05-25-2006, 07:42 PM
Quote:The Han in the same manner had the same occurrence with XiangYu of the Chu dynasty. The Han dynasty's first battle with XiangYu ended pathetically. Han elite cavalry was defeated by a mob of quickly assembled soldiers out of desperation. In fact, XiangYu won WAY more battles than he lost, but in the end he lost the war. Don't ask me how it happened, I don't know how. Right now I'm trying to find a reason on how XiangYu won every battle he went into but lost the war. It's MINDBOGGLING.
Why? Take Phyrros, or Hannibal. Both won their battles but still lost the war. Their enemies could sustain much more losses in defeat than either winner could take in winning. Hence the phrase 'Phyrric victory'. Who was it again that said wars were not about winning battles, but logistics?
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
