Where did we see the fiercest fighting ever?

[Hortlund]

Pozieres.

[mosgood]

Since everyone has pretty much derailed the list.

My vote is Thermopyle

[Wilfrid]

From what I've read, Betio  and Tarawa

[funkedup]

If you read personal accounts of combat they are all pretty much the same.  When people are fighting for survival they are ruthless.
If I had to pick one I would have to go with Nazis vs. Soviets, because it was basically a war of extermination for the Nazis and a war for national survival for the Soviets.

[MasterBlaster]

#1) - Waco, Texas (Branch Davidians' Experience)

[Frogm4n]

those crazy nuts in waco always holding themselves up in strongholds filled with guns!

[Dune]

Well, since I didn't give a correct answer the first time  , out of the list I'll choose a tie between the Eastern Front and the Pacific Island campaign.  With an honorable mention for the Chosin fighting.

BTW: There is this 5'7", 70 year old guy who is a balif in the courhouse next door.  And he's also the toughest SOB in there.  He joined the USMC at 18 and fought on Tarawa, Iwo Jima and most of the other islands, was stationed in China (He has a "China Marine" badge) and fought in the Chosin Resevior.

[rpm]

Tarawa was the most aggressive battle fought in the Pacific. I have no exact numbers, but would dare to say it cost more lives per square foot (excluding civilians) than any other battle fought in modern warfare.

[jamusta]

American Civil War?

[Frogm4n]

WW1 for France britian and germany was far worse then the civil war. but if your talking about american  deaths. the civil war has no equal in our history.

[B17Skull12]

no id have to say (chit wtf was that place on black hawk down i forget) was the fiercest i think even though some of the other port here been pretty rough



skull12

[rpm]

Originally posted by B17Skull12
no id have to say (chit wtf was that place on black hawk down i forget)  

Mogadishu, Somalia

[cpxxx]

From the original list the Eastern front and the Pacific front would easily qualify as the most intense and personal infantry battles. The rest are arguable except:

The Falklands hardly qualifies as it was fought by British professionals on the one hand and confused conscripts on the other. The was really only one instance of hand to hand combat at the point of the bayonet in that war.

The Russian Afghan experience was mostly hit and run guerrilla warfare with the Russians standing off as much as possible.

Neither Gulf war I and II qualifies as close up and personal. Not the way they were fought.  But one war not listed definitely qualifies and is up there with the Eastern front or Pacific theatre.

That's the original Gulf war in the eighties between Iran and Iraq. Trench warfare, fanatical human wave attacks, chemical and biological warfare. It was vicious, long lasting and had enormous casualties.  That qualifies by any standard.

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Civil War no doubt, most other battles/wars someone had a superiority - except in the middle ages, but in the middle ages you weren't getting your bellybutton shot at while you were swinging your mace around.

In the Civil War, everyone lined up, fired at the enemy who was also lined up, then someone advanced. Many dropped on both sides, reload as fast as possible, then get another shot off. After that, bayonett time with people still being shot at. This was close quarters combat.

In an open field, one sided advanced with canon balls and a wall of shot coming at them.

Maybe there was something in europe equivelant to this? French Revolution?

WWI had trench warfare, while it was brutal, they still had trenches. Prior to that, all projectile armed warfare was out in the open.
-SW

[Holden McGroin]

The largest battle ever in the western hemisphere took place in Pennsylvania for three days in  July 1863.

60,000 casualties