| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "BATTLE NORMANDY": |
|
|
The Battle for Normandy, 2002.
A review of "The Battle for Normandy" by E.M.G. Belfield and Hubert Essame.
1,602 words (approx. 6.4 pages), 0 sources, $ 52.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews current sources of information on the battle and the book itself and concludes that the book provides a well-written, factual and informative account of the Normandy Campaign and Montgomery's role in the campaign.
From the Paper
"The Battle for Normandy by E.M.G. Belfield and Hubert Essame provides a factual and well-documented account of the Normandy Campaign. It was a massive operation under Field Marshall Bernard Montgomery for the Allies and involved thousands of aircraft, armored vehicles and hundreds of thousands of troops engaged in deadly combat. The book depicts the origins of the operation through the final phase of the battle. Many factions severally criticized Field Marshall Montgomery and the battle of Normandy is seen as his undoing in the book because of a lack of cooperation between Allied commanders."
| |
|
Invasion of Normandy, 2003.
This paper analyzes the battle of the Invasion of Normandy in the summer of 1944.
3,266 words (approx. 13.1 pages), 10 sources, APA, $ 93.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is a paper covering the Invasion of Normandy in the summer of 1944. Includes strategies, commanders, and forces on both sides during the invasion of Normandy. It covers the campaign from the landings on June 6 until the closing of the "Falais Pocket" and the destruction of the German 7th Army, which led to the liberation of Paris on August 25.
From the Paper
"The Invasion of Normandy, in the summer of 1944, opened up a second large front from which the western Allies could launch a direct assault against the Germans in Europe. This invasion the largest amphibious operation of World War Two. Prior to the battle both sides spent years planning their strategies. This battle was one of the most significant battles of the war, and victory for either side would result in devastation for the other."
| |
|
The Battle of Hastings, 2001.
An overview of The Battle of Hastings which took place in 1066 between William Duke of Normandy and King Harold of Saxony.
985 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addesses the tactics used in the Battle of Hastings by Duke William of Normany and King Harold of Saxony. It discusses the conflict for the crown between William and Harold after King Edward died, due to miscommunication and the fact that Edward did not name his successor. The paper describes the course of the war and emphasizes the effect of William's rule on England after his victory.
From the Paper
"William's defensive wall grew weaker as the battle raged on through the afternoon. He decided to change tactics. He ordered his archers to aim high. When the archers shot their arrows they were able to take out the remaining portion of the defensive wall. Harold was left unprotected when the wall fell. A stray arrow, shot by a Norman soldier, struck Harold in his right eye, and Norman knights cut him down. When the word passed that King Harold was killed the English army fled by horse or on foot. The battle had lasted ten hours. William commanded his troops to burn and destroy everything. He left nothing but a great number of bodies littering the earth. William found Harold's body. It was barely recognizable. After the battle William ordered a monastery built on top of the hill where the battle was fought."
| |
|
Addressing the Battle of Antietam from Its Impact on Military Strategy, 2002.
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle of Antietam helped prove that a small, maneuverable fighting force could win over superior firepower, demonstrating that a lack of strategy could not be compensated through weaponry. Through doing so, it can be seen how the Battle of Antietam helped redefine war protocol to a significant degree.
| |
|
The Battle of New Orleans, 2005.
Examines the background, the battle and the aftermath of the 1815 conflict known as "The Battle of New Orleans".
2,641 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The Battle of New Orleans of the War of 1812 was fought on January 8, 1815, between about 6,000 American troops, mostly irregulars, under the command of the American general, Andrew Jackson, and a British force of about 7,500, commanded by the British general, Sir Edward Pakenham. This paper covers the background for the War of 1812 that enveloped New Orleans and the South and the preparation for the battle. It also looks at the battle itself and the aftermath.
Paper Outline
Introduction
Background
Preparations
The Battle
After the Battle
Works Referenced
From the Paper
"The British were concentrating their forces along the Gulf. They had attempted an amphibious landing in Mobile Bay, with the intention of destroying the city of Mobile, and then advancing on New Orleans. Andrew Jackson, in command of the American irregulars in the South repulsed the British. "Not only did he successfully defend the entrance to Mobile Bay against a powerful amphibious expedition sent by the British to capture and destroy Mobile, but his men had blown the enemy flagship out of the water and repulsed the King's forces, inflicting 232 casualties." After that, Jackson, defying the orders of the Secretary of War, James Monroe, decided to march East to Pensacola where he defeated the British again."
| |
|
The Confederate Cause at the Battle of Gettysburg, 2000.
This paper take a detailed look at one of the greatest battles of the Civil War. Follows General Robert E. Lee and his men as they plot their strategy and take action against the Union Army leading up to and during the battle.
2,110 words (approx. 8.4 pages), 6 sources, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper follows General Robert E. Lee and his men as they plot their strategy and take action against the Union Army leading up to and during the Battle of Gettysburg. It also goes into great detail about the military strategy that both the Union Army used prior to this attack, and the affect it had upon the outcome of this battle, and what affect it had on the eventual outcome of the Civil War.
