Were there battles between three hostile factions?

Like, ever?

>>2444440
yeah

Me- your father- your mum lover

Faction A
Faction B
Faction C

>>2444440
The 1066 invasions of England
The English (under Harold Godwinson), the Danish (under Harald Hardrada) and the French (under Wilhelm le Bastaerd)

>>2444478
I'm not particularly well-versed on this period of history, but wasn't it more like "William waited until the two initial belligerents had beat the shit out of each other, and then came by to clean up"?

>>2444440

Wars and conflicts yes, actual battles, not that I now of but of course we don't have any record of most battles.

>>2444440
Eastern Europe 1944-45
Faction 1: Soviets
Faction 2: Germans
Faction 3: Polish Partisans

>>2444440

There were probably a few instances where ambitious generals betrayed each other mid-battle, creating three factions. But I doubt there where any real battles that started out three-way. The very nature of warfare favors concentrating all factions into two alliances... or the third force waiting and letting their opponents weaken each other.

>>2444440
WW2
>Germans
>Allies
>Italians

>>2444533
>Faction 4: Ukrainian partisans

>>2444511
Wilhelm didn't even know Godwinson was fighting with Hardrada, he just got really lucky because when Harold was occupied with the Norse crossing the sea wasn't a suicide anymore.

There have been countless wars with more than two sides, including in the present day (e.g. Syria). So it probably depends on what counts as a "battle."

If you're asking a question about absolute insanity during wartime, the Russian Civil War is always a good bet.

I mean, you've got the
>Bolsheviks
>White Guard
>Petliuran Nationalists
>Czech Legion
All fighting each other at one point or another. And don't forget about those German reserves stationed throughout Ukraine and in Kiev.

>>2444605
Well wouldn't that make it two separate conflicts (i.e. Anglo-Saxons vs Danes & Normans vs Anglo-Saxons) just taking place within an incredibly short span of each other? By which I mean, were the Danes and the Normans opposing one another aside from having mutually incompatible goals that neither knew about?

maybe second sino-japanese war with nationalists, communists and japanese fighting each other.

also in Braveheart when the british send the scottish attachment against william wallace but then they join the scottish army and attack the british

File: isis-flag-2.jpg (25KB, 660x330px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 660x330px

Well, it's pretty much the case with the current syria civil war
> Syria governement, Russia
> NATO, kurdistan
> Islamic state and some other allahu akbar-related organisations.
I know this is much more complex that just three faction fighting each others, but I think this is at least partially true.

File: neatkaribas kaujas.jpg (72KB, 714x277px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 714x277px

Latvian Independence War was between Nationalists(major Estonian support), Baltic Germans and Communists, but then again not really.
It was a first a Baltic Germans and Nationalists(Latvians were in two parts, one in the West with Germans, the other up North with Estonians) against Commies,
then Commies became irrelevant so it was Germans(Backed up by White Russian warlord) versus Nationalists until Bermond capitulated at Riga,
after which everyone on the block helped out clearing Reds out of Latgalia

File: 1414770420466.jpg (18KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 500x500px

>>2444478
>The french

>>2444440
the battle of Sekigahara between the Tokugawa and Hideyoshi factions comes to mind off the top of my head.

the Kobayakawa clan was the only daimyo to not have picked a side for the battle, but were present and fighting on the field skirmishing with both Tokugawa and Hideyoshi armies. After a few hours and some sweet talking between generals the Kobayakawa armies sided with Tokugawa to finish the fight.

>>2445275
Hideyori* not Hideyoshi

derp

>>2445139
>t. Lindybeige

>>2444440
Three Kingdoms Period - China