Military Deceptions That Changed the Course of History

Sometimes the difference between winning and losing a war has surprisingly little to do with which side has the bigger army. Throughout history, commanders have turned seemingly hopeless situations around through deception, surprise attacks, unconventional strategies, and occasionally decisions so audacious that failure could have been catastrophic. Of course, not every gamble paid off, and some victories came at a terrible human cost.

From George Washington crossing an ice-filled river on Christmas night to a Germanic commander leading three Roman legions into an ambush, history is full of examples where strategy changed everything. Some of these decisions helped bring wars to an end. Others started new ones, reshaped national borders, or permanently altered the way armies fight.

These eight military strategies, surprise attacks, and consequential wartime decisions illustrate just how much can depend on planning, timing, and occasionally catching an enemy completely off guard. They also serve as reminders that a successful military operation isn't always the same thing as a wise or morally defensible one.

• Where: Georgia, United States
• When: November 15 to December 21, 1864
• Strategy: Destruction of military resources and economic infrastructure

Union General William Tecumseh Sherman understood that defeating Confederate armies was only part of the challenge facing the North during the Civil War. The Confederacy also depended on railroads, factories, farms, and transportation networks to keep those armies supplied. So, in November 1864, Sherman set out from Atlanta with approximately 60,000 soldiers on a campaign designed to cripple that support system. Over the following weeks, his forces marched across Georgia toward Savannah, destroying railroad tracks, military facilities, and supplies that could be used by Confederate forces. They also seized food and livestock as they advanced, placing an enormous burden on civilians caught in their path.

The campaign was controversial then and remains so today, particularly because of its destructive effects on civilian property. However, it achieved its primary military objectives and further weakened an already struggling Confederacy. When Savannah fell to Union forces on December 21, Sherman had demonstrated how attacking an opponent's economic resources and ability to sustain a war could be almost as devastating as defeating its soldiers on the battlefield.

• Where: Poland, Western Europe, and the Soviet Union
• When: 1939 to 1941
• Strategy: Rapid, concentrated attacks using coordinated ground and air forces

After World War I demonstrated just how devastating prolonged trench warfare could be, military planners had good reason to look for faster ways to defeat an opponent. Germany's early World War II campaigns provided one particularly destructive example. Commonly called Blitzkrieg, or "lightning war," these operations relied on concentrated armored attacks, mobile infantry, artillery, and air support to break through enemy defenses before opposing commanders could reorganize their forces. The approach helped Nazi Germany overwhelm Poland in 1939 and achieve a stunning victory over France and the Low Countries in 1940.

Although Blitzkrieg is frequently described as a formal German military doctrine, historians have challenged that characterization. The term became a convenient label for a collection of tactics and operational methods rather than a single official plan. Whatever the terminology, the results were devastating. German forces often advanced faster than their enemies could respond, surrounding entire formations and disrupting communications and supply lines. But the approach was hardly unbeatable. Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 demonstrated the limits of rapid offensives when confronted with enormous distances, increasingly determined resistance, and major logistical problems.

• Where: Straits of Salamis, Greece
• When: September 480 B.C.
• Strategy: Deception and exploitation of restricted waters

Persian King Xerxes I commanded an enormous invasion force when he attempted to conquer the Greek city-states in 480 B.C. On paper, the Persian fleet enjoyed a substantial numerical advantage over the allied Greek navy. Fortunately for the Greeks, their commander Themistocles understood that having more ships wasn't necessarily an advantage if those ships couldn't maneuver properly. According to ancient accounts, Themistocles sent a misleading message to Xerxes suggesting that the Greeks were preparing to flee. The Persian fleet subsequently moved into the narrow waters around Salamis, where its greater numbers became considerably less useful.

When battle began, the Greeks used their knowledge of the waterways and the restricted space to their advantage. The larger Persian fleet struggled to maneuver effectively, and the resulting battle ended in a major Greek victory. Ancient accounts differ on the precise details and losses, but historians generally regard Salamis as a turning point in the Persian invasion. It also remains one of history's clearest demonstrations that a well-chosen battlefield and a little deception can sometimes accomplish what superior numbers cannot.

• Where: Pearl Harbor and other military facilities on Oahu, Hawaii
• When: December 7, 1941
• Strategy: Surprise carrier-based air assault

Japan's military leadership knew that American naval power posed a serious obstacle to its plans for expansion across the Pacific. Rather than wait for a confrontation on American terms, Japanese commanders decided to strike first. In the weeks leading up to December 7, 1941, a Japanese carrier force crossed the northern Pacific while taking extensive precautions to avoid detection. Early that Sunday morning, aircraft launched a coordinated surprise attack on American naval vessels and military airfields around Oahu. The results were devastating. Twenty-one American ships were sunk or damaged, 188 aircraft were destroyed, and 2,403 Americans, including 68 civilians, were killed.

