Has there ever been a successful invasion where the aggressor didn't have overwhelming numerical superiority? It seems like an invasion where the attacker doesn't have at least a 4:1 advantage inevitably turns into a slow meat grinder.
>>2876555
Yes. Are you fucking retarded? It's not even hard to think of examples. The Franco-Prussian war. The Invasion of Serbia in WW1. The Six Day War. Etc.
>>2876567
How the fuck is the Six Day War an example of a successful invasion?
The Spaniards in Mexico?
>>2876572
Because Israel pre-emptively attacks both Syria and Egypt, winning enormous territorial concessions from the latter, minor ones in scope but important ones in value from the latter, at a roughly 1:5 numerical inferiority. Israel was on the offensive the entire time.
>>2876555
yes retard
Can think of a dozen examples just from roman history alone
>>2876580
That's still not an invasion. They were acting in self-defense.
>>2876592
What? And the motives of an offensive force somehow change the operational parameters? A justified pre-emptive invasion still has the chance of turning into a "slow meat grinder", same as a completely unjustified attack.
>>2876555
The Americans and British invaded Iraq with about 160,000 men, peaking at 250,000 towards the very end of the invasion, at a time where Iraq's army and reserves numbered over a million (on paper; actual effective strength may have numbered 400-600k).
>>2876592
they invaded sinai and golan heights so it was still an invasion
Alexander the Great
Ghengis Khan's conquest of China
The initial Rashidun Caliphate conquests