
A blunder is a spectacularly bad or embarrassing mistake--a bad decision with a disastrous result. This is a list of what are widely considered to be major, historically significant blunders. To be included in this list an incident must meet two criteria: (1) It must be an extremely bad or otherwise significant failure. (2) It must be famously considered to be a blunder--that is, it must be widely considered to be a disaster which was the result of bad decision making. To be objectively considered famous, it must appear in a list of blunders compiled by a respectable authority or be noted as a blunder by multiple, unbiased sources. If there is disagreement as to the nature of the blunder, or whether it is even a blunder at all, then the opinions of both sides should be summarized in the listing. The majority of famous blunders are of a military nature. However, there are also a number of famous and significant blunders in business, politics, and other disciplines. ==The List== ===Military=== List of military disasters commonly believed to be the result of a major mistake or extremely bad decision making. * 1854 — The suicidal and ill-advised Charge of the Light Brigade in the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War. It was based on Earl of Cardigan's misunderstanding of, and failure to ask for clarification of Lord Raglan's orders. Alfred Lord Tennyson, in his famous poem praising the valor of the cavalrymen, wrote: "'Forward the Light Brigade!'/Was there a man dismay'd?/Not tho' the soldier knew/Some one had blunder'd." Of the action, French marshall Pierre Bosquet said ''C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre'' ("It is magnificent, but it is not war.") (Saul David, 1998, p. 13-24) * 1876 - The Battle of the Little Bighorn (also called Custer's last stand), the subject of a number of books and several films, was a catastrophic failure for George Armstrong Custer, leading to the death of Custer himself and all 210 men who were with him at the time. Many feel that this failure was a result of a series of blunders on the part of Custer, including poor communication, failure to wait for reinforcements, excessive cruelty in his treatment of the Indians, and general overconfidence. Others have argued that Custer was largely the victim of bad circumstance, and that his actions and decisions during the battle differed little from standard military strategy of the time. (Saul David, 1998, p. 236-251) * 1930 to 1940 - The Maginot Line in France. The Maginot Line is widely considered to be a great blunder because the German armies went around it. However, it should be noted that the German forces did not dare attack the Maginot Line directly; Germany had to invade Belgium and the Netherlands in order to circumvent it, and in the few incidents during World War II where the line was involved it proved to a highly effective defensive fortification. So it can be argued that the Maginot Line was effective for what it was, and that it was the overall defensive strategy of France that was at fault. Thus, many historians feel that France's blunder was not in building the Maginot Line; it was in relying on the line as its only major means of defense.[http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues97/jun97/maginot.html] (GBIH) ===Political=== Mistakes and missteps that caused a resignation or significantly contributed to the loss of an election. *1963 – John Profumo, the United Kingdom Secretary of State for War, lied to Parliament of the United Kingdom about his affair with Christine Keeler, a showgirl who was simultaneously involved with an attaché at the Soviet Embassy. When the truth came out, he was forced to resign and the ensuing scandal contributed to the defeat of the government in the 1964 election. (Coates) *1983 – The Labour Party (UK)'s Manifesto was so left wing that Gerald Kaufman called it "the longest suicide note in history". Throughout the campaign Labour increasingly moderated their policies, but that was not enough to undo the damage and the Conservative Party (UK) won a decisive election victory. (Heffernan and Marqusee) *1992 – The Sheffield Rally by the Labour Party (UK), held a week before the United Kingdom general election, 1992, was meant to top off a successful campaign for the Labour party; ahead in the polls, it was supposed to convince the electorate that Labour was ready for Government. Unfortunately, it had the opposite effect. People saw it as pretentious, triumphant when the election had not yet been won, and "too American". Labour lost the 1992 election. *2004 – After his defeat at the 2004 Iowa Democratic caucuses, Howard Dean made a speech containing his infamous "Dean Scream". This outburst of passion was considered poor form, and particularly unpresidential. Dean, who before the Iowa Caucus had been the front-runner in the race for to become the Democrat candidate for the U.S. presidential election, 2004, quickly lost much credibility, and within a few weeks was effectively out of the race. === Business === Misjudgements causing a severe loss of profit, often associated with the failure of an individual product (business). * 1958 model year - Ford Motor Company introduces the Edsel, a new car model remembered as a spectacular blunder because of its association with the Ford family. The Edsel was named after Edsel Ford, former company president and son of Henry Ford. The vehicle sported a front grill described as looking like a horse collar, and was priced higher than competing companies' models. The Edsel was discontinued early in the 1960 model year. The model failure was responsible for Ford losing nearly half of the $650 million raised by the company in its 1956 initial public stock offering (IPO). The Ford Edsel is such a famous failure that the name "Edsel" itself has become an appellation for something that's irredeemably flawed and thus doomed to failure. [http://www.uniquecarsandparts.com.au/unique_cars_index_e.htm] [http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Edsel] * 1985 - Coca-Cola releases New Coke. The New Coke formula actually beat the old Coke in taste tests, but Coca-Cola's blunder was in failing to realize the immensity of the Coke legacy that they had built up over nearly a century. This legacy was so strong that the mere idea of changing Coke, by this time considered an American icon, – even "for the better" – met with intense, passionate resistance. People felt as if Coke was turning its back on their drinking preferences, their childhood, and even their way of life. "Coke is as basic as the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence." "Next week, they'll be chiseling Teddy Roosevelt off the side of Mount Rushmore." Coca-Cola eventually re-released the original Coke formula as "Coca-Cola Classic". [http://members.lycos.co.uk/thomassheils/newcoke.htm] * 1991 - Gerald Ratner made a speech in which