After watchin BHD again on Sun night- just wondering, what 19th C battle between European soldiers & African tribes could best match the Battle of Mogadishu of Oct 1993in terms of losses on both sides (similar to the 18 American dead, 70 wounded vs 1,000 + Somalis killed) & consequences ?
Melvin,
Casualty wise, I'd say nearly all European vs. African battles in the 19th Century were like Mogadishu. Look at Omdurman for instance; 47 KIA and 340 WIA versus 9,700 KIA and 13,000 WIA.
As for consequences, it was a different time. Less media saturated and far less squeamish. Kitchener got in trouble for destroying the Mahdi's tomb with an eye towards having his skull made into a drinking cup, but no one seriously questioned the war or whether Britain should be in the Sudan.
Even the Zulu War, which Gladstone and other important figures bluntly stated was wicked, wasn't derailed by any hand wringing at home. The Zulu "king", Cetshwayo, become something of a media darling during is years in exile/captivity in London, but that didn't effect the partition of the kingdom, appointment of a resident, and other postwar matters one whit.
Bill