From the paper:
"There were over 70,000 Confederates involved in the Battle of Gettysburg. Of those men, 3,903 died, 18,735 were wounded, and 5,425 were missing, for a grand total of 28,063 men lost. That is about 40 percent of the soldiers who fought the battle. The percentage of men lost on the last day was much higher. Total losses on both sides came to 51,053.
"The Battle of Gettysburg was a major turning point in the Civil War. More men were lost in this battle than any other battle of the Civil War. After such a crushing defeat, Lee was never again able to launch a full-scale offensive on Union ground. The battle was also a landmark in the minds of people for years to come. Abraham Lincoln quoted in November 1863, "The world... can never forget what they did here." Although the Confederates suffered a tremendous defeat that third day of July, their dedication and determination are still evident in the valiant effort displayed during those three long days."
| |
|
Battle of the Bulge, 2006.
An examination of the battle that became the turning point in World War Two: The Battle of the Bulge.
3,240 words (approx. 13.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 93.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the battle that became the turning point in World War Two, greatly aiding the efforts of the Allied forces to bring a quick and decisive end to the war and to the Third Reich. On December 16, 1944 the German army began their "Ardennes Offensive" in the Ardennes region of Belgium and Luxembourg. The "Battle of the Bulge", as it became known, is Adolph Hitler's "last stand" against the Allied forces. Hitler knew that if the Americans managed to penetrate the German front lines, it would signal the beginning of the end for the Third Reich. The paper takes the student through the history of the battle and how the Allied forces, though ill-prepared and utterly taken by surprise, managed to fight back to victory. This battle serves as one of the greatest military engagements in the war in Europe, and some historians compare it to the Battle of Gettysburg during the Civil War. It is also the worst battle, in terms of loss, to the American forces during World War II.
From the Paper
"According to John Kline, the biggest and most costly battle of World War II began on December 16, 1944 which the German army referred to as their Ardennes Offensive. On this eventful day, "the (American) 106th Infantry Division. . . were hit with full force" by the German army, and after three days of fighting, "two of the Regiments, the 422nd and 423rd, were surrounded" which forced the 424th Regiment to join the 112th Regiment, part of the 28th Infantry Division. And working together as a massive armed team, these regiments and divisions "countered the German attack (by) driving the Germans back through the same area where the 106th had been in position in mid December 1944." Thus, "this German offensive became known in the U.S. Forces journals as the Battle of the Bulge." "
| |
|
Battle of the Ardennes, 2002.
A battle analysis of the Battle of Ardennes.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A paper which briefly analyzes the Battle of the Bulge in WWII. Topics such as opening moves, climate, terrain an opinions as to what the first targets should have been are discussed.
| |
|
WWI Battle Tactics, 2005.
An examination of the use of armor and infantry on the battlefield during World War I from the Battle of Cambrai to the Battle of St. Mihiel.
2,149 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 67.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper begins with a discussion of the tactics used for the deployment of tanks and infantry, followed by a description of the integration of combined arms tactics used by General Pershing and other generals. A summary of how the synchronized or simultaneous application of armor, infantry, artillery, engineers, air defense and aviation changed the course of modern warfare is also provided in the conclusion. Includes tables and diagram.
From the Paper
"The epigram above suggests that General of the Armies John Joseph Pershing was responsible for a legacy that remains largely unrecognized among military leaders in the United States today. Certainly, World War I established new precedents across a number of measures, particularly in terms of the amount of death and destruction it caused. The First World War only lasted four years (1914-1918), but by the time the conflict ended, it had involved most of the European nations of Europe as well as the United States, Russia, countries in the Middle East, and other regions (Royde-Smith, 2005). Along the way, though, a military infrastructure emerged that would serve as the basis for military doctrine and training up to the present day."
| |
|
Battle of Britain in 1940, 1991.
This paper analyzes the British-German battle, the "Battle of Britain" in 1940: Causes, strategies, German mistakes, Operation Sea-Lion, outcome and impact on WWII.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 6 sources, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The Battle of Britain, which took place over a few weeks in the summer of 1940, is the most famous episode in the history of air warfare. It inspired Winston Churchill, the century's most quotable statesman, to make his most-quoted remark, of the British fighter pilots in the battle, that "never before in the annals of warfare did so many owe so much to so few." It was a fundamental turning point in the course of the Second World War--the first serious check suffered by the hitherto-triumphant Nazi German war machine, and which ultimately led to the two-front war that all German strategists, including Hitler himself, desperately wanted to avoid.
Why was the Battle of Britain fought, and why did it come out the way it did? To understand the strategic meaning of the Battle of Britain, it must be viewed in the context of the most ... "
| |
|
The Battle of Antietam and Its Impact on Military Strategy, 2002.