he rubbished one of his own company's products and, by implication, their entire range. As a result he lost his job, and the company lost market share and had to rebrand. See Doing a Ratner. ==References== *Coates, Tim. ''John Profumo and Christine Keeler'' (London: Tim Coates, 1999) ISBN 0117024023 *Darling, Roger. ''A Sad and Terrible Blunder: Generals Terry and Custer at the Little Big Horn: New Discoveries'' (Vienna, VA: Potomac-Western Press, 1990) ISBN 0962148814. *David, Saul. ''Military Blunders: The How and Why of Military Failure'', (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1998) ISBN 0786705043 *Heffernan, Richard and Marqusee, Mike. ''Defeat from the Jaws of Victory'' (London: Verso, 1992) ISBN 0860913511 *Wikipedia articles listing further sources: **Battle of the Little Bighorn **John Profumo **Maginot Line **UK general election, 1983 *''Great Blunders in History (television)'' television series first broadcast on the History Channel in 2001. ==Further reading== *''Wrong! The Biggest Mistakes Ever Made by People Who Should Have Known Better'', Jane O'Boyle, published by Plume Books (1999), ISBN 0452281121. *''Wrong Again!: More of the Biggest Mistakes and Miscalculations Ever Made by Peple Who Should Have Known Better'', Jane O'Boyle, published by Plume Books (2000), ISBN 0452282012. *''America's Stupidest Business Decisions: 101 Blunders, Flops, and Screwups'', Bill Adler and Julie Houghton, published by Quill (1997), ISBN 0688151523. *''Great Military Blunders'', Geoffrey Regan, published by Motorbooks International (2000), ISBN 0752218441. *''Scientific Blunders: A Brief History of How Wrong Scientists Can Sometimes Be'', R. M. Youngson and Robert Youngson, published by Carroll & Graf (1998), ISBN 0786705949. *''The Greatest Blunders of World War II'', Horace Edward Henderson, published by iUniverse (2001), ISBN 0595162673. *''The 100 Greatest Sports Blunders of All Time'', Eldon L. Ham, published by Masters Press (1997), ISBN 1570281599. *''The Book of Heroic Failures'', Stephen Pile. ==See also== *:Category:Flops - for general failures, which may or may not be due to poor decision making. ==External links== * [http://paintedover.com/albums.php?action=view&albumid=507&s=uAQre1 Batman #66] - A classic Batman story involving the great blunders of all time. * [http://www.historychannel.com/exhibits/military_blunders/index.html Five famous military blunders] - From the History Channel. History by topic
This is an important topic. Just because you do not like the title does not mean that it should be deleted. For those who don't know, boner is another word for blunder. "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana We must learn from the mistakes of history so that we do not make them again. Also it may be good to discuss just how bad these mistakes were. Some so-called "great blunders" may be merely ordinary mistakes that historians or pop culture has given a bad rap. Hindsight is 20/20. - User:Pioneer-12 == More Great Blunders (Unsourced) == Candidates for the main list. Unsourced entries can be placed here. However, a topic must be shown to be a blunder by an external source before being added to the main page. (This prevents arbitrary and POV listings.) * Unsourced entries on the main page should be moved here until sources are found. * Ideas are welcome! Feel free to add to this unofficial list. (This is a wiki, after all.) Note that famous blunders that you believe to be untrue can also be listed. This article exists in part to combat common misconceptions by presenting an objective view of the event. - User:Pioneer-12 12:24, 6 May 2005 (UTC) === Military === * 13th century BC or 12th century BCE - The Trojan's acceptance of the Trojan horse. * 1863 - At the Battle of Gettysburg, Robert E. Lee ordered a suicidal Pickett's Charge led by George Pickett. * 1941 - Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union. * 1941 - The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. * 1942 - Despite advice to take the oil fields of the Middle East, Adolf Hitler focused strength on the city of Battle of Stalingrad. It served no strategic purpose and may have cost Hitler the war. Germany was in need of oil, and capturing the Middle East might have given Hitler an empire that would have rivaled the power of the postwar United States. * 1961 - The Bay of Pigs Invasion. * 1990 - Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait. === Political === *1976 – In a debate with Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford stated that the Soviet Union did not dominate Eastern Europe. *1988 – Images of U.S. presidential candidate Michael Dukakis, considered weak on defense, riding in a tank looking silly in an oversized helmet were published. *2004 – U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry defended a vote against $87 billion for the War in Iraq, saying, "I actually voted for the $87 billion, ''before'' I voted against it." The line was seized on by opponents to paint Kerry as a "flip-flopper." === Diplomatic === *1917 - Zimmerman Telegram sent :''If you hadn't misspelled it, you might have read the article (Zimmermann Telegram) and learned that Zimmermann's blunder wasn't in sending it, but in underestimating US capacity. It's also worth reading that article both for its intrinsic interest and to see what a quality WP article looks like.'' *1930s - Neville Chamberlain adopted a policy of appeasement of Adolf Hitler :''see Munich Agreement'' *1956 - Nikita Kruschev tells Western ambassadors, "We will bury you!" :''He was wrong, but it wasn't a blunder. It's interesting to note that Ronald Reagan later returned the sentiment with "They're going into the ashbin of history."'' *1964 - Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh visit Quebec, sparking large-scale riots. === Business === * 1981 - IBM's outsourcing of operating system rights to Microsoft, who then in turn bought DOS from a small business (Seattle Computer Products) for $50,000. :''This is slightly confused. IBM outsourcing OS development was no blunder. But giving Bill Gates control of the system he was paid to provide certainly was. But there's more to it than that. Gates lied to IBM, telling them he already had an (almost finished) OS. He then lied to SCP by omission, failing to tell them of his deal with IBM. Tim Paterson (later employed by MS, heh heh) of SCP had developed QDOS in 6 weeks by reading the CP/M manual. CP/M was written by Gates's friend Gary Kildall -- the two had a gentleman's agreement that languages were Gates's territory and OS's were Kildall's. So Gates engaged in at least three major ethical transgressions. And then there's the fact that his knowledge of IBM's interest in getting into the microcomputer business came via his mother's charity-benefit acquaintance with IBM exec John Akers. A fine example of capitalism in action.'' === Sports === * 1919 - The