Agincourt wasn’t fought on a hillside.
Was it? The RAF had a supply of pilots to replace those lost, their bases were more or less below where the fighting took place and the Germans had to fly far and concentrate not only on the RAF but the cities they were supposed to bomb as well.
Aside:
Cheers for the rec. I looked that up and liked what I saw so ordered it.
It’s a really good book. Same guy that wrote Bagger Vance.
I read a couple of years ago that it was going to be a movie but haven’t heard anthing since.
I’m not sure I’d agree their fight is one of liberation (though it is from their personal view) as the current trend seems to be that said suicide bombers and their cohorts are increasingly angering ordinary Arabs and other Mulim West/Central Asians. While it is increasingly unlikely, they might be able to drive out the US. But its also looking unlikely that they could plausibly and succesfully control the areas thereafter. The key quesiton here is support and organization. While the Communists in Vietnam succeeded in their political goals, they had vast technical and financial support (orders of mangnitude higher than our enemies have) and had advanced large-scale organization, better terrain, and - most importantly - had the support of a considerable portion of the populace (though the exact portion will never be known). The terrorists we face now have none of those things, and are trending down on all of them. And as far as PR goes, they’ve increasingly switched over to kidnapping some aid worker or whatever. Which is not really a very impressive or manly act and won’t win them admiration of anyone.
Well, no one said “striking examples of strategic or tactical genius” were not blatantly obvious after the fact! 
I would submit Oda Nobunaga’s victory over Daimyo Imagawa Yoshimoto. In a daring night attack, Oda defeated and killed Yoshimoto, with only a few thousand men against 20,000 and more. It was a masterstroke at the exactly proper time, and led to the failure of the entire campaign - and Oda’s ascension over central Japan.
WWII saw the fall of superior French forces to the German blitzkrieg in less than 3 weeks.
The British were successful in defeating much larger and heavier armed Spanish ships through superior tactics.
The ‘seven days’ was the first one that occured to me. The way Lee and company bedazzled the Union generals in that campaign was amazing.
But I’m not exactly a disinterested observer, there.
I’m surprised that no one has mentioned the Six Day War, 1967. I’m no military historian, so I’d be interested to hear if that doesn’t qualify.
Pssst…
Read the thread again and pay special attention to Malthus’ first post…
I do hope you’re kidding. I’m not 16, you know.
Not kidding at all. Just politely asking because it is against forum protocol to use the board for assignments and your specific questions and conditions just screamed ‘assignment’.
Denver Broncos v. Cleveland Browns, AFC Championship game.
Both teams played well, but Cleveland’s up in the fourth quarter with just over two minutes left. Their kick to Denver was masterful, leaving the Broncos on their own two yard line. Everyone was preparing for the inevitable: Denver was going to lose.
Tell that to John Elway. 98 yards in 2 minutes. The Drive. A thing of beauty. Even the sports writers of the time described Cleveland as “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.”
Outstanding football.
I’d nitpick this one a bit, as I don’t think the British were all that inferior. They held on by the skin of their teeth resource-wise, but they had some serious advantages going for them…
Ground observers, early radar, and fantastic communications enabled very fast response to incoming German planes. They were able to tactically choose their fights and advantages. The Germans on the other hand were essentially flying in blindly.
German escorts (ME109’s primarily) were very short ranged, after the flight over the channel, they only had around 10 minutes of loiter time if they wanted to make it home without running out of fuel. This severely hampered their ability to protect their bombers from the British intercept.
After the initial early BoB ('40-'41) the German effort was very limited, being distracted by the resources devoted to the Eastern front. Later german resources (longer range aircraft, better technology) could have swamped the British air defence, it just wasn’t seriously attempted.
I will admit though that Hitler/Goering seriously underestimated the strength of the British defense, and that the defense was very noble and plucky.
Another football game:
Dallas Cowboys beat Washington Redskins at RFK Stadium in 1989.
The hapless Cowboys had a record of 3-13 in 1988. Jerry Jones comes in, buys the team, and fires legendary head coach Tom Landry: the only head coach Dallas had ever known, who had led them to 5 Super Bowl appearances and 2 Super Bowl wins.
In 1989, the pathetic 0-8 Cowboys, with rookie head coach Jimmy Johnson and rookie quarterback Troy Aikman, came into Washington as a 14 point underdog, having lost to the hated arch-rival Redskins in Week 3 at Dallas by a score of 30-7.
By taking several unusual risks, such as great 4th down conversions, Dallas walked away with an incredible upset victory against the Redskins by a final score of 13-3.
Dallas ended up just 1-15 on the year, with their sole win against Washington. The Redskins went 10-6, missing the playoffs by one game.
'Twas a thing of beauty.
Rebel assault on the Death Star.
Not sure of exact time and place but it happened a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.
'Bout time someone brought it up 
‘Never have so few, with so little, done so much, for so many.’
-Winston Churchill
Gotta disagree with you here. First of all, there was only ONE Battle of Britain, from 1940-1941, which coincided with German plans for a seaborne invasion of England. The Battle of Britain, from the German perspective, was to end the RAF’s capability to defend the British Isles. It ended when the Germans elected to attack Russia, and was never attempted again, as the Germans never again had the same level of force to bring to bear to attempt to invade England.
Tactically, the Germans were stupid to attack as they did, going for the home bases of the fighter wings but breaking off just when they were on the brink of victory, focusing their bombers instead on cities like London, whilst the RAF had time to regroup and re-arm. If the Germans had pushed just that much harder on the RAF when it was reeling (say in Mid-'41), they would have gutted the RAF and had no one to stop them from destroying all of the cities on the south end of England, paving the way for a Nazi invasion and occupation of England. It was damn close, and only tactical stupidity on the part of the Germans won the battle for the Brits.
Add to that things you already mentioned about limited loitering / attack time for the German fighters vs the British ones, home-field advantage, ground observers, and radar, and you have a much smaller force beating a much larger force due to tactical success and strategic forthought.
But it still wouldn’t have meant anything if the Germans had continued to concentrate attacks on air bases instead of English cities. So it wasn’t strategy and tactics as much as luck really.
When is luck not a factor?
I think luck is a huge factor in any battle, especially ones with a tactical or strategic advantage / disadvantage… so how much of victory is capitalizing on that luck?
The 101st Airborne held out at Bastogne for how many days / weeks, before reinforcements arrived? If it hadn’t been for a couple lucky days where the weather was clear enough to get airdrops in of food and ammo, they never would have been able to hold out until they were reinforced by Patton’s 3rd Army. How much of that battle was luck and how much the sheer tenaciousness of the Airborne soldiers in the face of adversity to capitalize on whatever ‘luck’ was available?
Luck???
Churchill ordered a bombing raid on central Berlin.
The Germans were so infuriated by this terror attack that they decided to bomb London in return.
“From now on, every bomb will be revenged with bombs” Was Hitler’s start of the bombing campaign against London.