History Discussion: "You blew it! You had one job, and you blew it!" Moments in history

[Mikestone8]

Here's a big one: Andrew Johnson, who I believe is truly worse than James Buchanan (tied with Woodrow Wilson for 2nd worst POTUS) and America in general allowing the sacrifices of the Civil War and Reconstruction to be vain, and letting the postbellum New South turn into a dystopian nightmare for the descendants of slaves.

The sacrifices of the ACW were *not* in vain. The North fought it to preserve the Union, and last time I looked the Union *was* preserved.

As for Reconstruction, that was never going to get anywhere in the short term, Johnson or no Johnson. People in the North just weren't interested enough to put a sustained effort into it. However, by getting the 14th Amendment into the Constitution, it gave Washington the power to support Black rights if and when it came to see them as worth promoting. So in the longer term it succeeded.

 

[Vinization]

Practically everything about emperor Pedro I, from his affairs to his autocratic behavior and interference in Portuguese affairs at the expense of Brazilian ones.

 

[Gentleman Johnny]

Practically everything about emperor Pedro I, from his affairs to his autocratic behavior and interference in Portuguese affairs at the expense of Brazilian ones.

You could also extend this to Pedro II. If the guy had just supported his daughter as his heir, or perhaps found some male cousin to be his heir, he could have kept the monarchy around. At the very least he could have put up a fight and refused to abdicate. He still had the support of the people and could have defeated the republicans if he cared to.

 

[Aluma]

If we are talking about the Pedros, as much as I hate to say it- Maria Leopoldina.
Tbh it wasnt even her fault, she just loved that scumbag of a husband of hers.
But if she had followed the advice of Bonifácio and did what everyone wanted - to tell Pedro I to pick his things and go rule Portugal with his mistress - nobody would oppose her as she was the de facto ruler of the country already during the Independence and despite how sexist the people were they all loved and felt pity for her due to the actions of her husband to humiliate her.
Pedro was done with Brazil so I doubt he would mind either, all he wanted was for it and Portugal to stay under his family's rule, so all the Empress would have to do is be her husband or son's regent if the people didnt want her as the nominal ruler.
Had her ruled Brazil instead of her husband we'd butterfly away the Regency entirely, maybe even the disaster that was the Cisplatine War if it was early enough, and considering she was vehemently abolitionist the abolition might happen during her reign instead of her son's.
With a better childhood due to his mom being there with him we would have a more stable Pedro II who likely wouldnt have to deal with the issue of slavery, meaning no republican coup against him over that nor the stress of the slow abolition, just him leading Brazil into the modern age for about 50 years and maybe the paraguayan war still that would cement him as a hero then retiring to be a teacher like he always wanted since even if he doesnt have a heir he would still have the precedent of his mother to legitimize having his daughter as one.

 

[TheLionOfJudah]

You could also extend this to Pedro II. If the guy had just supported his daughter as his heir, or perhaps found some male cousin to be his heir, he could have kept the monarchy around. At the very least he could have put up a fight and refused to abdicate. He still had the support of the people and could have defeated the republicans if he cared to.

Tbh Pedro knew it was an uphill battle, and that any other close relatives were the mainline Portuguese House of Braganza, which would never fly in Brazil. The old guy was just burnt out, and didn't want anyone to die for a throne he was too tired to keep up with.

 

[Vinization]

If we are talking about the Pedros, as much as I hate to say it- Maria Leopoldina.
Tbh it wasnt even her fault, she just loved that scumbag of a husband of hers.
But if she had followed the advice of Bonifácio and did what everyone wanted - to tell Pedro I to pick his things and go rule Portugal with his mistress - nobody would oppose her as she was the de facto ruler of the country already during the Independence and despite how sexist the people were they all loved and felt pity for her due to the actions of her husband to humiliate her.
Pedro was done with Brazil so I doubt he would mind either, all he wanted was for it and Portugal to stay under his family's rule, so all the Empress would have to do is be her husband or son's regent if the people didnt want her as the nominal ruler.
Had her ruled Brazil instead of her husband we'd butterfly away the Regency entirely, maybe even the disaster that was the Cisplatine War if it was early enough, and considering she was vehemently abolitionist the abolition might happen during her reign instead of her son's.
With a better childhood due to his mom being there with him we would have a more stable Pedro II who likely wouldnt have to deal with the issue of slavery, meaning no republican coup against him over that nor the stress of the slow abolition, just him leading Brazil into the modern age for about 50 years and maybe the paraguayan war still that would cement him as a hero then retiring to be a teacher like he always wanted since even if he doesnt have a heir he would still have the precedent of his mother to legitimize having his daughter as one.

Wait, can you expand on that?