Boston Red Sox sell Babe Ruth to the New York Yankees. === Other === * 1173 - Initial construction of the Leaning tower of Pisa. :''The tower leans because it rests on a river bed; it would have leaned no matter what. It could hardly have been less of a blunder to not build it at all, or to build it somewhere other than next to the cathedral for which it's the bell tower. So what, exactly, is the blunder?'' * 1773 - The Tea Act and related British policy toward the American colonies. :''As the WP article says (emph added), this was "but one of the many causes of the American Revolution".'' * 1947 - The Spruce Goose. :''The Spruce Goose was not an incident, let alone a blunder. It might help to read the WP article.'' * 1950 - The grounding of the USS Missouri (BB-63). :''The grounding is neither demonstrably a blunder nor famously considered such, and has no historical significance.'' == Not Blunders... or are they? == === Misc === ==== Hannibal spanks the Romans ==== *216 BC - On his day of command of the largest Roman army in history, 80,000 infantry and 7,000 horsemen, Terrentius Varro attacked Hannibal head-on at Battle of Cannae and was slaughtered. The loss, I think, was more due to Hannibal's great skill then to any blunder on Varro's part. I don't think that it should be on the main page unless a first rate source claims it is a blunder. - User:Pioneer-12 11:06, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :Source: ''How Wars Are Won'' by Bevin Alexander, 2002, Three Rivers Press, New York, First Paperback Edition, pp. 274-276. ::''Varro foolishly made no analysis of the unorthodox Carthaginian formation, and simply perceived the infantry out front as a weak point his men could attack. This they did with their whole force, handily driving the Gauls and Spaniards back, just as Hannibal had intended. ::''... ::''In succeeding centuries, Cannae took on an almost mystical significance, becoming a sort of military Holy Grail, the highest and purest form of intellectual perfection in warfare. But it was difficult to duplicate what Hannibal achieved, especially wrapping both flanks around an enemy at the same time he was held in place on the front and attacked on the rear. Only an extremely obtuse commander could be induced to advance directly into a trap such as Terentius Varro entered at Cannae. Against a less gullible enemy, the more reliable method was to attack his front to hold him in place, and then move on just one of his flanks, as Frederick the Great did at Leuthen in 1757.'' :-User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 00:40, May 27, 2005 (UTC) ==== The Titanic ==== * 1912 - White Star Line advertised the cruise liner RMS Titanic as "unsinkable." On its maiden voyage, it struck an iceberg and went down with 1,800 passengers. It's certainly a famous disaster, but where's the blunder here? Saying something is unsinkable and then it sinking ''does'' makes you look like an idiot, but it didn't cause the sinking. Maybe there should be a section for "statements that made people look like buffoons", like Al Gore inventing the internet. User:68.6.40.203 10:33, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) - User:Pioneer-12 06:41, 6 May 2005 (UTC) ''Since Al Gore never said that he invented the internet, your statement makes you look like a buffoon.'' :The White Star Line never advertised that ''Titanic'' was unsinkable, so the sentence is inaccurate anyway. User:MechBrowman 04:11, May 26, 2005 (UTC) ::[http://snopes.com/titanic/unsink.htm Snopes] concludes otherwise. Also, Al Gore ''did'' say that as a Congressman, he "took the initiative of creating the internet." - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 00:40, May 27, 2005 (UTC) :::No, he did not say that. He said " I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system." He said it, and it was true. The buffoons are those who change "create" to "invent" or "in" to "of", significantly changing the meaning of the statement. Gore may have spoken awkwardly, as we all do when speaking extemporaneously, but he did not make any sort of false or outlandish claim -- Gore was, in fact, the senator who pushed forward commercialization of the internet, as has been widely documented by non-buffoons, including Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn, the actual inventors of the internet's TCP/IP protocol -- see, e.g., http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue5_10/wiggins/ -- "Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development... there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore's initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolving Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and promoting the Internet long before most people were listening." User:68.6.40.203 10:33, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Power of United States in 1942== "I have the support of the greatest country on Earth." - Winston Churchill Just because the United States did not dominate the world militarily, economically, and culturally in 1942 doesn't mean it couldn't be a major world power. Situated defensibly between two oceans, Mexico, and British-ruled Canada, the U.S. was a major industrial power. It was Thomas Jefferson's transcontinental empire of liberty with "Michael Badnarik", despite FDR's aspirations to the contrary. It had a gross domestic product of $1,435,000,000,000 in today's dollars, no small amount of money, and had been propping up England with intelligence cooperation and lend-lease equipment. I am not arbitrarily asserting this, it is the opinion of historians I cannot specifically remember. I'll try to find a source for that sentence, but leave it in. - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 23:48, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) :I agree more or less, but I think the sentence is worded too speculatively right now ("would have" implies some sort of certainty that I don't think can be assigned to this statement). User:JYolkowski // User talk:JYolkowski 01:14, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) :The problem is with the tense. I don't think you're understanding my objection, Calmypal. You're using the wrong grammatical tense. User:Moncrief 01:16, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC) ''This conversation is bizarre. Even if Churchill was mistaken (and a claim that he was certainly seems POV), his statement was in no way a blunder, nor is it considered so, certainly not famously. And finally, no evidence has been offered that Churchill ever made the statement.'' :Please register and sign your comments instead of just posting them in italics. Use margins, too. Anyway, I was just offering the statement from memory as support for my assertion that the US was a force to be reckoned with ''before'' it won World War II. The statement was never being called a