In the short term, the operation inflicted severe damage on the U.S. Pacific Fleet. Strategically, however, it failed to achieve Japan's larger objective. The American aircraft carriers based in the Pacific were absent from Pearl Harbor, and important repair facilities and fuel storage installations survived. Rather than discouraging American involvement in the Pacific, the attack united much of the country behind entering the war. The United States declared war on Japan the following day, setting in motion a conflict that would ultimately end with Japan's defeat in 1945.

• Where: Delaware River and Trenton, New Jersey
• When: December 25 to 26, 1776
• Strategy: Secret nighttime crossing followed by a surprise attack

By Christmas 1776, the American Revolution wasn't going particularly well for George Washington. His Continental Army had suffered a string of defeats, morale was collapsing, and many soldiers were approaching the end of their enlistments. Washington needed a victory, and preferably one that nobody saw coming. His solution was to lead roughly 2,400 troops across the ice-filled Delaware River on Christmas night, then march toward Trenton, New Jersey, where approximately 1,400 Hessian soldiers serving Britain were stationed. The operation was already difficult enough without the freezing temperatures, fierce winds, and winter storm that accompanied the crossing.

Despite delays, Washington's forces reached Trenton and launched their attack on the morning of December 26. The Hessian garrison was caught by surprise, and hundreds of its soldiers surrendered after a relatively brief engagement. Contrary to a popular legend, there's no reliable evidence that the Hessians were incapacitated by Christmas drinking. The victory was important not because it destroyed an enormous enemy army, but because it demonstrated that Washington's battered forces could still win. It revived American morale and helped lay the groundwork for further victories in New Jersey.

• Where: Germania, probably near present-day Kalkriese, Germany
• When: A.D. 9
• Strategy: Deception, ambush, and exploitation of difficult terrain

The Roman Empire had conquered enormous territories, built an extraordinarily disciplined army, and developed a reputation for crushing anyone who stood in its way. Unfortunately for three Roman legions in A.D. 9, none of that mattered much when they marched into a carefully prepared trap. Arminius, a Germanic leader who had served in the Roman military and earned the trust of Roman commander Publius Quinctilius Varus, secretly organized a rebellion against Roman rule. He helped lure Varus and his soldiers into difficult terrain, where Germanic warriors could use the forests, narrow passages, and surrounding marshlands to negate Rome's advantages.

Over several days, the Germanic forces attacked the extended Roman column, inflicting catastrophic losses. Three legions were effectively destroyed, and Varus reportedly took his own life as the disaster unfolded. The defeat became one of the most humiliating episodes in Roman military history. Rome subsequently launched punitive campaigns, but it never established lasting provincial control over the territory east of the Rhine in the way it had attempted before the battle. More than 2,000 years later, the ambush remains a powerful example of how misplaced trust, unfamiliar terrain, and a well-informed opponent can destroy even an elite military force.

• Where: Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan
• When: August 6 and 9, 1945
• Strategy: Use of nuclear weapons to compel surrender

By the summer of 1945, Nazi Germany had surrendered, but the war in the Pacific continued. American military leaders faced the prospect of invading Japan's home islands, an operation expected to produce enormous casualties. President Harry Truman ultimately authorized the use of a weapon unlike anything previously employed in warfare. On August 6, an American B-29 dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Three days later, a second atomic bomb struck Nagasaki. Both attacks caused catastrophic destruction, killing tens of thousands of people immediately and many more from injuries and radiation exposure. Estimates of the combined death toll vary considerably, but the human consequences were staggering.

The bombings occurred alongside another major development: the Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 8 and began attacking Japanese forces in Manchuria. Japan announced its surrender in mid-August, formally signing the surrender documents on September 2. Historians continue to debate the relative influence of the atomic bombings, the Soviet offensive, and Japan's deteriorating military position in bringing the war to an end. Whether the bombings were necessary or justified remains one of the most consequential moral and historical debates surrounding World War II. What cannot be disputed is that these attacks introduced nuclear warfare to the world and permanently changed international security.

• Where: Near Hastings, East Sussex, England
• When: October 14, 1066
• Strategy: Feigned retreats and attacks against exposed infantry

Sometimes the best way to defeat an enemy is to convince them that they've already won. That tactic is commonly associated with William, Duke of Normandy, during the Battle of Hastings in 1066. William had invaded England to challenge the claim of King Harold Godwinson, whose army occupied a strong defensive position on higher ground. The English fought behind a formidable shield wall, making repeated Norman attacks extremely difficult. At one point, part of William's army retreated, prompting some English soldiers to abandon their defensive positions and pursue the fleeing troops. The Normans then counterattacked, catching their pursuers in a vulnerable position.

Historical accounts suggest that Norman forces later employed deliberate feigned retreats to draw additional English troops away from their defensive line, although historians still debate exactly how the tactic developed during the battle. Eventually, the English resistance collapsed, and Harold was killed. William was crowned King of England on Christmas Day 1066, beginning a new era of Norman rule. The conquest transformed England's political institutions, aristocracy, landownership, and language. It also gave military historians an enduring example of how convincing an opponent to abandon a strong position can prove far more effective than attacking that position directly.