"The most prolific defensive terrain in history?" Topic

link

Land mines?

Trenches?

Foxholes

Rubble

water

Digging holes and building walls.

People have been doing both for thousands of years!

Cerdic is probably right. But 20th & 21st century has to be land mines, from what I've read. BTW interesting tidbit about the Falklands and penguins. Who would have known?

Definitely the Penguins. Especially if they have the laser gun.

hill, rise, elevation

nice mines, btw

Trees

Rocks.

Running away? That's what I'd do.

Mother inlaw…

The unfortunate bloke standing in front who takes the hit.

The bouncing Betty was the bain of allied soldiers. That and the newer little plastic ones.

High ground.

An enemy with bad maps.

Hills/ high ground.

There was a bored individual who got shipped back from the Falklands rapidly for machine gunning penguins, a minefield and a left over fuel dump nearby………….big fine and a psych-eval greeted him on return.

Land lacking significant natural resources. Lousy farming potential kept many places safe for a long stretch of human history before the discovery of oil reserves.

"There was a bored individual who got shipped back from the Falklands rapidly for machine gunning penguins, a minefield and a left over fuel dump nearby………….big fine and a psych-eval greeted him on return."

We don't want our soldiers to be too crazy do we? "We want you to kill the enemy, but we don't want you to 'want' to kill the enemy." Catch 22.

LOL, he was 'excused weapons' for a few months……he became our 'mule' , fetching and carrying etc until he was 'cleared'…………then we got another 'section 8' as a replacement-he wasn't allowed to drive either.

We don't want our soldiers to be too crazy do we? "We want you to kill the enemy, but we don't want you to 'want' to kill the enemy." Catch 22.

At what point in the conflict did either side declare war on the penguins?

Hey term is throughout history. Barb wire, land mines and trenches have only been around a limited amount of time. Rivers are the most effective but is not the most common. Both rocky ground and wooded areas will disrupt an attack and provide cover to the defender. Between those two rocky ground is more common so I would say it.

Union General George McClellan, lol.

Perhaps the soldier was from Hartlepool and thought in was an Argentinian spy

Italy

The English Channel. Been around since the end of the last ice age. And Cornwall to Kent is quite a long way.

It didn't stop William the Conqueror though, so how defensive was it really? ;)

Mountains have been the bane of attacking armies for centuries. Examples are Switzerland(ain't been conquered by an invader yet), Afghanistan (just ask the British, Russians or now the U.S.), just to name a couple. Even with the advent of helicopters, mountains give the defender a definite advantage. On the other hand, flat, open terrain (desert, plains or steppe) can be an attackers dream terrain.

The Alcazar

Here is what Napoleomn had to say:

"The frontiers of nations are either large rivers, or chains of mountains, or deserts. Of all these obstacles to the march of an army, deserts are the most difficult to surmount; mountains come next; and large rivers hold only the third rank."

which seems fair enough.

Afghanistan is of course a mountainous desert:)

Deserts are more of a logistical obstacle than a defensible terrain. The scarcity of resources (i.e. water, food etc…) means that a invading army must supply nearly everything needed to conduct and maintain operations. Napoleon was just pissed off about his Egyptian debacle.

1940's foundation garments

As Keegan pointed out in his History of Warfare almost all land battles were not fought in mountains deserts jungles or across major rivers but at strategic points along trade routes
One could argue pointing to WW2 in the Pacific or the Western Desert or Russia unless one includes the battles in Europe Northwest Africa China and many key places in the Pacific Russia and even the desert
So the issue of the defensive terrain becomes of much less importance as well the Rhine and the Ardennes had far fewer battles than Flanders, indeed, cities feature more in warfare than mountains, forests etc
And most of the terrain is neutral. Indeed as Alexander knew an army that is using mountains rivers or a prepared battlefield is simply announcing weakness in contrast to Clausewitz claim that the defense is naturally stronger than the offense
And important terrain is relative, a slight rise in the ground is not as important in Flanders as it is in the Lybian desert A small jungle stream may be more of an obstacle than the Dneiper