blunder. - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 00:40, May 27, 2005 (UTC) ::That makes no sense. This is an article about blunders, and Churchill's statement was offered up as possibly being one. This is not an article about the US or whether it was a force to be reckoned with, so assertions in that regard and support for them are irrelevant, unless they specifically pertain to whether or not something (Churchill making a statement, in this case) was a blunder. Also, since the merit of a claim is independent of the person who makes it, I don't think a signature contributes anything. :::I originally wrote that seizing the Mid-East would have given Hitler a superb defensive position and "an empire comparable in strength to the United States," and Moncrief had a problem with the tense. The quote created dramatic effect. - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 19:10, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC) ::::Oh, is that what you were talking about. It might have helped had you backreferenced the Churchill quote to the Hitler gaffe. As it is, this is the first mention of Hitler in this section. But I suppose, had I been sufficiently scrupulous, I could have ferreted out the meaning from your esoteric communication. Sorry for wasting your time (and mine). ==Political blunders== Wow--the political blunders section actually looks objective. I'm impressed. Now, we just need some sources for those entries. In particular, sources that indicate that they are famously considered a blunder by people who aren't just trying to push their ideological viewpoint. What's nice about political blunders is.... if a blunder contributed to the loss of an election, then both the candidate's supporters and opponents are likely to agree that it was a blunder. We should limit the political blunders section only to incidents that lead to a loss of an election or to a resignation. Those are verifiably bad events and events of significance. Anything else is just a PR gaffe or a slander by ideological opponents. - User:Pioneer-12 12:04, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) ''There's no evidence that Kerry's statement had any significant affect on the outcome of the election -- certainly not comparable to other entries; the claim that this is "famously considered a great blunder" is clearly POV (does ''anyone'' actually believe that?). Notably, people take actual changes in policy a lot more seriously than an apparent admission of flip-flopping that is clearly clumsily stated or taken out of context (both, in this case -- Kerry voted for a funded version and against an unfunded version). A far more serious blunder was Kerry's failure to address such attacks, or address them too late. Most widely viewed as Kerry's greatest blunder was presenting himself as a war hero of the DemNatCon, which opened him wide to the SwiftBoatAttack (attacking perceived strengths is a well known KarlRove strategy). The current entry just looks amateurish.'' == Overlap == Check out the lists on flop. User:JRM · User talk:JRM 17:23, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC) :This is a subset of flops. Only "flops" that were due to extremely bad decision making are included, not those due to bad luck, acts of god, strong competition, or some other factor. :I think blunder-based failures are the most interesting and educational types of failures... What mistakes did they make, and why? :- User:Pioneer-12 20:02, 5 May 2005 (UTC) ==VfD== On April 21, 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep (no consensus, rewrite, etc.). See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of the Great Boners of all time for a record of the discussion. User:Mindspillage User talk:Mindspillage 22:16, 5 May 2005 (UTC) == The Title == === The title is poor === The title is poor. List of great blunders should be fine. -User:Stevertigo|User_talk:Stevertigo|[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stevertigo&action=edit§ion=new add] 06:55, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) :I personally agree. The current title is to prevent the list from appearing to be POV. This seems to be a necessary compromise when working on in a wiki envirionment. Items are on this list only because they are famously considered to be blunders, not because the list's authors consider them to be blunders or not. The wordier, but more precise, title makes this explicit. See List of movies that have been considered the greatest ever. - User:Pioneer-12 10:06, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) === The title is boring === change to List of great blunders or something else less bulky you don't need to get this specific in the title - User:Stoph 22:20, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :How about changing it to Greatest Boners of All Time ;-) --User:Carnildo 23:34, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :Problem is, that would violate WP:NPOV - Wikipedia would be saying that the incidents are blunders, not that people call them blunders. I do like the Boners one... but that name might have been what got it on VfD in the first place. User:Nickptar 00:51, 6 May 2005 (UTC) ::I guess I don't make the NPOV distinction between "List of incidents famously considered great blunders" and just "List of great blunders." The former seems unnecessarily bloated. Of course there is no official way to determine a great blunder, but you can explain whatever you need to in the actual article. - User:Stoph 01:04, 6 May 2005 (UTC) :::Then what NPOV distinctions ''do'' you make? Do you make no distinction between "list of events famously believed to be miracles" and "list of miracles"?'' :::Calling things "blunders" is always POV, just as it would be POV to say "Killing people is wrong" (even though most everybody agrees) - encyclopedias just don't do it that way. How about the difference between "List of people who have been called the Antichrist" (I'm pretty sure we have one like that) and "List of Antichrists"? User:Nickptar 15:03, 6 May 2005 (UTC) == maybe we should add this to the list == === Wikipedia=== * April 25, 2005 - User:Pioneer-12 chooses to name the page for his list of incidents famously considered great blunders as List of the Greatest Boners of all time. Many users don't take well to the joke, and as a result of this poor naming decision the article was almost deleted. - (just kidding) User:Stoph 03:23, 6 May 2005 (UTC) :And despite their lack of a sense of humor, the page emerged victorious from the melee. And the forces of arrogant cluelessness, who would destroy anything they do not understand, have lost a battle to the forces of wisdom, logic, and understanding. :THE PAGE STILL STANDS, a beacon of hope to all who have felt the stinging attack of Wikipedia's ridiculous and unjust Vfd process. :- User:Pioneer-12 06:10, 6 May 2005 (UTC) ::''Have you ever considered growing up?''
