10-03-2019, 11:39 PM
(10-03-2019, 11:29 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL sure, that must be what I think.
It's what you said.
Quote:Anyway, I don't see where any significant "delay" occurred. A blocking action failed. Possibly the Spartans, with a few hundred unremembered Thebans and Thespians were able to delay pursuit of the bulk of retreating Greek land forces for a day. Whatever. Land resistance was shattered and ineffective for he remainder of that year. The Persians controlled Boeotia, the Attic peninsula and Phocis. Athens, Thespiae, and Plataea were burned. It wasn't until the next year, 479 BCE, that the Poleis combined enough allied strength to defeat the Persians at Plataea. (Not before the Persians burned Athens a second time.)
Not sure what naval action you are referring to. The battle of Artemisium was occurring at the same time as Thermopylae to protect the land army's flank, but that was pointless once the Greeks abandoned the pass, and ended in a Greek naval retreat when they couldn't sustain any more losses.
The Persian naval defeat was at Salamis a month later, but that was a rather ad hoc affair won by same forces that had been engaged at Artemsium. I don't see how a "delay" at Thermopylae a month earlier helped the Greeks win that.
Excellent job of Monday morning QB'ing. I guess with perfect military intelligence Leonidas might have done things differently. He sacrificed himself to buy time. Whether you think he succeeded or not the end result was a Greek victory. I suppose if you view every action in a complete vacuum, which you seem to be doing, then yeah, what a waste. Or maybe, just maybe the delay affected logistic lines, prevented a more aggressive campaign and bought the Greeks the time needed to win a naval victory that saved their people. Bottom line is the Greeks won, hence Leonidas did not fail, as his objective was to save the Greek people.
Again, it's rather telling that our far left leaning posters view this self sacrifice as a "failure". Maybe you're just mad the Persian's lost?