 

[kasumigenx]

Actually, the main reason why Northern Luzon was conquered by the Spanish is that Tarik Sulayman got killed early on take that away you would prevent the Spanish from conquering that place and decide for it to be a buffer state preventing Sakoku, his colleagues Inc. the ruler of Kaboloan are foolish(the ruler of Kaboloan fought Limahong instead of using him as a buffer).

 

[Just a Turteldove Fan]

When General Meade didn't attack Lee retreating army after Gettysburg. Lee's army was forced to wait until his engineers could make a bridge to retreat to the safety of Virginia. Meade had numerical superiority. Lincoln did even write a letter to tell him how he had prolonged the war 2 years because he let Lee escape. Lincoln didn't send the letter but the Union could have won the war a lot earlier if Meade had attacked.

 

[Aluma]

Wait, can you expand on that?

Alright, but I dont have my sources with me so you can decide if you want to take my word for it or not:

Maria Leopoldina was the one who signed the independence as the Empress-Regent while urging her husband to take a side.
She disagreed with him quite a bit on how the new country should be ruled as well, being a austrian princess and all who disliked. liberalism, but she did agree with him that slavery was horrifying(being from a christian from a european court who never saw a sugar plantation before likely helped).
She and Bonifácio(who in contrast was veeeery liberal so they both balanced each other well) were the ones doing the transition between United Kingdom to Empire while Pedro was suppressing the rebellions of the few portuguese aristocrats who resisted the idea, they even design the flag and country symbols that we still have today.
Then once he was back he proceeded to kick Bonifácio out, open & close the assembly a couple times while he tried to write his own constitution, humiliate & worsen his wife's health by bringing his mistress Domitilia to the court angering the brazilian population who saw Bonifácio(who was the one who convinced Pedro to stay in the first place) and the Empress as their heroes, fight Argentina over Uruguay and finally go on a war with Portugal after Miguel overthrew his daughter resulting in him ending up returning to Portugal anyway with his new wife after Leopoldina died leaving his son who just came out of his diapers and lost a father & TWO mothers to rule the country.
Pew that was a lot wasnt it?
For things to not go that terrible all that was required was for Maria to not blindly love Pedro and not take all of this silently.
If she actively supported the guy who stood by her side during the whole independence thingy and called Pedro out for the mistress bs & his desire to rule Portugal rather than Brazil it's not impossible to imagine the people siding with her and the rash Emperor deciding to go be King of Portugal instead of staying on a country where nobody liked him so long as it stays under his family anyway like what happened IOTL.
If she doesnt die at 29 years old thanks to, between many other factors -a better mental condition, you'd have the Empress ruling Brazil up till Pedro II feels ready to take the throne, setting the example for princess Isabel later on if she's not butterflied away.
And like I said, depending on how early Pedro I dedided to nope the hell out of Brazil, the cisplatine war could have went differently, exactly the same or not happened at all, and in case Brazil did get Uruguay(likely later when it got a better army) it would have the control of the La Plata river...and that's a different POD on it's own, sorry.
But regardless of things went on the war, the thing that held Brazil back more than anything else was undoubtly slavery and most people seem to agree that had Pedro I done enough of a good job to stay in the country he could eventually have abolished it by the end of his reign, so again with another assumption - if Maria who hated slavery with passion got it abolished by the end of her reign/start of her son's reign Brazil would have stood a much better chance of modernizing during the 19th century rather than delaying it all the way to the Vargas's dictatorship in the 1930s.

 

[Duke of Orlando]

Lieutenant General John Whitelocke in 1807, single handedly fucking up the entire British campaign in the Southern cone so badly they never even tried again.

People bitch about early union generals losing fights to inferior forces and being to slow. Well folks they cannot begin to compare to John Whitelocke when it comes with to these categories. This man with 12,000 troops who had already taken Montevideo, lands in Buenos Aires and routes the first force he meets. He vastly out numbers his opponent. He has naval and land artillery ready to bombard the city. So does he attack? Of course not. He sits around with his thumb up his ass for a few days asking for surrender while the locals visibly are building defenses. When he does decide to attack he forms some columns and sends them in with no artillery cover and is surprised when the Spanish are ambushing them and catching them in traps. He asks for and armistice and the Spanish respond by shelling him. He then gets his armistice and retreats but leaves behind POW’s and injured.

How far do they retreat? All the bloody way back to the England, abandoning Montevideo which already were firmly in control of and in the process left all of his severely wounded behind.

He had the audacity to be surprised when he was court marshaled, and blamed his men.

This post isn’t meant to take away from the Argentinian soldiers/militia or De Liners. They fought bravely and intelligently. But any half decent general would have captured the city from them. Whitelocke might truly be the worst military leader I’ve ever read about that wasn’t a king/noble that was high of their own ego.

 

[Just Another Night]

Shah Muhammad II of the Khwarazmian Empire deliberately pissing off Genghis Khan, first by having a Mongol trade caravan arrested and then, when the Khan sent three envoys to talk him down, killing one of them, shaving the other two to publicly humiliate them, and then having the trade caravan killed.