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with List_of_incidents_famously_considered_great_blunders:
List_of_incidents_famously_considered_great_blunders
List_of_incidents_famously_considered_great_blunders
List of incidents famously considered great blunders
A blunder is a spectacularly bad or embarrassing mistake--a bad decision with a disastrous result. This is a list of what are widely considered to be major, historically significant blunders. To be included in this list an incident must meet two criteria: (1) It must be an extremely bad or otherwise significant failure. (2) It must be famously considered to be a blunder--that is, it must be widely considered to be a disaster which was the result of bad decision making. To be objectively considered famous, it must appear in a list of blunders compiled by a respectable authority or be noted as a blunder by multiple, unbiased sources. If there is disagreement as to the nature of the blunder, or whether it is even a blunder at all, then the opinions of both sides should be summarized in the listing. The majority of famous blunders are of a military nature. However, there are also a number of famous and significant blunders in business, politics, and other disciplines. ==The List== ===Military=== List of military disasters commonly believed to be the result of a major mistake or extremely bad decision making. * 1854 — The suicidal and ill-advised Charge of the Light Brigade in the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War. It was based on Earl of Cardigan's misunderstanding of, and failure to ask for clarification of Lord Raglan's orders. Alfred Lord Tennyson, in his famous poem praising the valor of the cavalrymen, wrote: "'Forward the Light Brigade!'/Was there a man dismay'd?/Not tho' the soldier knew/Some one had blunder'd." Of the action, French marshall Pierre Bosquet said ''C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre'' ("It is magnificent, but it is not war.") (Saul David, 1998, p. 13-24) * 1876 - The Battle of the Little Bighorn (also called Custer's last stand), the subject of a number of books and several films, was a catastrophic failure for George Armstrong Custer, leading to the death of Custer himself and all 210 men who were with him at the time. Many feel that this failure was a result of a series of blunders on the part of Custer, including poor communication, failure to wait for reinforcements, excessive cruelty in his treatment of the Indians, and general overconfidence. Others have argued that Custer was largely the victim of bad circumstance, and that his actions and decisions during the battle differed little from standard military strategy of the time. (Saul David, 1998, p. 236-251) * 1930 to 1940 - The Maginot Line in France. The Maginot Line is widely considered to be a great blunder because the German armies went around it. However, it should be noted that the German forces did not dare attack the Maginot Line directly; Germany had to invade Belgium and the Netherlands in order to circumvent it, and in the few incidents during World War II where the line was involved it proved to a highly effective defensive fortification. So it can be argued that the Maginot Line was effective for what it was, and that it was the overall defensive strategy of France that was at fault. Thus, many historians feel that France's blunder was not in building the Maginot Line; it was in relying on the line as its only major means of defense.[http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues97/jun97/maginot.html] (GBIH) ===Political=== Mistakes and missteps that caused a resignation or significantly contributed to the loss of an election. *1963 – John Profumo, the United Kingdom Secretary of State for War, lied to Parliament of the United Kingdom about his affair with Christine Keeler, a showgirl who was simultaneously involved with an attaché at the Soviet Embassy. When the truth came out, he was forced to resign and the ensuing scandal contributed to the defeat of the government in the 1964 election. (Coates) *1983 – The Labour Party (UK)'s Manifesto was so left wing that Gerald Kaufman called it "the longest suicide note in history". Throughout the campaign Labour increasingly moderated their policies, but that was not enough to undo the damage and the Conservative Party (UK) won a decisive election victory. (Heffernan and Marqusee) *1992 – The Sheffield Rally by the Labour Party (UK), held a week before the United Kingdom general election, 1992, was meant to top off a successful campaign for the Labour party; ahead in the polls, it was supposed to convince the electorate that Labour was ready for Government. Unfortunately, it had the opposite effect. People saw it as pretentious, triumphant when the election had not yet been won, and "too American". Labour lost the 1992 election. *2004 – After his defeat at the 2004 Iowa Democratic caucuses, Howard Dean made a speech containing his infamous "Dean Scream". This outburst of passion was considered poor form, and particularly unpresidential. Dean, who before the Iowa Caucus had been the front-runner in the race for to become the Democrat candidate for the U.S. presidential election, 2004, quickly lost much credibility, and within a few weeks was effectively out of the race. === Business === Misjudgements causing a severe loss of profit, often associated with the failure of an individual product (business). * 1958 model year - Ford Motor Company introduces the Edsel, a new car model remembered as a spectacular blunder because of its association with the Ford family. The Edsel was named after Edsel Ford, former company president and son of Henry Ford. The vehicle sported a front grill described as looking like a horse collar, and was priced higher than competing companies' models. The Edsel was discontinued early in the 1960 model year. The model failure was responsible for Ford losing nearly half of the $650 million raised by the company in its 1956 initial public stock offering (IPO). The Ford Edsel is such a famous failure that the name "Edsel" itself has become an appellation for something that's irredeemably flawed and thus doomed to failure. [http://www.uniquecarsandparts.com.au/unique_cars_index_e.htm] [http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Edsel] * 1985 - Coca-Cola releases New Coke. The New Coke formula actually beat the old Coke in taste tests, but Coca-Cola's blunder was in failing to realize the immensity of the Coke legacy that they had built up over nearly a century. This legacy was so strong that the mere idea of changing Coke, by this time considered an American icon, – even "for the better" – met with intense, passionate resistance. People felt as if Coke was turning its back on their drinking preferences, their childhood, and even their way of life. "Coke is as basic as the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence." "Next week, they'll be chiseling Teddy Roosevelt off the side of Mount Rushmore." Coca-Cola eventually re-released the original Coke formula as "Coca-Cola