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle of Antietam helped prove that a small, maneuverable fighting force could win over superior firepower, demonstrating that a lack of strategy could not be compensated through weaponry. Through doing so, it can be seen how the Battle of Antietam helped redefine war protocol to a significant degree.
| |
|
The Battle at Antietam, 2007.
This paper examines the effects of the battle at Antietam, the bloodiest battle in the American Civil War.
2,338 words (approx. 9.4 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses how the battle at Antietam ended the first attempt by the South at invading the North, with the army under the leadership of General Robert E. Lee. The paper explains that the battle was inconclusive because while Lee withdrew, the Northern army under McClellan did not follow and so did not destroy the Southern army at this time. The paper shows, however, how the battle did set the stage for the Emancipation Proclamation, making slavery a more explicit subject for the rest of the war. The paper relates that this was something President Lincoln had not wanted to do in this manner, but which he embraced once it was possible.
From the Paper
"At the time, General Lee was buoyed by his success at Bull Run but also uncertain about what to do next. He could not go after Pope's army because the later withdrew to Washington and was protected by a fort and by reinforcements. Analysts say he could have fallen back to the fortifications at Centreville, but he did not want to do this because the provisions and forage in that area had all been used up the year before. Lee had other choices he could have made, such as moving west or south, but he also faced the desire to deny the North the time to recover from recent defeats. A move to the west appealed most to Lee, and he was especially interested in an invasion of Maryland, with reasons that were military, political, and psychological."
| |
|
Battle of the Bulge, 2001.
An examination of the tactics used by the Germans during the Battle of the Bulge of WW2 and how it lead to them into losing this battle.
2,040 words (approx. 8.2 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains the effects, circumstances, causes and happenings of the Battle of the Bulge, also known as the Battle of the Ardennes. It also suggests what went wrong for the Germans and what mistakes Hitler made. Military tactics of both sides are analyzed - Germans and Allies.
From the Paper
"The Battle of the Bulge, which lasted from December 16, 1944 to January 25, 1945, was the largest battle of World War II in which the United States participated (Toland). Over a million men fought for their lives, countries and families. Although many a soldier dreamed of the day they could return to their families, many of them did not make it home. At the conclusion of the battle there were 81,000 American casualties including 23,554 captured and 19,000 killed. The British suffered 1,400 casualties, with only 200 killed. Also, the greatest number of all, there were 100,000 German soldiers killed, wounded or captured (Cole)."
| |
|
The Battle of Gettysburg, 2002.
The story of the Battle of Gettysburg, the bloodiest battle of the American Civil War, from both perspectives.
3,171 words (approx. 12.7 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper recounts the story the Battle of Gettysberg, one of the most horrific battles to occur during the Civil War. It provides a concise account of the days leading up to and a detailed description of the events of actual battle in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania taken from factual accounts and historical documentation. It discusses the leadership and tactics of both sides and looks at the events from the perspectives of both the North and South .
From the Paper
"General Stewart's troops were well behind him and would be unable to join the fight this day. It took several hours for General Lee's three corps to get into position, in which he had laid out, to ready for an attack. General Meade had been up all night inspecting and arranging his lines. By early the second day, most of the army of the Potomac was in place, in the shape of a rough horseshoe pointing towards Gettysburg and open to the south. General Jeb Stewart, riding far ahead of his men, had arrived after noon, and Lee was quite furious with him. General Lee demanded to know why Stewart had not kept in contact with him."
| |
|
Battle of the Boyne, 2005.
A brief background and history of this famous battle for the English throne.
1,246 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the fight between William and James for the English throne in the 17th century. The paper describes Williams initial conquest of the throne and James' refusal to give up the throne even after the English parliament had declared William and Mary as joint sovereigns. The paper then describes the battle that ultimately took place in the fight for the throne, the Battle of the Boyne, as well as why William won the battle and why it was a battle not only over who would be King, but a battle that would determine the religious climate throughout Europe too. Its aftermath is also discussed, pointing out that even to this day, the battle remains a controversial issue between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland.
From the Paper
"In the late 1600's, two men were claimants to the English throne, William and James (Lenihan). William landed at Torbay on November 5, 1688 and marched slowly through the country, gaining followers as he went, while support for King James withered away. James fled to France on December 11, and in January 1689, Parliament declared that James had abdicated, and offered the throne to William and Mary. Although the English made an attempt to appoint Mary the sole English monarch, she rejected the proposal. William had no intention of being his wife's consort stating that if that was all England could do for him after he had saved the country, then he would go back to the Netherlands. King William and Queen Mary were declared joint sovereigns on February 13. To confirm his claim to the throne, William promised to obey the Declaration of Rights, which assured the English people of certain basic rights while making it illegal for the king to keep a standing army, levy taxes without Parliament's approval or become a Roman Catholic. William was willing to let Parliament limit his power in return for its support against France (Hayes McCoy). "
|
|
|