He effectively pissed away stability in the Middle East just to flip the Mongols the bird.

 

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II: "Let's both invite Pompey's armies to intervene in the Judean civil war! What could possibly go wrong?"

 

[DeltaEnterprise252]

The Qing rejecting the macartney mission. This arrogrance and ignorance led to the century of humiliation and ultimately their own downfall.

 

[Vinization]

Túpac Amaru II disregarding his wife's advice and not capturing Cusco immediately after the victory at Sangarará. When he did finally try to take the city it was too heavily defended.

 

[The Ranger]

The Crusader Army at the battle of Hattin-going out into the desert in the height of summer without enough water is idiotic.

General Henry Hawley, Battle of Falkirk, 1746.

First you get all your cannons bogged down in the muck on the way to the battlefield so you can't use them. Then you send in the horsemen as if they were dealing with badly armed rioters, not a fully armed Clan army, and they get fired on at point blank range and flee through your own lines. Then your infantry turn and run for their lives, so you obviously didn't train them to face a highland charge.

Lieutenant General Chelmsford. 1879.

Where do I start? First you provoke a war with the Zulus for no good reason. Then you camp at Islandwana and don't dig any trenches, set up any barbed wire or circle the wagons, even though the Boers gave you good advice about that. You then go off with half the army looking for non existent Zulus and the other half of your army gets wiped out and all the supplies get stolen or trashed.

 

[EMT]

Túpac Amaru II disregarding his wife's advice and not capturing Cusco immediately after the victory at Sangarará. When he did finally try to take the city it was too heavily defended.

If I had a nickel for every time a Quechua rebellion against the Spanish collapsed because of their inability to capture Cuzco, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice and the lesson wasn't learned the second time

 

[Aluma]

If I had a nickel for every time a Quechua rebellion against the Spanish collapsed because of their inability to capture Cuzco, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice and the lesson wasn't learned the second time

Honestly the south american equivalent of the invading Russia in the winter meme

 

[Neal Caffrey]

Pablo Morillo in the American reconquista, like motherfucker started executing everyone just because some ass on an island hurt his feelings by rebelling again, and by executing those people he ensured that the territories that were the Gran Colombia would never be part of the Spanish Empire for more than a decade.

Also all of the debt taking by the diplomats of the Gran Colombia they were so bad and deserve a post because of how dumb they were and how those debts were probably one if not the main reason the Gran Colombia collapsed.

 

[wcv215]

When General Meade didn't attack Lee retreating army after Gettysburg. Lee's army was forced to wait until his engineers could make a bridge to retreat to the safety of Virginia. Meade had numerical superiority. Lincoln did even write a letter to tell him how he had prolonged the war 2 years because he let Lee escape. Lincoln didn't send the letter but the Union could have won the war a lot earlier if Meade had attacked.

That's way too harsh. While maybe Meade should have attacked with hindsight, without hindsight that decision is a LOT harder than its made out to be. Meade had only been in commander for a WEEK by this point, and he had just fought one of the bloodiest battles to that point in the war. His army had lost a full quarter of its strength, and 4 of his six corps that had been engaged had taken 40%+ casualties. His seventh corps had undertaken a long and hard 30 mile forced march on the 2nd as well, leaving them just as exhausted as the ones who had just fought the battle. It had also rained heavily on the 4th, making pursuit difficult since Lee had already begun to withdraw.

Meade did not know the state of the AoNV, and so had no idea just how badly mauled Lee's army was. His job was to keep his army between Lee and Washington, and, above all else, to defend the federal capital. He did that. Sure he might have done it better, but Meade absolutely did not blow it.

 

[Aghasverov]

The Crusader Army at the battle of Hattin-going out into the desert in the height of summer without enough water is idiotic.

General Henry Hawley, Battle of Falkirk, 1746.

First you get all your cannons bogged down in the muck on the way to the battlefield so you can't use them. Then you send in the horsemen as if they were dealing with badly armed rioters, not a fully armed Clan army, and they get fired on at point blank range and flee through your own lines. Then your infantry turn and run for their lives, so you obviously didn't train them to face a highland charge.

Lieutenant General Chelmsford. 1879.

Where do I start? First you provoke a war with the Zulus for no good reason. Then you camp at Islandwana and don't dig any trenches, set up any barbed wire or circle the wagons, even though the Boers gave you good advice about that. You then go off with half the army looking for non existent Zulus and the other half of your army gets wiped out and all the supplies get stolen or trashed.

Yeah... Chelmsford's little adventure also wound up getting this man killed:

Louis-Napoléon, Prince Imperial - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Which, apart from being tragic and unnecessary, is causing me no end of difficulty in the alt-geneaologies going on in my head