Classic". [http://members.lycos.co.uk/thomassheils/newcoke.htm] * 1991 - Gerald Ratner made a speech in which he rubbished one of his own company's products and, by implication, their entire range. As a result he lost his job, and the company lost market share and had to rebrand. See Doing a Ratner. ==References== *Coates, Tim. ''John Profumo and Christine Keeler'' (London: Tim Coates, 1999) ISBN 0117024023 *Darling, Roger. ''A Sad and Terrible Blunder: Generals Terry and Custer at the Little Big Horn: New Discoveries'' (Vienna, VA: Potomac-Western Press, 1990) ISBN 0962148814. *David, Saul. ''Military Blunders: The How and Why of Military Failure'', (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1998) ISBN 0786705043 *Heffernan, Richard and Marqusee, Mike. ''Defeat from the Jaws of Victory'' (London: Verso, 1992) ISBN 0860913511 *Wikipedia articles listing further sources: **Battle of the Little Bighorn **John Profumo **Maginot Line **UK general election, 1983 *''Great Blunders in History (television)'' television series first broadcast on the History Channel in 2001. ==Further reading== *''Wrong! The Biggest Mistakes Ever Made by People Who Should Have Known Better'', Jane O'Boyle, published by Plume Books (1999), ISBN 0452281121. *''Wrong Again!: More of the Biggest Mistakes and Miscalculations Ever Made by Peple Who Should Have Known Better'', Jane O'Boyle, published by Plume Books (2000), ISBN 0452282012. *''America's Stupidest Business Decisions: 101 Blunders, Flops, and Screwups'', Bill Adler and Julie Houghton, published by Quill (1997), ISBN 0688151523. *''Great Military Blunders'', Geoffrey Regan, published by Motorbooks International (2000), ISBN 0752218441. *''Scientific Blunders: A Brief History of How Wrong Scientists Can Sometimes Be'', R. M. Youngson and Robert Youngson, published by Carroll & Graf (1998), ISBN 0786705949. *''The Greatest Blunders of World War II'', Horace Edward Henderson, published by iUniverse (2001), ISBN 0595162673. *''The 100 Greatest Sports Blunders of All Time'', Eldon L. Ham, published by Masters Press (1997), ISBN 1570281599. *''The Book of Heroic Failures'', Stephen Pile. ==See also== *:Category:Flops - for general failures, which may or may not be due to poor decision making. ==External links== * [http://paintedover.com/albums.php?action=view&albumid=507&s=uAQre1 Batman #66] - A classic Batman story involving the great blunders of all time. * [http://www.historychannel.com/exhibits/military_blunders/index.html Five famous military blunders] - From the History Channel. History by topic
List of incidents famously considered great blunders
This is an important topic. Just because you do not like the title does not mean that it should be deleted. For those who don't know, boner is another word for blunder. "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana We must learn from the mistakes of history so that we do not make them again. Also it may be good to discuss just how bad these mistakes were. Some so-called "great blunders" may be merely ordinary mistakes that historians or pop culture has given a bad rap. Hindsight is 20/20. - User:Pioneer-12 == More Great Blunders (Unsourced) == Candidates for the main list. Unsourced entries can be placed here. However, a topic must be shown to be a blunder by an external source before being added to the main page. (This prevents arbitrary and POV listings.) * Unsourced entries on the main page should be moved here until sources are found. * Ideas are welcome! Feel free to add to this unofficial list. (This is a wiki, after all.) Note that famous blunders that you believe to be untrue can also be listed. This article exists in part to combat common misconceptions by presenting an objective view of the event. - User:Pioneer-12 12:24, 6 May 2005 (UTC) === Military === * 13th century BC or 12th century BCE - The Trojan's acceptance of the Trojan horse. * 1863 - At the Battle of Gettysburg, Robert E. Lee ordered a suicidal Pickett's Charge led by George Pickett. * 1941 - Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union. * 1941 - The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. * 1942 - Despite advice to take the oil fields of the Middle East, Adolf Hitler focused strength on the city of Battle of Stalingrad. It served no strategic purpose and may have cost Hitler the war. Germany was in need of oil, and capturing the Middle East might have given Hitler an empire that would have rivaled the power of the postwar United States. * 1961 - The Bay of Pigs Invasion. * 1990 - Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait. === Political === *1976 – In a debate with Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford stated that the Soviet Union did not dominate Eastern Europe. *1988 – Images of U.S. presidential candidate Michael Dukakis, considered weak on defense, riding in a tank looking silly in an oversized helmet were published. *2004 – U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry defended a vote against $87 billion for the War in Iraq, saying, "I actually voted for the $87 billion, ''before'' I voted against it." The line was seized on by opponents to paint Kerry as a "flip-flopper." === Diplomatic === *1917 - Zimmerman Telegram sent :''If you hadn't misspelled it, you might have read the article (Zimmermann Telegram) and learned that Zimmermann's blunder wasn't in sending it, but in underestimating US capacity. It's also worth reading that article both for its intrinsic interest and to see what a quality WP article looks like.'' *1930s - Neville Chamberlain adopted a policy of appeasement of Adolf Hitler :''see Munich Agreement'' *1956 - Nikita Kruschev tells Western ambassadors, "We will bury you!" :''He was wrong, but it wasn't a blunder. It's interesting to note that Ronald Reagan later returned the sentiment with "They're going into the ashbin of history."'' *1964 - Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh visit Quebec, sparking large-scale riots. === Business === * 1981 - IBM's outsourcing of operating system rights to Microsoft, who then in turn bought DOS from a small business (Seattle Computer Products) for $50,000. :''This is slightly confused. IBM outsourcing OS development was no blunder. But giving Bill Gates control of the system he was paid to provide certainly was. But there's more to it than that. Gates lied to IBM, telling them he already had an (almost finished) OS. He then lied to SCP by omission, failing to tell them of his deal with IBM. Tim Paterson (later employed by MS, heh heh) of SCP had developed QDOS in 6 weeks by reading the CP/M manual. CP/M was written by Gates's friend Gary Kildall -- the two had a gentleman's agreement that languages were Gates's territory and OS's were Kildall's. So Gates engaged in at least three major ethical transgressions. And then there's the fact that his knowledge of IBM's interest in getting into the microcomputer business came via his mother's charity-benefit acquaintance with IBM exec John Akers. A fine example of capitalism in action.'' === Sports === * 1919 - The Boston Red Sox