5]


Russians

Approx. 1,120,000 killed, missing or wounded
(including 478,741 killed and missing
650,878 wounded and sick)
40,000 civilians dead
4,341 tanks destroyed or damaged
15,728 artillery pieces
2,769 combat aircraft [6]
​

Yes, in quantitative terms, is not comparable. Although in its own way the battle of Stalingrad will remain for centuries and millenniums as a symbol of bravery and courage, like story of 300 Spartans.
Pavlov's House - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Along with pavlov's house don't forget the stand of the russian soldiers at brest fortress 1941.

 

[vostok]

Along with pavlov's house don't forget the stand of the russian soldiers at brest fortress 1941.

Have you seen the movie "Fortress of war"(2010)? Not bad film about Brest.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Have you seen the movie "Fortress of war"(2010)? Not bad film about Brest.

I couldn't get subtitles so couldn't understand what they were saying.

 

[Mighty Caty]

In fact, the situation is somewhat similar. Stalingrad is very important from a strategic point of view. If the defenders of Stalingrad would gave up - the Germans have had open way to the Caucasus oil. Germans - the aggressors, as the Persians. Soviet soldiers - defenders as the Spartans.

Soviet soldiers in Stalingrad stood as well as 300 Spartans. To death. Died, called for artillery fire on themselvez - but did not give up! Even burning alive - continued to fight!

You cannot compare the act of 300 to the stand off at stalingrad.

While at Thermopylae, the spartan know they are all going to be kill but they stay and fight so they can at least save some troop. On the other hand, the Persian have no choice but to fight the spartan on the pass. While Stalingrad is simple brutal urban fighting. Russian could have retreat from stalingrad via the volga, but they elect to stand and fight. On the other hand, taking Stalingrad is not a must for the Germany campaign in Russia, they could have bypass it or siege it, and continue on with their campaign, yet Germany, like they do with Bastogne a year later, choose the fight the Russian in Stalingrad.

There are literally nothing in common between Stalingrad and Thermopylae, beside the fighting is brutal.

 

[vostok]

I couldn't get subtitles so couldn't understand what they were saying.