sell Babe Ruth to the New York Yankees. === Other === * 1173 - Initial construction of the Leaning tower of Pisa. :''The tower leans because it rests on a river bed; it would have leaned no matter what. It could hardly have been less of a blunder to not build it at all, or to build it somewhere other than next to the cathedral for which it's the bell tower. So what, exactly, is the blunder?'' * 1773 - The Tea Act and related British policy toward the American colonies. :''As the WP article says (emph added), this was "but one of the many causes of the American Revolution".'' * 1947 - The Spruce Goose. :''The Spruce Goose was not an incident, let alone a blunder. It might help to read the WP article.'' * 1950 - The grounding of the USS Missouri (BB-63). :''The grounding is neither demonstrably a blunder nor famously considered such, and has no historical significance.'' == Not Blunders... or are they? == === Misc === ==== Hannibal spanks the Romans ==== *216 BC - On his day of command of the largest Roman army in history, 80,000 infantry and 7,000 horsemen, Terrentius Varro attacked Hannibal head-on at Battle of Cannae and was slaughtered. The loss, I think, was more due to Hannibal's great skill then to any blunder on Varro's part. I don't think that it should be on the main page unless a first rate source claims it is a blunder. - User:Pioneer-12 11:06, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :Source: ''How Wars Are Won'' by Bevin Alexander, 2002, Three Rivers Press, New York, First Paperback Edition, pp. 274-276. ::''Varro foolishly made no analysis of the unorthodox Carthaginian formation, and simply perceived the infantry out front as a weak point his men could attack. This they did with their whole force, handily driving the Gauls and Spaniards back, just as Hannibal had intended. ::''... ::''In succeeding centuries, Cannae took on an almost mystical significance, becoming a sort of military Holy Grail, the highest and purest form of intellectual perfection in warfare. But it was difficult to duplicate what Hannibal achieved, especially wrapping both flanks around an enemy at the same time he was held in place on the front and attacked on the rear. Only an extremely obtuse commander could be induced to advance directly into a trap such as Terentius Varro entered at Cannae. Against a less gullible enemy, the more reliable method was to attack his front to hold him in place, and then move on just one of his flanks, as Frederick the Great did at Leuthen in 1757.'' :-User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 00:40, May 27, 2005 (UTC) ==== The Titanic ==== * 1912 - White Star Line advertised the cruise liner RMS Titanic as "unsinkable." On its maiden voyage, it struck an iceberg and went down with 1,800 passengers. It's certainly a famous disaster, but where's the blunder here? Saying something is unsinkable and then it sinking ''does'' makes you look like an idiot, but it didn't cause the sinking. Maybe there should be a section for "statements that made people look like buffoons", like Al Gore inventing the internet. User:68.6.40.203 10:33, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) - User:Pioneer-12 06:41, 6 May 2005 (UTC) ''Since Al Gore never said that he invented the internet, your statement makes you look like a buffoon.'' :The White Star Line never advertised that ''Titanic'' was unsinkable, so the sentence is inaccurate anyway. User:MechBrowman 04:11, May 26, 2005 (UTC) ::[http://snopes.com/titanic/unsink.htm Snopes] concludes otherwise. Also, Al Gore ''did'' say that as a Congressman, he "took the initiative of creating the internet." - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 00:40, May 27, 2005 (UTC) :::No, he did not say that. He said " I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system." He said it, and it was true. The buffoons are those who change "create" to "invent" or "in" to "of", significantly changing the meaning of the statement. Gore may have spoken awkwardly, as we all do when speaking extemporaneously, but he did not make any sort of false or outlandish claim -- Gore was, in fact, the senator who pushed forward commercialization of the internet, as has been widely documented by non-buffoons, including Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn, the actual inventors of the internet's TCP/IP protocol -- see, e.g., http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue5_10/wiggins/ -- "Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development... there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore's initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolving Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and promoting the Internet long before most people were listening." User:68.6.40.203 10:33, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Power of United States in 1942== "I have the support of the greatest country on Earth." - Winston Churchill Just because the United States did not dominate the world militarily, economically, and culturally in 1942 doesn't mean it couldn't be a major world power. Situated defensibly between two oceans, Mexico, and British-ruled Canada, the U.S. was a major industrial power. It was Thomas Jefferson's transcontinental empire of liberty with "Michael Badnarik", despite FDR's aspirations to the contrary. It had a gross domestic product of $1,435,000,000,000 in today's dollars, no small amount of money, and had been propping up England with intelligence cooperation and lend-lease equipment. I am not arbitrarily asserting this, it is the opinion of historians I cannot specifically remember. I'll try to find a source for that sentence, but leave it in. - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 23:48, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) :I agree more or less, but I think the sentence is worded too speculatively right now ("would have" implies some sort of certainty that I don't think can be assigned to this statement). User:JYolkowski // User talk:JYolkowski 01:14, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) :The problem is with the tense. I don't think you're understanding my objection, Calmypal. You're using the wrong grammatical tense. User:Moncrief 01:16, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC) ''This conversation is bizarre. Even if Churchill was mistaken (and a claim that he was certainly seems POV), his statement was in no way a blunder, nor is it considered so, certainly not famously. And finally, no evidence has been offered that Churchill ever made the statement.'' :Please register and sign your comments instead of just posting them in italics. Use margins, too. Anyway, I was just offering the statement from memory as support for my assertion that the US was a force to be reckoned with ''before'' it won World War II. The statement was never being called a blunder. - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 00:40, May 27, 2005 (UTC) ::That makes no sense. This is an article about blunders, and Churchill's statement was offered up as possibly being one. This is not an article about the US or whether it was a force to be reckoned with, so assertions in that regard and support for them are irrelevant, unless they specifically pertain to whether or not something (Churchill making a statement, in this case) was a blunder. Also, since the merit of a claim is independent of the person who makes it, I don't think a signature contributes anything. :::I originally wrote that seizing the Mid-East would have given Hitler a superb defensive position and "an empire comparable in strength to the United States," and Moncrief had a problem with the tense. The quote created dramatic effect. - User:Calmypal User talk:Calmypal 19:10, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC) ::::Oh, is that what you were talking about. It might have helped had you backreferenced the Churchill quote to the Hitler gaffe. As it is, this is the first mention of Hitler in this section. But I suppose, had I been sufficiently scrupulous, I could have ferreted out the meaning from your esoteric communication. Sorry for wasting your time (and mine). ==Political blunders== Wow--the political blunders section actually looks objective. I'm impressed. Now, we just need some sources for those entries. In particular, sources that indicate that they are famously considered a blunder by people who aren't just trying to push their ideological viewpoint. What's nice about political blunders is.... if a blunder contributed to the loss of an election, then both the candidate's supporters and opponents are likely to agree that it was a blunder. We should limit the political blunders section only to incidents that lead to a loss of an election or to a resignation. Those are verifiably bad events and events of significance. Anything else is just a PR gaffe or a slander by ideological opponents. - User:Pioneer-12 12:04, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) ''There's no evidence that Kerry's statement had any significant affect on the outcome of the election -- certainly not comparable to other entries; the claim that this is "famously considered a great blunder" is clearly POV (does ''anyone'' actually believe that?). Notably, people take actual changes in policy a lot more seriously than an apparent admission of flip-flopping that is clearly clumsily stated or taken out of context (both, in this case -- Kerry voted for a funded version and against an unfunded version). A far more serious blunder was Kerry's failure to address such attacks, or address them too late. Most widely viewed as Kerry's greatest blunder was presenting himself as a war hero of the DemNatCon, which opened him wide to the SwiftBoatAttack (attacking perceived strengths is a well known KarlRove strategy). The current entry just looks amateurish.'' == Overlap == Check out the lists on flop. User:JRM · User talk:JRM 17:23, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC) :This is a subset of flops. Only "flops" that were due to extremely bad decision making are included, not those due to bad luck, acts of god, strong competition, or some other factor. :I think blunder-based failures are the most interesting and educational types of failures... What mistakes did they make, and why? :- User:Pioneer-12 20:02, 5 May 2005 (UTC) ==VfD== On April 21, 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep (no consensus, rewrite, etc.). See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of the Great Boners of all time for a record of the discussion. User:Mindspillage User talk:Mindspillage 22:16, 5 May 2005 (UTC) == The Title == === The title is poor === The title is poor. List of great blunders should be fine. -User:Stevertigo|User_talk:Stevertigo|[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stevertigo&action=edit§ion=new add] 06:55, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) :I personally agree. The current title is to prevent the list from appearing to be POV. This seems to be a necessary compromise when working on in a wiki envirionment. Items are on this list only because they are famously considered to be blunders, not because the list's authors consider them to be blunders or not. The wordier, but more precise, title makes this explicit. See List of movies that have been considered the greatest ever. - User:Pioneer-12 10:06, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) === The title is boring === change to List of great blunders or something else less bulky you don't need to get this specific in the title - User:Stoph 22:20, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :How about changing it to Greatest Boners of All Time ;-) --User:Carnildo 23:34, 5 May 2005 (UTC) :Problem is, that would violate WP:NPOV - Wikipedia would be saying that the incidents are blunders, not that people call them blunders. I do like the Boners one... but that name might have been what got it on VfD in the first place. User:Nickptar 00:51, 6 May 2005 (UTC) ::I guess I don't make the NPOV distinction between "List of incidents famously considered great blunders" and just "List of great blunders." The former seems unnecessarily bloated. Of course there is no official way to determine a great blunder, but you can explain whatever you need to in the actual article. - User:Stoph 01:04, 6 May 2005 (UTC) :::Then what NPOV distinctions ''do'' you make? Do you make no distinction between "list of events famously believed to be miracles" and "list of miracles"?'' :::Calling things "blunders" is always POV, just as it would be POV to say "Killing people is wrong" (even though most everybody agrees) - encyclopedias just don't do it that way. How about the difference between "List of people who have been called the Antichrist" (I'm pretty sure we have one like that) and "List of Antichrists"? User:Nickptar 15:03, 6 May 2005 (UTC) == maybe we should add this to the list == === Wikipedia=== * April 25, 2005 - User:Pioneer-12 chooses to name the page for his list of incidents famously considered great blunders as List of the Greatest Boners of all time. Many users don't take well to the joke, and as a result of this poor naming decision the article was almost deleted. - (just kidding) User:Stoph 03:23, 6 May 2005 (UTC) :And despite their lack of a sense of humor, the page emerged victorious from the melee. And the forces of arrogant cluelessness, who would destroy anything they do not understand, have lost a battle to the forces of wisdom, logic, and understanding. :THE PAGE STILL STANDS, a beacon of hope to all who have felt the stinging attack of Wikipedia's ridiculous and unjust Vfd process. :- User:Pioneer-12 06:10, 6 May 2005 (UTC) ::''Have you ever considered growing up?''
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
L
LA | LB | LC | LD | LE | LF | LG | LH | LI | LJ | LK | LM | LN | LO | LP | LR | LS | LT | LU | LW | LX | LY | LZ |Words begining with List_of_incidents_famously_considered_great_blunders:
List_of_incidents_famously_considered_great_blunders
List_of_incidents_famously_considered_great_blunders
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
